The USA Political Thread

[lennco]

Here you can spout your USA political views.

Rules:
1. Keep it clean
2. No fighting
3. Respect the views of others.
4. US Political views, No Religious views
5. Have fun

:wave:

 

[verbster]

It seems this election is being fought behind the safety net of statistics. Big mistake. It should be about emotions. People want to find a cause to believe in; they want to follow; and that’s what the candidates are missing. Thats' what specifics offer. It’s hard to cheer for a statistic or risk your house on a percentage.

 

[hollywood]

It seems this election is being fought behind the safety net of statistics. Big mistake.

Exactly. An unfortunate consequence of the "network effect" that now pervades us all.

 

[RogueWriter]

It seems this election is being fought behind the safety net of statistics. Big mistake. It should be about emotions. People want to find a cause to believe in; they want to follow; and that’s what the candidates are missing. Thats' what specifics offer. It’s hard to cheer for a statistic or risk your house on a percentage.

Prepackaged emotion is what washed Obama into office in the first place. Packaged and marketed to appeal to a simple minded voter. No complicated message, just, "Hope and Change". The reason he is having such a hard time closing on a second term is that you can't use emotion for a second term in office; you have to have actually accomplished something that your voters wanted you to accomplish.

Romney could try for the emotional victory, but he strikes me as a numbers man, and right now that is exactly what voters want; substance over fantasy.

 

[IntrepidPoster]

It seems this election is being fought behind the safety net of statistics. Big mistake. It should be about emotions. People want to find a cause to believe in; they want to follow; and that’s what the candidates are missing. Thats' what specifics offer. It’s hard to cheer for a statistic or risk your house on a percentage.

To me, it seems like it is emotional. Politics has become very emotional in the "Obama Age" with politicians being seen more as celebrities or "heroic Christian saviors" fighting against the "evil [half] Black Muslim man". Emotion is a natural part of human existence, but it is logic that must be employed to solve the problems of this country.

 

[JB Lions]

Prepackaged emotion is what washed Obama into office in the first place. Packaged and marketed to appeal to a simple minded voter. No complicated message, just, "Hope and Change". The reason he is having such a hard time closing on a second term is that you can't use emotion for a second term in office; you have to have actually accomplished something that your voters wanted you to accomplish.

Romney could try for the emotional victory, but he strikes me as a numbers man, and right now that is exactly what voters want; substance over fantasy.

Yeah, it wasn't an economy on the brink of collapse and the Repubicans targetting simple minded voters picking Sarah Palin as VP, that "washed Obama" into office, lol. Romney is a numbers man, except super secret numbers/light on facts and the people supporting him apparently aren't, since they can't follow simple charts.

To me, it seems like it is emotional. Politics has become very emotional in the "Obama Age" with politicians being seen more as celebrities or "heroic Christian saviors" fighting against the "evil [half] Black Muslim man". Emotion is a natural part of human existence, but it is logic that must be employed to solve the problems of this country.

Except Romney isn't half black or Muslim, only 1 Christian in this race, that would be Obama. But most people don't care about that (good thing) only some "simple minded" people on the right - http://pastors4huckabeeblog.com/the...who-support-romney-actualy-violate-scripture/

Latest Electoral map, Romney actually picked up some, made it close after the first debate, which should go away after the numbers start rolling in after this debate:

http://electoralmap.net/2012/intrade.php

Republicans have never won the White House without winning Ohio, and all the polls show Obama winning that state.

 

[RogueWriter]

Yeah, it wasn't....

Well, I did leave off that Obama chose to run against Bush instead of McCain. Obama's teleprompter knew that Bushes low popularity could translate into votes for Obama. That's why they tried to peg McCain as '4 more years of Bush'.

So, basically, Obama was washed into office via a marketing plan that took advantage of a general tiredness that people felt towards a previous President.

 

[JB Lions]

Well, I did leave off that Obama chose to run against Bush instead of McCain. Obama's teleprompter knew that Bushes low popularity could translate into votes for Obama. That's why they tried to peg McCain as '4 more years of Bush'.

So, basically, Obama was washed into office via a marketing plan that took advantage of a general tiredness that people felt towards a previous President.

Bush, McCain, Romney, same economic plan. And I agree, it was part that people got tired of Bush and the mess he left for Obama. It was also that McCain sold out his country picking Palin, the worst VP pick in history. That's one of the most important things you do when running for President and he scoured the Republican Party, looking for the best and came up with Palin? We all know he probably didn't want her in the first place and was looking for a woman to fire up the base/Right. You want to talk about simple minded, there you go.

 

[IntrepidPoster]

Well, I did leave off that Obama chose to run against Bush instead of McCain. Obama's teleprompter knew that Bushes low popularity could translate into votes for Obama. That's why they tried to peg McCain as '4 more years of Bush'.

So, basically, Obama was washed into office via a marketing plan that took advantage of a general tiredness that people felt towards a previous President.

You make a great point about this, which is why I believe that Romney will win this election, because people seem to be tired and don't want four more years of Obama.

I don't see myself profiting from Romney's policies, and certainly not from the attitudes of much of his fan-base, but if i were a betting man, I'd bet on Romney.

 

[JB Lions]

Finally, Romney releases his tax plan, looks good:

http://www.romneytaxplan.com/

 

[bmugford]

Finally, Romney releases his tax plan, looks good:

http://www.romneytaxplan.com/

I saw that earlier today. Pretty funny.

Brad

 

[GILSAN]

It wasn't only CBS and CNN that thought Obama won the debate last night:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9UrOmhH2PeI

 

[JB Lions]

It wasn't only CBS and CNN that thought Obama won the debate last night:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9UrOmhH2PeI

They can see the future.

Bob Schieffer (Host of Face the Nation on CBS) - October 22, 2012 - Foreign policy

That's supposed to be just on Foreign Policy, but I wonder if they stick to that, I can't imagine another one and a half hours talking about that.

For Romney, it's either 2 things:

You would do exactly what Obama is doing now, in regards to Iran and Syria or

You would do something different/more and what's that usually? Our own ground troops in Syria? Support Israel and go bomb Iran, which if you truly believe they're only 4 years from a nuke and intend to use it, that's what you would do.

So agree with Obama, or more war. Either way, this looks like a win for Obama.

When pressed on it, Ryan dodged, talked about what he would have done like 4 or 5 years ago. I hope they press Romney on it and actually try to get a real answer.

I'm sure they'll find some other foreign policy things to talk about but where does Romney win this debate at?

 

[sanfran]

Did we all forget that Mitt is not just the guy who ships our jobs to China, but he's also a religious fanatic who wants everybody in this country to follow his Moronic religion?

:lol:

 

[IntrepidPoster]

Hopefully. there are enough Israel-firsters in the US that seem to be hungry for war against Iran that a warmongering Romney might actually gain points, it seems.

 

[GILSAN]

Nobody says it better than Pat Condell

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lgnUZxJfsU"]Why You Can Not Vote Barack Hussein Obama For President 2012 Pat Condell - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JB Lions]

-nm-

 

[eyedomainous]

"Simple minded", "prepackaged emotion" pretty much defines the anti-Obama Republican voter. Who, like you, cannot even bring themselves to acknowledge Obama's qualifications, or substance.

This (Black) man was, and is, "qualified for the job" of the President of The United States. The "birther" crap, and your no "substance" nonsense, are clearly emotional responses --based on prepackaged feelings.

Its easy to make an (emotional) point. Its another thing to prove a point factually. You say voters want "numbers", not "fantasy"... yet you provide NONE!

I'll give you some numbers. (Yes, I understand they won't change your mind, or any 'simple mind driven by emotions', but here goes).

The financial crises was global, producing a "worldwide recession". So one can compare the effectiveness of the Obama Administration response against other countries, and region-wide "State" policies.

The Credit Suisse Research Institute and Investment Banking Securities Report, which measured global household wealth during the financial crises states:

"Europe was responsible for 10.9 trillion US dollars of the total global loss of 12.3 trillion US dollars. [That's 89%]

Asia-Pacific (excluding China and India) was the other big regional loser, shedding 1.3 trillion US dollars on the back of the dollar appreciation.

Other losses in Africa, India and the Latin American countries were offset by modest gains in North America (880 billion US dollars) and China (560 billion US dollars), which had a relatively quiet time compared with recent years and has supported wealth growth of 13 percent per annum since 2000."

In short, Obama lead the U.S. to the best economic recovery, when compared to the rest of the (recession country) world.

To fully appreciate how substantive this is , consider it was a global FINANCIAL crises, and U.S. banks own 46% of the global financial market. Holding half the "bad paper" we had, by far, the highest risk of bank failure and economy collapse.

How are we doing now:

"The latest wealth estimates indicate that by mid-2011, all regions (except Africa) had fully recovered from the financial crisis; however, Europe and India have now dropped back below the level achieved in 2007.

The U.S. minted nearly one million new millionaires in the last year, but Europe shed "almost 1.8 million U.S. dollar millionaires" in 2011, with half of those losses coming from Italy, France, and Germany."​

Bottom line, the conservative right (white) wing" has been playing (fantasy) "bogeyman" politics against blacks and liberals for centuries -to "frighten children into compliant behaviour".... preciously because they are simple minded and have been conditioned NOT to acknowledge the actual substance of others.

Prepackaged emotion is what washed Obama into office in the first place. Packaged and marketed to appeal to a simple minded voter. No complicated message, just, "Hope and Change". The reason he is having such a hard time closing on a second term is that you can't use emotion for a second term in office; you have to have actually accomplished something that your voters wanted you to accomplish.

Romney could try for the emotional victory, but he strikes me as a numbers man, and right now that is exactly what voters want; substance over fantasy.

 

[IntrepidPoster]

Bottom line, the conservative right (white) wing" has been playing (fantasy) "bogeyman" politics against blacks and liberals for centuries preciously because they are simple minded and have been conditioned NOT to acknowledge the actual substance of others.

You're on point there. Racial politics will always be big in America, and White supremacy is global and inescapable. On the other hand, i cannot say that liberal policies are always good for Blacks, and I certainly won't say that liberals are a Black's best friend.

 

[verbster]

Prepackaged emotion is what washed Obama into office in the first place. Packaged and marketed to appeal to a simple minded voter. No complicated message, just, "Hope and Change". The reason he is having such a hard time closing on a second term is that you can't use emotion for a second term in office; you have to have actually accomplished something that your voters wanted you to accomplish.

Romney could try for the emotional victory, but he strikes me as a numbers man, and right now that is exactly what voters want; substance over fantasy.

Speaking of appealing to simple-minded voters, I noticed Romney pulled out the old trick of a five-point plan. I don't fault him for that, because it's effective. Without looking it up, hardly anyone remembers what his five points were or how unrealistic they were, but they will remember something about Romney having a "plan" to make things better. Short and sweet, just like a good domain. And that's all it takes for about 20-30% of the voters. I fully expect to hear something of the same from Obama soon because it worked so well the first time.

You say Romney is a numbers man, and then somehow make the huge leap to equating being a numbers man to being something of substance that voters want. I look at him as being a numbers man who hasn't been able to produce the simple math that shows what balances a 20% cut in taxes without losing money. That seems more like wishful thinking, which is suprisingly similar to hope.

Trust is the emotion that will win the election this time. For me, it comes down to which candidate I trust has the greater desire and skillset to help the nation and its people in a thoughtful manner. That's where I give Obama the edge . . . because I agree with you in part: Romney acts like a numbers man. But for me, that's not an indicator of substance; it's the kiss of death. Numbers men decide the fates of ordinary people in a penthouse office over a martini and a joke about the 47%. It's all money and no conscience. Some people may want that kind of leadership. I don't.

 

[RogueWriter]

Here are some pretty impressive numbers regarding Obama's War on Pottery.