The Presidential Race 08

[LexBex17]

I did support Bush (regretfully), but no one spouted and gushed and orgasmed over his charisma and speaking ability. We all knew he couldn't talk.

Obama, however, makes women faint and people just swoon when he talks and everyone talks about how charismatic he is. I have yet to see this charisma in action, that is my point.

I remember when I was in high school and the senior girls who were old enough to vote, picked Bill Clinton because they thought he was cute. I also remember feeling that those votes were wasted. I wonder how many grown women and men don't take this seriously and vote like it's a popularity contest without taking in the political aspects? I overheard a few women wanting to vote for Obama because of the cuteness factor. I felt disgusted with them.

[Goin2Disneyland]

I think Obama was making a reasonable point about how frustration over long-term unemployment, economic stagnation and declining opportunity are often manifested through misdirected anger toward ethnic minorities, immigration or various other groups and issues and that in the US this is often channeled through religion and the gun lobby. The causes of their problems aren't any of these things, but these feelings are effectively massaged by the Republican Party so that people end up voting for exactly the kinds of economic policies that have left them in the state they're in because they've been led to believe its the gays, Mexicans, and people trying to take their guns that are destroying their way of life. It's an easy and appealing explanation. Of course, you can't say that...

I do think Hillary is overall a better communicator than Obama. At the beginning of all of this I thought Obama was more appealing, but watching the first debates it was clear that Hillary had a greater handle on policy and whenever the discussion comes down to the specifics of what they would do in office she runs circles around him. Overall I still prefer Obama as I find Hillary a little too coldly cynical, but I think it's very hard to say who would be better in office. If people didn't judge candidates on their likability I think she'd be well in front.

As someone who comes from small-town America and has extended family in states like Pennsylvania, I can tell you that I have never heard a Republican politician tell myself or my family members that our economic stagnation, unemployment levels, gas prices or declining opportunity are the fault of gays, Mexicans and pro-gun control people. And to say that that sentiment is the driving force behind small-towners is nothing short of ludicrous and proves that you share a similar, out-of-touch view as Obama on the subject.

What Obama fails to understand is that these people don't have economic reasons for their beliefs.

I'm going to let that sink in.

Their beliefs on homosexuality (gay marriage, not necessarily existence), gun control (or lack thereof) and illegal immigration were the same during the Clinton years when America was supposedly free of economic problems and everything was magically wonderful.

There are people who believe marriage is between a man and a woman, that their second amendment rights are not to be infringed upon and that if you want to come to America, come on in, but do it legally and follow our rules without sucking up our tax dollars on the fringe.

You may not agree with any of those beliefs, as Obama appears to not agree, and that's fine. The beautiful thing about America is that people are allowed to hold whatever beliefs they want. I find it disgustingly assumptive and judgmental to dismiss them so categorically as Obama has. For someone whose whole campaign is built on being a changer and a uniter, he has not only failed to unite his own party, but become more divisive on a weekly basis.

I concur with your assessment of Hillary Clinton on policy, she runs circles around Obama who clearly is in over his head.

My main problem with Bush, Clinton, McCain and Obama and all these other puppets is that their heart is not really for the best interests of America and her people. In fact, if the American people had half as many lobbyists as Philip Morris or Archer Price, things might be different in this country. All of the government's wasteful spending might be curbed, our debt might scale down and our dollar wouldn't be constantly devalued by stupid economic policies. I don't need the government telling me what light bulbs I can and cannot buy. I won't buy those stupid CFL lights because if one breaks, my family and I are screwed. My dog could die, a child could die because a broken CFL releases mercury. Sorry, I'll wait to LEDs come to the household market before I replace incandescents.

And while we're at it, let's talk about ethanol. Don't want to pay more for food or gas? Dump the ethanol crap. Our politicians want to eliminate our dependence on middle east oil? Then they need to start drilling and refining her in America, where we have untapped resources that will last for centuries. But G2D, the caribou will die! They're endangered! Did you know the oil pipeline in Alaska has tripled the caribou population? They crowd around it for warmth!

We get what we ask for. The far leftists wanted $4/gallon gas so people would drive less and use public transit. Is it working? Are people driving less? No.

And I'd believe we were fighting a war on terror if our own border was secured, but no one seems interested in doing that. Until then, I'm not sure what we're fighting, because every day people, drugs and potential terrorists are smuggled across our wide open border.

And we, as Americans, complain about how our government sucks and nothing gets done. My advice? Elect someone else. Stop voting for the same old senator who hasn't been out of office in 20 years. Stop voting for Byrd, Boxer, Kennedy, Kerry and Santorum and whoever else. Vote for someone else, someone who might actually get something done. I'm still waiting for Ms. Pelosi's first 100 days promises to come to fruition.

It's been more than 100 days.

And now we have a presidential election, where on one side we have a long-useless senator (McCain) running as a semi-conservative Republican. Just four years ago McCain nearly left the party to be John Kerry's VP candidate.

On the other side we have the wife of a former President whose antics are legendary and who let Osama bin Laden go free on several occasions. She is unlikable for the most part and began her official political career a few years ago only to have a shot at being president herself. Her opponent is a loose cannon senator who was known as being by far the most liberal senator in the Illinois state senate before being in Washington for a couple years. Now, simply because he's "charismatic" people are going ape for him and thinking he can actually deliver on his promise for change, while his true beliefs come to surface and he refuses to debate his opponent (I would too if I was that bad at off-the-cuff speaking). His policies are sketchy and tentative and his wife is out there telling everyone how racist we are and how hard it was for her, being a six figure income earning Ivy League graduate while encouraging others not to strive for such achievements and what she calls "middle-class-ism."

It's a sad state of affairs here. Three candidates, all of whom flop in the wind and engaging in the same-old same-old politics, sustaining the same overload of underperforming programs and unmitigated spending and inflation.

But you know what? We've done it to ourselves. 300+ million of us can't seem to make a dent in the less than 500 that run our country. And sad to say, our current President, whom I regrettably supported, has made the federal government all-powerful and with the flick of his wrist, our Constitution is suspended indefinitely and whomever the new police state chooses to can be instantaneously detained without attorney indefinitely in one of FEMA's 800+ concentration camps across the country.

You want change America? Start it at home and don't think for a second one of these political candidates is going to save you from unemployment, high gas prices or anything else. Vote with your ballot and vote with your pocketbook and do yourself and your nation a favor...get out of debt. Take that imaginary stimulus check for $600 and pay off a credit card, then cut it up.

Sorry this turned into a multi-page manifesto. Love you all!

[cinder]

This scares me.

[viigduckman]

* On my feet applauding *

I cant believe how much on the same page we are G2D.

[Mortimer]

I'm becoming wary of this entire political nightmare. Obama is my choice but he is looking weathered and battered. His pastor needs to shut the hell up. Obama needs to shut the hell up. Seems like as of lately, the more he talks, the more damage he is doing to himself. It's called lack of experience or tiredness or both, I guess.

Hillary is doing a better job right now controlling her campaign. She might not be doing it in a very nice way, but she has proven it to be effective. Hillary is constantly putting Obama on the defense, which is making him look like an idiot.. Good new for Hillary.

Policy wise, they are very similar. So all they have to bring forward ito the battle is character issues, he said/she said bull crap. Hillary has maybe an ounce more experience than Obama, but Obama has more charisma and likable traits and is good at pulling people together, (look at the $uccess of his campaign)...

McCain must be pretty happy right now where he is sitting...

Hoping that next Tuesday will end this debacle on the Democratic side. But I doubt it.

[Majikku]

I'm becoming wary of this entire political nightmare. Obama is my choice but he is looking weathered and battered. His pastor needs to shut the hell up. Obama needs to shut the hell up. Seems like as of lately, the more he talks, the more damage he is doing to himself. It's called lack of experience or tiredness or both, I guess.

Hillary is doing a better job right now controlling her campaign. She might not be doing it in a very nice way, but she has proven it to be effective. Hillary is constantly putting Obama on the defense, which is making him look like an idiot.. Good new for Hillary.

Policy wise, they are very similar. So all they have to bring forward ito the battle is character issues, he said/she said bull crap. Hillary has maybe an ounce more experience than Obama, but Obama has more charisma and likable traits and is good at pulling people together, (look at the $uccess of his campaign)...

McCain must be pretty happy right now where he is sitting...

Hoping that next Tuesday will end this debacle on the Democratic side. But I doubt it.

I agree Mort.

While I like Obama,alot! and definatly feel he is the best choice for President,I too get the impression hes just worn out. Im sure once he gets the nomination it will be a huge weight off his shoulders and he will start to look better again.

[WrongWay]

Going2Disneyland,
I very strongly agree with much of what you said. Red necks aren't Bible Thumpin', gun totin', bigots 'cause of economic problems. They are Bible Thumpin', gun totin', bigots because they are Bible Thumpin', gun totin', bigots.

Many who are harmed by Republican economic policy vote Republican because their "social issues" overcome their "economic issues". Ditto... many harmed by Democratic economic policy vote Dem on social issues.

The politicians re trying to turn us into one-issue social voters so they can all robus blind while we're distracted.... IMO.

The one thing I disagree with you on is none of the politicians caring about U.S. and the people. I do think McCain cares. He is just tired of losing. So this time he is saying whatever it takes..... He was staunchly against the ethanol subsidies since they do nothing to decrese green house emissions... but that cost him the farmer vote. Now he is pro! Once he was in favor of much stronger banking and business regualtion, but that cost him the money... so now he is anti. One day he says he doesn't think bailing out the housing bubble lenders is the job of the government. Give him a week and he is out with a statement that there is a role for the government to keep people in their houses and prevent foreclosures and maintain economic stability... blah. blah. blah.

He thought it was wrong for Republicans to run on a platform of "traditional family values", thus the "agents of intollerance" statements. Now he sucks up to these agents of intolerance because you have to get the bible thumpin', bigot vote if you want to get the Republican nomination.

I think he still cares. I just think he has decided that telling the truth of your opinions is a loser on the campaign trail.... so he's stopped doing it.

Truth is for losers!

[Sir_Cliff]

First off, thanks G2D for taking the time to thoughtfully give your perspective on the issues! As I'm not from the US at all my knowledge of American politics is generally either from academic or media sources so it's good to hear different points of view on the issues. I guess people might feel that since I'm not American I don't have the right to comment on US politics or sufficient knowledge, but hopefully I have something to contribute!

As someone who comes from small-town America and has extended family in states like Pennsylvania, I can tell you that I have never heard a Republican politician tell myself or my family members that our economic stagnation, unemployment levels, gas prices or declining opportunity are the fault of gays, Mexicans and pro-gun control people. And to say that that sentiment is the driving force behind small-towners is nothing short of ludicrous and proves that you share a similar, out-of-touch view as Obama on the subject.

What Obama fails to understand is that these people don't have economic reasons for their beliefs.

I think Obama's point is getting somewhat lost. There are obviously many valid reasons to be socially conservative, but there is a phenomenon of those who are most economically disadvantaged or in the most economically disadvantaged regions continuing to vote against people who focus most on addressing this disadvantage (though this is somewhat mitigated by race-based voting trends). Not so coincidentally, it's also in these regions that anti-immigrant sentiment and conservative religious beliefs are most prevalent in politics. The people who espouse these beliefs are the people who most actively support exactly the kinds of policies that have sent jobs overseas, seek to reduce labor protections and oppose redistribution measures. So, if you're on the left side of politics, there appears to be a fairly clear case of misdirection here in which people are having deep-seated prejudices and religious beliefs stoked in order to get them to vote against their own interests. Ironically, the longer this goes on and the more people feel economically disempowered the more effective this tactic becomes. The feelings become so intense that you'd imagine that rights and freedoms being granted to others like gay marriage were being made compulsary for everyone.

Now, people can disagree with that line of argument, but there is certainly far more to it than Obama being a snob. However, he is running for president and you just don't say those things, even behind doors, as a presidential candidate. I personally suspect Bush, McCain and their advisors agree entirely with Obama.

My main problem with Bush, Clinton, McCain and Obama and all these other puppets is that their heart is not really for the best interests of America and her people. In fact, if the American people had half as many lobbyists as Philip Morris or Archer Price, things might be different in this country. All of the government's wasteful spending might be curbed, our debt might scale down and our dollar wouldn't be constantly devalued by stupid economic policies.

But what do the American people think is right for them? A significant amount of people will support stuff you don't support. Constructing a political system is a tough business, but it seems clear that America needs massive change going forward. I think this is why people have responded so positively to Obama so far as people will listen to anyone trying to offer something different. People will likely end up finding him too different and go with McCain, but I don't think they'll be happy about it as I really don't see what he has to offer that's any different from the current system. He's already shown himself prone to cave in to pressure to change his stances on the issues when politically convenient.

[Goin2Disneyland]

I think the American people at large are happy with the basics: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not to mention a stable economy, a government that does its job and does its job well without taxing everyone to death, etc.

Cliff, I highly respect your opinion and find it even more fascinating since you are in another country looking in.

You see, here in America we have failed. We have raised a couple generations of people who feel they are entitled to whatever they desire without earning it. This is the antithesis of America and its Constitution, not that the Constitution matters.

As a result of having a populace raised on decadence and taught apathy, most people my age are blissfully ignorant of the government and how it works until it affects them. They lose their job, their house is foreclosed, a healthcare disaster befalls them, they don't get a tax refund.

Then all of the sudden, the government matters to them. They know they don't like the current state because they can't take responsibility for their own circumstances (they weren't taught how to do so) and so therefore, CHANGE sounds awesome. What kind of CHANGE is it? Will this CHANGE further hurt our spinning-top economy? Is Robin Hood economics REALLY going to be a long-term solution? Will socialism fix our ills?

They don't know. All they know is that they need someone to blame and someone to fix it for them. It's a self-serve philosophy that will bankrupt an all ready teetering government. Social Security and Medicare alone will bankrupt us in the next few decades.

To me, the answer is obvious. You can't rely on your government. They can't even take care of themselves. The only person who can change your circumstances is you. I know homeless people who have become milionaires (one during the Gulf War). An illiterate man on welfare who made over $200,000 in one year. While Michelle Obama is out there telling people not to pursue their dreams of a better life, those dumb enough to ignore her can still, in this country, go out and bootstrap it.

And when they do, we'll raise their taxes to 50% so they have no incentive to continue doing so. The rich all ready pay the bulk of our taxes anyway, why not make them pay all of them? They've got the money! And then, because I don't have the money, the government should give me some of theirs. Manipulation.

And now, I'm dependent on the government, which is just where the government would like me to be. Now I'm easy to control.

Is that a pessimistic viewpoint? Maybe. But our federal government gives me no reason to be optimistic, their track record speaks for itself. And their policy moves since Bush has been elected have been made in a far less capitalistic fashion and toward much more governmental control.

[WrongWay]

Goin2Disleyland, I agree with much of what you say.

My SIL was at my house a couple weeks ago complaining that the economy is bad, getting worse, and no one seems to have any idea what to do about it. This is the SIL that for the last 10+ years has made a habit of spending much more than she makes. 3 cash-out refi + a bankruptcy to wipe out her credit card debts just before the laws changed. Here is an idea.... SPEND LESS!!!

But, how can she be blamed? Inflation insures that our savings will lose value and out debt will be wiped away. AND, inflation is inevitable now. There is too much debt to ever be repaid, so we will have to inflate it away.

The government chose not to deal with trade deficits. They chose not to deal with pensions going away making people more dependant on the unsustainable social security and medicare. They chose not to deal with healthcare costs rising at 2-3x inflation. Heck, they chose to lie about inflation with things like the quality adjustment.

They embraced globalization as a way to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. After all, poor don't make campaign contributions.

The rich pay all the taxes because they are the only ones with any money. If the rich want to make sure the poor are paying more taxes, then need to lock down debt, stop the trade deficit, return jobs to the U.S., make sure the poor are less poor, MASS cuts to government spending, put the lawyers out of business, put Wall Street brokers and other debt pushers out of business, etc.

It isn't just that people have made themselves dependant on the government. The government has done nothing to ensure people can continue to be self-sufficient.


And, if you don't mind, how did the homeless guy make $200K in a day?