At this point, who do you think you are voting for, and why? Or still shopping?
(non-US users welcome to the discussions too).
2012 US Presidential Elections
2012 US Presidential Elections
For those in the US, what do you think about the line-up at this point? Any preferences?
At this point, who do you think you are voting for, and why? Or still shopping?
(non-US users welcome to the discussions too).
At this point, who do you think you are voting for, and why? Or still shopping?
(non-US users welcome to the discussions too).
Re: 2012 US Presidential Elections
I'm going to vote for whoever is hyped the most who also has really bad ideas/policies. Like Ron Paul, or that pizza guy.
Re: 2012 US Presidential Elections
That's interesting. Why would you want to vote for someone with bad ideas?
Also, interesting that you said Ron Paul has bad ideas. What exactly? I am actually leaning towards him because he seems to make sense to me. The pizza guy just seems to be in this to sell his book.
Also, interesting that you said Ron Paul has bad ideas. What exactly? I am actually leaning towards him because he seems to make sense to me. The pizza guy just seems to be in this to sell his book.
Re: 2012 US Presidential Elections
I'll vote, but it probably won't make much difference, since a huge portion of the country will re-elect our incumbent because of his skin color and the "D" by his name, despite his presidency being one of the worst in US history. One that is so bad, in fact, that it makes Bush Jr. (a terrible president) look positively great by comparison.
Real unemployment rate up from 9% during Bush to 16+% now under Obama (despite supposed improvements), crumbling economy, diminishing influence overseas, lack of respect from any foreign government, insane levels of federal corruption (the Secretary of the Treasury owing back taxes is just the tip of the iceberg...), and numerous policies that show a complete lack of understanding of basic economics.
Real unemployment rate up from 9% during Bush to 16+% now under Obama (despite supposed improvements), crumbling economy, diminishing influence overseas, lack of respect from any foreign government, insane levels of federal corruption (the Secretary of the Treasury owing back taxes is just the tip of the iceberg...), and numerous policies that show a complete lack of understanding of basic economics.
-
Pickpocket
- Posts: 1615
- 0 Ratings
- Your TCI: na
- Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 2:20 pm
Re: 2012 US Presidential Elections
ShogunRua wrote:I'll vote, but it probably won't make much difference, since a huge portion of the country will re-elect our incumbent because of his skin color and the "D" by his name, despite his presidency being one of the worst in US history. One that is so bad, in fact, that it makes Bush Jr. (a terrible president) look positively great by comparison.
Real unemployment rate up from 9% during Bush to 16+% now under Obama (despite supposed improvements), crumbling economy, diminishing influence overseas, lack of respect from any foreign government, insane levels of federal corruption (the Secretary of the Treasury owing back taxes is just the tip of the iceberg...), and numerous policies that show a complete lack of understanding of basic economics.
I agree with all of this minus this part
ShogunRua wrote:I'll vote
-
hellboy76
- Posts: 446
- 463 Ratings
- Your TCI: na
- Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 1:53 am
Re: 2012 US Presidential Elections
A political thread, this should end well. 
Re: 2012 US Presidential Elections
when Obama took office in 08; it was widely know that it would be for two terms.
while i agree things seem to have gotten worst, i believe Obama unfortunately inherited a lot of what Bush began.
Obama hasn't done anything drastic to derail his 2-term path, so i think it should come as no surprise that he'll easily be re-elected.
He can claim he ended the war in Iraq (unfortunately withdrawing/shifting to Afghanistan), and I'm sure he'll bank on the fact Osama was killed under his command.
The Republicans aren't putting up much of a fight either... with McClain and that clown Palin as a match up, it was an easy victory for the Dems in 08, and the "grand old party" hasn't seemed to gain much better representations... Herman Cain, Perry, Romney, Bachmann; all pretty pathetic candidates with extremest views in a country moving more towards the middle... i don't see any of them bringing a strong fight.
We'll see what happens in 2016, that will likely be the next transition of executive power.
As for Obama's 2nd Term, while I'd like to think most 2-Term presidents are a bit more assertive with their desires the second half; it's more likely (judging on his 1st term actions) that he'll still likely not do much, but rather coast and slowly burn out.
while i agree things seem to have gotten worst, i believe Obama unfortunately inherited a lot of what Bush began.
Obama hasn't done anything drastic to derail his 2-term path, so i think it should come as no surprise that he'll easily be re-elected.
He can claim he ended the war in Iraq (unfortunately withdrawing/shifting to Afghanistan), and I'm sure he'll bank on the fact Osama was killed under his command.
The Republicans aren't putting up much of a fight either... with McClain and that clown Palin as a match up, it was an easy victory for the Dems in 08, and the "grand old party" hasn't seemed to gain much better representations... Herman Cain, Perry, Romney, Bachmann; all pretty pathetic candidates with extremest views in a country moving more towards the middle... i don't see any of them bringing a strong fight.
We'll see what happens in 2016, that will likely be the next transition of executive power.
As for Obama's 2nd Term, while I'd like to think most 2-Term presidents are a bit more assertive with their desires the second half; it's more likely (judging on his 1st term actions) that he'll still likely not do much, but rather coast and slowly burn out.
-
cameron326
- Posts: 153
- 0 Ratings
- Your TCI: na
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:54 am
Re: 2012 US Presidential Elections
Shogunrua:
Besides anything else, a president’s economic policies do not take hold when they enter office. The federal fiscal year begins October 1. So any new president in office beginning in January (in this case Jan. 2009) doesn’t actually have their budget take hold until Oct of that same year, if congress acts in a timely manner. The fact is that jobless numbers went through the roof in that period of time when the country was still running under George W. Bush’s last budget.
The facts are that the Bush administartion left behind the biggest defecits in US history and under his Presidency the compettivieness of US industries and manufacturing hit an all time low. Obama has had less than one term to start the recovery while at the same time having to deal with the effects of the world financial crisis/managing the costly wars started by the last administration. The high unemployment levels now being witnessed are nothing more than the conseqneces of the massive mismanagement of the economy under Bush.
The Republicans ran the US economy into the ground for 8 years. The Democrats took power right at the start of the global financial crisis, with the domestic economy in meltdown and unemployment rising fast, and are now also battling under the threat of a global recession. Yet as the Democrats have now not solved the whole mess in basically three years, you want to bring back the totally inept Republicans? Crazy.
Real unemployment rate up from 9% during Bush to 16+% now under Obama (despite supposed improvements), crumbling economy, diminishing influence overseas, lack of respect from any foreign government, insane levels of federal corruption (the Secretary of the Treasury owing back taxes is just the tip of the iceberg...), and numerous policies that show a complete lack of understanding of basic economics.
Besides anything else, a president’s economic policies do not take hold when they enter office. The federal fiscal year begins October 1. So any new president in office beginning in January (in this case Jan. 2009) doesn’t actually have their budget take hold until Oct of that same year, if congress acts in a timely manner. The fact is that jobless numbers went through the roof in that period of time when the country was still running under George W. Bush’s last budget.
The facts are that the Bush administartion left behind the biggest defecits in US history and under his Presidency the compettivieness of US industries and manufacturing hit an all time low. Obama has had less than one term to start the recovery while at the same time having to deal with the effects of the world financial crisis/managing the costly wars started by the last administration. The high unemployment levels now being witnessed are nothing more than the conseqneces of the massive mismanagement of the economy under Bush.
The Republicans ran the US economy into the ground for 8 years. The Democrats took power right at the start of the global financial crisis, with the domestic economy in meltdown and unemployment rising fast, and are now also battling under the threat of a global recession. Yet as the Democrats have now not solved the whole mess in basically three years, you want to bring back the totally inept Republicans? Crazy.
