US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
evra, I think there are more centrists on the forum than you might think [probably where i balance out eventually].

Your Saint Obama comment brings to mind how a Ron Paul supporter used to call me an "Obama koo0laid drinker", whereas MikeUpNorth [in jest] once described me as being close in my politics to Pope Bedediuct. :lol:

Seeing as we are in an American themed thread, how far apart are some US Democrats from Tories? The Republican brand of Conservatism isn't necessarily a close fit once you move beyond certain fiscal and libertarian sentiments.

Perceptions...
 
This forum is more anti-Romney/GOP than it is pro-Obama, which might give the misconception of it solely being the latter.

I'd regard myself as a far-leftie and I don't particularly care for Obama much.
 
There's no way evra is your run of the mill British Conservative. I'm half convinced he votes for BNP. The Conservatives surely have more in common with the Democrats than the Republicans in the US.
 
I don't understand why anyone would not like Obama. It's one thing to disagree with some (or even all) of his politics, but any level-headed person would still have to admit that he's a thoroughly decent and charming guy who really does want what's best for his country.

I don't get that impression from Romney at all. And even though I disagree with virtually every one of McCain's political positions, I at least have some respect for the guy.
 
Saliph said:
I don't understand why anyone would not like Obama. It's one thing to disagree with some (or even all) of his politics, but any level-headed person would still have to admit that he's a thoroughly decent and charming guy who really does want what's best for his country.

I don't get that impression from Romney at all. And even though I disagree with virtually every one of McCain's political positions, I at least have some respect for the guy.
Click to expand...

He did a great bag of oven chips too.
 
Saliph, I'd hazard a guess that you disagree with virtually every one of Presidential Candidate McCain, and not regular old McCain. Sadly, there's a sizeable difference. It almost made me dislike him, but not quite.
 
Red Dreams said:
if you can say Rin Paul is a viable alternative you are not a far leftie.

Try and be objective will you?

You better pray Obama gets in again instead of Romney...cause if it is Romney you and your Iranian mates will be in the shitter faster than you think.
Click to expand...

:wenger: I don't even know where to start peeling through this.

Firstly not once did I ever say Ron Paul was a viable option. I said I agreed with his foreign policy, and I recently mentioned how he might give Obama a decent run. Would I vote for him? Hell no!

And I'm getting kind of tired of this 'pro-Iran' label. I've been as critical of the Iranian regime as anyone else here. Being opposed to to military intervention in Iran doesn't equate to me endorsing the regime. The leftie thing to do would be to oppose war on the basis of imperialism and greed of resources.
 
Red Dreams said:
if you can say Rin Paul is a viable alternative you are not a far leftie.

Try and be objective will you?

You better pray Obama gets in again instead of Romney...cause if it is Romney you and your Iranian mates will be in the shitter faster than you think.
Click to expand...

:lol:
 
Red Dreams said:
if you can say Rin Paul is a viable alternative you are not a far leftie.

Try and be objective will you?

You better pray Obama gets in again instead of Romney...cause if it is Romney you and your Iranian mates will be in the shitter faster than you think.
Click to expand...

What is the point of posts like this? You say some sensible stuff from time to time, but this shit is pointless.
 
evra said:
Just as an example of the left-wing bias that sums up the general forum. For example, when they moan about campaign finance they never mention that Saint Obama reneged on the promises he made to join with John McCain and use the public financing system. There was a rare opportunity and he cynically squandered it for his own ends.
Click to expand...

There's clearly a tremendous left wing (relative to US politics) bias on the forum. There are some centrists or moderates on here but they usually get labeled as Repubs/conservatives/neo-cons due to the over whelming number of left leaning folks.

It's ok though, just pop in a read for the comedic factor. Sometimes they get this group think going and it's page after page of comedy. See all the pages directly after the VP debate. So many were confounded to think how anyone could have seen that anything other than a crushing Biden win. It was pretty genius. Then of course followed up by the 'stupid American' comments. Excellent stuff.
 
Neutral said:
Just to jump in here, despite the accusations of being a limp dick, Obama has been far more hawkish than even Bush the last 4 years.
Click to expand...

Certainly true when it comes to drone strikes and going after AQ. Not sure that's the case when it comes to over all Middle East policy though. He's pretty much tried to refrain from anything other than rhetoric. I'm sure many like that policy and while the Repubs use it to attack him as being soft. In reality even if he wanted to go into Libya, Iran or Yemen he's probably smart enough to know the US can't engage in that right now.
 
Excal said:
Which makes him miles better than his predecessor, for a start.
Click to expand...

Different scenario and I doubt Bush would be going into any of the countries I mentioned. Shouldn't have gone into Iraq but with that and Afghanistan none of the others are doable.
 
Neutral said:
Just to jump in here, despite the accusations of being a limp dick, Obama has been far more hawkish than even Bush the last 4 years.
Click to expand...

This is why I've found it hard to warm to Obama the President. Obama the individual I'd say is very likeable, and has plenty of charisma and charm (which is a lot more than you can say about his counterpart), but there are some of his certain stances, particularly in regards to civil liberties and foreign policy, which it make it difficult for me to warm to him. Though I do accept that sometimes his hands are tied as to what he can or can't accept.

This is why I think the US desperately needs a serious 3rd party contender to revitalize their democratic process. It'll reverse the stranglehold and monopoly that powerful corporations and lobbyists hold over the two major parties, and hence the government.
 
just to address evra's tired old argument he dragged from some right wing blog on Obama 'reneging' on campaign finance agreement with McCain....

They talked and Obama realised he could get a lot more money from numerous small donors than go for federal funding. So what? How is that in any way harming the election process?

'Hey I gave $100 bucks...I'd like to lobby for this or the other...'

And to build him up to be a Saint so you can crucify him...is pretty lame.

I would not want a kin Saint as President.

He is a politician...just a lot less harmful than the alternatives in the last two cycles.
 
Eboue said:
Michael Moore is a fat wanker.
Click to expand...

A necessary fat wanker. People might find him a little too partisan or even obnoxious, but he's done a terrific job in documenting the crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush regime, as well as exposing the corruption and hypocrisy of both the political process and the crony capitalism culture.
 
Kaos said:
This is why I've found it hard to warm to Obama the President. Obama the individual I'd say is very likeable, and has plenty of charisma and charm (which is a lot more than you can say about his counterpart), but there are some of his certain stances, particularly in regards to civil liberties and foreign policy, which it make it difficult for me to warm to him. Though I do accept that sometimes his hands are tied as to what he can or can't accept.

This is why I think the US desperately needs a serious 3rd party contender to revitalize their democratic process. It'll reverse the stranglehold and monopoly that powerful corporations and lobbyists hold over the two major parties, and hence the government.
Click to expand...

The 3rd party alternative can only work if we have run-off elections. Otherwise any third party vote would only bring about the result you least want.
 
Red Dreams said:
The 3rd party alternative can only work if we have run-off elections. Otherwise any third party vote would only bring about the result you least want.
Click to expand...

Electoral reforms would be a good starting point, but it wouldn't be enough. You'd also have to look at things like media coverage.....how much coverage were the the other presidential candidates given? Not much, if any at all. Heck, one of them got arrested for trying to engage in a presidential debate...and this was a presidential candidate eligible in 85 ballots.

This is also why I hope Ron Paul runs as an independent - he'll pick up enough substantial votes to send a bit of shock to the two main parties, while setting a precedent suggesting that third party candidates should be viable options for the electorate. Ralph Nader worked hard to try and achieve this but was unfortunately seen as a partial scapegoat to Bush's 'victory' in 2000.
 
Grinner said:
Unless you are forced to watch his movies, how does he affect you?
Click to expand...

He affects the global food supply!


But seriously, he gives liberals a bad name. I imagine conservatives feel similar about Rush Limbaugh. He is a poor representative of what I believe in and his movies have impacted the public perception of my values.
 
Eboue said:
He affects the global food supply!


But seriously, he gives liberals a bad name. I imagine conservatives feel similar about Rush Limbaugh. He is a poor representative of what I believe in and his movies have impacted the public perception of my values.
Click to expand...
Sure he's fat but surely Americans would be used to that?

What has Michael Moore done to give liberals a bad name? I ask that honestly since I don't know much about him and I've only watched one of his films, Bowling for Columbine. He is pretty fat.
 
Eboue said:
It's possible to do that without being an insufferable cnut. See Stewart, John or Colbert, Stephen.
Click to expand...

Those two are primarily comedians. Moore is a serious leftie filmaker activist. You can argue he's profited very handsomely from his ventures but I think his intentions and activism are benevolent and genuine. This is a man who spent much of the last decade in fear of his life since and had to live with bodyguards because of the copious amounts of death threats he received due to his opposition to the Iraq war. Like his style or not he deserves a tremendous amount of respect for persisting in what he does despite the extreme and hostile adversity he receives.

An article well worth reading about him: http://readersupportednews.org/opin...ael-moore-i-was-the-most-hated-man-in-america
 
Eboue said:
He affects the global food supply!


But seriously, he gives liberals a bad name. I imagine conservatives feel similar about Rush Limbaugh. He is a poor representative of what I believe in and his movies have impacted the public perception of my values.
Click to expand...

I choose not to watch Rush or buy Ann Coulter books. They amuse me more than annoy me.

MM is very clever but he has to present his case in a way that your average dumbo yank can understand. His greater point that guns are bad, universal healthcare is good and Wall St. needs regulation seem reasonable enough to me.
 
Kaos said:
Electoral reforms would be a good starting point, but it wouldn't be enough. You'd also have to look at things like media coverage.....how much coverage were the the other presidential candidates given? Not much, if any at all. Heck, one of them got arrested for trying to engage in a presidential debate...and this was a presidential candidate eligible in 85 ballots.

This is also why I hope Ron Paul runs as an independent - he'll pick up enough substantial votes to send a bit of shock to the two main parties, while setting a precedent suggesting that third party candidates should be viable options for the electorate. Ralph Nader worked hard to try and achieve this but was unfortunately seen as a partial scapegoat to Bush's 'victory' in 2000.
Click to expand...

you are merely stating a wish list.

..and tbf so am I.

How do we actually change things?

Well firstly you show up at your local elections...be it council or primaries. This is what the tea party did. It may not be good for the country. but what they showed the rest of the country is you can change your party from within.

the worst thing you can do is not to vote. Voting should be compulsory...perhaps that should be on teh ballot?

Change does not come with a switch. You have to work at it...face defeats...many times. But if you persist, change will happen.

I don't like what has happened to our country...but I'm not going to give up.
 
Eboue said:
But seriously, he gives liberals a bad name. I imagine conservatives feel similar about Rush Limbaugh. He is a poor representative of what I believe in and his movies have impacted the public perception of my values.
Click to expand...

Have yet to meet a conservative who had anything more negative to say about Rush than "Yeah, he goes OTT sometimes."
 
Red Dreams said:
you are merely stating a wish list.

..and tbf so am I.

How do we actually change things?

Well firstly you show up at your local elections...be it council or primaries. This is what the tea party did. It may not be good for the country. but what they showed the rest of the country is you can change your party from within.

the worst thing you can do is not to vote. Voting should be compulsory...perhaps that should be on teh ballot?

Change does not come with a switch. You have to work at it...face defeats...many times. But if you persist, change will happen.

I don't like what has happened to our country...but I'm not going to give up.
Click to expand...

I'm not quite understanding what your proposed solution is. I can understand the importance of turning up to vote, but do you think the solution would be to keep voting Democrat and hope that they eventually change from the goodness of their hearts? Vice versa if you normally vote GOP. Or are you suggesting that people should vote 3rd party/independent on a local level in order to boost their leeway in the political process?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.