jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (28 posts)

Obama or Romney? Your vote and why?

  1. isenhower33 profile image60
    isenhower33posted 4 years ago

    Which one do you think will lead the country better?

    1. Josak profile image59
      Josakposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Simple as this for me: Romney is pushing the same failed policies we just had under Bush and his party platform of banning abortion and opposing marriage equality is distasteful at best, I am no huge Obama fan but the economy is growing steadily and his social policies have been great, particularly the bill that allows our best men and women to serve their country with pride regardless of their personal lives, by which I mean the abolition of don't ask don't tell.

      America is becoming a brighter, better country but there will always be people who resist change.

      1. 0
        JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        1 - Romney is not pushing the same policies as Bush. He is pushing many policies that are unique, so trying to compare the two doesn't really work.

        2 - Romney is not pushing to ban all abortion.

        3 - The economy isn't growing under Obama. It is simply stagnating. We are barely keeping up with population growth.

    2. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      For so many obvious reasons it ain't even funny.
      And anyone who says the two-Party system has failed,  isn't quite telling the whole story.   The Republican Party hasn't failed;  it's just been at the mercy of several big-wig defectors like Colin Powell, etc., thereby drawing outright assaults from the Left and drawing in many RINOS who would like to see its demise or else straddle the fence because they have no resolve to stand up for America.

      We don't need another rock star activist.   We need to fill the Office of the Presidency with someone who's gonna have an agenda of actually leading America based on Constitutional and moral responsibility, not bent on destroying our very foundation.

      What I'm telling you is this--------
      When Obama was elected (wait---even during his nomination for candidacy),  America allowed the Democrat Party to re-mold the Office of the President of the United States to fit the candidate.  It should've been the other way around---any Candidate should've fit, or been willing to fit into, the mold that was already there----a mold that has stood the test of time since the Office was created.   That mold is one of patriotism, Constitutionalism, and tried-and-true systems of leadership,  not some malleable mass of personal agenda and socialist activism.

      1. innersmiff profile image88
        innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        The key is in the name, the liberals are clearly not liberal at all, and the Republicans most definitely not conservatives. There is nothing conservative about their penchant for massive government that they share with the democrats. There is nothing conservative about their willingness to expand the American Empire at the expense of the people. Neither of those things have a foundation in the constitution either.

    3. Quilligrapher profile image89
      Quilligrapherposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Hi, everybody!

      I believe our society should be judged by how it treats the poor, the disadvantaged, and the defenseless. I lean toward re-electing President Obama because I believe he is better suited for taking a healthy, balanced approach. As the nation slowly recovers from the largest economic meltdown since the Great Depression, I see Gov. Romney and Chairman Ryan preparing to throw the poor under the bus in order to avoid modest tax increases for those who benefited the most from the recession, the stimuli, and the bailouts.

      Between 1971 and 2008, the average income in this country grew by $12,026 and all of this new wealth went into the pockets of the richest 10% while incomes for the bottom 90% declined. {2} Since then, the US Census Bureau reports the poverty rate in this country increased from 14.3 percent in the 2009 American Community Survey to 15.3 percent in the 2010 ACS. The number of people in poverty increased from 42.9 million to 46.2 million during the same time period. {3}

      How I ultimate vote will depend on the facts at the time.
      {1} http://www.nationaljournal.com/domestic … s-20120917
      {2} http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc … rs/262221/
      {3} http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acsbr10-01.pdf

      1. habee profile image91
        habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Real median household income declined between 2009 and 2010 and again between 2010 and 2011.


        1. Quilligrapher profile image89
          Quilligrapherposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Thank you, habee.

  2. HowardBThiname profile image89
    HowardBThinameposted 4 years ago

    Neither. I simply refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils again. There's no reason - as large as this nation is - that we should be reduced to two such incompetent choices. So this time - I refuse.

    Obama is a disaster. Driven up the debt. Increased our military meddling in the Middle East. Reduced our standing in the world.

    Romney's no better.

    1. lone77star profile image91
      lone77starposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @Howard, well said!

      Both Obamney and Rombama work for the Corporate Party. And both halves of that elusive tyranny have eliminated voting and Roberts Rules of Order.

      RNC Scripted:

      DNC Scripted:

      And protesting has now been made a felony. I just read that Spain has enacted similar legislation. Looks like Orwell's dystopia has finally arrived.

      The New World Order wants America to crash and burn. That's the only way they can dismantle all nations and reform humanity in their image -- Power Elite over the masses of slaves. Only their plan seems to call for the murder of about 6 billion of us. Looks like the 4 horsemen are about to ride.

      Time to wake up spiritually. This planet is going to pot.

      But before it does, we might be able to slow down the lunacy by surprising the Rockefellers and Rothschilds -- by electing a 3rd party candidate.

  3. innersmiff profile image88
    innersmiffposted 4 years ago

    It's like Alien VS. Predator.

    Whoever wins, we lose.

    Three points: economy, war, police state.

    Both candidates both thoroughly support the Federal Reserve, the completely unaccountable institution responsible for the collapse of '08 and a future collapse that could destroy the world's economy.

    Both candidates are in favour of Imperialist America, and the winner will almost certainly provoke a war with Iran (not aggressive, no nuclear weapons), that could spark a larger war with China and/or Russia. Obama in his term has not rolled back any of the wars, instead continuing military presence in the middle-east, expanded it, invaded Libya without congressional approval, and peppered the world with military drones that kill civilian children every day. Obama can now be counted amongst the most vicious leaders that has ever lived, and for this reason alone needs to be ousted from his position immediately.

    Both candidates are in favour of the growing police state; Obama passing NDAA, which in essence legalises the indefinite detention or assassination of any individual in the world, proves this, along with his approval of TSA checkpoints on all transport, RFID chips, and other great violations of our civil liberties. Romney by all accounts agrees with this state of affairs, and further demonstrates his disregard for civil liberties by refusing to legalise medical marijuana, despite the fact that the government owns the patent for the medicinal use: just check out US Patent 6630507 titled “Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants”. He is by all accounts in favour of the failed drug war that costs billions of tax dollars to fight, and then imprison non-violent users, and more importantly, thousands of lives each year.

    America, despite its history as a bastion for liberty and prosperity, is fast becoming a totalitarian dystopia, and it's all down to the failed two-party system. You simply have the illusion of choice.

    Despite my disbelief in the political system, I myself will be supporting Gary Johnson for the principles of liberty. A vote for Obama or Romney is a wasted vote, and shame on you if you do.

    1. kathleenkat profile image90
      kathleenkatposted 4 years ago in reply to this


      There is some truth in that, though. Voting for the lesser to two evils is still evil. I don't so much care for Romney, however, Obama has done absolutely nothing to deserve my vote.

  4. isenhower33 profile image60
    isenhower33posted 4 years ago

    Glad to see some posts on here, i dont really keep up with any political things. I figured asking the question would get me a better insight on it. Thanks everyone for the posts and i hope this keeps going so i can further see some more points of view. Thanks all

  5. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 4 years ago

    I'm voting for Romney because I believe the economy will improve under his leadership.

    1. innersmiff profile image88
      innersmiffposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I have some magic beans you might be interested in.

      1. habee profile image91
        habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Will they lead me a goose that lays golden eggs? If so, send 'em on!

  6. Mighty Mom profile image91
    Mighty Momposted 4 years ago

    Are you actually blaming the decline of the GOP on Colin Powell?

    1. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      What decline?   There is no decline.   There is only infiltration by people who have no intention of standing on the GOP Platform.    Powell's last-minute endorsement of a Far-Left Democratic Candidate certainly did set the pace for insulting conservatism in this Country, yes.    There are many citizens, probably, who didn't even draw the logical conclusion that Powell was seeking revenge against the Bush Administration, plus playing the race card even after he had promised publicly that he wouldn't;   many just simply respected him (as I did prior to his little game-playing) and ran with his opinion, following the "leader".   Powell knew his endorsement would be powerful.   And indeed it was.   He's not the only one, of course;  but his was powerful.   I wonder if he regrets it now.    Who knows?    He seems to be incapable of keeping set standards;  his allegiances are about as fluid as water.

      1. Mighty Mom profile image91
        Mighty Momposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        News coverage of GOP as a party in decline goes backs months. It has continued as a drumbeat since the convention, revelations about your so-called "moral" candidate, the rift between him and ryan, why the tea party is no longer relevant -- I could find you 100+ sources.
        But here's an older one. And it's a prediction by Pat Buchanan.
        http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/bl … n-20120727

        1. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I'm not interested in any of those opinions except to say they should be reminding people of the Platform and its value instead of announcing the demise of something that's not dead.
          I'm more interested in why the Democrat Party has allowed itself to be molded into a Socialist Party without anyone batting an eye, yet still retaining the title of "Democrat".    It is the Democrat Party (which, though far from perfect, at least used to act with some common integrity) that is not only declining, but declining rapidly, almost to the point of invisibility.

          1. Cody Hodge5 profile image82
            Cody Hodge5posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Huh? Did you copy that from a Fox News report or something?

            Also, the GOP IS in decline. I'm not really sure how people still justify voting for them at the moment..

            1. Paul Wingert profile image80
              Paul Wingertposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              But not according to ass-clowns like Limbaugh, Palin and Beck. They think the Republican and conservatism is the ONLY thing that alive! LOL! Buy the way, Hey Limbaugh, it's been 3 years and you still never picked up that one-way plane ticket to Costa Rica!

        2. HowardBThiname profile image89
          HowardBThinameposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The GOP isn't "in decline." Nor is it indicative of putting out the moral candidate, although the Democrats would like to make everyone think it is.

          The 2010 election, which Obama called a "shellacking," shows the rally of the GOP. It's just that these things cycle and the parties ebb and flow.

  7. Moderndayslave profile image60
    Moderndayslaveposted 4 years ago

    Neither, Both of them have been purchased by big money that will be looking for something in return  and a vote for them will just mean ,Business as usual.

    Everyone promises things will get better.  roll
    I have to keep fighting until they do

    1. Shelby Diotte profile image61
      Shelby Diotteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It doesn't really matter who we vote for. The president of the United States does not make decisions in this country and neither do the people themselves. If you want a change in America, vote in a new congress! Let me remind you of how this REALLY works.

      The truth is, the President is not supposed to be the Great Decider, but the Capable Administrator, who faithfully executes whatever laws are duly enacted by Congress. Congress makes the laws. The President faithfully executes the laws. The Supreme Court interprets the laws. This is how it is now, and always has been, under our Constitution, and nothing about this changes....EVER!

      Therefore, Congress has the Constitutional authority to establish whatever policies it wants to. If the President disagrees, he can veto the act passed by Congress. But Congress has the final say, because it can override a Presidential veto with a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress. The act then become law, regardless of the President's veto, and the President is obligated to obey and implement that law, even it he disapproves of it. If he fails to do so, Congress can impeach him and remove him from office, for the high crime of deliberately refusing to execute a law duly passed by Congress.

      1. Quilligrapher profile image89
        Quilligrapherposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        ...except for the part where you say it doesn't matter who we vote for!

        There would not have been a "Trail of Tears" if President Andrew Jackson had complied with the Supreme Court decision Worchester v. Georgia, 1832. {1} The Cherokee nation argued its claim of sovereignty before the US Supreme Court and won. President Jackson’s decision not to enforce the court’s ruling is a national disgrace that we, as Americans, should never forget. Some might argue that the Indian Removal Act of 1830 was the Cherokee’s version of today’s Patriot Act. President Jackson enforced this unjust statute even after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the tribe. So much for "it doesn't matter who we vote for" President.
        {1} http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Jac … an_removal

        1. Shelby Diotte profile image61
          Shelby Diotteposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Point well made! I will stand corrected! smile

  8. isenhower33 profile image60
    isenhower33posted 4 years ago

    After the debate has your vote changed or maybe slightly looking in the other direction?