2012 Presidential Election Discussion

[Jacko]

Afghanistan and Iraq are nothing like Libya lol.
"polimic etc.."

You read this "Libya", right. I'm looking forward to the results in Libya it's going to be the same as in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Joe Liebermann, Bernie Sanders.

Wow atleast two.

But regardless here's the point of more ignorance. That you think merely calling oneself under either of those banners means one suddenly becomes an identical ideological clone with all the other people under it. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
The parties mean less than you know. You don't have a point here.
Frankly I don't know why you think you know in the first place. Is it that sort of arrogance shown by some Europeans where they assume America is very simple and that they have it figured out? No you don't lol. We're a huge country, if you don't figure what that can and does mean for variety and complexity when it comes to politics you need to get humble fast.
Any American who pays half attention at our own history will be familiar with this.
Multi-party democracies have never shown any difference to me in either effectiveness or hell even just being different. The parties here are exactly the same except they just happened to call themselves similar things.
Any person who has actually paid attention to recent American politics would very obviously see that this thing called the Republican Party is actually like two or three different factions, that do the same exact shit they would if they called themselves different things. They argue, pressure eachother, bring new issues to the table, make new flags around them.
Hell yes we have smaller factions pressuring larger ones. The Tea Party faction has been pressuring the crap out of the Moderate Republicans for several years now.

There are a few factions in both political camps, thats a very well known fact, i am not stupid. And somehow you're right there isn't really a big differnce in multi-party democracies towards the US system, the winner in elections is either a liberal or a conservative. The only real difference is that the voter has more options to give his own political opinion more power, with more partys the formation of a government is harder for the politicians and imo it's more representative than the vote between two partys.

[Badass SnoCone]

If I were able to vote, I'd probably go with Obama. Only because I don't hate everything he's doing and I think he's a bit over-criticized. If given the chance, I believe he could do good things.

But, since the election is one month before I turn 18, I shall be unable to vote. Oh well.

[Monkey King]

You read this "Libya", right. I'm looking forward to the results in Libya it's going to be the same as in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Do you think Rome was built in a day? Do you think Western Europe became a stable democractic stronghold overnight? Do you think there wasn't instability? Mass emigration? Economic crap? Dead dictators? War? Civil War? International involvement? Years of extremely hard and scary work? Setbacks? Do you even think it's all done?

I would think I wouldn't have to tell a German this of all nationalities, but you seem to have little to no appreciation of what your own country's been through, considering you would probably have been crying when the wall came down had you been there.

Libya is not like those two, it's not a war placed on it suddenly by the outside like Iraq. Nor is it a place that has barely been a nation in any sense rather than a mountain range and it's extremties that have changed hands through warlords and empires for millenia.

It's a small, barely populated considerably culturally homogenous nation that rose up and fought it's OWN war by it's own choice. If you mock Libya's hard road you are mocking Libya, not MY country. So think about that first.

Besides what kind of communist thinks historical development toward a thing is an easy and clean road. Mao would have a few words to say to you comrade!

Wow atleast two.

Thanks for ignoring my actual point!

There are a few factions in both political camps, thats a very well known fact, i am not stupid.

Yes, you knew this thing that entirely undermines the argument you made previously. I believe this.

And somehow you're right there isn't really a big differnce in multi-party democracies towards the US system, the winner in elections is either a liberal or a conservative. The only real difference is that the voter has more options to give his own political opinion more power,

So do Americans lol. How do we not have this same exact power. Your so fixated on parties, as if that somehow matters more than the individual you're voting for. It really really doesn't.

with more partys the formation of a government is harder for the politicians

And what do you mean by harder for the politicians? To do what? Get stuff done? Because this sounds exactly like the US right now.

and imo it's more representative than the vote between two partys.

There ARE third candidates in the US. Again you're operating off some myth where it's not allowed. If such a candidate stood up nothing would stop him from being voted for. However mostly this sort of thing is done through the primary process. If you want to ask Ron Paul why he's running as a Republican in the election and not a Libertarian party be my guest.

[Jacko]

Do you think Rome was built in a day? Do you think Western Europe became a stable democractic stronghold overnight? Do you think there wasn't instability? Mass emigration? Economic crap? Dead dictators? War? Civil War? International involvement? Years of extremely hard and scary work? Setbacks? Do you even think it's all done?

I would think I wouldn't have to tell a German this of all nationalities, but you seem to have little to no appreciation of what your own country's been through, considering you would probably have been crying when the wall came down had you been there.

Libya is not like those two, it's not a war placed on it suddenly by the outside like Iraq. Nor is it a place that has barely been a nation in any sense rather than a mountain range and it's extremties that have changed hands through warlords and empires for millenia.

It's a small, barely populated considerably culturally homogenous nation that rose up and fought it's OWN war by it's own choice. If you mock Libya's hard road you are mocking Libya, not MY country. So think about that first.

Besides what kind of communist thinks historical development toward a thing is an easy and clean road. Mao would have a few words to say to you comrade!

First, don't call me a communist, at best call be a socialist democrat. Second, you don't have to educate me about german history, you know nothing about the turning time. Third, you can't compare the establishment of european democracy towards the building of democracy in the arabic countries.

And last,
Lybia is in some way the same as Iraq and Afghanistan when you talk about building a democracy. The western world freed these countries from dictatorship and Europe/USA are responsible to ensure a stable political system.

Thanks for ignoring my actual point!

That's what you are doing all the time!

Yes, you knew this thing that entirely undermines the argument you made previously. I believe this.

So do Americans lol. How do we not have this same exact power. Your so fixated on parties, as if that somehow matters more than the individual you're voting for. It really really doesn't.

And what do you mean by harder for the politicians? To do what? Get stuff done? Because this sounds exactly like the US right now.

There ARE third candidates in the US. Again you're operating off some myth where it's not allowed. If such a candidate stood up nothing would stop him from being voted for. However mostly this sort of thing is done through the primary process. If you want to ask Ron Paul why he's running as a Republican in the election and not a Libertarian party be my guest.

Before we go deeper into this discussion, let us stop. There is a lot of differences we're talking about. The whole discussion is meaningless, since we're talking about two different voting systems. In the USA the President is voted directly and undemocratic, i'm talking about indirect voting through partys, which then vote for the countryleader.

[Monkey King]

First, don't call me a communist, at best call be a socialist democrat.

Some democrat you were on the other thread lol. And what kind of socialist reads Lenin in a non educational environment lol.

Second, you don't have to educate me about german history, you know nothing about the turning time.

I have a feeling I may know more than you.

Third, you can't compare the establishment of european democracy towards the building of democracy in the arabic countries.

Oh hold on what was that we just heard?

"you know nothing about the turning time."

Exactly, you don't know nothing about the turning of time lol.
This is some seriously historical bullshit on your part. What is it bud? Is it some nonsense pseudo-history where you surgically remove the Arab world from Europe through some confused rant about imperialism? Turning it into some condescending sub-category where everywhere else is somehow a different species from Europe? Is that it?

Oh and please say you weren't calling Afghanistan an Arab country in that.

And last,
Lybia is in some way the same as Iraq and Afghanistan when you talk about building a democracy.

Oh? Enlightenment.

The western world freed these countries from dictatorship

nah nah

Iraq, yes.

Afghanistan, we sided with one side in an ongoing civil war.

Libya, we aided from above and afar an internal conflict without actually doing the dirty work ourselves. This was their victory and deaths.

and Europe/USA are responsible to ensure a stable political system.

This is impossible in Afghanistan, talk about naive. It wasn't even stable before we came in!
As for Iraq we did as much as possible, we were asked to leave. Would you have stayed anyway? Afghanistan is trending this direction as well.

As for Libya I support (as does the Obama white house) essentially a Marshall Planning of Libya (as well as Tunisia, and with time maybe Egypt since it's hardly more than a junta at the moment). Our government is trying to do what it can in Libya, we don't have much room at the moment, and again, we did not cause the Libya conflict.

That's what you are doing all the time!

Nyope.

Before we go deeper into this discussion, let us stop. There is a lot of differences we're talking about. The whole discussion is meaningless, since we're talking about two different voting systems. In the USA the President is voted directly and undemocratic, i'm talking about indirect voting through partys, which then vote for the countryleader.

Wait wait wait, your Chancellor being voted on through others is fine, but the electoral college isn't? I'm not even defending the electoral college but we both rely on this. Electors don't even have their own choice, it's a winner take all basis for winning a state, or in the case of a few they win them based on districts.

[bartholemew kuma]

Zephos, just...... if he wont listen don't burn too much blood on the situation.

[Moriah]

There's the religious republicans, and the military republicans, and the tax cut republicans. Its basically three different parties under one umbrella, they don't all totally overlap or agree on everything.

The only reason they're unified is so they can have the shared votes.

If it was as simple as a party being a one topic issue, then the country wouldn't be split 50/50 nearly as much as it is. Hell, look at the poll above. I realize this is a board of artists and creative freedom types, but even in an anonymous poll, we have 27 Democrat and 1 republican. Wouldn't it be split more if it was *just* an either/or thing, or if either side had only one issue they cared about?

I mean. There's gay republicans. the party is incredibly anti-gay... but there's still gay republicans... because the OTHER 95% of the issues matter to them, and they aren't defined by just one thing.

But aren't there Blue Dog Democrats, which are the more conservative part of the Democrat party (which the regular Democrats have been trying to unseat for years).

Another question is what category of republican does Ron Paul fall under. While I mention that none of the candidates really wowed me with their ideas, I forgot to mention that to me Ron Paul would be a good candidate. Unfortunately, several of the ideologies he supports (gay rights, legalizing marijuana, staying out of potential wars, etc.) are the type of policies that the Republican party are against.

[Monkey King]

Blue Dog Democrats I'm pretty sure are just Democrats from very conservative states, so that their politics are basically conservative by cultural geography.
Vice versa for RINOs. Like the recently departed and badly missed Olympia Snowe.
(I don't know where you got the idea that democrats are trying to unseat probably the only democrats that would be winning in places where those types come from, which they wouldn't have power over mostly, or would have a worse alternative)

They're a perfect illustration of why the name of the party says little about where a politician actually stands.

I remember republicans crowing with joy when Ted Kennedy's old senate seat went to a republican, Scott Brown.
Soon though they realized he was a republican from Mass, which meant he was hardly conservative in a national sense.

[Moriah]

Blue Dog Democrats I'm pretty sure are just Democrats from very conservative states, so that their politics are basically conservative by cultural geography.
Vice versa for RINOs. Like the recently departed and badly missed Olympia Snowe.
(I don't know where you got the idea that democrats are trying to unseat probably the only democrats that would be winning in places where those types come from, which they wouldn't have power over mostly, or would have a worse alternative)

They're a perfect illustration of why the name of the party says little about where a politician actually stands.

I remember republicans crowing with joy when Ted Kennedy's old senate seat went to a republican, Scott Brown.
Soon though they realized he was a republican from Mass, which meant he was hardly conservative in a national sense.

I guess I was referring to those in the far left who view the BD as "Democrats in name only", basically the ones who supported several of the Bush policies such as the warrantless wiretapping and so forth.

[Demon Rin]

I'm getting really tired of politics in this country. The whole thing.

It's gotten so bad that I recently had a conservative yell and scream at me about how I'm what's killing America and I'm just a sheep who blindly follows the fold, when all I said was that calling Obama a "Socialist" was just a buzz word piece of rhetoric and that even if he were, nobody would ever be able to turn this county Socialist. Take note, I never once said anything positive about Obama, just that he's not an actuall, full-on socialist. For all this guy knew, I could have hated every single one of Obama's policies, but I just don't buy into the "socialist" rhetoric. That's not my view, but he didn't know that. However, because I didn't fully agree that Obama is Karl Marx reincarnated, I was an actual enemy and am "What is killing America".

That's what the problem with America is. We can't just be a people who disagree about certain political topics, who debate those topics to come to fair and just compromises for everyone. It's literally a "With Us or Against Us" war where nobody can agree. Where the party not in charge has to be "The Party of No" and oppose every Idea the other has simply because it's the other who had it.

t's become petty, childish, and makes me feel ashamed to be an American.

[Monkey King]

I guess I was referring to those in the far left who view the BD as "Democrats in name only", basically the ones who supported several of the Bush policies such as the warrantless wiretapping and so forth.

I've seen no real move of this kind from the democrats (do we even have a far left in any elected positions aside from ol' Bernie and Dennis?).

The Tea Party has been doing this to what they consider RINO's however, sadly their idea of RINO's seems to be what used to be a normal republican.

[Baou Zakurga]

I don't like any of them. As a grown woman, I find the current anti-woman's rights stance very offensive ... and that is the only way to describe the laws goin into effect in states like Texas, forcing a woman to have a sonogram before an abortion no matter what the situation is. They act as if the only woman getting an abortion is a youth whose contraception failed when many more reasons exist, such as a fatal deformation or the woman was raped.

I hope Obama wins,
If for nothing else keep these anti-women's righter out the office.

I saw this in a magazine and I thought of your post:

http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/gop...roblem-2012-4/

It's pretty long,though.

[Jacko]

Zephos would you please turn your brain on and start thinking.

I have a feeling I may know more than you.

Would you please name the relationship between West Germany and the GDR with one subject before and after the fall of the wall.

This is some seriously historical bullshit on your part. What is it bud? Is it some nonsense pseudo-history where you surgically remove the Arab world from Europe through some confused rant about imperialism? Turning it into some condescending sub-category where everywhere else is somehow a different species from Europe? Is that it?

I repeat myself, you can't really compare the establishment of democracy in europe and in the muslim nations.
Why, because european countries never had a lot of powerful countries with established democracies behind them like the muslim nations today.

nah nah
Iraq, yes.
Afghanistan, we sided with one side in an ongoing civil war.
Libya, we aided from above and afar an internal conflict without actually doing the dirty work ourselves. This was their victory and deaths.

This is impossible in Afghanistan, talk about naive. It wasn't even stable before we came in!
As for Iraq we did as much as possible, we were asked to leave. Would you have stayed anyway? Afghanistan is trending this direction as well.
As for Libya I support (as does the Obama white house) essentially a Marshall Planning of Libya (as well as Tunisia, and with time maybe Egypt since it's hardly more than a junta at the moment). Our government is trying to do what it can in Libya, we don't have much room at the moment, and again, we did not cause the Libya conflict.

Instead of nitpicking about the differences try to find the similarities between these three nations.
The USA and Nato intervened with military power and eradicated the political powers back then. And now they've the duty to ensure a stable political system. That's all i wanted to say.
And if you still insist to talk about this topic, we should change the issue to US foreign policy that would be more ontopic.

Wait wait wait, your Chancellor being voted on through others is fine, but the electoral college isn't? I'm not even defending the electoral college but we both rely on this. Electors don't even have their own choice, it's a winner take all basis for winning a state, or in the case of a few they win them based on districts.

And again, read the first sentence of this post.
In this thread the topic is the presidential election and i interposed, that in the US a partisan variety for a more represantative formation of a government is missing. Regardless how many differnet factions in both partys exsist in the end either Obama or a republican is going to be President. The discussion would be meaningfull if we would be talking about congressional election. So my bad

[Monkey King]

Zephos would you please turn your brain on and start thinking.

You're probably the most painfully amateur self styled expert on this board lol, who are you to call anyone out on not thinking.

Would you please name the relationship between West Germany and the GDR with one subject before and after the fall of the wall.

Relations to the Nazi past is an interesting one. How about that.
You don't really think I'm intimidated by you on history do you Mr. "EUROPE IS NOTHING LIKE THE ARAB WORLD REVOLUTION WISE"

I repeat myself, you can't really compare the establishment of democracy in europe and in the muslim nations.

Of course you can loll, I've even written term papers on that shit.

Oh and do you enjoy moving goalposts? What happened to Arab World? Are you just quietly shuffling your apparent thoughts of Afghanistan being Arab under the rug? Don't think I'll you live that one down lol.
And which muslim nations? Former Soviet? Arab? Persiosphere? South Asian? Sub-Saharan? Southeast Asian? Southeast European? They ain't similar holmes, some of them couldn't be more different. Heck you could even divide the Arab world even further.

Why, because european countries never had a lot of powerful countries with established democracies behind them like the muslim nations today.

lol, yes they did. Maybe not in 1848, but most of Europe did have a contrast with other parts of Europe (and the US). Eastern Europe as a whole (and STILL for that matter in some of those places). Greece struggled with democracy and shit, and received support from the west just like Libya did. The entire Iberian peninsula until the 70's. The Fascist nations during WW2 versus the Allied Europe (your country, Italy mainly).

And that's just one category of comparison!

Instead of nitpicking about the differences try to find the similarities between these three nations.

lol at you arbitrarily deciding the differences don't matter.
No, you can't do that. They matter a helluva lot more than the similarties. Sorry if that makes you bad argument not work, but that's why it's bad.

The USA and Nato intervened with military power and eradicated the political powers back then.

NATO was not involved with Iraq. How does a German think this is true? Your country (wisely) stayed away.

Also this is such a banal comparison, it doesn't say anything. See that's the issue fool. If you bring up a similarity (which this barely is to Afghanistan as soon as even the slightest detail is added) and it doesn't actually add any food for thought...what was the point??
Are you just saying it to say it? Are you that backed into a corner already?

And now they've the duty to ensure a stable political system. That's all i wanted to say.

We have no duty. That's not even up to us.
No seriously. You think we have a duty to do this.
Guess what Mr. Marxist Anti-Imperialist or whatever you style yourself. That would involve overthrowing, possibly endlessly, the leaders of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Both men have shown themselves to be dubious corrupt kleptocrats. And there is absolutely nothing we can do about that. We can't get better people, because in these sorts of scenarios men like this come to power. And the alternative would be pulling a coup against them.
The people of these countries would love none of that. Iraq wanted us out, Afghanistan wants us gone.
And Libya we never put boots on the gorund to begin with, no occupation, only contribution. Contribution after request for that matter.

I think we should help Libya out financially but not because of your idea that we're cleaning up a mess we made, but for the same reason we bailed out West Germany. Because a stable country is good for the world at large. An unstable one is not.

And if you still insist to talk about this topic, we should change the issue to US foreign policy that would be more ontopic.

This IS US foreign policy lol. In fact we're discussing some things involving the current race, incumbent, and candidates! Duh!

In this thread the topic is the presidential election and i interposed, that in the US a partisan variety for a more represantative formation of a government is missing.

No, you're simply fixated on the fact that our parties don't bisect themselves with more obvious names, colors, and shit. You're only paying attention to the surface. Here let me indulge you with a little imagination to make our politics more pretty for you.

Right now the Republican electorate is choosing between four different parties.

The Center Right Party, Mitt Romney. Their color is red.
The Christian Values Alliance, Rick Santorum. Their color is white.
The Southern Good Ol' Boy Alliance, Newt Gingrich. Their color is brown.
And the Libertarian Love Party, Ron Paul. Their color is yellow.

Just pretend this is there and all your problems with go away!

Regardless how many differnet factions in both partys exsist in the end either Obama or a republican is going to be President.

No either, Obama (incumbent so no votes among the left wing factions), a Center Right Party candidate, a Christian Values Alliance candidate, a Southern Good Ol' Boy candidate, and a Libertarian Love candidate will win!

Also the people who literally will be running in different parties as always, the (actual) Libertarian Party, Constitution Party, Green Party (yes we have one too), Reform Party and whoever the hell else.

[Katzztar]

I saw this in a magazine and I thought of your post:

http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/gop...roblem-2012-4/

It's pretty long,though.

Thanks, I'm off to read it... will say more afterwards

[RobbyBevard]

Zephos. Jacko. You guys are having a debate. Thats fine and great.

But personal insults and negative tone are starting to slip into those walls of text.

Like I said at the start of the thread, I'm going low tolerance on that where politics or religion are involved, hotbeds that they are.

Carry on. Without the name calling.

[Ubiq]

Right now the Republican electorate is choosing between four different parties.

The Center Right Party, Mitt Romney. Their color is red.
The Christian Values Alliance, Rick Santorum. Their color is white.
The Southern Good Ol' Boy Alliance, Newt Gingrich. Their color is brown.
And the Libertarian Love Party, Ron Paul. Their color is yellow.

They've also done away with the old GOP elephant and replaced it with more modern and fitting symbols. Respectively:

1. A gold-plated Etch-N-Sketch.
2. The Black Knight From Monty Python and the Holy Grail after he met Arthur.
3. The General Lee jumping a ravine.
4. A grizzled old prospector doing the "GOLD! IT'S GOLD, I TELLS YA!" dance.

Anyway, on a serious note, stuff like the following is why Romney will lose.

Romney said he has some connections to Wisconsin.

“One of most humorous I think relates to my father. You may remember my father, George Romney, was president of an automobile company called American Motors … They had a factory in Michigan, and they had a factory in Kenosha, Wisconsin, and another one in Milwaukee, Wisconsin,” said Romney. “And as the president of the company he decided to close the factory in Michigan and move all the production to Wisconsin. Now later he decided to run for governor of Michigan and so you can imagine that having closed the factory and moved all the production to Wisconsin was a very sensitive issue to him, for his campaign.”

Romney said he recalled a parade in which the school band marching with his father’s campaign only knew the Wisconsin fight song, not the Michigan song.

“So every time they would start playing ‘On Wisconsin, on Wisconsin,’ my dad’s political people would jump up and down and try to get them to stop, because they didn’t want people in Michigan to be reminded that my dad had moved production to Wisconsin,” said Romney, laughing.

[cooldud]

Couple of points:
The GOP candidates, while appearing really weak individually in the primaries, will have the support of the whole machinery behind them once one is picked. The hardcore Evangelical Christian voters, who Romney is finding so hard to win over, will definitely vote Romney over Obama. For them, it's choosing the least of all evils. Between the Catholic and the Mormon, they pick the Catholic (which would be unthinkable a few years ago). Between a Mormon and a 'Muslim', they'll pick the Mormon. Begrudgingly, but they will. Romney is struggling hard to portray himself as a conservative right now, because he needs to pull some of the conservative vote against guys like Gingrich and Santorum. But in the general election, he'll win the conservative vote by default because he'd be up against a more liberal candidate.
As the house elections showed a couple of years ago, the party has momentum behind it. For all Obama's hope and change message, he's been a thoroughly disappointing president. The economy's improving, but that's mostly due to inertia than anything else. None of the bold domestic or foreign policy moves that were expected have been forthcoming. His healthcare plan is a disaster. Having the house armtwist him at every opportunity hasn't helped admittedly.
Ron Paul is a very enigmantic candidate. While most of his message is appealing, his brand of unchecked capitalism is very dangerous.

[Silence]

http://coelasquid.tumblr.com/post/20160506121/chompass-alpha-centauri-in-this-video-at

I'll just leave this here:

"In this video, at 34:25, Rick Santorum called Barack Obama the N world."

But because this is the internet, I'm sure folks are going to stumble over themselves trying to pretend he was going to say something else.

God help me.

[Cyan D. Funk]

He was clearly going for nagger.