Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
* * * - - 1 votes

Romney v Obama


  • Please log in to reply
206 replies to this topic

Poll: Who would you vote for? (42 member(s) have cast votes)

Who would you vote for?

  1. Obama (33 votes [78.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 78.57%

  2. Romney (4 votes [9.52%])

    Percentage of vote: 9.52%

  3. Neither (3 votes [7.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.14%

  4. I'm not American, why should I care. (2 votes [4.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.76%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#61 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,278 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 06:40 PM

Which makes it even odder that he has pledged to repeal 'Obamacare' if he is elected President. Isn't is more or less the same thing?


Yup.
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#62 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,559 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:12 PM

If presidential candidates did not pander to the religious, would religion be such a major factor in elections and therefore candidates would not focus on religion? What I am saying is that is it a vicious circle. I thought one of the founding principals of the US was the separation of church and state. Why is religion such a political issue?

The freedom to form a religion and express religious belief is a constitutional right in the USA. The right is set out in the First Amendment alongside freedom of speech and of the press. Constitutional rights are always big political issues in the US, and rightly so. They have a strong culture of freedom of expression and that is a good thing IMO. They have far more freedom in this respect than we do in the UK. Insofar as religious belief is concerned, that allows both the balanced believer and the nutjob to coexist but Americans would rather the nutjob exist than the balanced believer be silenced. Churches are massive in the US. Huge. I've been to a couple. They are also everywhere, certainly up to and including the Midwest (I haven't been further West than New Mexico so I couldn't speak for that side of the country which I admit will be a different culture). Religions of all kinds exist in certain areas but there is still a predominantly Christian influence in the States, either protestant or (where the Hispanic population is concerned) Roman Catholic. It is perfectly normal to be listening to mainstream radio or watching TV or hearing an interview by a well known sports personality and there be a reference to God or personal belief. There is not the cynicism about or fear of religion in the States that there is over here. So either of the candidates for presidency referring to faith (and both have one) would be the norm rather than the exception.

The separation of church and state was a decision based upon the corruption (and worse) experienced here in England by the early settlers rather than as a comment upon faith. The early Americans worked hard to ensure checks and balances in their system of government. Alas, the downside to that system is often inaction because stalemates occur, stalling the progress of a particular policy, and Obama has suffered in this area as he appears unable or unwilling to 'cross the floor' and negotiate with the opposition, something that is crucial to making the American governance system work.

Edited by Saintslass, 05 November 2012 - 08:17 PM.


#63 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:28 PM

So we've now got 2 votes for Romney - anyone owning up? (or do we have to have a poll on it?)
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#64 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,451 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:37 PM

So we've now got 2 votes for Romney - anyone owning up? (or do we have to have a poll on it?)


My money's on Northern Sol and JohnM.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#65 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,291 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 09:01 PM

Wrong. I voted for Obama.

edit: and it is now three votes

Edited by Northern Sol, 05 November 2012 - 09:05 PM.


#66 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,291 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 09:04 PM

The poll of polls puts it something like 47.9% to 47.4% to Obama but a comparative landslide in electoral college points.

http://www7.politica...national-polls/

For the gazillions spent by Romney he's reached the dizzy heights of 47.4% having started on 46%.

For the gazillions spent by Obama he's more or less stayed the same.

This is democracy, apparently.


I can't see your point. All the billions spent by both candidates have made sod-all difference. That's surely a good thing.

#67 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 09:45 PM

Wrong. I voted for Obama.

edit: and it is now three votes


A late surge!
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#68 napoleon

napoleon
  • Coach
  • 992 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 09:47 PM

So we've now got 2 votes for Romney - anyone owning up? (or do we have to have a poll on it?)


I will own up without fear or trepidation, so here is my 50 cents worth.
Reason being, all politicians have their faults and stuff up(eg Romney) ,my concern in any election is the state of the economy.And the state of the US economy is at best marking time with unemployment worse than prior to election.The money being thrown around on dud environmental projects(Solyndra), is similar to what our current mob did in Oz with money for school halls etc..
Yes the idea of providing money to the car manufacturers was a good idea(a plus for Obama) and some of the US banks needed a swift kick up the Kyber.That is only part of the economic equation.

If you don't have a growing economy to support those looking for jobs,the less fortunate and the frail,then it is an exercise in shuffling the deck chairs.The national debt is horrendous as is ours in Oz (although ours is healthy employment wise)and this will be left to our kids and grandkids to absorb.Therefore I would be looking at someone who has the ability to create employment longterm.The spin on the latest job figures is just that,sugar coating.
In Australia 60% of employment is created by small business,and likewise in the US.They are taking a hammering in the US ATM,so Govt policies " äint"working in toto.

The killing goes on in Syria meaning the US influence and Hillary have had no impact.Obama stated Al Queda is torn apart ,much weaker.Really ?Try telling that to the Libyans,Afghanis,Iraqis,Malians,Kenyans,Somalians.Cells being found in UK,Germany,US ,Indonesia .

I will say this ,Obama's govt is streets ahead, of the mish mash of one, we have in Australia.

Romney has business experience, Obama was a lawyer,I say no more.

I am napoleon and I authorise this policy statement,on behalf of the good guys (capitalists with a conscience). ;) :o
Rugby league :If it was art, it would be a Monet.

#69 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 09:47 PM

I can't see your point. All the billions spent by both candidates have made sod-all difference. That's surely a good thing.


Except that it's a complete waste. They could both have agreed to spend a tenth of the amount and got the same result.
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#70 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 13,052 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:03 PM

The freedom to form a religion and express religious belief is a constitutional right in the USA. The right is set out in the First Amendment alongside freedom of speech and of the press. Constitutional rights are always big political issues in the US, and rightly so. They have a strong culture of freedom of exp<b></b>ression and that is a good thing IMO. They have far more freedom in this respect than we do in the UK. Insofar as religious belief is concerned, that allows both the balanced believer and the nutjob to coexist but Americans would rather the nutjob exist than the balanced believer be silenced. Churches are massive in the US. Huge. I've been to a couple. They are also everywhere, certainly up to and including the Midwest (I haven't been further West than New Mexico so I couldn't speak for that side of the country which I admit will be a different culture). Religions of all kinds exist in certain areas but there is still a predominantly Christian influence in the States, either protestant or (where the Hispanic population is concerned) Roman Catholic. It is perfectly normal to be listening to mainstream radio or watching TV or hearing an interview by a well known sports personality and there be a reference to God or personal belief. There is not the cynicism about or fear of religion in the States that there is over here. So either of the candidates for presidency referring to faith (and both have one) would be the norm rather than the exception.

The separation of church and state was a decision based upon the corruption (and worse) experienced here in England by the early settlers rather than as a comment upon faith. The early Americans worked hard to ensure checks and balances in their system of government. Alas, the downside to that system is often inaction because stalemates occur, stalling the progress of a particular policy, and Obama has suffered in this area as he appears unable or unwilling to 'cross the floor' and negotiate with the opposition, something that is crucial to making the American governance system work.

Cheers.
Fides invicta triumphat

#71 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,291 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:32 PM

IThe killing goes on in Syria meaning the US influence and Hillary have had no impact.Obama stated Al Queda is torn apart ,much weaker.Really ?Try telling that to the Libyans,Afghanis,Iraqis,Malians,Kenyans,Somalians.Cells being found in UK,Germany,US ,Indonesia .


The US never has had any influence in Syria.

Obama is right, AQ is in pieces but AQ aren't the be-all and end-all of Islamic terrorism.

#72 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,291 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:33 PM

Except that it's a complete waste. They could both have agreed to spend a tenth of the amount and got the same result.


It might be a waste but that doesn't mean it isn't democratic.

#73 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:51 PM

I will own up without fear or trepidation, so here is my 50 cents worth.
Reason being, all politicians have their faults and stuff up(eg Romney) ,my concern in any election is the state of the economy.And the state of the US economy is at best marking time with unemployment worse than prior to election.The money being thrown around on dud environmental projects(Solyndra), is similar to what our current mob did in Oz with money for school halls etc..
Yes the idea of providing money to the car manufacturers was a good idea(a plus for Obama) and some of the US banks needed a swift kick up the Kyber.That is only part of the economic equation.

If you don't have a growing economy to support those looking for jobs,the less fortunate and the frail,then it is an exercise in shuffling the deck chairs.The national debt is horrendous as is ours in Oz (although ours is healthy employment wise)and this will be left to our kids and grandkids to absorb.Therefore I would be looking at someone who has the ability to create employment longterm.The spin on the latest job figures is just that,sugar coating.
In Australia 60% of employment is created by small business,and likewise in the US.They are taking a hammering in the US ATM,so Govt policies " äint"working in toto.

The killing goes on in Syria meaning the US influence and Hillary have had no impact.Obama stated Al Queda is torn apart ,much weaker.Really ?Try telling that to the Libyans,Afghanis,Iraqis,Malians,Kenyans,Somalians.Cells being found in UK,Germany,US ,Indonesia .

I will say this ,Obama's govt is streets ahead, of the mish mash of one, we have in Australia.

Romney has business experience, Obama was a lawyer,I say no more.

I am napoleon and I authorise this policy statement,on behalf of the good guys (capitalists with a conscience). ;) :o


So, in summary, Obama struggles to deal with the mess left by the previous Republican administration so the answer is to elect another Republican. Really?

As for Australia's national debt, I didn't think it was anywhere near as bad as the UK's or US's. I've seen varying figures, but the CIA Worldbook has national debt in 2011 as 26.8% of GDP (US: 67.7%, UK: 86.3%) The government deficit is only 3.3%, and is expected to return to surplus by 2015 (US: 8.6%, UK: 8.3%). You and your government are doing okay!
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#74 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 10:54 PM

It might be a waste but that doesn't mean it isn't democratic.


I wasn't necessarily saying it was. Although it does squeeze out those candidates and parties that do not have access to such funds.
"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#75 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,208 posts

Posted 05 November 2012 - 11:01 PM

Its a choice between, (by European standards) right wing and more right wing and to be honest I don't think it will make any difference. Israel will bomb Iraq no matter who is in charge in the US. he country will only ever do anything that is is it's own interests, no matter who is President.

This is because in the 1980's Reagan abollished the rules that required US broadcasters to be even handed politically (like they are here) and opened the way for Mr Murdoch's Fox News. They are hysterically right wing, they have branded Obama a Communist, a foreigner, and a Muslim, all of which are untrue,but enough Americans believe it because Fox transmit this stuff every day. We should be thankful we don't get it here.
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#76 napoleon

napoleon
  • Coach
  • 992 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 02:27 AM

The US never has had any influence in Syria.

Obama is right, AQ is in pieces but AQ aren't the be-all and end-all of Islamic terrorism.


The US doesn't have any influence in Iran,but has organised reasonably effective trade sanctions.A decent bit of arm twisting with Russia and indeed China. who do have direct influence with the Assad mob may helped.Pushing for a united oppostion much earlier would have helped,and given those opposition some decent anti plane weaponry to avoid/reduce the bloodshed.It worked in Afghanistan against the Ruskies.
I am continually appalled by the sight of indiscriminate bombing and its results..
Then it is plain silly by Obama to give the impression that terrorism has been hit on the head,because AQ has many affiliates and influence.OBL was eliminated but his clown 2IC Zawahiri?? is still there with his influence and his financial backers..

Edited by napoleon, 06 November 2012 - 02:29 AM.

Rugby league :If it was art, it would be a Monet.

#77 napoleon

napoleon
  • Coach
  • 992 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 02:40 AM

So, in summary, Obama struggles to deal with the mess left by the previous Republican administration so the answer is to elect another Republican. Really?

As for Australia's national debt, I didn't think it was anywhere near as bad as the UK's or US's. I've seen varying figures, but the CIA Worldbook has national debt in 2011 as 26.8% of GDP (US: 67.7%, UK: 86.3%) The government deficit is only 3.3%, and is expected to return to surplus by 2015 (US: 8.6%, UK: 8.3%). You and your government are doing okay!


The mess was twofold Reagan and the clowns in the Democratic party(including Barnie Frank) who via the financial lender Freddie Mac & Fannie May,lent miliions upon millions of dollars to the very poor people,who had zero abiltiy to repay the loans.Plus the greed of the big US banks who took advantage of the situation.
The US govt has increased the debt since 2008 by the trillions since ,can't blame Reagan or even Bush.If this situation continues for another 4 years further increasing the debt,the next GFC will make the last look like a picnic.He stated he would reverse the situation with unemployment,it hasn't happened.
His cheer squad in the media in the main,lack the balls to criticise him.

Expected to return to surplus LOL,Swan duckshoved on the latest interim budget,because he was out on the May one.
No Govt US or Oz can continue to spend beyond their means,as the Greeks have found out to their dismay.
There are aspects of the Obama govt's policy I like,I just don't like continually spending more and printing more money.It is not responsible.Caliifornia is broke.

Ozs national debt is not I agree,but our brilliant govt thought they could rely on tax from the mining companies,Trouble is raw material prices went down and ditto the monetary cred of the govt.

Edited by napoleon, 06 November 2012 - 02:46 AM.

Rugby league :If it was art, it would be a Monet.

#78 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,291 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 06:49 AM

The US doesn't have any influence in Iran,but has organised reasonably effective trade sanctions.A decent bit of arm twisting with Russia and indeed China. who do have direct influence with the Assad mob may helped.Pushing for a united oppostion much earlier would have helped,and given those opposition some decent anti plane weaponry to avoid/reduce the bloodshed.It worked in Afghanistan against the Ruskies.
I am continually appalled by the sight of indiscriminate bombing and its results..
Then it is plain silly by Obama to give the impression that terrorism has been hit on the head,because AQ has many affiliates and influence.OBL was eliminated but his clown 2IC Zawahiri?? is still there with his influence and his financial backers..


Trade sanctions against Iran haven't changed Iranian policy. They still fund terrorism and they are still trying to build a nuclear weapon.

The Syrian conflict hasn't seen much use of aircraft so giving rebels anti-aircraft missiles wouldn't help much. Nor would "pressing for a united opposition", Obama could press all he likes but they would still be fragmented because that's the nature of Arab politics. See Lebanon and Iraq for examples.

Obama hasn't used indescriminate bombing, what they Americans use are targetted at known individuals based on intel received. It's far from perfect but it's the cleanest form of warfare out there, far better than getting involved in conflicts like Afghanistan where US intervention caused far more deaths.

If you follow the use of drone strikes more closely, you'd know that very many top Al Qaeda people had been taken out this way not just bin Laden. Zawahiri is on borrowed time. Google Abu Yahya Al-Libi for a random example.

I don't think Obama ever did claim that Islamic terrorism had been defeated.

Edited by Northern Sol, 06 November 2012 - 06:52 AM.


#79 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,291 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 06:51 AM

I wasn't necessarily saying it was. Although it does squeeze out those candidates and parties that do not have access to such funds.


It's true but then the electoral system does that anyway. Ross Perot had billions but didn't win a single state.

#80 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,311 posts

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:42 AM

Its all odd to me. However, there is a distinct possibility that whoever is elected will not hold to all their pre-election promises.