Why Should I Vote for Obama?
- Thread starter Illegal Smile
- Start date
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Do only the clean ones look like clergy?
Catchin22
Well-Known Member
You should vote for O because there is NO other choice. He hasn't done anything horrible at all and had the chance to, the rest running WILL have that chance if you give it to them. I am confident all of the republicans will fk us over BADLY. Also even though O promised a lot of things, typically that all comes to fruition in the last 4 years. Remember also the Republitards got control of the house fairly quickly. This was the result of people having no patience and forgetting what Bush and the republicans did to us for 8 years. Apparently most Americans have the memory of a simple goldfish.
That said if somebody else comes along worthy of a vote over Obama I would be glad to give it to them, it just hasn't happened yet.
That said if somebody else comes along worthy of a vote over Obama I would be glad to give it to them, it just hasn't happened yet.
sync0s
Well-Known Member
OMG guys he deserves to be reelected cause, like, he so isn't terrible, he is, like, bad, ya know, but not horrible or anything, so like you should, like, so vote for him cause, like, republitards, like, bush, like, O.M.G., like yeah.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
it wasn't that bad.
he made some good points too.
i mean, would you vote for any of the other VIABLE candidates (if you were one of those people that tended to vote for viable candidates)?
sync0s
Well-Known Member
Valid point, but I still think saying that you should vote for Obama because he hasn't done anything horrible just demonstrates the terrible state of democracy in our America.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
maybe he was being kind. i can sit here and list a few very awesome things he has done that have benefitted me personally, and half a dozen more that benefit us overall.
sync0s
Well-Known Member
I've seen your list. I want to see his.
Quite frankly, I don't think either of the past two Presidents have benefited me, or us as a whole, very much at all.
Catchin22
Well-Known Member
You have a severe case of reading comprehension which seems to be a common theme for your type. Let me break it down to you in an analytical way
1. Obama has done some great things.
2. Obama has not done anything horrible.
3. Other candidates running have not shown they are more qualified
4. Other candidates have not shown they will not do worse than Obama
5. Other candidates have not shown they will do better than Obama
6. Republicans screwed us over for 8 years and nearly drove this country into the ground
If you have a piece of mechanical equipment that is important, would you swap out a vital part of it with an unproven part in the hopes that it may do a better job when it likely wont? You don't fix things that aren't broken and you certainly don't replace somebody with some one else is appears to be far worse. If you are going to get involved in politics you need to think analytically about your decisions and not emotionally.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Was the economy not pretty decent during Bushs tenure? Did Bush personally make people take loans they couldn't afford to pay back? Not saying the guy was perfect (far from it), but has Barry not totally stuffed it down the pan for your kids and grandkids when they have to repay his debt?
Catchin22
Well-Known Member
Did you somehow miss out on all the debt bush created? The poor economy and mass borrowing, the illegal wars and bail outs? No, the economy was not decent, did you live in another country, under a rock? What the hell. The debt that needs to be repaid is the debt bush created. Obama prevented another depression if anything.
I swear, some people, no clue.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
So during Obamas administration, nearly 50% wasnt added to the national debt?
Sure Bush went to war, but if I remember correctly there was almost UNIVERSAL PUBLIC SUPPORT in the US for those wars in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. It was a nation baying for blood and he simply provided, it's funny how people changed their stance once the smoke in Afghanistan and Iraq cleared, suddenly everyone deplores Bush for these "illegal" wars.
Its my understanding that during the Bush years there was unprecedented GDP growth no? And the woes of Americans now are as a result of a massive housing bubble that isn't really the fault of the President, is it?
Not saying the guy is perfect, far from it, he definately made fuck ups, but come on, how much does the President himself really influence the "real" economy?
Its nice to have a scapegoat tho, it makes you forget the fact your still running a big deficit and without continual borrowing you won't be able to service the debts you already have. Instead of playing golf, maybe Obama should be working night and day to try convince both parties to "trim the fat" off the budget? I personally believe he is too inept for the job tho. We can agree to disagree if oh feel so strongly, but I presented facts before the last paragraph so draw your own conclusions.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
For the first time (almost) ever, Americans are legally growing cannabis with out having to compete with a ruthless cartel or corporation...
Dan Kone
Well-Known Member
During Bush's tenure the economy was being propped up with libertarian magic dust.
The financial services "industry" had just been deregulated which allowed these financial services companies to make a killing selling snake oil. The snake oil allowed banks to sell a ton of mortgages to people who couldn't afford them which created demand in the home ownership market. This raised the value of everyone's homes leading them to believe they were worth more than they actually were worth, so these people spent money they didn't have based on the believe they owned fictitious home equity. Basically, it made American home owners appear rich on paper, when they were actually in debt and underwater but didn't know about it.
So yes, the economy did very well, but it was a fraud based economy. When you combined that with unprecedented action of spending debt to give tax cuts to the rich while the country was in two wars and it was a time bomb waiting to go off.
That's a simpletons way of looking at it.
Part of Bush's job as president was to keep an eye on the economy. The single biggest financial fraud in the nations history happened on his watch. It was his job to detect that fraud and stop it before it got out of hand. He failed.
And it wasn't just about people buying homes they couldn't afford. That could not have happened in the 1990s or before. Banks would not have handed out these loans because before Bush, banks would have been financially responsible for these loans. But thank to financial deregulation, we gave the banks the "freedom" to sell then bundle these bad mortgages and we gave Wall St the "freedom" to sell them as safe investments. It was libertarianism at it's finest. Everyone was free to do what they wanted. It turns out what they wanted was the freedom to defraud the public out of trillions of dollars.
Also the second part of this scam was it made people believe they were worth more money than they actually were worth, so they spent more money than they actually had. You can't blame people for doing this, since on paper, they actually did have this money. If you take out a mortgage for an investment property for $250k, and a few years later you still owe $200k on the property, but now the property is worth $500k, it's a pretty reasonable assumption that the mortgage holder now owns $300k worth of equity on the property. Because they did. So it's not unreasonable to spend $100k. But when the bottom fell out on those fraudulent housing prices that $500k home became worth $200k, and now the mortgage holder went from owning $300k in equity, to -$50k in equity, owing more on the property than it is actually worth.
Now that has nothing to do with people buying homes they can't afford. That has to do with commercial banks and Wall St defrauding the public. They made it appear that these homes were worth way more than they actually were. They told people that they had more money than they actually had. Many people who at the time were told they were living within their means actually were not doing so because they had been defrauded.
The difference being that Bush spent money we didn't have during a healthy economy, when we should have been paying off that debt. It's impossible to balance the budget during a recession because revenues are down. You'd have to disband the military and end social security to balance the budget during a recession. You need a healthy economy to pay down debt. Obama has never had that opportunity.
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
Pearls before swine, Dan.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
If you are implying Obama is "pro marijuana" you are sadly mistaken.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Am I mistaken that it is legal to grow cannabis in a third of the country? Am I mistaken that it was not legal anywhere prior to 2009? Am I mistaken that Cannabis prohibition was started by a GOP president?
If not, I have 3 facts by which to form an opinion. What facts do you have to support a contrary opinion? I really don't care that he is "going after" dispensaries, I would rather have the means of production than the "freedom" to buy a commercial product.