Presidential Election: 2012

[FoolKiller]

Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower

I hate these kinds of reports. First of all, it acts as if the president sctually decides these things on his own. If anyone wants to act as if public perception of spending is wrong they need a report that states the president gets a fraction of the credit. Obama is as equally responsible for the spending in Bush's last four years as Bush because Obama voted for that.

I want a study that lists career spending of each politician in three lists:
1) Spending authored or co-signed in a bill.
2) Spending they voted in approval of.
3) Spending they voted for and passed.

Presidents get a fourth and fifth list:

4) Spending initiatives they encouraged legislators to create.
5) Spending they signed into law.

This would show how much spending was their idea, how much they tried to spend, and how much actual spending they are responsible for.

 

[Danoff]

Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower

Additionally:

That is a load of crap... I wish people would actually pay attention well enough to realize it, but I guess not:

The first year of any incoming president term is saddled—for better or for worse—with the budget set by the president whom immediately precedes the new occupant of the White House. Indeed, not only was the 2009 budget the property of George W. Bush—and passed by the 2008 Congress—it was in effect four months before Barack Obama took the oath of office.

Accordingly, the first budget that can be blamed on our current president began in 2010 with the budgets running through and including including fiscal year 2013 standing as charges on the Obama account, even if a President Willard M. Romney takes over the office on January 20, 2013.

Leftovers from Bush, so the whole year doesn't count! Toss out anything Obama did in 2009!

Well yea, if you toss out anything he did in 2009 and then judge the rest of the years against 2009, he looks like a saint! But that's really shoddy.

2009 was the result of the bailouts (in addition to declining income and therefore declining income tax revenue). You can't just waive your hands and pretend it didn't happen because budget was Bush's - that doesn't mean the bailouts belonged to Bush (though he did some of his own). And then to claim that the next 3 years were miserly because they weren't quite as bad as the worst deficit the country has ever seen but each of which would have been the worst deficit the country had ever seen if compared to anything before Obama took office... and then on top of that to say that he's been careful with money when he's spent as much money as every prior president combined!!!

This guy should lose his job. The writer of the article, and Obama. WTH, I can't believe this qualifies as worthy of publication in Forbes.

Edit:

To spell it out, Obama's 2009 stimulus package was approved by congress in Feb of 2009 spending $800 billion.... $800 billion dollars in February of 2009. But let's just forget about that because Bush passed that budget for FY2009. That was Bush's fault!

Bush did enough damage to the economy without also being blamed for the damage Obama did.

 

[Joel]

Watching a bit of the replay of the debate today, holy smokes it's brutal.

War in Iran 2012!

 

[Bye Ya]

Watching a bit of the replay of the debate today, holy smokes it's brutal.

War in Iran 2012!

BBC World Poll

 

[FoolKiller]

BBC World Poll

Not that their opinion counts.

And does the BBC think we only have two candidates?

 

[Famine]

It barely thinks you have more than one.

 

[Joel]

What's that poll supposed to mean? Other parts of the world (including Canada) still believe the lie that Obama "fixed the economy", and they still believe in all the "Hope" and "Change" stuff. I'm not meaning that Romney deserves more support worldwide, but when you look deeper they're the same candidate. I was watching my twitter feed last night, and I tweeted this.

Obama 2012 = war in Iran. Romney 2012 = war in Iran. Hmmm.

Literally right after CNN tweeted quotes from the debate:

Obama: As long as I’m president of the United States, Iran will not get a nuclear weapon. http://on.cnn.com/Rhmurj #CNNdebate

Romney: If Israel is attacked, we have their back. http://on.cnn.com/Rhmurj #CNNdebate

Robamney is basically aruging over who gets to go to war with Iran for Israel. Who gets to keep UAV bombing Pakistani civilians.

 

[Bye Ya]

What's that poll supposed to mean?

Nothing. "Current events." It's related to the discussion.

 

[Zenith]

Most European countries are more socialist than the US. It's no surprise that most of the citizens feel more comfortable with the left.

I've learned not to trust polls that I haven't done myself or make a big attempt to make the methods of their data gathering clear. I'd call the accuracy of the BBC poll into question if I thought it mattered at all.

 

[sumbrownkid]

How does Romney expect to build more battleships while being fiscally responsible?

Growing a navy ain't cheap.

 

[FoolKiller]

How does Romney expect to build more battleships while being fiscally responsible?

Growing a navy ain't cheap.

That is fiscally responsible in circular government logic. Remember, these are the same guys who think increasing debt is being fiscally responsible, and planning to cut debt spending (not all spending, debt spending) in half in 20 years is responsible.

Besides, more boats means a quicker ability to stop the evil regimes that sit on resources and lower our costs after the country rebuilds in 50 years.

 

[Danoff]

How does Romney expect to build more battleships while being fiscally responsible?

Growing a navy ain't cheap.

Same way Obamacare is fiscally responsible... neither candidate gives a crap.

 

[Quackjack]

This thead is more "OH MAH GOD ALL POLITICS SUCK THIS SUCKS OBAMA SUCKS ROMNEY SUCKS BOOOO EVERYTHING" more than legit political arguments. Please complain elsewhere.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Most European countries are more socialist than the US. It's no surprise that most of the citizens feel more comfortable with the left.

I probably can't speak for all Europeans, but I think you're giving us too much political credit!.. I have no idea which candidate represents what, but from what I've seen on the news Romney comes across as an arrogant smarmy t**t, I'd trust him about as much as I'd trust an estate agent or journalist -- in other words, not in the slightest.

I think I'd vote for the guy with the boot on his head before I voted for Mitt.

Just my two cents.

 

[Danoff]

This thead is more "OH MAH GOD ALL POLITICS SUCK THIS SUCKS OBAMA SUCKS ROMNEY SUCKS BOOOO EVERYTHING" more than legit political arguments. Please complain elsewhere.

This is our thread to complain about the presidential election, please take your anti-complaining elsewhere.

 

[Dennisch]

And does the BBC think we only have two candidates?

2 that actually stand a chance of winning. The rest are ballot fillings.


And I liked the debate last night, they should be all like that, but with even more verbal violence.

 

[Keef]

I think we should put them both in street clothes and let them have at it. The black guy would rob the white guy, the white guy would shoot him in self defense and later be acquitted, race riots would break out around the country, anti-discrimination laws would be enacted immediately...

Has everybody forgotten about affirmative action? Obama is going to win, there's no way around it.

I want to analyze a few examples from that foreign candidate support graphic, starting from the bottom.

Spain: They really like Obama. They're also bankrupt and totally incapable of taking care of their own business. Of course they want Obama to take care of it for them.

France: They just elected a fascist president. Enough said.

Mexico: They're not willing to fix their own drug problems but they are willing to let Obama do it for them.

UK: Socialists.

Germany: They want the Federal Reserve to keep ruining the world's economy so they can absorb all the poor nations of Europe again. Wasn't the idea of the Germany leading the EU proposed very recently? Pretty sure they tried that. Twice.

China: They want the US's economy to collapse so they (theoretically) can control everything, despite that fact that there will be nobody left to buy their junk.

Canada: Thanks to them, the US never has a bad hair day. It's always well kept and very kind.

Pakistan: Wait, wut?

 

[livemusic]

Third party debate is live right now:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EcaX12h46k

 

[Omnis]

Can't watch this debate, lol. Just gonna vote for Gary Johnson since Virgil Goode sounds like Foghorn Leghorn.

Jill Stein: Free public higher education, Woo! Climate is in meltdown, Woo!

 

[cphbullet]

I probably can't speak for all Europeans, but I think you're giving us too much political credit!.. I have no idea which candidate represents what, but from what I've seen on the news Romney comes across as an arrogant smarmy t**t, I'd trust him about as much as I'd trust an estate agent or journalist -- in other words, not in the slightest.

I think I'd vote for the guy with the boot on his head before I voted for Mitt.

Just my two cents.

Glad to see that wasn't just me thinking that, i watched a BBC report just after the first presidential debate and the reporter was making out like he was some sort of genius and all i could think was were you watching the same debate? He's a 🤬

IMO Obama needs to win for the world having any chance of being secure peacefully and economically.

 

[Joel]

This thead is more "OH MAH GOD ALL POLITICS SUCK THIS SUCKS OBAMA SUCKS ROMNEY SUCKS BOOOO EVERYTHING" more than legit political arguments. Please complain elsewhere.

If you read the thread through you'd see there's a lot of support for Ron Paul and his ideas, which lead to support of Gary Johnson from the Libertarian party. There's real discussion about that, but discussing Romney vs. Obama seems a bit pointless.

 

[Crash]

It barely thinks you have more than one.

You have to give them credit though for accidentally cutting out the BS. We do essentially only have one candidate: Obamney.

This thead is more "OH MAH GOD ALL POLITICS SUCK THIS SUCKS OBAMA SUCKS ROMNEY SUCKS BOOOO EVERYTHING" more than legit political arguments. Please complain elsewhere.

How much of this thread have you read? Because there have been some very good political discussion on many of the issues throughout. Yes, many members on this thread tend to lean Libertarian and dislike either of the major candidates, but the members actually discuss their political convictions, the why, behind their opinions. I suggest you start reading from the beginning of the thread if you haven't already.

 

[FoolKiller]

This thead is more "OH MAH GOD ALL POLITICS SUCK THIS SUCKS OBAMA SUCKS ROMNEY SUCKS BOOOO EVERYTHING" more than legit political arguments. Please complain elsewhere.

Weird, I could swear that my mentioning of how both suck was backed by an encouragement for everyone to look at the other candidates, who will legitimately be on the ballot, and voting based on your principles and not some odd party affiliation.

Are you trying to say that pointing out how the presidential election shows just how US politics has become more like a team sport is irrelevant to the presidential election thread? Or is your issue that you want to cheerleader for one team but realize you won't get far?

You know, I don't like the Giants or the Patriots (and really dislike Brady and Eli) but I still watched the Super Bowl and commented on the game, quickly followed up by adding a hope that my Rams can get their crap straight sometime in the near future.

 

[mister dog]

I want to analyze a few examples from that foreign candidate support graphic, starting from the bottom.

Spain: They really like Obama. They're also bankrupt and totally incapable of taking care of their own business. Of course they want Obama to take care of it for them.

France: They just elected a fascist president. Enough said.

Mexico: They're not willing to fix their own drug problems but they are willing to let Obama do it for them.

UK: Socialists.

Germany: They want the Federal Reserve to keep ruining the world's economy so they can absorb all the poor nations of Europe again. Wasn't the idea of the Germany leading the EU proposed very recently? Pretty sure they tried that. Twice.

China: They want the US's economy to collapse so they (theoretically) can control everything, despite that fact that there will be nobody left to buy their junk.

Canada: Thanks to them, the US never has a bad hair day. It's always well kept and very kind.

Pakistan: Wait, wut?

I hope you were joking there, or else this sounds like plain ignorism... Yes Spain is in a economic crisis, but no we don't expect Obama nor America to solve our problems, we just don't want another republican warmonger creating crisis all over the world like we had with Bush.
Let's not forget also that the whole economic crisis with the housing market started in the US to begin with...

And france a fascist president? He's a socialist for crying out loud, how do the 2 even compare? I guess you still serve "freedom fries" at home.

IMO Obama needs to win for the world having any chance of being secure peacefully and economically.

Same here 👍

 

[Famine]

Glad to see that wasn't just me thinking that, i watched a BBC report just after the first presidential debate and the reporter was making out like he was some sort of genius and all i could think was were you watching the same debate? He's a 🤬

Wait, which one was that again?

IMO Obama needs to win for the world having any chance of being secure peacefully and economically.

Same here 👍

Yes, since he has an awesome track record in both of those areas in the last four years...

Electing either of them has the same result.

 

[livemusic]

The media over here is very biased towards Obama as well.

 

[Keef]

I hope you were joking there

No, I was completely honest. You'll notice you were the only one who took issue with what I said.

we just don't want another republican warmonger

Democratic warmongers are preferable, of course.

economic crisis with the housing market started in the US to begin with...

I was unaware the housing market had anything to do with the world's economic problems at all. I'm pretty sure all these problems started in China hundreds of years ago when they invented fiat money - money that is not related to any valuable commodity in any way. Quite literally, legislated Monopoly money. This Chinese invention is what set the stage for economic ruin.

And france a fascist president? He's a socialist for crying out loud, how do the 2 even compare?

Well for starters they're both ****ing awful, but I digress. Yes, Hollande supports socialist econ policies and subscribes to the party. I forgot he wasn't the fascist candidate. To be honest I'm still rather shocked than any developed, educated nation would ever consider such a thing.

 

[FoolKiller]

And france a fascist president? He's a socialist for crying out loud, how do the 2 even compare?

While Keef may be incorrect the two are not mutually exclusive. Just ask fascist leaders like Hitler, head of the National Socialist (Nazi) Party. Fascism and socialism are on opposite ends of the scale but that has not prevented some rulers from taking from both.

All that said, socialism or fascism, they are both government by force and I find them both to be in opposition to true liberty.

I guess you still serve "freedom fries" at home.

I call mine French fries, but they cling together in a carton, separate from all the other food, with only a handful daring to challenge their self-imposed imprisonment and escape to fight for freedom, in small groups, hidden in the deep recesses of the bag.

Same here 👍

Which part of peaceful includes unmanned drones dropping bombs daily, threatening war with Iran, and secret kill lists of assassination targets? Bush openly challenged our enemies and made a show of power. Obama accepts a Nobel Peace Prize and continues our attacks via remote controlled aircraft controlled from his mother's The Pentagon's basement. And when he thinks no one is looking at all he orders his own citizens detained indefinitely, tortured, or assassinated.

You'll have to excuse me if I think he is a piss poor chance for peaceful anything.

 

[mister dog]

Funny that you all can compare the years under Obama that easily like the ones you had under Bush... Like there was no difference at all...

Well there was; international politics stabilized under Obama, and the US won some respect back from the rest of the planet. Something which it lost greatly when Iraq was invaded bypassing the UN and we had to put up with a lying idiot in the white house and the evil neocon goons that surrounded him + a whole nation that was practically brainwashed by FOX news standards, and only showed how ignorant and easy to manipulate they were (freedom fries being one example of that).

 

[Liquid]

It's equally true that America has lost some of this reclaimed 'respect' by going into Libya.