Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Let The Debates Begin! Obama v Romney
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 1 of 86 (674818)
10-03-2012 9:58 AM


Which Platform Has More Substance?
Well folks, here I am in my home of Denver, Colorado waiting for the first of the televised presidential debates. They say that our state is a battleground state, and I can see why. Here in working class Denver, the vote is largely pro-Obama, and my labor union obviously feels the same way. Out in the suburbs, however, the business class and wealthier electorate largely favors Mitt Romney.
What does our friendly peanut gallery at EvC think? Which candidate represents the best ideology and/or have the best plan for America?
I respect Obama's intelligence and his ability to best represent the majority of Americans. Many of my "christian" friends seem to prefer Mitt Romney, but most of them are self-employed. I always ask them WWJD?
Edited by Phat, : fixed subtitle

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by 1.61803, posted 10-03-2012 10:08 AM Phat has replied
 Message 10 by dronestar, posted 10-03-2012 12:46 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied
 Message 13 by ooh-child, posted 10-03-2012 2:49 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 2 of 86 (674821)
10-03-2012 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
10-03-2012 9:58 AM


Re: Which Platform Has More Substance?
In my opinion I think the Prez condensed it all down to:
Do we want a every man for himself society?
Or do we want a "we are all in this together.
We will see which one America chooses very soon.

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 10-03-2012 9:58 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-03-2012 10:20 AM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 6 by Phat, posted 10-03-2012 10:29 AM 1.61803 has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 3 of 86 (674823)
10-03-2012 10:16 AM


Romney looses me
Not that I was going to vote for him, but this right here has me against him:
For the video impared:
quote:
I would not legalize marijuana for medicinal purposes.
He goes on to talk about how its a gateway drug and legalization for medical use is a path towards total legalization and he's not for that.
quote:
If you'd like to get somebody who's in favor of marijuana, I know there is some on the democratic side...(mumble)... but I'm opposed to it.
And here's the worst part:
quote:
If you elect me president then you're not gonna see legalized marijuana. I'm gonna fight it tooth and nail.
Whelp. That does it for me folks. Fuck you Romney!
Like you had a chance at winning anyways

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Phat, posted 10-03-2012 10:23 AM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 7 by NoNukes, posted 10-03-2012 11:38 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 86 (674825)
10-03-2012 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by 1.61803
10-03-2012 10:08 AM


Re: Which Platform Has More Substance?
In my opinion I think the Prez condensed it all down to:
Do we want a every man for himself society?
Or do we want a "we are all in this together.
I'll tell you what: There are way too many people here who I do not want to be together with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by 1.61803, posted 10-03-2012 10:08 AM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 5 of 86 (674826)
10-03-2012 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by New Cat's Eye
10-03-2012 10:16 AM


Re: Romney looses me
The intelligence of the average voter is somewhat limited to the scope of their individual interests. Much of the reason that I am voting democratic is because it makes for a stronger environment for my labor union, which is what I need to have strong to insure a good retirement.
The issues in this election are common to many elections throughout history, and I simply want to know a few answers to some questions that I have.
  • Why do tax breaks for the upper income group benefit everyone?
  • Is it better to rebuild an economy from the ground up or from the top down?
  • Are we as a people ready to propose a long range plan for getting out of debt? If so, whom will it hurt the most and whom should be responsible...as a group as well as individuals?

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 3 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-03-2012 10:16 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 8 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-03-2012 11:44 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    (1)
    Message 6 of 86 (674828)
    10-03-2012 10:29 AM
    Reply to: Message 2 by 1.61803
    10-03-2012 10:08 AM


    Re: Which Platform Has More Substance?
    1.61803 writes:
    Do we want a every man for himself society?
    Or do we want a "we are all in this together.
    Free Market versus Socialism? Or is that too simple?
    I think that it has to be both. It can't simply be an either/or question.
    In my own life, for instance...I need to be able to earn a decent living. I can't compete at minimum wage. I can't even live at minimum wage without abandoning any plan for retirement. And I don't trust the monied class enough to give them tax breaks. Like Obama said in his acceptance speech, "they tried that before and it didn't work."
    My Republican friend always points me to Milton Friedman and his economic philosophies. IIRC, Reagan also liked Milton, and that was the start of our enormous national debt. Something is very wrong with this picture.
    By the way, this is an interesting article:
    History Says Debate Moments Matter
    Edited by Phat, : added features

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 2 by 1.61803, posted 10-03-2012 10:08 AM 1.61803 has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 12 by 1.61803, posted 10-03-2012 2:04 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied
     Message 16 by onifre, posted 10-03-2012 11:33 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    NoNukes
    Inactive Member


    Message 7 of 86 (674839)
    10-03-2012 11:38 AM
    Reply to: Message 3 by New Cat's Eye
    10-03-2012 10:16 AM


    Re: Romney looses me
    He goes on to talk about how its a gateway drug and legalization for medical use is a path towards total legalization and he's not for that.
    I had no position on this until I read here about how medical marijuana had alleviated suffering for one of the EvC residents. I simply hadn't given it any serious thought. I am still opposed in general to legalization, but not to the legalization of medical marijuana.
    I am glad Romney is against it at least for now.

    Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
    The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
    It's not too late to register to vote. State Registration Deadlines

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 3 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-03-2012 10:16 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 9 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-03-2012 11:49 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

      
    New Cat's Eye
    Inactive Member


    (1)
    Message 8 of 86 (674840)
    10-03-2012 11:44 AM
    Reply to: Message 5 by Phat
    10-03-2012 10:23 AM


    Re: Romney looses me
    I never studied economics, Phat. I don't really know the answers to your questions. I think the idea of tax breaks for the wealthy is to incentivize them to to use their money in the economy, to invest it in business, to buy stuff, to get that money ball rolling. But you can't predict what people are actually going to do. It turns out that the wealthy tend to act criminally with thier excess and we can't trust them to do the right thing.
    I'm not sure that you can build an economy from the ground up (short of starting everything over). Think about this: If you took all the money and evenly distributed to every single person, wouldn't it just end up concentrating back to a small group of people? Poor people are bad with money and rich people are good with it. That's how they get that way.
    I think we're fucked either way. Either we put too much effort into helping the poor to the point that the middle has enough and gives up, or we let the rich take the wheel and screw the middle out of their share.
    This country's going downhill. I tried to care but my opinions are inhumane. So fuck it, I'm out. You guys can have it just leave me the fuck alone.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 5 by Phat, posted 10-03-2012 10:23 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    New Cat's Eye
    Inactive Member


    (5)
    Message 9 of 86 (674842)
    10-03-2012 11:49 AM
    Reply to: Message 7 by NoNukes
    10-03-2012 11:38 AM


    Re: Romney looses me
    I had no position on this until I read here about how medical marijuana had alleviated suffering for one of the EvC residents.
    Here's an article for ya:
    Marijuana And Cancer: Scientists Find Cannabis Compound Stops Metastasis In Aggressive Cancers | HuffPost San Francisco
    quote:
    Marijuana And Cancer: Scientists Find Cannabis Compound Stops Metastasis In Aggressive Cancers
    I simply hadn't given it any serious thought. I am still opposed in general to legalization, but not to the legalization of medical marijuana.
    I think they should put it on the shelf next to Budweiser. And tax it. That'll get us out of the shitter.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 7 by NoNukes, posted 10-03-2012 11:38 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

      
    dronestar
    Member
    Posts: 1407
    From: usa
    Joined: 11-19-2008


    Message 10 of 86 (674851)
    10-03-2012 12:46 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
    10-03-2012 9:58 AM


    Re: Which Platform Has More Substance?
    Phat writes:
    I respect Obama's intelligence and his ability to best represent the majority of Americans.
    I don't think intelligence matters at all. Obama may be vastly more intelligent than Bush Jr., but the same elite goals are reached with either an immoral-simpleton in office or an immoral rocket-scientist in office: policies that enrich the 1% over the 99%. However, being smart allows the more intelligent candidate to pull the wool over the voting eyes more effectively. For example, in 2008 Obama said:
    quote:
    Decades of trade deals like NAFTA and China have been signed with plenty of protections for corporations and their profits, he declared before GM workers in Janesville, Wisconsin, but none for our environment or our workers who’ve seen factories shut their doors and millions of jobs disappear.
    But despite his 'intelligent' campaign pledges to protect the american worker, Obama championed Bush Jr.'s free trade deals with "labor-rights pariah Colombia, tax-haven Panama, and South Korea"
    And now with nearly silent corporate-media complicity, Obama is finalizing a huge free-trade deal with Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.
    quote:
    "the deal would extend the incentives for U.S. firms to offshore investment and jobs to lower-wage countries.
    quote:
    These trade agreements have been the number one job killer for our members, the APPW’s vice president, Greg Pallesen, toldDollars & Sense.
    The only REAL difference between Obama and Romney is that only one of them is outspoken for the best interests of the 1%. Laugh all you want about 'Romney the buffoon,' either way, the 1% will get the last laugh. Again.
    zcommunications.org - zcommunications Resources and Information.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Phat, posted 10-03-2012 9:58 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 11 by NoNukes, posted 10-03-2012 1:39 PM dronestar has not replied

      
    NoNukes
    Inactive Member


    Message 11 of 86 (674853)
    10-03-2012 1:39 PM
    Reply to: Message 10 by dronestar
    10-03-2012 12:46 PM


    Re: Which Platform Has More Substance?
    quote:
    Decades of trade deals like NAFTA and China have been signed with plenty of protections for corporations and their profits, he declared before GM workers in Janesville, Wisconsin, but none for our environment or our workers who’ve seen factories shut their doors and millions of jobs disappear.
    But despite his 'intelligent' campaign pledges to protect the american worker, Obama championed Bush Jr.'s free trade deals with "labor-rights pariah Colombia, tax-haven Panama, and South Korea"
    Perhaps there is more context to clarify this, but I don't see any promise not to do trade deals, but only a promise to also champion American workers and the environment. I don't think you've made the case on this one.
    At this point American workers are really in a tough bind. Americans aren't going to benefit from trade protectionism because they need us to export stuff to generate jobs. Americans seem to be hooked on cheap plastic and other gaudy stuff made overseas.

    Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
    The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
    It's not too late to register to vote. State Registration Deadlines

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 10 by dronestar, posted 10-03-2012 12:46 PM dronestar has not replied

      
    1.61803
    Member (Idle past 1503 days)
    Posts: 2928
    From: Lone Star State USA
    Joined: 02-19-2004


    (4)
    Message 12 of 86 (674854)
    10-03-2012 2:04 PM
    Reply to: Message 6 by Phat
    10-03-2012 10:29 AM


    Re: Which Platform Has More Substance?
    I suppose Mitt's platform has more substance.
    Unfortunately it is of the kind that sticks to the bottom of your shoes and stinks.
    Romney's platform
    Withdrawal from Iraq is tragic.
    Privatize public schools
    eradicate unions
    go to war with Iran
    higher taxes for the middle class
    no equal pay for equal work
    end obama care
    end medicare
    More tax breaks for the uber rich
    encourage the US auto industry to go bankrupt
    Over turn Roe Vs Wade
    Enjoy the firing of people
    Self deportation
    Privatize Social security
    encourage Bush doctrine of preemptive war
    Kill the Dream Act
    Oppose the Buffet rule
    dismantle all social welfare programs
    Throw away 47 percent of Americans.
    Edited by 1.61803, : No reason given.

    "You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 6 by Phat, posted 10-03-2012 10:29 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    ooh-child
    Member (Idle past 343 days)
    Posts: 242
    Joined: 04-10-2009


    Message 13 of 86 (674857)
    10-03-2012 2:49 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
    10-03-2012 9:58 AM


    Re: Which Platform Has More Substance?
    Well, I just returned yesterday from a pleasant visit w/ friends to your area - we spent some time in the 'burbs, and I saw few signs for either candidate.
    Our friends claim to be non-political, although I think the hubby is a closet tea-partier. He mostly tried to keep his conservative feelings to himself, I think mainly because he knows me & my progressive leanings & he had very little to offer up in support of Romney. I don't think the Republican platform excites him much. I'm not even sure if either of them are registered to vote.
    Here in California, folks keep asking me why I support Obama since he 'wants to shut down NASA' (my hubby's employer). I usually just blink and tell them that's just not true. Where do they get this stuff? One guy just today asked me if I was serious in my support of the president, since he 'closed down the shuttle program'. Huh? At least he let me explain the basics of the NASA budget, and thanked me for filling him in.
    The conservative/tea-bagger bubble just keeps getting bigger & bigger.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Phat, posted 10-03-2012 9:58 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 14 by dwise1, posted 10-03-2012 3:21 PM ooh-child has seen this message but not replied

      
    dwise1
    Member
    Posts: 5930
    Joined: 05-02-2006
    Member Rating: 5.8


    Message 14 of 86 (674860)
    10-03-2012 3:21 PM
    Reply to: Message 13 by ooh-child
    10-03-2012 2:49 PM


    Re: Which Platform Has More Substance?
    The conservative/tea-bagger bubble just keeps getting bigger & bigger.
    Ah, but when that bubble also bursts as the others have ... .

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 13 by ooh-child, posted 10-03-2012 2:49 PM ooh-child has seen this message but not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 15 by Phat, posted 10-03-2012 3:45 PM dwise1 has not replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 18262
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.1


    (1)
    Message 15 of 86 (674861)
    10-03-2012 3:45 PM
    Reply to: Message 14 by dwise1
    10-03-2012 3:21 PM


    Re: Which Platform Has More Substance?
    dwise1 writes:
    Ah, but when that bubble also bursts as the others have ... .
    But by then they may have laid off a bunch of skilled grocery workers in favor of the cheaper new labor that costs them less but that in general also accomplishes much less.
    Obamacare has cost my union health insurance more in that they now have to insure a wider pool of people than they did before, but overall our insurance is still a bargain. My poor sister must pay $900.00 a month for the same coverage I get for around $50.00 a month year around.
    My union provides value for the company, however. We are slowly learning to multitask and to cross-train, something we previously refused to do. I want to go back to school, and I think that at my new store I can find the time to fit it in. Obama seems more pro education than does Romney. I fear that the Republicans want more jobs--- but that they want low wage jobs to help their companies compete. This is not a win for America. Not for the American laborer, at least.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 14 by dwise1, posted 10-03-2012 3:21 PM dwise1 has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 17 by Taz, posted 10-04-2012 1:09 AM Phat has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024