election 2012

[Brontos]

Yep my bad. Let me reformulate it to be more in the topic.

I'm not sure I would vote for someone who's against abortion and in favor of non-trial-kills-of-terrorists. It's a moral contradiction. Either you defend life, or you don't. If you start to place some lifes in the balance or to judge who deserve to live and die, well it's a dangerous path and not something I want to ear in the mouth of my politicians. As well, if you don't beleive terrorists should have trials before being killed, well you don't beleive in your own system. I can understand it from a citizen, but not from someone who wants to be president.

[russianspy1234]

Yep my bad. Let me reformulate it to be more in the topic.

I'm not sure I would vote for someone who's against abortion and in favor of non-trial-kills-of-terrorists. It's a moral contradiction. Either you defend life, or you don't. If you start to place some lifes in the balance or to judge who deserve to live and die, well it's a dangerous path and not something I want to ear in the mouth of my politicians. As well, if you don't beleive terrorists should have trials before being killed, well you don't beleive in your own system. I can understand it from a citizen, but not from someone who wants to be president.

if you have a problem voting for a hypocrite, you might as well stay home and not vote.

[Belthus]

In all seriousness though, I think this whole thing is going to end up blowing over. I doubt it will have any impact once its all said and done.

There is not only a fourth woman (Sharon Bialek), but also a fifth (Donna Donella). That is not counting the two women working for Steve Deace — an incident that happened very recently. At some point, even conservatives — who have become very good at constructing their own narratives on so many topics — will say that all these women aren't part of a conspiracy. What we are hearing appears to be how Herman Cain rolls.

[nerd1]

personally, I don't agree with Obama over abortion, but I feel he is the best of multiple evils, and he does a remarkable job of letting the public know where he stands, as well as refrain from becoming a hypocrite.

[darkrobe]

Id like to share Rick perry's campaign ending with you. So much for herman cain's troubles being in the news for the rest of the week.

&feature=player_embedded (

&feature=player_embedded)

Warning this is incredibly painful to watch.

[Belthus]

Id like to share Rick perry's campaign ending with you. So much for herman cain's troubles being in the news for the rest of the week.

&feature=player_embedded (

&feature=player_embedded)

Warning this is incredibly painful to watch.

I don't like the substance of Rick Perry's politics one iota. However, I do sympathize with getting brain fog on occasion. It's embarrassing, but it is hard to argue that a momentary mind slip makes one unfit to be President. It's not like Reagan's Alzheimer's. Rick Perry is a poor debater, and he can survive it.

Cain, on the other hand, is in a world of shit, and every passing day becomes worse for him.

[darkrobe]

Id like to share Rick perry's campaign ending with you. So much for herman cain's troubles being in the news for the rest of the week.

&feature=player_embedded (

&feature=player_embedded)

Warning this is incredibly painful to watch.

I don't like the substance of Rick Perry's politics one iota. However, I do sympathize with getting brain fog on occasion. It's embarrassing, but it is hard to argue that a momentary mind slip makes one unfit to be President. It's not like Reagan's Alzheimer's. Rick Perry is a poor debater, and he can survive it.

Cain, on the other hand, is in a world of shit, and every passing day becomes worse for him.

true. cain is. But specifically regarding rick perrys debate performances. hes had a track record of poor debate skills. this is just the most embarrasing one, pretty much tops all the other ones combined. Most people can forgive one or two forgetful instances. But he does this every debate, and this was his own plan, its not like he was asked about something complex or abstract. it was what were the 3 agencies HE would get rid of in his plan. and he could only remember 2. he stumbled around for over a minute, without remembering.

A candidate for president is expected to be able to debate his opponent and at least not fail epically. rick perry has shown a propensity to make huge gaffs during debates. I dont see how any republican primary voter would vote for him. considering that he doesnt look like he could challege obama, and isnt on the "right" side of a couple key issues.

My point about cain, is not that hes out of shit. its that he will get a breather for a few days until the next allegation surfaces. because rick perry is going to be the headline for the next day or 2.

[Neopergoss]

I was leaning towards Herman Cain, but not anymore, now that I found out he won't legislate against abortion. (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/herman-cain-tells-piers-morgan-that-he-is-anti-abortion-yet-pro-choice/)

Now? I gotta lean towards Ron Paul. I disagree with his foreign policy, but agree with just about everything else. When it boils down to it, I care more about a candidate's domestic policies than foreign. (Especially when I don't agree with any candidate through and through, something has to give...)

That's really funny. I respect Ron Paul immensely for his foreign policy, though I disagree with much of his domestic policy. If I had to vote for a Republican, I'd vote for him. Let me give you a little quote I ran into today from a Republican debate.

CBS’ SCOTT PELLEY: ...Is it appropriate for the American president on the president’s say-so alone to order the death of an American citizen suspected of terrorism?

MITT ROMNEY: Absolutely.
...

SCOTT PELLEY: Speaker Gingrich, if I could just ask you the same question
...

NEWT GINGRICH: If you engage in war against the United States, you are an enemy combatant.  You have none of the civil liberties of the United States.  (APPLAUSE) You cannot go to court.

This is one of the most disturbing trends in American politics for me. Clearly, terrorists don't deserve civil liberties. The problem is that the government can accuse someone of being a terrorist who isn't actually one. Ron Paul had to inject a little sanity by pointing out the irony of most Republicans who claim to support limited government while defending the right to assasinate by Presidential decree.

Sadly, this discussion was related to Obama's decision to kill Anwar Al-Awlaki. No evidence was given to support the accusation against him. No, I don't think I'll be voting for Obama, either. It says a lot that the Republicans all love this decision. The only reason Democrats don't have a problem with it is that most of them have no principles and will support their own team at all costs -- this rank tribalism is generally a serious problem with American politics. If Bush had done something like that they'd be screaming bloody murder, like when Jose Padilla was merely detained illegaly.

a question
i would really like an answer to is who supported obama last election, and if you would still support him, and if you don't, why?

Well for the biggest reason, see the spoiler above. Obama generally has taken the same approach as Bush in the "war on terrorism." He's also a servant of Wall Street, though I suspect that Republicans would be even more craven to the top 1%. I support Occupy Wall Street. Many in that group believe that the electoral process is no longer an effective way to bring about change, and I'm inclined to agree given the way things are going right now. I'm surprised there's not a thread on OWS (there would be if I were still active here).

personally, I don't agree with Obama over abortion, but I feel he is the best of multiple evils, and he does a remarkable job of letting the public know where he stands, as well as refrain from becoming a hypocrite.

Obama is a huge hypocrite. Maybe not in relative terms, but many of his supporters are bitterly disappointed with how far he fell short from what he promised as a candidate. Civil liberties is one of the most clear areas, but certainly not the only one. He was also supposed to bring the troops home. He's finally doing it, but only because negotiations to get them to stay fell apart. And there will still be an army of private contractors in Iraq indefinitely. No, I could go on and on about disappointments, but that's not really the point of this thread.

The Republican primary is a spectacle both amusing and depressing. I honestly wish people would pay more attention to real issues like the tragic consequences of our immigration policy (http://www.democracynow.org/2011/11/10/report_thousands_of_us_born_kids). The election is a whole year away and this is all anyone's talking about! I don't know who will come out of it on top (my guess would be Romney), but it will blow my mind if any of them beat Obama. For all his faults, I think he is actually a relatively shrewd politician, and these guys can't stop sabatoging themselves. I'll be voting Green with you, Belthus. Texas isn't exactly going to be a close state anyway, and if it is Obama's definitely going to win.

[darkrobe]

mmm... im not particularly disapointed in Obama. hes generally done most of what he said he would, as far as i can tell. (I say this as a previous and current Obama supporter) Most people who seem disapointed in him give me the impression they are dissapointed because

1. he didnt do what he promised as fast as they thought. (which lets face it, no politician gives a timeline on how fast they will accomplish something)
2. he didn't do something they wanted him to do but he never promised he would do. (thats just poor listening in my opinion. just cause hes a democrat doesnt mean hes going to work towards all democrat agenda items all the time.)

Im more disappointed in the economy as a whole. but its hard to place all the blame on the president for that when Greece seems to have more impact on our economy than our own government.

Edit: actually when i think about it, most politicians give ridiculous timelines for one thing or the other, but you can usually tell when they are just shitting you. Like "we will have a fence that spans the entire mexico border in a year." those are just bombastic statements which i hope no one takes seriously.

[Belthus]

So what do the Republicans and Republican-leaners here think of Newt Gingrich? He seems to be picking up steam now that Cain is bogged down with sexual harassment accusations. Will he be the one to unite the anti-Romney factions?

[darkrobe]

So what do the Republicans and Republican-leaners here think of Newt Gingrich? He seems to be picking up steam now that Cain is bogged down with sexual harassment accusations. Will he be the one to unite the anti-Romney factions?

No.

explanation
He is surging in the polls simply because most people think hes next in the republican field's flavor of the month trend. Anyone who has spent any amount of time looking at him knows he is filled with problems. he looks good in debates cause no one cares to attack him. he has in the past had a larger number gaffs and he has been caught on the wrong side of many rebulican issues. (need i mention that he was partly responsible for the individual mandate that is part of the Obama healthcare plan that all republicans seem to hate so much.)

[Belthus]

What I don't like about Obama (and other Blue Dogs) is that, since being elected, he has not acted upon or even given voice to any alternative vision that is substantially different from the Republicans' view of the world. Rs say that the deficit is a big problem; Obama agrees. Rs say that Social Security and Medicare have to be cut; Obama agrees. He rarely defends progressive principles; he almost always accepts Republican principles and haggles (poorly) over the details of implementing those principles. This approach will not please Republicans because they will always hate him as a Black socialist from Kenya, and it won't please rank-and-file Democrats. He may win reelection, but he has done nothing to shift the terms of debate. The Rs still frame every issue unchallenged. Don't be surprised if voters decide, sooner or later, that a real Republican is better than Republican Lite.