Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

John Drake

Romney v Obama

Who would you vote for?   42 members have voted

  1. 1. Who would you vote for?

    • Obama
      33
    • Romney
      4
    • Neither
      3
    • I'm not American, why should I care.
      2

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

207 posts in this topic

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..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

I think it's more difficult for presidents or parties in the States to hold to their promises because the chances of those promises being fulfilled depends heavily on their ability to win over the opposition. At the outset of a presidency the president's party can be the majority party in congress but then during their premiership one or both houses could fall to the opposition, so putting paid to the pre-election intentions of the president. Obama lost the house to the republicans a year into his term of office and that no doubt has had a negative effect upon his plans although such as his universal healthcare idea was not popular with all members of his own party never mind the republicans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our lass hasn't voted yet,but we will be on the transport bus to take us at lunchtime.I will have a laugh with the bible reciting GO ladies by singing"while cowards weep and traiters sneer"and not finish it off,and see if they know what it is.They are ok really all good fun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank God, the democrats are above such petty cheating.

http://www.cbsnews.c...er-fraud-video/

Yes. That is clearly the same and in no way an example of false equivalance.

It shows a Project Veritas "investigator" telling Patrick Moran that he has a friend who is seeking to "get in a van" and vote on behalf of about 100 people. Patrick Moran responds with skepticism, but is later shown saying the person voting on behalf of others could potentially use "utility bills or something like that."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. That is clearly the same and in no way an example of false equivalance.

It shows a Project Veritas "investigator" telling Patrick Moran that he has a friend who is seeking to "get in a van" and vote on behalf of about 100 people. Patrick Moran responds with skepticism, but is later shown saying the person voting on behalf of others could potentially use "utility bills or something like that."

Moran later says the person would be better off participating in traditional get-out-the-vote efforts, but he goes on to have a conversation about how to forge documents.

Unwise to say the least.

But if you investigate more throughly you'll find that both parties indulge in gerrymandery of voting districts. You seemed to suggest that only the Republicans would be so devious.

On the subject of black voters, ironically, the Republicans have a better record on not screwing over blacks in the American south than the democrats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seemed to suggest that only the Republicans would be so devious.

Right now, I'd suggest that only the Republicans are using legislation to exclude legitimate votes.

Gerrymandering, which as far as I'm aware doesn't impact this election as you can't change the shape of Wyoming, is something both parties are guilty of, I agree.

And, yes, it is quite eye-watering the Democrat position on segregation (for example) historically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And of course a catholic bishop has said that voting democrat will send you to hell

See here

Somehow I don't think that would have as much effect in the UK as it would in the US

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldnt mind being back home in Bramley right now and would like a couple of wealthy young mormons to knock on my door.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerrymandering, which as far as I'm aware doesn't impact this election as you can't change the shape of Wyoming, is something both parties are guilty of, I agree.

No, but the electoral college weighting is somewhat subjective as it isn't directly proportional to the population of the state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Romney's faith. It's all about Missouri for a Millennium.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxMD02zU9SE

Is it a good thing that someone that believes in the second coming of Christ and that, being one of the righteous, they will live in paradise could potentially have his finger on the big red button? (Assuming it is a big red button, I would be disappointed if it wasn't big and red).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but the electoral college weighting is somewhat subjective as it isn't directly proportional to the population of the state.

That's interesting. I didn't know the EC votes had been amended but now thanks to the power of Wiki I see that Florida is going to get even more important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

California is the tricky one. It has (relative to the others) a huge population and thus loads of EC votes, votes consistantly democrat.

If it was split into two states (as some think it should) then the combined EC votes would be higher or possibly the Republicans might win Northern California.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

California is the tricky one. It has (relative to the others) a huge population and thus loads of EC votes, votes consistantly democrat.

If it was split into two states (as some think it should) then the combined EC votes would be higher or possibly the Republicans might win Northern California.

According to a piece I've just read of California has a whole some 30% of the population is registered Republican and yet they stand not a chance of getting a say in the election of the President.

It was apparently 13 counties in the south of the state - all Republican leaning - who last put up the idea of splitting. That was last year and they plan to rally again for it next year.

It seems that there are a couple of states that divide their EC votes according to proportion rather than "all or nothing". Is that right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is true.

Strictly speaking the electoral college is simply how many voters each state will have in the election of a president. Who those voters are is a matter for the state and its electoral system, the federal government merely sets the number. The voters could theoretically vote for anyone, they aren't bound to vote the way that the electorate said they should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the figures on Wiki Obama polled 50.9m to Romney's 50.7m.

EDIT:

So far. I imagine not even they are claiming to know the vote in polls which haven't actually closed yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017