VOTERS MUST CHOOSE RIGHT.
The choice will be yours.
The last debate between President Barack Obama and ex-governor Mitt Romney showed the American people one unique and solitary thing that America was being pulled in two different directions, politically.
Between the two candidates, there were polls that focused mainly on the economy and health care soon after the debate, the results of which were promising to Obama's opponent, Mitt Romney; however, the overall winning polls conducted by some media outlets all favored Obama as being the winner of Tuesday's debate.
He had put up a performance that, given the deep recession that he had inherited from the previous Bush Republican administration, he has managed to create 5 million private sector jobs, industry and manufacturing assembly lines were busy again, and with changes planned for the national tax code to make it fair and balanced, America would be able to deal with the huge deficit, leading to bringing down, or even totally defraying the enormous debt of over $16 trillion dollars.
The cost of two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have obviously affected the nation's budget each and every single year; but he has ended the Iraq war so as to be able to bring the money being spent there to help build a strong economy; and the Afghan war would also end in 2014, and its cash flow could be returned home.
Simply put, Obama was able to lay out a foundation on which to start anew, to ensure a better future for the United States; a future that would have a workforce prepared to take on the technological challenges the world would present.
Germany, China and India have invested heavily in bio-fuels and renewable energy sources, of wind, solar and natural gas; and therefore the U.S. could not fall behind in those developments, as catching up would be more costly.
At home, a universal health care would be provided for millions of Americans, who lacked health care insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act; and unemployment was being whittled down gradually, so that million would be able to find work, with a vibrant middle class growing the economy even more stronger, not for a year or two, but for decades to come.
Then comes, on the other hand, a successful businessman, who will use his business expertise to create 12 million jobs in four years and reduce taxes by 20% for all tax payers. His experience in foreign policy matters seems to be non-existent, there is not any assurance that his plan for America will fit future world trends.
With nuclear proliferation becoming common, the world will be a dangerous place for an individual, whose only qualification to be a leader is through his wherewithal; and as the plan he is pushing for the future is based on sheer promises, there is no guarantee that he will succeed.
The last debate has given the American electorate a glimpse of what was ahead, in two different options; one that was solid and innovative by Obama, and one that his opponent was promoting, which was outlandish; but bland and without much substance.
He would be able to produce the jobs in the numbers that he was forecasting, with the help of heavy financial backers and Wall Street influence; but would that be worthwhile, if the U.S. was not at peace, and would, perhaps, become engaged in another war to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon?
It would therefore defy common sense, if voters would choose the second option, as what they took away from the debate clearly demonstrated that one choice was far better than the other.
That would be the choice before them on election day, November 6th, 2012.