Who yall voting for come November?

[sbruning29]

Barack or Romney is what it will come down to. I got Mitt.

[AlecRaenos]

Why is it in my voting life time I have felt like I have to choose between Missouri and the Oakland Raiders when it comes to voting for President?

[tophawk1983]

It doesn't matter. I think it's hilarious that Romney is going to be the best option the GOP can put out there. When has a sitting president been more vulnerable to lose his second term? I agree with Alec. I actually think Obama could have been a really good president. Bush probably could have been too for that matter. But nobody can in this political environment. Everybody is set up to fail in a system where compromising turns you into a lame duck for your next election. Americans should be ashamed we've let our system of government go down the tubes, but most are too fucking stupid to even notice.

[KansasPhog]

"I think it's hilarious that Romney is going to be the best option the GOP can put out there."

I actually think its funny that people still think Obama is a President and not a dumb smuck that alot of uniformed people voted for. While I'm not a Romney fan anything is better than the last 3 1/2 years.

Kinda makes Bush's 4 - 5 % unemployment that all the newspeople bagged on early in his administration look kinda nice.

[Crimson Army]

I wish huntsman was going to be the republican candidate - financially conservative and socially liberal, plus not a partisan hack, he's the best candidate from either party in a long time

[Rockchalk]

Originally Posted by KansasPhog

"I think it's hilarious that Romney is going to be the best option the GOP can put out there."

I actually think its funny that people still think Obama is a President and not a dumb smuck that alot of uniformed people voted for. While I'm not a Romney fan anything is better than the last 3 1/2 years.

Kinda makes Bush's 4 - 5 % unemployment that all the newspeople bagged on early in his administration look kinda nice.

Except that the unemployment continued to rise the rest of his administration. This brings up an interesting point since unemployment continued to rise into and during the first 3 years of the Obama administration although it has actually decreased recently. Republicans often refer to something called the "residual effect". What it means, at least to the GOP is that anything positive that occurs during a Democrat's stay in office is the result of strategies levied by the preceding Republican President and anything negative that occurs during a Republican's run is the result of failed strategies of the preceding Democrat. A cute way to cover both ends.

BUT, here we see that unemployment rose during the Bush administration and continued to rise during the first 3+ years of the Obama administration and now it has started to turn the other way.

[pgittemeier09]

but thats capiatlism? ups and downs. its stupid to have people argue about whos fault unemployment is even tho it will keep going up and down.

[msg123]

Gary Johnson.

[tophawk1983]

Originally Posted by KansasPhog

"I think it's hilarious that Romney is going to be the best option the GOP can put out there."

I actually think its funny that people still think Obama is a President and not a dumb smuck that alot of uniformed people voted for. While I'm not a Romney fan anything is better than the last 3 1/2 years.

Kinda makes Bush's 4 - 5 % unemployment that all the newspeople bagged on early in his administration look kinda nice.

Typical partisan bullshit. If Romney gets elected, your Democrat counterparts will be saying the same types of things about him four years from now. And nothing will have changed...no progress made. Status quo.

[guitarmas5]

Obama without a doubt. I feel like the Republicans are playing a huge practical joke on the country with that candidate field. Huntsman is the only guy who even comes close to being a reasonable, viable candidate... and he's in dead last place.

[KansasPhog]

Im going to leave the political discussion where its at. My bet would be your minds would not be changed and Im pretty sure your not going to get me to vote for a guy that still wont release is actual college transcripts. So I'll leave it at that.

By the way Bush unemployment was well under 5% until gool old Nancy got elected queen of the House. And as for the unemployment going down now. Dont bet on it, its kinda like the way we started counting the unemployment differently for Obama so we dont discuss the real unemployment which is actually around 15 - 18%. But if you must give credit, why not give it the Republicans in the House as they have at least tried to stop this idiot from spending more money, although it has not worked well to this point.

[AlecRaenos]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk

Except that the unemployment continued to rise the rest of his administration. This brings up an interesting point since unemployment continued to rise into and during the first 3 years of the Obama administration although it has actually decreased recently. Republicans often refer to something called the "residual effect". What it means, at least to the GOP is that anything positive that occurs during a Democrat's stay in office is the result of strategies levied by the preceding Republican President and anything negative that occurs during a Republican's run is the result of failed strategies of the preceding Democrat. A cute way to cover both ends.

BUT, here we see that unemployment rose during the Bush administration and continued to rise during the first 3+ years of the Obama administration and now it has started to turn the other way.

Liberals use this little info all the time.

But yet they refuse to get Bush Sr all the credit for Clinton's early successes.

Or give Bush Jr a pass for the miserable economy Clinton left him (the bubble had burst and the economy was going down - but people only remember the good years under Clinton that were the result of Bush Sr).

Fucking hypocrites.

If you use that logic, use it everywhere. I dont care how you slice it or which side of the fence you sit on, just stop being a douchebag hypocrit (not you necessarily Bud, but this stupid ass logic pisses me off).

[Rockchalk]

Originally Posted by AlecRaenos

Liberals use this little info all the time.

But yet they refuse to get Bush Sr all the credit for Clinton's early successes.

Or give Bush Jr a pass for the miserable economy Clinton left him (the bubble had burst and the economy was going down - but people only remember the good years under Clinton that were the result of Bush Sr).

Fucking hypocrites.

If you use that logic, use it everywhere. I dont care how you slice it or which side of the fence you sit on, just stop being a douchebag hypocrit (not you necessarily Bud, but this stupid ass logic pisses me off).

The residual effect is a big tool used by the Republicans but maybe it will help to explain I am not left or right winged. I think the bi-partisan tug o war is a major problem. Some days I am what you might call a conservative liberal and others I am more of a liberal conservative.

Stick around, I will bag on the Dems too.

[Rockchalk]

And for the record I consider the whole idea a farce. The truth is economics like almost all things is cyclical. During the Clinton admin we experienced an unbelievable boon and saw the first balanced budget since pre-depression if Im not mistaken but it did start to turn and things moved in another direction as we transitioned to a different president. Anyone who thinks the success in the early 90s is all Clinton's doing is living in a vacuum just as those are who think everything that went wrong afterward was all the fault of GWBush.

I understand your frustration and know your comments were not directed at me but I still wanted to let you know where I stand just to offer some levity.

[pgittemeier09]

Originally Posted by Rockchalk

And for the record I consider the whole idea a farce. The truth is economics like almost all things is cyclical. During the Clinton admin we experienced an unbelievable boon and saw the first balanced budget since pre-depression if Im not mistaken but it did start to turn and things moved in another direction as we transitioned to a different president. Anyone who thinks the success in the early 90s is all Clinton's doing is living in a vacuum just as those are who think everything that went wrong afterward was all the fault of GWBush.

I understand your frustration and know your comments were not directed at me but I still wanted to let you know where I stand just to offer some levity.

he balanced the budget after he borrowed from social security...i dont really care tho cuz i love the man...just sayin

[A-Rob]

Ron Paul. If he doesn't make it I quit. He is the only one whos message has never changed, and he makes the most sense out of all these idiots.

[RockChalkWoody]

Originally Posted by Crimson Army

I wish huntsman was going to be the republican candidate - financially conservative and socially liberal, plus not a partisan hack, he's the best candidate from either party in a long time

+1,000,000

It's too bad that he's got no shot.

[sbruning29]

Originally Posted by A-Rob

Ron Paul. If he doesn't make it I quit. He is the only one whos message has never changed, and he makes the most sense out of all these idiots.

Right there with ya. I hope he beats Romney but chances ain't good

[Turn_my_swag_on]

I would vote for the Pillsbury Doughboy before I voted for Obama. And no, it isn't because the Pillsbury Doughboy is white.

[sbruning29]

Hahahahaha amen to that. He has been awful.

[Crimson Army]

I don't know about awful, he hasn't been great, but still been better than Bush. Killed Bin Laden, tax cuts for the vast majority of Americans, credit card reform, repeal of Don't ask, don't tell, New START treaty, got us out of Iraq - that's a decent list of accomplishments.

I know Fox and co. like to paint him as some far left radical, but really he's been a fairly centrist president. The most "socialist" thing he's done is Obamacare (which is overall a pretty shoddy piece of legislation, mostly due to Congress), but that was based on Romney's plan for Mass.

In fact, most of the right's talking points against him are complete BS. The stimulus was largely a failure, but Bush was the one who started the bailouts. They talk about him showing weakness to foreign leaders, but really he's just trying to repair the damage done by the previous administration. and overall his foreign policy is infinitely better than Bush's was. The whole czars thing is nonsense. He's not a Muslim. He wasn't born in Kenya.

Really, I don't understand why there's so much hate against the man. He's not a great president, but if I had to grade him, he'd have a solid C, pushing for a C+.

[Rockchalk]

I agree with you Crimson. Obama has been a pretty average president who just happened to be thrust into a no win situation following one of the more inept and destructive administrations in the country's history. I might lean more to C- than C+ actually.

[msg123]

Crimson, can you talk about how many votes he was able to garner for his budget?

Like it or not, but the trajectory of our deficit and overall debt is the biggest issue this country will face in the long run. Not a single attempt has been made to address it by the POTUS.

[Jordan1]

Originally Posted by sbruning29

Hahahahaha amen to that. He has been awful.

Let's see he came into office with two wars going, a leader of the house vowing to make his four years his only term (main focus is what he says), he inherited a country on the brink of a financial meltdown and a congress who has proven time and time again that they will agree with anything even though most of his proposals are things that as late as 2 yrs ago were republican ideas. It kills me how when the towers went down everyone was on tv foaming at the mouth asking for blood and rightfully so.... Our next steps were to go fight another country (list tjousands of our kids for what?) and blow off Osama even though we knew he did it. This president didn't talk ish, he just got it done! Now we blame him for staying too long in the place we SHOULD have been all along.

[Crimson Army]

Originally Posted by msg123

Crimson, can you talk about how many votes he was able to garner for his budget?

Like it or not, but the trajectory of our deficit and overall debt is the biggest issue this country will face in the long run. Not a single attempt has been made to address it by the POTUS.

Obviously Obama's spending is the biggest strike against him, I'll admit that. It's my single biggest disappointment with him as president. On the campaign trail he said he would go through the budget, line by line, and eliminate wasteful spending. He hasn't. But the stimulus spending is something that I believe any president would have done, trying to jump start the economy. Add in the fact that he didn't exclude the war spending from the budget like Bush did and of course he's going to look a spendthrift.

I agree with you though and most of the country for that matter, that we need to get our spending in check, and it does start with the POTUS. He's failed in this, that's true. But in my opinion, lots of things he's spending on are things that are going to be needed sooner rather than later.

The clean energy initiatives may seem wasteful now, but anyone with a pragmatic view can see oil reserves are not infinite and the sooner we start to ween ourselves off of fossil fuels, the easier the transition will be. Further, the TARP bailouts have largely been repaid. The $30 billion allocated to renovate schools is long overdue. The infrastructure improvements are needed (though we could probably hold off a while on the need for high speed rail). Do we need all of these things immediately? No, not really, but we're going to need them eventually.

And it's not the entitlement programs that are bankrupting us, if anything it's our military spending, which could easily be cut in half and still keep us far and away #1 in the world. Of course no politician would ever come out and support this, as the military industrial lobby would immediately brand them as weak and anti-American.

Overall, Obama's spending is worrisome, but he was handed a mess by the previous administration (not a blame Bush statement, but a simple fact - when Bush took office, the country was going through a period of unparalleled prosperity. 8 years later we were in the weeds, partly due to the cyclical nature of the economy and partly due to mismanagement and lack of action by both parties in congress on things like the housing bubble).