The American Politics Discussion Thread

KingCharizard said:

my point was if someone asked for documents i knew i had to donate to charity i'd done it, even if it was for good publicity

Click to expand...

showing government documents -> had to donate to charity = you'd have done it even for good publicity

That's your point? I think you need to reread that a bit, because showing government documents has nothing to do with donating to charity and...

just, reread that sentence. It makes no sense. Donating to charity is a moral decision, showing government documents is a legal or at least interpersonal decision.

What economic plan do you think he has that would have been good for America? Details, please. With sources. If you're such a big supporter I'm sure it shouldn't be hard to outline what he actually was planning on doing to help the economy, right? :)

Click to expand...

If that's the case, tell me how Obama did on the job creation and his economic plan?

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104719.html

Almost all those years except the 30's the unemployment rate was below 8%

Even with the war* and bush in office the rate is below 6%

And the list doesn't even mention 2011

just, reread that sentence. It makes no sense. Donating to charity is a moral decision, showing government documents is a legal or at least interpersonal decision.

Click to expand...

Because he is the president his PERSONAL documents become sacred? They are a national Treasure? If Obama showed the docs, he would have made alot of people shut up and charity would have gained 5 million, by not showing them the "nay sayers" think he is hiding something and now have even more to say.. I'm done "Discussing" this point its not gonna get anywhere...

KingCharizard said:

If that's the case, tell me how Obama did on the job creation and his economic plan?

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104719.html

Almost all those years except the 30's the unemployment rate was below 8%

Even with the way and bush in office the rate is below 6%

Click to expand...

If 33 consecutive months of private-sector job creation isn't good enough for you, and if unemployment levels crawling back down to where they were during the 2008 economical meltdown are something terrible, please move to Europe. We have been losing jobs month after month for several years already and our unemployment levels are at an all-time high, and we have been reducing Government spending like madmen, and reducing the services provided by the State, and firing civil servants and privatizing jobs- and things are getting worse and worse and here in Spain our unemployment level is up to 25% with no hopes of going anywhere. I wish we had had someone to enact a Stimulus plan, maybe we'd be where the US are right now. I'd cry of happiness if that happened.

Who cares if the nay sayers have "more to say", honestly? By now reasonable people have written them off as unhinged nutjobs for needing his college records, and he won, so they obviously don't have a hold on the country. It is a little troubling to see that you find Trump's actions completely reasonable though. Once again, if he wanted to donate to charity, he could have. He chose not to.

@your reply to me: I see that you avoided the question. Should I assume from this that you have no answer and actually have no clue how Romney would help the economy? Not that I'm surprised or blame you for that, no one really knew how he would help since he didn't say anything about it.

KingCharizard said:

The point was, if he showed the docs 5 million would have been donated to charity, thats the reason I have to side with trumph, not because I believe in proving obama isn't american.

Click to expand...

Donating is a personal decision, not something that would concern everyone. If I had said something comparable to that, like, "IF YOU DON'T GIVE ME A COOKIE, THEN I WON'T DO MY HOMEWORK", I would be justifiably ignored. There's no reason I should be listened to. Homework is something you should do, but not something you have to. In the same way, donations are something you should do, but not something you have to. And then, a cookie is junk food, and doesn't help you with life in any way other than just feeding your satisfaction. In the same way, Obama's birth certificate is, in the same way, just something that feeds the public's satisfaction. There is in no way that those two things are connected.

KingCharizard said:

But I haven't herd one valid reason on why romney shouldn't have been president. All people talk about is a few key choices that shouldn't even matter, such as his tax priorities, his business decisions he made in the past, when he had his company's best interest in mind... That closing PBS line probably killed his chances because that's all people focus on what they dont need... The negative, the few mistakes. There is a bigger picture that Americans cant see.

Click to expand...

We have said many of them, but ignore them if you will.

There is a bigger picture that Americans can't see, but I can see. I have no obligation to provide any support for any group, because I can go back to my home country if things get bad here in America, unlike true Americans, who can't revoke their citizenship. But still, I support Obama, because he had four years to fix something eight years long, we should at least give him the same amount of time to fix the problem than it was made worse.

And, if you don't mind a tidbit of personal opinion, he seems really desperate and unskilled, with bad foresight for the future. He ran in 2008, he ran now in 2012, he's probably going to do it again in 2016 (but I hope he learns his lesson by then). He has all these contradictions only a spastic 12-year-old running for president could make, and he supports the people he likes, again, like a spastic 12-year-old going through adolescence, sticking up for his clique.

But that's just me. Maybe you support him, and I have no reason to make you believe otherwise. But the matter of fact is, Obama and his general support for the majority (as far as I can tell) may just be better for America (maybe!), more than Romney, and the "trickle down economics" that the Republicans so prefer.

@your reply to me: I see that you avoided the question. Should I assume from this that you have no answer and actually have no clue how Romney would help the economy? Not that I'm surprised or blame you for that, no one really knew how he would help since he didn't say anything about it.

Click to expand...

Its not clear how Obama plans to help either.... It seems to me he will continue to do what he has been doing which is alot of nothing, i know too many people who lost jobs that voted for Obama who chose not to vote this year, some even voted for Romney

KingCharizard, please answer my question. You made a claim. What is this "bigger picture" that America can't see? Are you implying by your avoidance that it's not economic? Are his social issues the "bigger picture"?

On the birth certificate issue... has Mitt Romney shown his yet? Are people picking solely on Obama just because he doesn't look they way they think a 'real american' should look? Because that's what it looks like from my (outsider) point of view.

KingCharizard said:

Its not clear how Obama plans to help either.... It seems to me he will continue to do what he has been doing which is alot of nothing, i know too many people who lost jobs that voted for Obama who chose not to vote this year, some even voted for Romney

Click to expand...

Just going to add, Romney got 2 million votes less than John McCain. So there were people who voted for Obama and switched to him, but there are also many who voted for McCain and decided to switch to Obama- or simply not vote. One anecdote doesn't prove a general tendency.

SwiftSign said:

On the birth certificate issue... has Mitt Romney shown his yet? Are people picking solely on Obama just because he doesn't look they way they think a 'real american' should look? Because that's what it looks like from my (outsider) point of view.

Click to expand...

You've got it completely right. There are no Romney birthers. Gee, I wonder why?

KingCharizard said:

Because he is the president his PERSONAL documents become sacred? They are a national Treasure? If Obama showed the docs, he would have made alot of people shut up and charity would have gained 5 million, by not showing them the "nay sayers" think he is hiding something and now have even more to say.. I'm done "Discussing" this point its not gonna get anywhere...

Click to expand...

Obviously a link from Snopes isn't as good as a link from usa.gov, but here's what I could gather.

Also, here's a bit from the official White House blog.

If that's not enough, I don't know if Trump was being an ******* or he actually had some doubts. Because the Internet is free for everyone, not just for poor people and middle-class citizens.

Toujours said:

KingCharizard, please answer my question. You made a claim. What is this "bigger picture" that America can't see? Are you implying by your avoidance that it's not economic? Are his social issues the "bigger picture"?

Click to expand...

Yes, what is the "bigger picture"? I would like to know too.

For the record, Trump wasn't asking about his birth certificate with the 5 million dollar offer, it was his college and passport records.

KingCharizard said:

But I haven't herd one valid reason on why romney shouldn't have been president. All people talk about is a few key choices that shouldn't even matter, such as his tax priorities, his business decisions he made in the past, when he had his company's best interest in mind... That closing PBS line probably killed his chances because that's all people focus on what they dont need... The negative, the few mistakes. There is a bigger picture that Americans cant see.

Click to expand...

With Romney personally, I wouldn't have had much of a problem. It's more the rest of the Republican party that that would have been part and parcel of a Republican administration.

I consider myself a Conservative. The Republicans have drifted though. Quite a bit. They have large branding issues. Not to mention hypocrites and contradictions. There are many voices yelling at once. They're supposedly the party of fiscal responsibility and civil liberties and yet largely against gay marriage and abortion in extreme circumstances. Both of which are fundamentally economic and liberty-based issues at their core.

They've become a party of no and exclusion and their core message (which I think would be wholly palatable) is buried. Also, have you seen who they have as part of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology. Makes no sense

Also, they've turned into a bumper sticker party. Simple answers for complex problems.

There is a place for PBS, for instance. In the grand scheme of the budget, it is minuscule. Should it be cut? No. What it should be though is restructured. Tweaked. Made leaner and more efficient. As should everything in government. More bang for the buck. That should be the Republican message. But it is not. There's no grey. There's only spend or cut, but not spend less. That's what business is. You make things efficient and responsibly run. Spend responsibly. Invest. You know... R&D.

And quite frankly, how a party who in their last administration cut taxes while increasing spending substantially and launching two unpaid wars can claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility is beyond me.

Romney did not necessarily campaign on those problem issues (except for PBS), but the formal platform and the party at large does represent those things even if he doesn't. That's the problem. That's why he lost.

Reagan increased taxes. Bush Sr. increased taxes. Suddenly, it's a dirty word in the party.

Toujours said:

Edit: And there are issues beyond the economic, which are important to different people.

Click to expand...

But economics should be (and are) important to everyone, even if they don't recognize it. Individual issues affect individuals. And on the campaign trail specifically.... it's mostly fluff. Rallying on one side. Fear-mongering on the other. Which and when depends on the situation and issue. But, lets take abortion. Roe v. Wade was in 1973. Since (and during) that time there have been five Republican presidents. And nothing has happened. It isn't going to be touched. It is a non-issue. But economics are reality

Toujours said:

KingCharizard, please answer my question. You made a claim. What is this "bigger picture" that America can't see? Are you implying by your avoidance that it's not economic? Are his social issues the "bigger picture"?

Click to expand...

I'll break it down from my point of view, I also have a few relatives who are soldiers so i'll mention what they have said to me to.

Obama is not the Commander in chief we need in a conflict situation, he couldn't call the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack, when it clearly was. He has made tense relations between us and Israel.
The Iran Situation is getting out of hand, just a few days ago with a drone getting targeted by Iranian pilots. He plans to cut spending for the military with these growing conflicts, he plans to stop insurance for military families only the soldier will be covered. He has already layed off a bunch of soldiers.. He plans to borrow more, Obama care is something w cannot afford. we continue to waste money. Unemployment has not gone down much, also romney is right most americans have stopped looking for jobs thats why the number isn't higher, the amount of americans on welfare is out of control. There is more I could say but I'm getting lazy and dont feel like it this should be enough for people to rip through and try to dismiss, have fun :)

It is not a non-issue, Triforce. Behind all the economy, in both the states and country-wide, there are constant social issues being fought. Abortion is being fought. In one of Romney's many "faces", he expressed how delighted he would be to support a ban on abortions countrywide. It's part of his platform. It may not be important to you as a man, but it's incredibly important to me, and it's what I voted on.

...wtf?

If I remember correctly from 8th grade, these are the requirements set by the constitution or whatever to be president:

• be a natural-born citizen of the United States
• be at least thirty-five years old;
• have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years.

Click to expand...

And one:

College: How old is Barack Obama? 51? Even if he came back to America after college when he was 37, which is probably too old for anyone, even for lawyers, he would be legal to be president.

Passport records: Out-of-country travels do not disqualify you from being a "permanent resident" of the US. Even if you live in another country, you can't have your status revoked, unless you specifically ask them to. At least that's how it works in China - I'm still a legal resident of the People's Republic of China, even though I've lived at least 13 years in America.

so neither of them matter.

KingCharizard said:

Its not clear how Obama plans to help either.... It seems to me he will continue to do what he has been doing which is alot of nothing, i know too many people who lost jobs that voted for Obama who chose not to vote this year, some even voted for Romney

Click to expand...

Well, possibly nothing. But not by his own doing. He did try to bring budgets to the table. Compromises. Job bills.

It's all stagnant due to a stupid Congress.

It's all stagnant due to a stupid Congress.

Click to expand...

Exactly part of the bigger picture I forgot to mention. Whats the point of having a president if he cant actually achieve anything.

And neither a President that can do something but won't.

KingCharizard said:

I'll break it down from my point of view, I also have a few relatives who are soldiers so i'll mention what they have said to me to.

Obama is not the Commander in chief we need in a conflict situation, he couldn't call the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack, when it clearly was.

Click to expand...

He did. He just waited until it was certain to call it that.

He has made tense relations between us and Israel.

Click to expand...

[citation needed]

The Iran Situation is getting out of hand, just a few days ago with a drone getting targeted by Iranian pilots.

Click to expand...

I completely agree that the drones in general are a large problem with his policy. Is Romney against drones? How would Romney have handled that differently?

He plans to cut spending for the military with these growing conflicts, he plans to stop insurance for military families only the soldier will be covered.

Click to expand...

Do some more research. Since you made another unsourced claim, I did it for you:

"The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) signed into law in 2010 had no direct effect on the TRICARE benefit. The bill meant changes in health care coverage for many Americans, but the legislation did not apply directly to TRICARE."

He has already layed off a bunch of soldiers.. He plans to borrow more, Obama care is something w cannot afford. we continue to waste money. Unemployment has not gone down much, also romney is right most americans have stopped looking for jobs thats why the number isn't higher, the amount of americans on welfare is out of control.

Click to expand...

The original unemployment did not account for people that weren't looking for work either. It is disingenuous to compare the two when they take into account different things. Unemployment has gone down. What do you think Romney would have done to make it go down faster? You say a lot of "Obama didn't do this", but not a lot of "this is how Romney would have done it better". That's the real question here. What do you think Romney would do to lower unemployment faster, outsource more jobs like he did at Bain Capital?