Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Global PokédeX Plus Forums _ Debates _ Debate of Romney and Obama!
Posted by: Beyonder Way Nov 5 2012, 02:34 PM
Who do you want Mitt Romney, or Barack Obama.
Debate reasons and support each president.
Posted by: Wolf Link Nov 5 2012, 05:08 PM
Romney. But, since I'm not old enough to vote, who cares? xD
Posted by: Beyonder Way Nov 5 2012, 05:17 PM
Exactly! Just say what your parents and you are oting or just who you like!
Posted by: The Shadow Nov 5 2012, 05:37 PM
I would say Romney, I don't go just based off of my parents decisions though, I really key into their policies, and who they are as a person. I don't believe Obama has done a very good job at leading this country with his multiple cover-ups, his failed economic plans, and his blatant attacks against Romney, this is just my opinion though.
Posted by: Virginia Woolf Nov 5 2012, 06:07 PM
Wow, just wow, Im not even American and I have watched so many interviews, videos and speeches including Romney to know his policy is one of the worst I've ever seen. Basically women, the gays and like, people of different nationality can wave to their rights. I don't mean like 16th century but c'mon...
what are right? lol.
Yeah.
Posted by: Lord Raven Nov 5 2012, 08:06 PM
Obama and Romney are almost like children because they both attack each other greatly. Romney just happens to add a million more lies in comparison to Obama.
Posted by: RoboFloatzel Nov 6 2012, 09:27 AM
I'm hoping Romney wins, because to be honest, Obama's really the one who caused the economy to go downhill in the first place, and electing him again will just make things worse.
Posted by: The Winnebago Nov 6 2012, 11:27 AM
What's this silly idea that Romney's going to fix the economy coming from?
"well Amurkia i will bring small bisness bak"
Bain Capital ate up many, many small businesses if I recall.
Actually, here's a quote by Obama that will prove the economy is never gonna be fixed, "My opponent and I both agree that corporate taxes are too high." And yes, he said that in the first presidential debate. Now, when corporations are literally making more now than they ever had, why do both presidents seem to back them? They're both wanting to hoard money. Also, notice how Romney trips up when asked detailed information? Yeah, that's because his economic plan will take ten years before the economy's back on track. And in those ten years people will complain that Romney didn't fix the economy like he promise.
Both candidates truly suck, but I feel Obama will win the election, which I think is good. The only thing making Obama marginally better in my eyes is his position on woman's rights and gay rights.
Posted by: Samoo Nov 6 2012, 11:36 AM
K i'm not American but whatever
Regardless of who becomes president, America is still screwed. You all know it and I'm pretty sure quite a lot of people who don't live in America know it too. Lol Romney isn't going to fix the economy. Obama has more of a chance.
The economic downfall started many years ago >_> Blaming it on Obama is just dumb. Besides, there's more than just the economy.
Would you want some guy who thinks as he lives? By that I'm talking about money issues
1. Romney doesn't know his people.
2. According to him, $250,000 a year is the middle class income. Really it's about $50,000 a year. Clearly, if he wants to run the country he surely would need to know proper statistics.
Six words now.
Women's Rights. Homosexual Rights. Nationality Rights. Is that not enough of a huge reason not to vote him? If I had the opportunity, I wouldn't vote for either. If I had to choose? Obama.
Posted by: doped up dolly Nov 6 2012, 11:47 AM
I'm not from the US, but given the choice, I would have to vote for Obama. Romney genuinely unnerves me with some of his archaic ideals.
Posted by: Jen Nov 6 2012, 01:37 PM
Hehe, the good part about having third parties is not having to vote for either of them! I think people forget about them a lot especially since I haven't seen anyone mention them. Even though I didn't vote for Obama (I voted for the Libertarian party hoping Johnson gets his 5%), I really hope he wins because of what you and The Winnebago just said there.
Posted by: Sora the Pikachu Nov 6 2012, 06:02 PM
I would vote for Romney. Ever since Obama came in, gas prices have gone up, and with Romney, his plans will help gas prices go down and create more jobs.
I mean, what has Obama done ever since he came into office other then sit back and react once events unfold?
Total Romney. In my school election, Romney even won.
Besides, I can't vote anyways, not old enough to.
Posted by: The Winnebago Nov 6 2012, 06:48 PM
-Pushed for universal health care
-Support for same-sex marriage equality, helped put an end to "don't ask, don't tell" and stop recognizing DOMA.
-While drone strikes aren't something I like, it's better than Romney's antagonistic nature towards the Middle East.
-Obama's policies have helped college students with pell grants and lower interest rates on federal loans, making college more affordable in the long run. Romney's education plan would reverse this. Obama wants to hire more teachers, Romney wants to cut from public education in the interest of private schools. I'm sorry, but inner city youth can't afford fancy private education.
-Keynesian economics > free market is magic pipe dream.
-Turned down the keystone pipeline, the temporary energy and jobs it would create is simply not worth the pollution it would bring.
welp.
Posted by: Giraffe A Laugh Nov 6 2012, 06:52 PM
I mean, what has Obama done ever since he came into office other then sit back and react once events unfold?
Total Romney. In my school election, Romney even won.
Besides, I can't vote anyways, not old enough to.
I might not be American, so I can't vote at all, which is such a shame~
but anyways
I figured this link would be insightful as to why people are voting for obama (and also, just to show that obama has indeed done things, instead of sitting back and watching :p )
http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html
To be perfectly honest, if I had to chose between the two, the only reason I'd pretty much vote for obama is because he doesn't come off as a bigot, unlike Romney. I just cannot make myself vote for someone who's so hateful towards others because of their sexuality/colour amongst other things.
They've both got their ups and downs, but romneys vision of a better american is pushing it way too far.
Anyways~ good luck t'you all who are voting.
Posted by: Sora the Pikachu Nov 6 2012, 08:21 PM
I mean, what has Obama done ever since he came into office other then sit back and react once events unfold?
Total Romney. In my school election, Romney even won.
Besides, I can't vote anyways, not old enough to.
I might not be American, so I can't vote at all, which is such a shame~
but anyways
I figured this link would be insightful as to why people are voting for obama (and also, just to show that obama has indeed done things, instead of sitting back and watching :p )
http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html
To be perfectly honest, if I had to chose between the two, the only reason I'd pretty much vote for obama is because he doesn't come off as a bigot, unlike Romney. I just cannot make myself vote for someone who's so hateful towards others because of their sexuality/colour amongst other things.
They've both got their ups and downs, but romneys vision of a better american is pushing it way too far.
Anyways~ good luck t'you all who are voting.
True, true, yet Obama promised sooooooooooo many things, and most of them were just lies. Empty promises, and by the looks of things through my perspective, things aren't exactly changing that much, and not only that, but the Vice President Joe Biden was IMMENSELY rude towards Paul Ryan during the vice presidential campaign, I don't want anybody like THAT help lead the country.
Posted by: Big Bidoof Nov 6 2012, 08:44 PM
what are right? lol.
Yeah.
Basically, these. It's the 21st century people, not the dark ages, yup yup.
Posted by: Lord Raven Nov 6 2012, 10:08 PM
At least Obama doesn't change his stance every week depending on what he gets flak for. And Romney was way ruder to Obama because he calls him a liar constantly; most of the debate was Romney going "obama u liar" and obama just went "bitch please," come on bro!
What did Obama promise to change anyway? He said he'd make the economy better, and he did a decent job considering the cards he'd been dealt.
Posted by: The Winnebago Nov 6 2012, 11:28 PM
Obama won. Whoop.
Posted by: Dazmi Nov 7 2012, 05:25 AM
Gay marijuana abortions for everyone!
Posted by: Beyonder Way Nov 7 2012, 06:32 AM
Other than Obama winning, Warren won Senate :/. This news made my day. [*Sarcasm*]
Posted by: Mars Adept Enten Nov 7 2012, 11:15 AM
ASFS;DKLJFASDARJWE ;RJ S;KDJF;LSDKJGASLEKAFJA;SDKJFSDLKRJ;WEKJR-RRAAGH!
-my reaction upon seeing the results. I'm a red-blooded Republican, so you can probably guess just why I reacted like this. Now watch as how the national debt gets worse, abortions still remain legal, religious liberties of Christians get trampled upon, and other such BS happens during the next four (IMO nightmarish) years. 
Go ahead and tear these arguments apart; I don't care.
Posted by: Samoo Nov 7 2012, 12:37 PM
I mean, what has Obama done ever since he came into office other then sit back and react once events unfold?
Total Romney. In my school election, Romney even won.
Besides, I can't vote anyways, not old enough to.
I might not be American, so I can't vote at all, which is such a shame~
but anyways
I figured this link would be insightful as to why people are voting for obama (and also, just to show that obama has indeed done things, instead of sitting back and watching :p )
http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html
To be perfectly honest, if I had to chose between the two, the only reason I'd pretty much vote for obama is because he doesn't come off as a bigot, unlike Romney. I just cannot make myself vote for someone who's so hateful towards others because of their sexuality/colour amongst other things.
They've both got their ups and downs, but romneys vision of a better american is pushing it way too far.
Anyways~ good luck t'you all who are voting.
True, true, yet Obama promised sooooooooooo many things, and most of them were just lies. Empty promises, and by the looks of things through my perspective, things aren't exactly changing that much, and not only that, but the Vice President Joe Biden was IMMENSELY rude towards Paul Ryan during the vice presidential campaign, I don't want anybody like THAT help lead the country.
To the underlined and bolded bit. Welcome to politics. All politicians lie and promise so many things.
What people don't understand, which pisses me off greatly, is that they can't do things with the click of their fingers. People just assume that they can do that. Well they can't. Yeah it's just as bad they go around promising all this stuff, but the chances are it'll take time. Everything takes times. The sooner people understand that the better
But woo Obama.
Posted by: Aura Dynasty Nov 7 2012, 01:27 PM
To be honest, none of them ceases to amaze me... Sure thing the economic will stay a failure and it'll take MANY more presidents before it's solved, but I don't really am into politics... yet
As a member of the youth-parlement of Belgium I'm thinking that there are others who could do SO much better then the others, both candidates have good points as they have as many bad points. Obama's taking his time and Romney is hatefull towards people of other religions and skincolour... (if my intells correct).
IDC but i'm rather the one that can't put up with scientology... *god I hate those guys*
Posted by: Wraenna Nov 7 2012, 01:34 PM
Numbers from a site known as PresidentialDebt.org:
Date taken, President in office at the time, national debt at the time, and growth rate. Red indicates worsening trend, green indicates improving trend. I've cut down Bush's, but for the sake of completion, it worsened from 2001 to 2003, improved from 2004 to 2006 (6.2% being his second-lowest during office, it was lowest in 2001, at 5.0%, a year after he took office). Notably, the debt decreased during Clinton's last term in office, at a trend of -2.0%.
12/29/2006 BUSH $8,680,224,380,086 6.2%
12/28/2007 BUSH $9,229,172,659,218 6.3%
12/31/2008 BUSH $10,699,804,864,612 15.9%
12/31/2009 OBAMA $12,311,349,677,512 15.1%
12/31/2010 OBAMA $14,025,215,218,709 13.9%
12/31/2011 OBAMA $15,125,898,976,397 7.8%
06/30/2012 OBAMA $15,856,367,214,324 4.8%
The debt is increasing, but more slowly over 2008-2012 than it did during 2006-2008. Should the decrease continue in this trend, it will approach levels similar to those of the 90s as far as debt growth.
This is not an issue I can just post numbers to, because the definition of fetus v. child is heavily entrenched in religious beliefs, and I don't wish to step on anyone's beliefs here. However, I will provide but one link on the topic of health and safety related to legalized abortion:
http://www.now.org/issues/abortion/roe30/beforeafter.html
I advise you to do your own research regarding it. There is a lot more to be said about abortion and all the various reasons and motivations for or against, but I'm trying not to intrude my own opinions here. (I hope I am not failing.)
Same to this one. I'm not even sure where to look for evidence for OR against this. I would ask that you more clearly define what you mean by the "religious liberties" of those in the Christian faith.
BONUS:
Unfortunately, Politifact isn't the most reliable source, but I cheated and used their Obameter aggregator to determine the numbers.
Total number of Promises (by their count): 508
Promises Kept: 193 (38%)
Promises Compromised: 79 (16%)
Promises Broken: 88 (17%)
Promises Stalled: 44 (9%)
In the Works: 102 (20%)
Not Rated: 2 (0%)
Unfortunately I don't have a source at the moment that calculates the average "promises kept" for all recent presidents, but I will amend this post if I find one.
Posted by: Mars Adept Enten Nov 7 2012, 02:32 PM
By 'religious liberties', I'm talking about that 'employers being pretty much forced to let their employees use contraceptives that are damaging to the fetus/might inactively cause an abortion even if they themselves are pro-life" You have to understand that I was conceived out of wedlock when my biological mother was 16. Instead of taking 'the easy way out', AKA abortion, she gave me up for adoption because she couldn't take care of me, and knew that someone else could. I was adopted by my current parents, so I'm no longer considered a 'bastard child' in the legal sense. So when it comes to issues regarding this, I'm extremely sensitive, due to my circumstances.
Posted by: Galahawk Nov 7 2012, 02:43 PM
Okay first of all, you don't use contraceptives when you're knowingly pregnant unless you're trying to self-induce an abortion, which I'm sure many people would rather not do when there's safe options in Planned Parenthood. You use contraception to prevent pregnancy, not to end it.
And secondly, contraceptives are NOT just for preventing pregnancies. I have a close friend who HAS to take birth control because her periods are seriously so bad that they can last weeks at a time and are excruciatingly painful to the point that she can't even function. Those people NEED it and you're acting as if that's a bad thing.
By choosing not to cover birth control for employees for religious reasons you're essentially indirectly forcing your religious beliefs on someone else. Kind of hypocritical that you're okay with your beliefs infringing on theirs but if theirs infringe on yours it's a horrible bad thing.
Not everybody is willing to go through childbirth like your biological mother was. It was her choice not to abort you because she was willing to go through with nine months of suffering followed by hours of labor/a c-section. Let's not forget to mention that costs related to childbirth (including prenatal care, hospital costs, medicine, etc) are REALLY DAMN EXPENSIVE. Not everybody wants to deal with that if they have an unplanned pregnancy so just because your circumstances were like that, you shouldn't act as if that's an option that everybody else SHOULD choose. It's selfish.
Posted by: Wraenna Nov 7 2012, 03:09 PM
Mars, I don't believe any situation like that is easy, no matter what the woman chooses. Choosing abortion--ending a potential life as an embryo or a fetus--is no easier than giving up the born child for adoption. I don't have the firsthand experience you do, but I have seen what it does to women who choose abortion. No matter what, she is going to suffer in some way.
That said, an employer restricting employees from taking contraceptives based on the employer's religious beliefs is a removal of choice on the employees' part, not on the employer's. The liberties of the employees are the ones being trampled, because they are now required to prescribe to the employer's religious beliefs and the results of those beliefs, even if those employees do not agree with those beliefs.
You may, of course, argue that the employer's beliefs supersede those of the employees', but I think you would be hard-pressed to find an employee out there that is content with an employer dictating what he/she cannot do based on his/her employer's religious preferences.
So maybe the "religious liberties" of the employer are protected, but the rights of employees to maintain their health and safety are trampled in the process.
When the state or federal powers require that employers offer contraception to their employees, they are not requiring employers to provide "free abortion" cards to women. They are requiring them to provide a sometimes-vital medication to women who otherwise could not function without it. For instance, I take contraceptives because otherwise my menstruation cycle would be days longer than necessary and very heavy, making it difficult for me to function. There are other women who take it for similar reasons--one of my friends, for instance, has been hospitalized at least twice in the past few years due to her cycle, and cannot function without contraception--and no one but an uneducated woman would take it for the reason you describe above, to abort an unwanted pregnancy. That represents a fundamental misunderstanding of how contraceptives work and are marketed to women.
As an aside based on your wording, my employer doesn't pay for my contraceptives, but I'd be pretty upset if he came to me one day and said I couldn't take that medicine because it went against his religion.
Posted by: SilverLugia456 Nov 7 2012, 03:31 PM
My Vote went towards Obama,
the reason for this comes as the following:
~ When it comes to Economy, sure its bad and both sides said they have a plan that could help it, Obama after 4 years has tried to improve it but hasn't gotten to the numbers that he wanted. Personally thinking about the situation, no matter who is in office i don't think either person could easily work with the economy and heal it within 4 years. When it comes to this situation i hear people say Obama put us in the downfall and stuff like that....well i think we were already in the downfall before Obama took office the first time and he was left with a mess to try to pick up. There are many sites that say many different things and have many different numbers of what Obama has done but what people need to realize is that the Economy probably won't get fix like everyone wants even in 4 years time, it could possibly take a lot long. It could possibly take 8 years 10 years or more to fix the Economy and get it to an ideal status which means there would be a few presidents who would need to deal with it even after Obama.
~Another thing I looked at was Jobs, people keep complaining that Obama hasn't given enough jobs or there aren't enough jobs out there for people, while Romeny said that he could give people so many jobs if he became President. Well this is from personally experience, even though there are many jobs opened....there is no guarantee a person will get it. I have for the past 4 years even since i was 16 have tried to get a job but I have either been turned down or given some sort of excuse that i wasn't qualified for the job. Now I'm sure that there are people who have different situations and stuff like that but this is just from my experience that 12,000 new jobs could open up but not that many people get hired for them, the reason for this is there are companies out there who pick and choose who they want and who they don't, sometimes its based on appearance as well(Another experience because my aunt has been out of the job for 5+ years and it has been proven that some people wouldn't hire her because of her appearance or they didn't like her in general).
those are the two many things i looked at because during this whole election those seem to be the top two things that people attacked both sides with and seemed to important points that each side needed to make.
I also think the way people look at it that neither candidate was the ideal President but i did choose Obama over Romeny because of those reasons I listed above. But also what people need to keep in mind is that the Economy and other problems this country face won't be healed or fixed over night or with the snap of a finger, it will take time, it will take effort, and it will come with many set backs until we can get it right.
Posted by: Sora the Pikachu Nov 7 2012, 05:47 PM
Can't believe Obama got re-elected. I AM SO MAD! EVERYONE IN MY SCHOOL WERE AS MAD AS A HORNET!!!!!
No use arguing now, except that by the year of 2016, the National Debt is going to go up to 20,000,000 dollars according to Fox News, which is a reliable news site...somewhat.
Not only that, but I swear, if I hear another story of how Obama tries to rid the Lord my God off of his party platform, I am going to go all berserk mode like Siax, and another story of how someone got their desperately needed feeding machine because of "Obama Care", GROGHGASLJHGDLGIU!
My say, no different, don't even quote me to point out stuff, especially stuff I already knew, I don't have the...patience...to deal with this.
Posted by: Commander Wymsy Nov 7 2012, 05:59 PM
I enjoy that we continue to have a President who does not consider somebody like me to be a second class citizen in more ways than one.
Posted by: Sora the Pikachu Nov 7 2012, 06:04 PM
OH MY GHERD FAMOUS COMMANDER WYMSY!
Obama isn't a bad guy at all, I just don't think he's living up to my expectation. Now, Joe Biden needs to get out of office seeming as he treated Paul Ryan like a 3-year-old in front of EVERYBODY.
Posted by: Samoo Nov 7 2012, 06:10 PM
Obama isn't a bad guy at all, I just don't think he's living up to my expectation.
And what is your expectation? Magically getting everything perfect in 4 years? In a magical perfect world it's possible. In the real world, no it isn't.
Just because he's president doesn't mean he can click his fingers and America's problems can be sorted overnight. It just doesn't work like that.
Although I am intrigued as to what your expectations really are.
Posted by: Commander Wymsy Nov 7 2012, 06:11 PM
Don't care that you slashed it out, it's in your post anyway and it's clearly not sarcasm.
I like that you say this when Paul Ryan treats minorities like me as if we're no better than the dirt everybody walks on.
Posted by: Sora the Pikachu Nov 7 2012, 06:16 PM
How do you know that? (Now, I know it's not smart to question an administrator...)
When has Paul Ryan ever said we're just a couple of nobodies? Paul Ryan is a nice guy, but it's not like he'll recognize the names and faces of the millions of people in the U.S.! But what has he done that openly states that we're just 'dirt'?
Posted by: Beyonder Way Nov 7 2012, 06:18 PM
I heard that Obama would make school in Summer, but I highly have doubt for that statement. I enjoyed watching those debates every couple of nights, and hearing what each president would do for our country. I like how Romney would lower gas prices a little, but also with takes. Anyone with over about 1 million dollars or makes a high salary, should pay a lot for taxes, but for people with lower money makings, they should pay the taxes they currently pay. At the final week, I laugh how desperate Obama is for votes, he lowered gas prices. I was watching Good Morning America this morning and I saw every state and which one Obama or Romney won that sates votes. Obama sadly won Massachusetts where I live, and then I saw, I think Hawaii, where Obama's hometown is, Obama won 93% votes, Romney 7%. He won a lot of states but not by a lot. Romney mostly one the middle states like Texas, Alaska, Alabama, but Obama won outer like D.C, California, Wisconsin, Ohio, etc. The only state undefined is Florida though.
I might be 12, but I like Romney.
Posted by: Darth Krytie Nov 7 2012, 06:19 PM
I am so incredibly grateful to have a president who doesn't seek to deny me rights based on my gender, my sex, my sexuality, my religion (or lack thereof). I could never vote for a person who would seek to take my rights away. I believe that my body is my own and no one else gets a say on what happens to it. Ever. In any way. In any situation.
I believe I should be able to get married to whomever I want. And to have it be recognized by all forms of our government.
I also wish people would take a lesson in civics. The President can only do so much if Congress doesn't let him get on with it. If you want to blame someone for our country not being as far ahead as it could be, blame the jerks in Congress who sit on their asses and do nothing but pander to lobbyists and big oil companies instead of improving our country...who are so married to their party-lines that they do nothing but vote themselves pay raises. Blame them.
Posted by: Wraenna Nov 7 2012, 06:20 PM
I wish you would have at least tried to read my previous post in this thread. I'll quote the relevant part for you.
Date taken, President in office at the time, national debt at the time, and growth rate. Red indicates worsening trend, green indicates improving trend. I've cut down Bush's, but for the sake of completion, it worsened from 2001 to 2003, improved from 2004 to 2006 (6.2% being his second-lowest during office, it was lowest in 2001, at 5.0%, a year after he took office). Notably, the debt decreased during Clinton's last term in office, at a trend of -2.0%.
12/29/2006 BUSH $8,680,224,380,086 6.2%
12/28/2007 BUSH $9,229,172,659,218 6.3%
12/31/2008 BUSH $10,699,804,864,612 15.9%
12/31/2009 OBAMA $12,311,349,677,512 15.1%
12/31/2010 OBAMA $14,025,215,218,709 13.9%
12/31/2011 OBAMA $15,125,898,976,397 7.8%
06/30/2012 OBAMA $15,856,367,214,324 4.8%
The debt is increasing, but more slowly over 2008-2012 than it did during 2006-2008. Should the decrease continue in this trend, it will approach levels similar to those of the 90s as far as debt growth.
By the projections given, it is unlikely that our debt could increase over 20 trillion. Not impossible, just not likely.
EDIT: Nick has kindly pointed out to me that the number you gave is, in fact, 20 million, and not 20 trillion. It certainly would be nice if the deficit decreased by that huge of a margin in 4 years.
Your hedging betrays your uncertainty. I believe the following to be evidence enough as a response to this part:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel_controversies
As to the rest of your post, it's hard to tell if you are frustrated by the lack of religion in Obama's administration or frustrated by the apparent belief that Obama is trying to rid the government of religion. Similarly, it's hard to tell what you mean by "desperately needed feeding machine." I presume it's a baby, but I can't be certain, so I have no good response for it.
By posting in a section like this--and I understand it is not the Debates section--you are, in my mind, permitting other users to read and respond, in a tactful and intelligent manner, to what you are saying. Being able to quote what you are saying alleviates the need for users to return to the source text to locate sources of argumentation and debate. It's also a thing I do in writing; we call it using and citing sources.
Furthermore, if this is "stuff I already knew," then I guess it begs the question, "why do you still think this way?" If you find evidence that runs contrary to your opinions, are you simply taking it into consideration to moderate your opinions, or are you disregarding that evidence entirely? I would hope the former is true, but I know the latter can happen.
I would also wonder why you would "have the patience" to type out your thoughts, opinions, and beliefs here, if you don't have the patience to listen to criticisms of your thoughts, opinions, and beliefs. If you recognize yourself as instigating the discussion, it would be highly unfair to others if you simply choose to ignore comments opposite to your views. We also have a subforum for that: it's called the Ranting Zone.
I see that other posts have come in while I was writing this up. I'll add edits as needed.
Posted by: Commander Wymsy Nov 7 2012, 06:29 PM
When has Paul Ryan ever said we're just a couple of nobodies? Paul Ryan is a nice guy, but it's not like he'll recognize the names and faces of the millions of people in the U.S.! But what has he done that openly states that we're just 'dirt'?
He's completely against LGBT rights (same-sex marriage, adoption, etc.), along with thinking that abortions shouldn't be allowed even in cases of rape.
Posted by: Beyonder Way Nov 7 2012, 06:38 PM
I might be 12, but I like Romney.
Also to add. A lot of people think Romney is rude, but people say to Democrats, " Don't worry, 2012 will happen with Obama as president you Democrat. " Bullying each other for voting for a president they don't like.
I think that is just plain rude, who cares, Democrats are Democrats, Republicans are Republicans. That is just who they are, they shouldn't be treated differently. That is their choice to vote for Obama, or be the party of their choice, nothing wrong with it. Who knows, give Obama a chance Republicans, maybe things will go better.
Posted by: Manticore Nov 7 2012, 06:46 PM
I think you mean Christians won't get special treatment any more. No one will be stopping you from worshipping however you want, you just won't be allowed to try to force everyone else in the country to follow the laws of YOUR religion regarding things like gay marriage and abortions.
I was so pleased to wake up this morning and find out that the biggest liar I've ever seen or heard of in politics didn't get elected. I'm honestly surprised it was as wide a margin as it was, considering the rather good evidence for vote flipping that's come out lately. I will be very interested to see how that works.
I am quite displeased that Ohioans rejected Issue 2 though, as that means republicans will still be allowed to gerrymander districts to try to help their side get votes.
Posted by: Wraenna Nov 7 2012, 07:09 PM
Unfortunately I'm not going to be able to give you anything that says "Black people are dirt!" or "All those gay people are a bunch of nobodies!" because that isn't how the world of politics works. But I can give you a few things (mostly courtesy of Rhapsody's research, as well as a bit of my own) that point to Ryan vastly preferring white male Christians over any other group when it comes to civil rights and matters of choice.
Ryan made a similar statement to ABC News in July when he continued the call to repeal health care reform after the Supreme Court upheld the law, saying that rights “come from nature and God, according to the Declaration of Independence.” His view appears to defy the trajectory of civil rights progress in the country, where disenfranchised groups including LGBT Americans have repeatedly turned to the courts and legislatures, not religious authority, to win rights. According to an analysis of his record, Ryan voted against equality legislation all but once during his Congressional career.
The Human Rights Campaign issued a statement that called Romney and Ryan out-of-touch with the majority of Americans, including some Republicans, on equality issues.
"Ryan's record of voting against fairness, dignity and equality is out of touch with the majority of Americans and a fast growing majority of Republicans," said Chad Griffin, the group’s president. "LGBT Americans need leadership that will continue to fight for their rights to protect their families, marry the person they love, and enjoy equal protections under the law."
In 2003, Ryan voted in favor of the Marriage Protection Act, which would have prevented federal courts from considering and possibly overturning the Defense of Marriage Act. Romney also backs DOMA.
Ryan voted in 1999 in favor of banning same-sex couples from adopting in the District of Columbia, over which Congress often exerts control. And although Romney acknowledges it's legal for gays and lesbians to adopt in many places, he doesn't go so far as to support it. In fact, he brags about siding with the Catholic Church in Massachusetts as governor as it sought an exemption that would have let it discriminate in adoptions and in foster care despite receiving government money.
Ryan also lined up with Romney on repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" when it came before Congress in 2011. Ryan voted against repealing DADT, and Romney was outspoken in his opposition to repeal. Since then, though, Romney has said reinstating DADT would be unnecessary.
Romney's record on the need for hate crimes laws is unclear. But when the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act passed through the House in 2009, Ryan voted against it.
“Now it’s a war on women; tomorrow it’s going to be a war on left-handed Irishmen or something like that,” Ryan told donors at a Naples fundraiser, according to Shushanna Walshe of ABC News.
And a giant aggregate of his stances, along with links through to quotes he's made:
http://www.ontheissues.org/house/Paul_Ryan.htm
He displays, based on the above, a desire to deny to homosexual couples the same rights and benefits--including marriage in general--that heterosexual couples now enjoy. He also displays an aloof attitude toward the idea of "a war on women" in a time when he supports taking away right of choice to women. He also wishes to deny to women and homosexuals the same protections from crimes that heterosexual men can enjoy.
Links for the other quoted materials:
http://www.advocate.com/politics/election/2012/08/11/ryan-rights-come-nature-and-god-not-government
http://www.advocate.com/politics/election/2012/08/11/here-lgbt-rights-record-paul-ryan-who-reports-say-romney-pick-veep
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/18/at-fla-fundraiser-paul-ryan-mocks-war-on-women/
Like I said, nothing where he outright says it. But I believe--as I think others do, too--that politicians speak with their votes on certain issues, and if he is consistently voting against these rights and benefits for people who are not like him--that is to say, not white, male, or Christian--then I think it speaks volumes about his thoughts and beliefs.
Posted by: Rainbow Dash x Nov 7 2012, 11:48 PM
I think you mean Christians won't get special treatment any more. No one will be stopping you from worshipping however you want, you just won't be allowed to try to force everyone else in the country to follow the laws of YOUR religion regarding things like gay marriage and abortions.
I was so pleased to wake up this morning and find out that the biggest liar I've ever seen or heard of in politics didn't get elected. I'm honestly surprised it was as wide a margin as it was, considering the rather good evidence for vote flipping that's come out lately. I will be very interested to see how that works.
I am quite displeased that Ohioans rejected Issue 2 though, as that means republicans will still be allowed to gerrymander districts to try to help their side get votes.
Love this post, it's so frustrating to see Christians try to say their religious liberties are getting taken away.
Posted by: IWillGoDownWithThisShip Nov 11 2012, 01:10 AM
This, pretty much, sums up everything I wanted to say.
I kind of wanted Gary Johnson(Libertarian) to win, though. Let's be honest, though, that would never happen, no matter how bad we wanted it to.
I'm glad Romney didn't take the stage and trample all over our civil rights. If not for his views on social policies like that? I think he might've won, tbch.
Posted by: Lord Raven Nov 11 2012, 03:23 AM
Libertarians are really fucking crazy too, I would never want a Libertarian in office.
Posted by: The Winnebago Nov 12 2012, 08:20 PM
Magic wonders, 20 states are petitioning to secede from the United States over the election.
People really just need to stop.
Posted by: Lord Raven Nov 13 2012, 12:06 AM
lol where did you see that? I'm curious of your source, because I did read it but it's something that happens every time a democrat is elected. It's funny too, they have enough for articles to be written about them but not enough to make their petitions public.
Posted by: Chrome Nov 13 2012, 12:12 AM
To be quite honest, I didn't vote. It was hard picking the lesser of two evils.
I would prefer to see Obama in office, but I don't like how I have to pay for some lazy people...
Mitt Romney was just...I just couldn't trust a word that guy said.
Posted by: Wraenna Nov 13 2012, 12:12 AM
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/peacefully-grant-state-texas-withdraw-united-states-america-and-create-its-own-new-government/BmdWCP8B
Right here, Raven. There are petitions for roundabout 20 states, but Texas is the only one (linked above, but others are on that site) to have met the requisite signature count of 25,000.
Posted by: Lord Raven Nov 13 2012, 12:50 AM
lol 57K signatures out of 25.6 million, gl texas
Posted by: CherryGryffon Nov 13 2012, 05:00 AM
Um.. You only need 25k signatures to have a petition like that put on the President's desk lol.
I know for some things there's a 0 a the end of that, but every source I've found thus far says it's only 25k for this/most area/s. 
Also: I voted for President Obama.
Ideally, I would like to see Mrs. Clinton run for president.
I know in '08 she went up for the Democratic nomination, and lost to Obama; But I'd like to see HER be our choice.
My reasoning points:
- She's already our "voice" to like, 80% or better of the world [And there are leaders in other nations that enjoy hosting Hillary Clinton in their country. ENJOY!]
- She's already been in the White House, and so knows how it works and won't be caught unaware as President Obama unfortunately was
- She's already had a VERY successful political career on her own, after her husband and she had to leave office
- She's shown with her husband that she's willing to stand by and support something that is failing, and that everyone else told her she SHOULD leave and let die; And that she can FIX it
- She's extremely intelligent, well enunciated, very well prepared, and apart from her husband's scandal she has no REAL ties to controversy. Except, of course, her flag-burning college days, which brings me to one of my final points
- Having been on the other side of the fence, the side of "Down with the man, man", she understands what it feels like to not have faith in the system, and wanting to revolutionize that
I mean. This woman is educated, versed in multiple cultures [Something Romney continually shot himself in the foot with and put US at risk of losing the allies Obama has brought us, including his aid in solidifying our friendship with Russia], seasoned with the White House workings, and more a person than a politician.
What else could we ask for?
Except, of course, a Vice President that could actually help her, and not get in the way.
For that, I suggest Michelle Obama. LOL
Posted by: Lord Raven Nov 13 2012, 07:53 PM
al gore vp
Posted by: IWillGoDownWithThisShip Nov 14 2012, 05:42 PM
People really just need to stop.
Sore losers, pfft.
Yee-haw? I heard it got bumped up to 22 states.
Posted by: CherryGryffon Nov 15 2012, 12:55 PM
People really just need to stop.
Sore losers, pfft.
Yee-haw? I heard it got bumped up to 22 states.
I have two petitions I've seen and signed I absolutely love.
1. Anyone that has signed a petition to secede from the United States should be kindly deported, assuming their state does not indeed succeed in seceding. They want out that badly? They should GET out.
2. Assuming a state is indeed allowed to secede 'peacefully', they should first pay off ALL of their portion of the national debt. Until such time, they remain a state and federal laws apply. A note should be made: ALL federal and government resources [National Guard, Public Schools, Utilities, Vehicles, Natural Resources, Etc.] would be returned to the United States, or bought from them for a reasonable price.
Seriously. I am in love with them.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)