Post: #51

For me, it's simple.

Obama had his shot with one party rule, Krugman's ideas and a Newer Deal. He probably hoped to be the next FDR. Fine. Nice try. Didn't work out, gave it your best, now beat it.

NEXT!

Post: #52

At least when a Republican is in office the media actually pays attention to the bullshit coming from the executive branch.

Post: #53

Another problem with the two party system is that there is hardly any way one party is going to satisfy all your ideals... when there are two parties you have to gravitate to who you feel best about and suck up aspects you dont like

Post: #54

(09-05-2012 10:35 PM)LoveBug Wrote:  Another problem with the two party system is that there is hardly any way one party is going to satisfy all your ideals... when there are two parties you have to gravitate to who you feel best about and suck up aspects you dont like

Except for the genuine cheerleaders of their respective party, that's always going to be the case. They have to cast a wide net in order to get a plurality of the vote and not everyone is going to have all their views represented.

But what do we propose as an alternative? Let's say we have a Ron Paul party and whoever gets the most votes wins. That would mean a party could win with only 34% of the vote, effectively pissing off the other 66% of the country. If you had four parties, one could win with only 26% of the vote to the chagrin of the other 74%. In Europe where you have multi-party coalition governments, there's still a lot of compromise.

I just don't expect that I'm ever going to have a party that represents all of my views. It's impossible.

-- Edit --

Just watched Clinton's speech. That was maybe the most effective speech of his career. Masterfully crafted and delivered. He has a way of attacking his opponents while at the same time seeming charming. It was exactly the tone needed to pull in swing voters. I also think it had a good amount of substance as well in comparing the economic policies of the Democrats and Republicans. That was a tough act to follow but if anyone can top that, it's Obama. Can't wait to see what he's got to say tomorrow.

Post: #55

Bill clinton just gave the speech of his life at the DNC. Made the GOP look foolish.

Post: #56

(09-05-2012 05:04 PM)ElJefe Wrote:  For me, it's simple.

Obama had his shot with one party rule, Krugman's ideas and a Newer Deal. He probably hoped to be the next FDR. Fine. Nice try. Didn't work out, gave it your best, now beat it.

NEXT!

This is exactly how I feel. Obama had his shot and blew it. Time for a real change.

Post: #57

(09-05-2012 11:17 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  

(09-05-2012 05:04 PM)ElJefe Wrote:  For me, it's simple.

Obama had his shot with one party rule, Krugman's ideas and a Newer Deal. He probably hoped to be the next FDR. Fine. Nice try. Didn't work out, gave it your best, now beat it.

NEXT!

This is exactly how I feel. Obama had his shot and blew it. Time for a real change.

Yeah and real change is going to come from Mitt Romney? I'm not buying it.

Post: #58

(09-03-2012 03:43 PM)soup Wrote:  If you were forced to to choose, who'd it be?

Bill Clinton.

Post: #59

I live in Wa State so it doesn't matter who I vote for!

I still will vote. Not sure why though

Post: #60

I think we're going to look back at Clinton's speech last night and realize that was the moment he sealed it for Obama. The man is simply the most immensely talented speaker and most accessible policy wonk of his generation. His only equal in oratory is Obama, and he is second-to-none when it comes to making the policy details and inside baseball of politics accessible and understandable to the goobers sitting at home. And he delivered last night in his usual easy, improvisational, and affable style. And you could totally see why he's a huge player and beloved by women---even more than most super-alphas. He came through in a big way.

Obama wins in November because of what Bill did last night. The only way he can be stopped now is if he shows up hammered to the debates or is caught buggering a nun on the White House lawn or some shit.

He's got this---bank on it.

Post: #61

Romney, for one reason only
Obama can't get anything through the republicans in the house and senate, and if obama wins, the party out of the white house takes more seats, which may give the republicans a majority, so with obama, 4 more years of deadlock
with romeny, at least something can be done

Post: #62

(09-06-2012 08:00 AM)clever alias Wrote:  Romney, for one reason only
Obama can't get anything through the republicans in the house and senate, and if obama wins, the party out of the white house takes more seats, which may give the republicans a majority, so with obama, 4 more years of deadlock
with romeny, at least something can be done

What is this "something" ?

Post: #63

Bill Clinton's speech last night was an amazing example of promising the moon without giving any specifics. There was not a woman in the audience who wouldn't want to go back to his hotel room.

But still, I don't care if Jesus is in office, nobody wins a re-election with consistent high unemployment and skyrocketing gas prices.

Post: #64

(09-06-2012 09:12 AM)EisenBarde Wrote:  Bill Clinton's speech last night was an amazing example of promising the moon without giving any specifics. There was not a woman in the audience who wouldn't want to go back to his hotel room.

But still, I don't care if Jesus is in office, nobody wins a re-election with consistent high unemployment and skyrocketing gas prices.

You're delusional. Here's an ex-Bush aide and Republican strategist talking about how substantive, detailed and specific Clinton's speech was last night:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...ney-s.html

Post: #65

(09-05-2012 12:50 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  What do you guys think about this:

Open, direct assassination of US citizens w/ no trial is a terrible precedent and a clear violation of due process. It's one of the many reasons I can't stand Obama - the guy was a Constitutional lawyer and he clearly doesn't give a rat's ass about the Constitution. He's a real piece of shit; I don't have anything positive to say about him specifically. However, it's cool to have a black president who makes Republicans' heads explode, even though policy-wise he's basically Reagan part 2.

Romney is significantly worse. The Taibbi piece on him is excellent.

Post: #66

(09-06-2012 09:55 AM)dragnet Wrote:  You're delusional. Here's an ex-Bush aide and Republican strategist talking about how substantive, detailed and specific Clinton's speech was last night:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...ney-s.html

He could have been reading the damn encyclopedia for all I care, there was little substance to the message.

I will admit that I only watched the first 5 or so minutes and wrongly based his whole speech off that impression. You are right that there was a lot more substance than I noticed.

But all of that went over most of the crowd's head. I'd bet the farm that nearly ALL the women who were impressed by the speech were so on a purely visceral level.

Post: #67

Quote:Open, direct assassination of US citizens w/ no trial is a terrible precedent and a clear violation of due process. It's one of the many reasons I can't stand Obama - the guy was a Constitutional lawyer and he clearly doesn't give a rat's ass about the Constitution. He's a real piece of shit; I don't have anything positive to say about him specifically. However, it's cool to have a black president who makes Republicans' heads explode, even though policy-wise he's basically Reagan part 2.

Romney is significantly worse. The Taibbi piece on him is excellent.

This is the core reason why Obama won't be getting my vote---I can't vote for someone who claims the right to knock-off US citizens without judicial review and at the same time shields the torturers & war criminals from the last administration (along with Wall Street fraudsters) from any sort of accountability. Obama has lent the two-tiered justice system in this country the veneer of partisan credibility---immunity for the powerful combined with increasingly draconian penalties for average citizens (ie, intensification of the drug war, the merciless crackdown on whistleblowers, etc). The rule of law has been in a coma since Iran-Contra---and Obama took it off life support.

All that said, Romney would be an order of magnitude worse. Because I live in MA, I'm going to vote for Gary Johnson, secure in the knowledge that my vote doesn't really matter. But if I lived in Ohio, I'd probably hold my nose and vote Obama.

Probably.

Post: #68

(09-06-2012 12:19 PM)dragnet Wrote:  

Quote:Open, direct assassination of US citizens w/ no trial is a terrible precedent and a clear violation of due process. It's one of the many reasons I can't stand Obama - the guy was a Constitutional lawyer and he clearly doesn't give a rat's ass about the Constitution. He's a real piece of shit; I don't have anything positive to say about him specifically. However, it's cool to have a black president who makes Republicans' heads explode, even though policy-wise he's basically Reagan part 2.

Romney is significantly worse. The Taibbi piece on him is excellent.

This is the core reason why Obama won't be getting my vote---I can't vote for someone who claims the right to knock-off US citizens without judicial review and at the same time shields the torturers & war criminals from the last administration (along with Wall Street fraudsters) from any sort of accountability. Obama has lent the two-tiered justice system in this country the veneer of partisan credibility---immunity for the powerful combined with increasingly draconian penalties for average citizens (ie, intensification of the drug war, the merciless crackdown on whistleblowers, etc). Then you have Obama getting involved in Libya without Congressional approval---clearly illegal. The rule of law has been in a coma since Iran-Contra---and Obama took it off life support.


All that said, Romney would be an order of magnitude worse. Because I live in MA, I'm going to vote for Gary Johnson, secure in the knowledge that my vote doesn't really matter. But if I lived in Ohio, I'd probably hold my nose and vote Obama.

Probably.

Post: #69

How the democratic party employs democracy:

Post: #70

This is what will happen:

Obama will win. In four years things will be more fucked up.

Eventually loaners will wake up one day and realize how stupid they were to give so much cheap credit to a country that already had too much debt to pay. Then interest rates on USA treasuries will hike for sure, like it happened in Europe.

And finally American people will have to choose a real fucking leader to try to put things right or otherwise the country will be as much bankrupted and poor as in the 30's.

Post: #71

The best argument for Romney is what EisenBarde said (#52):

Quote:At least when a Republican is in office the media actually pays attention to the bullshit coming from the executive branch.

And the best argument for Obama is what Vox Day wrote here: http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/willard-is-even-worse/

Quote:There are two reasons why Romney will be even worse for America than Barack Obama has been over the last four years. The first is that instead of instinctively reacting in opposition to the lunatic proposals coming out of the White House (even if they usually end up caving in the end), Republicans in the House and Senate will be running interference for them.
...
The second reason is that Mitt Romney is a hard worker. Given the choice between two corrupt, anti-constitutional, authoritarian administrations, isn’t it obvious that the one run by the lazy golfer who does nothing in the Oval Office but watch ESPN is to be vastly preferred to the one headed by a guy who will burn the midnight oil working out new ways to crush American freedom?

Post: #72

Now these are all just opinions and you can feel free to disagree. I can't stand when people cite this as an example of his failed policies. Yes several millions went to this company, and it ultimately went under-but it doesn't mean that the money was wasted. Again Im not 100 percent sure (but I dont think anyone can be in this day and age, which is a problem with the American news media because it is hard to find the absolute truth) but whos to say this money was completely wasted when I guarantee you this company most likely came up with valuable research that others will be able to learn from in the future. Its easy to look at a balance sheet and say wtf, this money was completely wasted and his policies are a complete failure, etc. But its not that easy to dismiss, this company might have put several others to work in a time when it was needed. I could go into the multiplier factors, blah blah blah. I love how people will absolute blame the terrible economy solely on Obama, when the guy inherited a shit sandwich to begin with. Just sayin.

The clinton speech was VERY good, and overall the speeches from the DNC have been WAY better. As stated, that speech very well may be what seals the presidency for Obama. Clinton was able to do something which Obama is never good at doing, which is defending his own policies and doing it WELL. After seeing Romneys speech and his pandering to Amurrikan greatness/boomers and the speeches at the DNC, I'm definitely going with Obama locking it up. Not to mention how much RIDICULOUSLY more diverse the DNC convention is/was than the RNC-and the RNC convention was held in TAMPA-one of the most diverse cities in the US!! OB has got this, provided there are no major disasters.

Oh, and also-the whole no president gets elected during high employment. Talk to FDR about that one, the dude was elected three times too. Just sayinnnn

If anything, the Republicans should be embarassed for shaming Ron Paul out of the nomination like they did. I said it before and I'll say it again, I believe if the Republicans would have nominated Paul/Huntsman for the election-there would be a REAL election. A true conservative against Obama, plus Huntsman has boomed Utah while being in charge (as well as is moderate, and not RIDICULOUSLY changed his stances like Romney has now done). Americans would have been left with a REAL choice to pick, not just Obama or this republican I want to vote for because I hate Obama so much (instead of someone who will actually do things differently, and have different points instead of the same old BS).

(09-04-2012 12:11 AM)tenderman100 Wrote:  

(09-03-2012 11:37 PM)IpsaScientiaPotestasEst Wrote:  Obama, easy. First president to actually put anything into renewable energy.

Yes, he put in tons of money, most of which we will never get back. Google Solyndra.

(09-03-2012 11:37 PM)IpsaScientiaPotestasEst Wrote:  Look, I hate how the economy has been going too, and have been looking for work in DC for over 7 months while waiting tables for like 8-10$ an hour (with my BA...yes yes I know)-

Here ya go, pal. This ad's for you.

Post: #73

Quote:Obama wins in November because of what Bill did last night. The only way he can be stopped now is if he shows up hammered to the debates or is caught buggering a nun on the White House lawn or some shit.

If he's caught with a live boy or a dead girl. I don't think Romney can win now even if gas goes up to $5.

Post: #74

I was just watching MSNBC after the Obama speech. I think Rachel Maddow's panties were moist(I know scary thought) after his performance. I've never seen her look so happy. That station doesn't even pretend to try to be objective. They are swinging from Obama's nuts.

Good speech, and strategically well-crafted. Pretty much what I expected of him, though no ground breaking territory. Did a good job of getting people to focus on the next 4 years and not think too much about the past 4. He did drop some devastating lines on Romney on his foreign policy experience. Romney's insistence on getting aggressive with Russia also had me scratching my head. I think it was a brilliant move to deflect the hope/change message onto the audience, putting his hope into the voters. Great way of re-branding the hope and change message while staying on course and without sounding so audacious as he did in '08. I think he said everything he needed to say to appeal to a general audience. The main thing missing for me was an explanation of what he will do differently the next 4 years. He says he wants to continue the path we are on. It hasn't been great so far(though maybe not entirely his fault). So what strategy adjustments will he make to bring about measurable change in the economy? That wasn't addressed and I think that's the most important thing people want to know.

I thing so long as he does nothing supremely stupid in the next few months and has at least a decent performance in the debates, he will be re-elected. I think tonight sealed it.

Post: #75

Jobs report comes out tomorrow