This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Why you should vote for Obama if you care at all about internet openness.

#381Snacks23Posted 11/6/2012 11:58:56 PM
Obsidus posted...
Maybe Republicans will get it through their heads now that pandering to far right sentiments and people isn't going to get them into office. Bush soured many people, the way Congress has been acting the past 2 years has been SHAMEFUL, the Tea Party are farcical, and the Republican Presidential candidates this time around were all an absolute slide show of buffoonery and idiocy, every single one of them was an absolute joke. At least four years ago they had McCain, whom I respect (Palin sunk that ship combined with people being iffy on the right because of Bush), but this time around it was just a collection of dullards. I really believe Obama won this not because people like Democrats more, but because the Republicans have been putting their feet in their mouths and aping it up for a couple years now, they dug their own graves. Maybe in four more years we'll, *gasp*, see a MODERATE Republican, if that occurs I know where I'll be voting.



Hopefully they see how popular the Libertarian party is, but more importantly, how votes for the Libertarian party took away votes from Romney in the closest Presidential race in history. If they begin to extend the hand toward Libertarians and reform their party to have more of the Libertarian party's ideals, the Republicans will win elections again. I would have happily voted for Romney if he explicitly stated that he was against the war on drugs, wanted to legalize drugs and would work to legalize all drugs during his administration. Then again, Obama said much the same thing in 2008, and broke that promise, so I don't know. I am however very dissatisfied that there wasn't an anti war candidate this election. Both Romney and Obama are pro war with Iran right now, voting for either of them means war with Iran is highly likely. That's not a choice I enjoy having to make.


KillerTruffle posted...
Oh well. Not gonna happen... we got the guy who's already proven he knows how to screw the country up.



Like I said, this is the same country that 8 years ago re-elected Bush. We've proven yet again that if things really suck but both candidates are exactly as awful as one another, we tend to prefer the incumbent. It isn't a surprise.
---
http://tinyurl.com/86ycesp http://tinyurl.com/7r8ouge
http://tinyurl.com/7hb5dzn http://tinyurl.com/6rxud7b
#382KillerTrufflePosted 11/7/2012 12:02:03 AM
Bush might have kick-started it, but his policies kept the economy well under control through his first 7 years. It wasn't until the end of his 8th year that the economy tanked, and continued to be royally screwed up throughout Obama's first four years. I have zero hope he'll manage to make any significant changes in the next four. He actually bought into Bush's terrible bailout idea and did it again - with even worse effect than Bush's try.

Declaring companies "too big to fail" is a cardinal sin in a country so heavily invested in capitalism. If a company is being managed in a way that is running it into the ground, it NEEDS to fail in order to keep the economy healthy. Will jobs be lost? Yep. Will those jobs be replaced as new, more responsible companies come in to pick up the slack where the big guy failed? Yep. Artificially dragging the big companies on with federal money is just ****ed up, and Obama was a 100% player in that mess. Neither Bush nor Obama understood economics a bit, but at least the economy was for the most part stable under him, until the end of his final term when it crashed. I still hold Obama just as responsible as Bush for our screwed up economy.
---
"How do I get rid of a Trojan Horse?" -Sailor_Kakashi
"Leave it outside the gates of Troy overnight." -Davel23
#383Snacks23Posted 11/7/2012 12:07:21 AM
Obsidus posted...
I love how some people consistently and easily ignore over and over again, how even if Obama was a reincarnation of Lincoln, he'd still look like a turd to some degree with a Republican congress hamstringing him every step of the way. I remember reading the newspapers where Republicans actually were trying to reason that the country going into default wouldn't actually be that bad, and that it was worth it to stop the Democrats from getting their way. I mean seriously? Obama has been pretty mediocre at best, and I myself am an Independent, but I just love how everyone ignores this key fact. Congress these past couple of years have been copiously obstructionist and partisan; but NOPE, it's ALL Obama, he's just terribad.



Well see the thing is Obama had an overwhelming Democrat majority for his first 2 years in office as opposed to his last 2 years in office. His first 2 years in office, as you can see from earlier in the thread from the Department of Labor's own statistics, the unemployment rate went up.


I'm not sure if you remember but Clinton had a Republican Congress for 6 of his 8 years just like Obama will. Clinton managed to work with that Congress and had a time of great prosperity in the nation. Now obviously I'm not looking for Obama to magically pull America into a time of great prosperity but if Clinton managed to work miracles, what does it say for Obama? Either Obama is nowhere near a competent President considering the work Clinton was able to do under the same circumstances, or the Republicans were responsible for the prosperity during the Clinton administration, and you aren't giving them near enough credit right now.



Now the reason I posted this Republican loving post is simple, you claimed to be an independent and quite clearly placed your lips firmly on the ass of Obama. I figured I might as well do the same for our GOP friends.
---
http://tinyurl.com/86ycesp http://tinyurl.com/7r8ouge
http://tinyurl.com/7hb5dzn http://tinyurl.com/6rxud7b
#384Snacks23Posted 11/7/2012 12:12:29 AM
KillerTruffle posted...
Bush might have kick-started it, but his policies kept the economy well under control through his first 7 years. It wasn't until the end of his 8th year that the economy tanked, and continued to be royally screwed up throughout Obama's first four years. I have zero hope he'll manage to make any significant changes in the next four. He actually bought into Bush's terrible bailout idea and did it again - with even worse effect than Bush's try.

Declaring companies "too big to fail" is a cardinal sin in a country so heavily invested in capitalism. If a company is being managed in a way that is running it into the ground, it NEEDS to fail in order to keep the economy healthy. Will jobs be lost? Yep. Will those jobs be replaced as new, more responsible companies come in to pick up the slack where the big guy failed? Yep. Artificially dragging the big companies on with federal money is just ****ed up, and Obama was a 100% player in that mess. Neither Bush nor Obama understood economics a bit, but at least the economy was for the most part stable under him, until the end of his final term when it crashed. I still hold Obama just as responsible as Bush for our screwed up economy.




I do also, I still remember when he was holding meetings with the auto executives he was bailing out and they treated him with great disrespect and he just let them talk over him.


The thing is, letting this companies not fail is just kicking the can down the road. You saw the unemployment statistics, they've been stagnant for a very long period of time. It's quite clear that he's just doing it so he can keep our heads just ever so slightly above the water, get credit for making sure we didn't collapse entirely, and then abandon ship as soon as 2016 rolls around and it isn't his problem anymore. I agree with Mike, I believe the Democrats will still hold control of the white house until at least 2020, and I also believe that they will still be blaming Bush when that time rolls around.


oh btw you don't often see someone claiming Bush ever did anything competent ever, I'm kinda surprised you haven't had a mountain of teenagers jumping on you yet.
---
http://tinyurl.com/86ycesp http://tinyurl.com/7r8ouge
http://tinyurl.com/7hb5dzn http://tinyurl.com/6rxud7b
#385KillerTrufflePosted 11/7/2012 12:20:14 AM
From: Obsidus | #380
I love how some people consistently and easily ignore over and over again, how even if Obama was a reincarnation of Lincoln, he'd still look like a turd to some degree with a Republican congress hamstringing him every step of the way. I remember reading the newspapers where Republicans actually were trying to reason that the country going into default wouldn't actually be that bad, and that it was worth it to stop the Democrats from getting their way. I mean seriously? Obama has been pretty mediocre at best, and I myself am an Independent, but I just love how everyone ignores this key fact. Congress these past couple of years have been copiously obstructionist and partisan; but NOPE, it's ALL Obama, he's just terribad.


http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0411.pdf


Year . . . . . . . . . . . . President . . . . . . . Congress. . . . . . . House. . . . . . . . . . . . . Senate
2007 . . . . . . . . . . . R (Bush). . . . . . . . . 110th. . . . . . . . . . . D-233 R-202 . . . . . . . D-49 R-49
2009 . . . . . . . . . . . D (Obama). . . . . . . 111th. . . . . . . . . . . D-256 R-178 . . . . . . . D-55 R-41
2011 . . . . . . . . . . . D (Obama). . . . . . . 112th. . . . . . . . . . . D-193 R-242 . . . . . . . D-51 R-47

Funny... I could swear he actually had a Democratic congress up until 2011.

In fact, I could swear that while Bush had a Republican congress, the economy was pretty decent. The instant Democrats took over, the economy tanked - the final year of Bush's last term. The economy continued to blow chunks consistently hovering around 17% jobless while Dems held congress, and only after Republicans came back into majority in the house did the economy show ANY signs of improvement, but no thanks to Obama.

Obama had all four years with a Democratic senate, and only two of four years with a Republican house. The two years with the Republican house showed improvement, so while Obama was working with full-on Democratic everything, the economy SUCKED. Your argument about him being "hamstrung" by Republican congress is a load of crap. The economy did its worst while we had a Democratic majority.
---
"How do I get rid of a Trojan Horse?" -Sailor_Kakashi
"Leave it outside the gates of Troy overnight." -Davel23
#386Snacks23Posted 11/7/2012 12:23:03 AM
KillerTruffle posted...
Obama had all four years with a Democratic senate, and only two of four years with a Republican house.




crap sorry, I made the mistake of confusing "congress" with "house of representatives", I completely forgot to say he's had a majority democrat senate all 4 years


that's completely correct
---
http://tinyurl.com/86ycesp http://tinyurl.com/7r8ouge
http://tinyurl.com/7hb5dzn http://tinyurl.com/6rxud7b
#387SilentHawk29Posted 11/7/2012 12:33:34 AM
From: KillerTruffle | #382
Declaring companies "too big to fail" is a cardinal sin in a country so heavily invested in capitalism. If a company is being managed in a way that is running it into the ground, it NEEDS to fail in order to keep the economy healthy. Will jobs be lost? Yep. Will those jobs be replaced as new, more responsible companies come in to pick up the slack where the big guy failed? Yep. Artificially dragging the big companies on with federal money is just ****ed up, and Obama was a 100% player in that mess. Neither Bush nor Obama understood economics a bit, but at least the economy was for the most part stable under him, until the end of his final term when it crashed. I still hold Obama just as responsible as Bush for our screwed up economy.

If he let the American auto industry collapse, would you then be blaming him now for increasing the unemployment rate even more?
---
PSN - Srikar || WKC2 - Jinto
My car: http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/239/71newwheels06.jpg
#388gecko_man2Posted 11/7/2012 12:45:20 AM
The butthurt is strong in this thread.
---
"Well maybe we'll get lucky and we'll both live again. I dont know, I dont know, I dont know, dont think so."
#389odm0154Posted 11/7/2012 12:51:34 AM
i am so sad that jill stein lost. she was america's only hope other than Gary Johnson and Ron Paul.
---
http://i.imgur.com/hCnvs.gif ~Aegyo~! http://i.imgur.com/uUvBa.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Cj2af.jpg ~~~no antis pl0x~~~ http://i.imgur.com/hzFMB.jpg
#390KillerTrufflePosted 11/7/2012 12:55:46 AM
From: SilentHawk29 | #387
If he let the American auto industry collapse, would you then be blaming him now for increasing the unemployment rate even more?

Have you seen anything about Detroit in the last few years? Considering it was the hub of the auto industry and it's nothing but a wasteland now, I'd say that's pretty good evidence the industry *did* collapse, and was largely held up by life support from the government, which has, as Snacks pointed out, simply "kicked the can down the road" rather than actually rebuilding anything. The bulk of bailout funds went straight into the pockets of the very company directors that were responsible for getting them into the mess in the first place. Rather than putting the money into fixing the *company*, most of it was used to give themselves bonuses.

As I said, yeah, the first round of that nonsense was Bush, but Obama did it too, and more excessively. Because obviously if something doesn't work right the first time, the solution is do it again, but go even *more* overboard.
---
"How do I get rid of a Trojan Horse?" -Sailor_Kakashi
"Leave it outside the gates of Troy overnight." -Davel23