Regretful Obama Voter
07-08-2011, 09:06 PM
#9
What do you mean by that? I'm not saying I vote along party lines, I'm saying that Palin is too far right for me, comes off as a moron, and would represent & lead the US poorly. Pres. Obama on the other hand, I think is a strong leader, not a moron and represents & leads the US well.
IMO no matter who is president, when the country has economic problems, unpopular wars, civil unrest etc. the president will get the blame for it all regardless if he/she actually had something to do with it or not, and thus be unpopular among a large percentage of the population. It's all about what people think, forget the facts. For example, just look at the birthers and people who believe he's a Muslim, reality doesn't phase them.
IMO no matter who is president, when the country has economic problems, unpopular wars, civil unrest etc. the president will get the blame for it all regardless if he/she actually had something to do with it or not, and thus be unpopular among a large percentage of the population. It's all about what people think, forget the facts. For example, just look at the birthers and people who believe he's a Muslim, reality doesn't phase them.
Reply
0
0
07-08-2011, 10:04 PM
#12
What do you mean by that? I'm not saying I vote along party lines, I'm saying that Palin is too far right for me, comes off as a moron, and would represent & lead the US poorly. Pres. Obama on the other hand, I think is a strong leader, not a moron and represents & leads the US well.
IMO no matter who is president, when the country has economic problems, unpopular wars, civil unrest etc. the president will get the blame for it all regardless if he/she actually had something to do with it or not, and thus be unpopular among a large percentage of the population. It's all about what people think, forget the facts. For example, just look at the birthers and people who believe he's a Muslim, reality doesn't phase them.
IMO no matter who is president, when the country has economic problems, unpopular wars, civil unrest etc. the president will get the blame for it all regardless if he/she actually had something to do with it or not, and thus be unpopular among a large percentage of the population. It's all about what people think, forget the facts. For example, just look at the birthers and people who believe he's a Muslim, reality doesn't phase them.
Reply
0
0
07-08-2011, 10:12 PM
#14
"IMO no matter who is president, when the country has economic problems, unpopular wars, civil unrest etc. the president will get the blame for it all regardless if he/she actually had something to do with it or not, and thus be unpopular among a large percentage of the population."
Assigning blame gets us no ware.
Reply
0
0
07-08-2011, 10:14 PM
#15
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,420
Total Cats: 84
You don't see STATISM vs. FREEDOM.
For example, just look at the birthers and people who believe he's a Muslim, reality doesn't phase them.
Try this for a new concept:
Reply
0
0
07-08-2011, 10:22 PM
#16
I personally think our last two presidents have been disasters. Look at the TSA. In 2000, that agency didn't even exist. Now it is one of (perhaps the) largest agency in the federal government. And it's a joke. And we all know it. Guess how much that body scanner you went through last month costs?
It wasn't that long ago that we were running a surplus. To me, legislation is like software, with lots of unintended consequences (i.e., bugs). Any good software engineer will revert to a last known good version when things get really FUBAR. So, step one to me would be to revert to 1999/2000:
1. Wind down the wars. We've won. We don't need to stay and try to nation build a place like Afghanistan fer chrissakes. The terrorists are now in Pakistan, Yemen and Sudan anyway.
2. TSA . . . gone. Geeez.
3. Prescription drug benefit . . . gone.
4. What's left of the stimulus . . . refunded to the treasury.
5. "Unfair" trade agreements . . . rescinded.
You know, at the time I was disgusted by Bill Clinton. But, on reflection, I really miss ol' Bill (coupled with a conservative republican congress). It was a nice combo and highly entertaining.
Perhaps there should be a constitutional amendment that no single party can dominate both the executive and legislative branches. That seems to be when most of the damage gets done . . . no checks and balances. Unfettered Republicans are just as dangerous as unfettered Democrats.
It wasn't that long ago that we were running a surplus. To me, legislation is like software, with lots of unintended consequences (i.e., bugs). Any good software engineer will revert to a last known good version when things get really FUBAR. So, step one to me would be to revert to 1999/2000:
1. Wind down the wars. We've won. We don't need to stay and try to nation build a place like Afghanistan fer chrissakes. The terrorists are now in Pakistan, Yemen and Sudan anyway.
2. TSA . . . gone. Geeez.
3. Prescription drug benefit . . . gone.
4. What's left of the stimulus . . . refunded to the treasury.
5. "Unfair" trade agreements . . . rescinded.
You know, at the time I was disgusted by Bill Clinton. But, on reflection, I really miss ol' Bill (coupled with a conservative republican congress). It was a nice combo and highly entertaining.
Perhaps there should be a constitutional amendment that no single party can dominate both the executive and legislative branches. That seems to be when most of the damage gets done . . . no checks and balances. Unfettered Republicans are just as dangerous as unfettered Democrats.
Reply
0
0
07-08-2011, 10:26 PM
#17
Wrong on both counts. I don't just see just right vs left, it kida seems like you do with your STATISM vs. FREEDOM argument. Hypocrisy fail.
I don't know when the modern tea party began, and I don't care. What they are now is a group farther right then the GOP, I could vote for a moderate republican, but not somebody who hails from the tea party.
BTW, It'd be funny as hell if Obama raised the tax on tea just to **** with the tea party.
I don't know when the modern tea party began, and I don't care. What they are now is a group farther right then the GOP, I could vote for a moderate republican, but not somebody who hails from the tea party.
BTW, It'd be funny as hell if Obama raised the tax on tea just to **** with the tea party.
Reply
0
0
