The American Politics Discussion Thread

Netto Azure

Netto Azure

Kiel
    • 9,405
    Posts
    16
    Years

    This thread is dedicated to discussion of the upcoming US Presidential, Gubernatorial and Congressional election in November 2012. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the various candidates, their positions, and the various other positions being voted on across the country. All news and discussion of the upcoming election will be placed in this thread, and once the results are in a possible new thread dedicated to the 113th Congress could be made.

    The usual forum rules apply (be considerate of others and their opinions, no flaming or cyclical posting, try and provide sources when possible, etc), and try not to get too caught up in the News coverage of the elections (i.e., we all know the mainstream media is inherently biased (toward the right and the left), so try not to create too much discussion based on how bad you perceive the individual networks are skewing the various elections). To clarify further, you can post any clips or excerpts you feel will add to this thread (as so long as they are actual news clips and not simply talking heads), but do not get too focused on the source of the information (which is partially irrelevant to the discussion topic)...

    Former Governor Mitt Romney is the Republican nominee for the 2012 Presidential cycle.

    President Barack Obama is the likely Democratic nominee for the 2012 Presidential cycle.

    Multiple 3rd party candidates will be announced as the election approaches.

    11 States and 2 territories will have Gubernatorial elections. 33 Senatorial Elections will take place, and all 435 Representative seats are up for election. And, of course, a variety of state and local elections will take place.

    _______________________​

    Wow, the GOP just chose the Rich Venture Capitalist and the Social Safety Net shredding Ayn Rand disciple. This has got to be one of the most ideologically polarizing ticket I've seen in a while.

    Anyways, I seriously want to see a through and knowledgeable debate about the role of government towards society this election cycle. But it still seriously ironic how the current 2012 Ryan Budget was scaled down to "Slash everything except the sacred cows of Defense, Medicare, and Social Security" after his original 2011 Budget proposal was effectively used by Democrats as a Piñata.
     
    Last edited:
    In most countries, elections are won by collecting votes from independents and swing voters. As such, choosing such an ideological team can prove a bless for the Democrats who can rely on just listing the politics of the R&R ticket to the point of parody to scare the middleground away. We'll see how it goes, but that's a tricky way to start making up for all the deficit in the polls.
     
    This is truly one of the worst elections in US History. (imo)

    You have Obama then you have Romney. Basically two same people, but in different suits.
    I don't want my vote to go to waste though. I might vote for a third party.
     
    Lmao Ryan is a desperation choice if that. Romney basically sacrificed any shot at pulling in moderates or minorities by creating a hyper partisan ultra conservative ticket meant to rally the neo cons of the far right. If he was smart he would have picked Rubio or Portman.
     
    Livewire said:
    Lmao Ryan is a desperation choice if that. Romney basically sacrificed any shot at pulling in moderates or minorities by creating a hyper partisan ultra conservative ticket meant to rally the neo cons of the far right. If he was smart he would have picked Rubio or Portman.
    Click to expand...
    And Rubio would have been any better? He's a darling of the Teabaggers and just as far right as Ryan, if not moreso. Portman or Pawlenty would have been safe, horribly boring picks - just like Romney himself.

    Ryan is young and charismatic - both things Romney lacks - but he has a ton of baggage. Namely, that little "let's get rid of Social Security, Medicare, and Pell grants" budget last year of which he himself was the mastermind. That debacle has gone down in history as the "Ryan plan" and was almost universally hated by liberals, moderates, and all but the most die-hard conservatives alike.

    The only people that Romney will capture with this VP pick are the hyper-conservatives. I doubt he'll even get Ryan's home state of Wisconsin - that's usually a pretty strong Democratic stronghold, and I'm not sure Ryan is very popular outside his own district in that state.
     
    Morkula said:
    Ryan is young and charismatic - both things Romney lacks
    Click to expand...

    Morkula said:
    The only people that Romney will capture with this VP pick are the hyper-conservatives.
    Click to expand...

    And that's why they probably picked him, I'm guessing. I think they're hoping that Ryan will come off as some kind of "conservative Kennedy" an appeal to younger voters. While, at the same time, appealing to the hard conservatives who are wary of Romney and see him to be Obama in sheep's clothing.

    So, with that in mind, I think it was a smart choice for the GOP. Not something that would sway me to vote for Romney over Obama if I were an American citizen. My choice for the GOP's presidential candidate was Jon Hunstman, and unless they move the party closer to that direction I'm just thoroughly uninterested - an I consider myself a conservative, at least by Canadian standards.

    The Democrats are just Republicans circa 1980s, so they're on their right of centre and I wouldn't have a problem voting for them. I want Obama to win.
     
    Ryan doesn't seem like too bad a pick. It's not like they had great options to choose from, and at least Ryan is different enough from Romney that it doesn't look like they're picking a Romney clone.

    I've seen quite a few anti-Obama bumper stickers, books, signs, and things, but very few pro-Romney ones. This tells me that the election is going to be all about Obama - whether people like him or hate him. So in this sense it only really matters who Romney picks insomuch as they can make people dislike Obama more or less.
     
    Quite frankly, I don't like either candidate at all.

    In his term so far, Obama has put this country in more debt than all the previous Presidents put together!

    Also, Romney wasn't well liked in his second term as governor in my state of Massachusetts.

    Well at least Obama did something about Bin Laden!

    This is such a conundrum. I'll sit this election out.
     
    Are you sure? I wouldn't put all the blame on Obama for that - there were some problems made by the previous president that happened to survive 2008 and then wreaked havoc after he went in term.

    But anywho, I would just like to have a president picked through a method where everyone as an equal vote (ie our votes are reported to the main vote counting instead of have another person vote for us). I don't think it's that hard to do, and with the advent of the Internet it's more than easy just to log in and count all the votes.

    But who cares? I don't think I'll ever care about politics. I'm much to busy being productive to care about that.
     
    Well, if we do direct voting, everyone will have the same power, regardless of state. After all, that's what a democracy is about. It doesn't matter how small your state is in but you still get the same say as someone in California.
     
    NarutoActor said:
    Well America is a republic, not a pure democracy, and it is to in sure the rights of the minority, and give respect to state sovereignty.
    Click to expand...

    From the Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

    Related to REPUBLIC
    Synonyms: democracy

    de·moc·ra·cy
    noun \di-ˈmä-krə-sē\
    1
    a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

    Sounds exactly like the US, doesn't it?

    No, honestly. Let's look at the French Republic, the other country that had a revolutiuon by the same time as the US and has a strong sense of freedom and defence of rights. There the President is elected by adding up all the votes of all the citizens and the one who gets one more vote than the other wins.

    I never understood what's wrong with that, seeing how, in the end, the US system has resulted in only a select few States having any real choice at all and the other ones being either won by a party by default or too small to count at all. A (rare) Socialist voter in Vaucluse, France (won by the pro-fascist National Front party) can still have their vote count for something, as it will add up to the votes from the other citizens in the rest of the country. A Dem voter in Idaho might as well stay in bed the whole election day.
     
    Yeah, the electoral college system is out of date. If you want to argue about states rights there's still the bicameral system of having senators and representatives. (There are 2 senators from every state, regardless of how big or small its population; there are population-proportionate numbers of representatives though.) With a presidential election it really should be 1 person = 1 vote.

    Also, going back to Ryan being picked. He's the one who wants to overhaul social security (well, plenty do, but he had that whole plan and has been one of the poster children for it) and that seems like a bad idea if the Republicans want to win Florida.
     
    droomph said:
    I don't think it's that hard to do, and with the advent of the Internet it's more than easy just to log in and count all the votes.
    Click to expand...

    Internet voting would be easy to rig. Not a good idea IMO.

    --

    I kinda wanted Ron Paul to be the GOP candidate. But everyone knew from the beginning there would be no chance of him being nominated. Such a shame, I liked some of his ideals.
     
    In other American Political/Election news, Republican Todd Akin, currently fighting for a senate seat from Democrat incumbent Claire McCaskill in the state of Missouri, is in very hot water over his comments about abortion laws, specifically about how he believed women's bodies could fight off pregnancy from "legitimate" rape.

    This implies, say many, that there are some kinds of rapes which are okay, which is why Akin has been under pressure to step down from the race. Akin claims he merely misspoke, but others have said his words exemplify the stance held by many far-right Republicans who believe abortion exceptions for rape will mean women will lie about being raped in order to have abortions.

    News sources currently say there is no language in the proposed abortion stance in the anti-abortion platform for Republican Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney that will include exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother.


    tl;dr Old man doesn't understand how pregnancy works, does not understand seriousness of rape. Old man also wants to be your senator.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top