US Prez Election 2012 Thread - Opinions and Discussions

[Mishakal]

Well seeing the current field of GOP candidates I have to say I'm going to vote for Obama again... I'm not impressed, at all.

[Coito ergo sum]

I just need to trot off and allow you to continue whinging about the Republicans fixing elections and disenfranchising people.

Does that mean we are finally spared your whining about "..the unceasing whine that somehow, someway, Democrats get "disenfranchised"..."?

Only if you'll stop whining about about the nonsense allegation that Democrats are being disenfranchised....

[Coito ergo sum]

Well seeing the current field of GOP candidates I have to say I'm going to vote for Obama again... I'm not impressed, at all.

So far, I have no idea what to do. I can't vote for Obama, but not a single Republican alternative provides any inspiration at this point. If the election were held today, I would likely throw my vote to a remote third-party candidate.

[Hermit]

I just need to trot off and allow you to continue whinging about the Republicans fixing elections and disenfranchising people.

Does that mean we are finally spared your whining about "..the unceasing whine that somehow, someway, Democrats get "disenfranchised"..."?

Only if you'll stop whining about about the nonsense allegation that Democrats are being disenfranchised....

Nonsense allegation? Like it never happened, right? Or it did, but we must never mention it. Or we can mention it, but only as long as we do so in an approving manner. Or...

[Coito ergo sum]

I just need to trot off and allow you to continue whinging about the Republicans fixing elections and disenfranchising people.

Does that mean we are finally spared your whining about "..the unceasing whine that somehow, someway, Democrats get "disenfranchised"..."?

Only if you'll stop whining about about the nonsense allegation that Democrats are being disenfranchised....

Nonsense allegation? Like it never happened, right? Or it did, but we must never mention it. Or we can mention it, but only as long as we do so in an approving manner. Or...

What's "it" specifically?

Democrats winning elections by having dead people vote by the thousands, trying to exclude military votes, finding "missing" votes in the trunk of some guy's car, or blocking polling places with billy-club wielding thugs?

Why is my mention of the Democrat incidents "whinging" but you feel perfectly justified in whinging about Republican incidents and claiming the Republicans have a monopoly on fixing elections?

Look - the Democrats win the overwhelming majority of elections - nobody is stealing elections from Democrats. They did, however, steal the 1960 election when Kennedy beat Nixon. That's been proved conclusively.

[Robert_S]

I just need to trot off and allow you to continue whinging about the Republicans fixing elections and disenfranchising people.

Does that mean we are finally spared your whining about "..the unceasing whine that somehow, someway, Democrats get "disenfranchised"..."?

Only if you'll stop whining about about the nonsense allegation that Democrats are being disenfranchised....

Nonsense allegation? Like it never happened, right? Or it did, but we must never mention it. Or we can mention it, but only as long as we do so in an approving manner. Or...

What's "it" specifically?

Democrats winning elections by having dead people vote by the thousands, trying to exclude military votes, finding "missing" votes in the trunk of some guy's car, or blocking polling places with billy-club wielding thugs?

Why is my mention of the Democrat incidents "whinging" but you feel perfectly justified in whinging about Republican incidents and claiming the Republicans have a monopoly on fixing elections?

Look - the Democrats win the overwhelming majority of elections - nobody is stealing elections from Democrats. They did, however, steal the 1960 election when Kennedy beat Nixon. That's been proved conclusively.

the 1960 Democrats/Republicans are not quite the same as today's.

[Hermit]

I just need to trot off and allow you to continue whinging about the Republicans fixing elections and disenfranchising people.

Does that mean we are finally spared your whining about "..the unceasing whine that somehow, someway, Democrats get "disenfranchised"..."?

Only if you'll stop whining about about the nonsense allegation that Democrats are being disenfranchised....

Nonsense allegation? Like it never happened, right? Or it did, but we must never mention it. Or we can mention it, but only as long as we do so in an approving manner. Or...

...nobody is stealing elections from Democrats.

So you settle on "it never happened"? Cool. I know someone who'd be keen on engaging you as a ghost-writer for his autobiography.

[Coito ergo sum]

Jackie Mason on Obama: http://www.breitbart.tv/jackie-mason-ob ... n-history/

[Ian]

I'll be voting for Obama. And Coito, as a Floridian, your vote against him will not cancel out mine, since your vote weighs less than 9/10ths as much as mine does in Maryland. Gotta love that Electoral College.

[Coito ergo sum]

I'll be voting for Obama. And Coito, as a Floridian, your vote against him will not cancel out mine, since your vote weighs less than 9/10ths as much as mine does in Maryland. Gotta love that Electoral College.

EC is a good system. My vote counts as much as any other Floridian's vote. Florida votes for the President, not me. We're just choosing as among ourselves who our state will support. I'm good with that.

At least we're not like in the Canadian system where they don't even get to vote for their chief executive, and the Prime Minister is selected by the majority of Parliament.

I can't vote for Obama - the last straw was the Presidential powers flip-flop. For him to run for President on the assertion that President Bush would not have had the lawful power to bomb Libya, but then assert the power to do so when he is in office, just demonstrates what kind of a person he is.

At this point, if the election was held today, I would vote for the most obscure third party candidate on the ballot. If I were a government worker, I'd probably vote for Obama, though. You folks are the only ones doing well under his leadership.

[Ian]

EC is a good system. My vote counts as much as any other Floridian's vote. Florida votes for the President, not me. We're just choosing as among ourselves who our state will support. I'm good with that.

You're good with that, eh? Does being a Floridian trump everything else you define about yourself? And you're also satisfied with having less power to influence the national election than I have?

I can't vote for Obama - the last straw was the Presidential powers flip-flop. For him to run for President on the assertion that President Bush would not have had the lawful power to bomb Libya, but then assert the power to do so when he is in office, just demonstrates what kind of a person he is.

That is your last straw? Oh come on. I think your last straw was probably no later than the health care reform act, if not his election in the first place. Have you ever seriously considered voting to re-elect him? I doubt it.

If I were a government worker, I'd probably vote for Obama, though. You folks are the only ones doing well under his leadership.

You mean apart from the auto industry, the health care industry, the financial sector, agriculture, communications, retail, etc?

And by the way - every federal worker has had their pay frozen until 2013, and the federal workforce is supposed to be reduced by 10% by 2014 - so your claim that "we're doing well" is utter horseshit. But I can't blame Obama for that as much as recent pressure from Republicans, for reasons which should be ideologically obvious.

Your understanding of what a "government worker" does is just plain ignorant. Comparisons between federal workers and the private sector shouldn't even be made, for the same reason that one shouldn't compare all workers in hospitals to all workers in non-hospitals. But shitbag ignorant opinions like those are what allows teabagger Republicans to exert the kind of pressure they do. And why do I get a little pissy about it? Because me and pretty much every single other person in my 2000-employee building could be making considerably more money in the private sector than we're making now, but we do our work because we understand its importance. Meanwhile, teabagging jackasses foment the perception that government workers are all lazy, overpaid and underworked. And they're happy to remain ignorant of the fact that the opposite is true.

[Warren Dew]

I'll be voting for Obama. And Coito, as a Floridian, your vote against him will not cancel out mine, since your vote weighs less than 9/10ths as much as mine does in Maryland. Gotta love that Electoral College.

Your understanding of the electoral college is weak. Think about when the last time Florida was a deciding state, versus when Maryland was.

Because me and pretty much every single other person in my 2000-employee building could be making considerably more money in the private sector than we're making now, but we do our work because we understand its importance.

I doubt people with that self important an attitude could get jobs in the private sector at all.

[Ian]

I'll be voting for Obama. And Coito, as a Floridian, your vote against him will not cancel out mine, since your vote weighs less than 9/10ths as much as mine does in Maryland. Gotta love that Electoral College.

Your understanding of the electoral college is weak. Think about when the last time Florida was a deciding state, versus when Maryland was..

No, you completely missed my point. I wasn't talking about battleground states. My point was that different states' voters are represented very much unequally in the electoral college.
Go back four pages and read:
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 40#p626661

Because me and pretty much every single other person in my 2000-employee building could be making considerably more money in the private sector than we're making now, but we do our work because we understand its importance.

I doubt people with that self important an attitude could get jobs in the private sector at all.

You have no earthly clue what I do. I can barely even talk about the tip of the iceburg here.

When comparisons can be made, federal employees earn about 20% less than private sector counterparts doing similar work. And some of us (like me )don't even have private sector counterparts.

[Coito ergo sum]

EC is a good system. My vote counts as much as any other Floridian's vote. Florida votes for the President, not me. We're just choosing as among ourselves who our state will support. I'm good with that.

You're good with that, eh? Does being a Floridian trump everything else you define about yourself? And you're also satisfied with having less power to influence the national election than I have?

I'm good with that, yes.
Being a Floridian does not trump everything else I define about myself. However, to find reasonable merit in the EC system, being a Floridian need not trump everything else.
Given that Florida under the current system has been a deciding factor in the last few elections, and Maryland has essentially been irrelevant due to its dearth of electoral votes as compared to Florida, one could argue that every Floridian's vote means more because the outcome of Florida actually determines the election - if Maryland swung either way it doesn't make a difference. But, the bottom line is that I've never been under the mistaken assumption that we have an election that determines the President based on the popular vote. We vote to determine who our State's electors will vote for.

There are many good reasons to shift a little bit of voting power over to little states - not the least of which is that little states like Wyoming and South Dakota are already irrelevant enough. If we take away their two votes for being a State, then they would be even less relevant and the Presidential candidates would have even less of an incentive to take those States' interests into consideration. The EC serves a reasonable purpose in binding the country together a little tighter than it otherwise would be, because the Presidential candidates could win the election by appealing to several small states to amass enough EC votes to equate to one larger state. If we eliminate the EC system altogether, then the election will just be decided, even more than it already is, by the major population centers. And, population is not the only interest at stake.

Now, I haven't asserted that the EC system is the best system ever - or that there is no other system that could work - or that all other systems suck - or even that it has to be this way for all time. I'm merely asserting that the EC system is a reasonable system, with worthwhile goals and is not the stupid, pointless system that many of its opponents make it out to be. There is wisdom behind it. That's why I'm "good with it."

I can't vote for Obama - the last straw was the Presidential powers flip-flop. For him to run for President on the assertion that President Bush would not have had the lawful power to bomb Libya, but then assert the power to do so when he is in office, just demonstrates what kind of a person he is.

That is your last straw? Oh come on. I think your last straw was probably no later than the health care reform act, if not his election in the first place. Have you ever seriously considered voting to re-elect him? I doubt it.

I have, actually. When I was thinking that Palin might run, I thought I might vote for him over her. And, I still might, if she runs. Bachmann too gives me that pause.... but, you're right about the Health Care Reform - that was miserable - and his "Stimulus" Boondoggle - and essentially destroying manned space flight - and now this fucking war powers hypocrisy. The guy is a tool, and he is not nearly as bright as his supporters think he is.

If I were a government worker, I'd probably vote for Obama, though. You folks are the only ones doing well under his leadership.

You mean apart from the auto industry, the health care industry, the financial sector, agriculture, communications, retail, etc?

You're under the impression that these industries are doing well because of Obama? GM is not doing well right now, and I know that from inside sources. Ford is doing well despite the Obama administration not because of it, and Chrysler is too small to matter much.

Retail is in the toilet. Agriculture is just subsidized to death.

Dude - news flash: the US economy is in the toilet and we're teetering on another dip. This is not good. The monetary policy sucks - we're underwater on debt and unemployment is through the roof. We're not doing well.

And by the way - every federal worker has had their pay frozen until 2013, and the federal workforce is supposed to be reduced by 10% by 2014 - so your claim that "we're doing well" is utter horseshit. But I can't blame Obama for that as much as recent pressure from Republicans, for reasons which should be ideologically obvious.

LOL - you credit Obama for what you perceive as good things in the private economy, but won't blame him for the bad things you say are happening in the public sector. Nice.

Your understanding of what a "government worker" does is just plain ignorant.

In what way? I know what government workers do.

Comparisons between federal workers and the private sector shouldn't even be made, for the same reason that one shouldn't compare all workers in hospitals to all workers in non-hospitals.

I made no such comparisons.

But shitbag ignorant opinions like those are what allows teabagger Republicans to exert the kind of pressure they do.

I don't hold that opinion.

And why do I get a little pissy about it?

You have sand in your vagina and it's irritating you?

Because me and pretty much every single other person in my 2000-employee building could be making considerably more money in the private sector than we're making now, but we do our work because we understand its importance.

Then go make the money, if you think that's true. According to USAToday, federal pay was higher than private sector pay in many areas -- http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/201 ... -pay_N.htm and http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/i ... 0_ST_N.htm

But, if every person in that group of 2000 you cite can make CONSIDERABLY more money in private industry -- have at it. Why wouldn't they? Private sector work can be just as important and even more important than public sector work, depending on the job. Most of those 2,000 persons aren't doing critical or national security/national importance type jobs - most of them are office workers doing office jobs. So, don't try to pretend like all those working there are sacrificing their own personal gain for the good of completing a thankless job under difficult circumstances - some may be, but most of them are going to work and earning their pay like everyone else, and if they could make "considerably more" they would. You don't work in a building 2,000 people who are all disproportionately self-sacrificing.

Meanwhile, teabagging jackasses foment the perception that government workers are all lazy, overpaid and underworked. And they're happy to remain ignorant of the fact that the opposite is true.

The government workers I've encountered are quite often lazy, overpaid and underworked. They quite often punch a clock, and government agencies are notoriously unresponsive for the needs of their "customers," and inflexible. I would much rather deal with a private company on a customer service issue than a government agency when I have any problem to solve or red tape to cut. That's my personal experience. I know it to be true.

You can accuse me of being a teabagger, which I'm not, not by a long shot, and you should know that by now. Having a low opinion of government workers in general is not new and it is not something exclusive to the Tea Party.

I would never suggest that all government workesrs are lazy, overpaid and underworked, but a person who thinks that government workers by and large go the extra mile, are underpaid and overworked hasn't dealt with a lot of government agencies and departments. I have. Perhaps there is a different level of understanding of what constitutes "hard work."

[Coito ergo sum]

I'll be voting for Obama. And Coito, as a Floridian, your vote against him will not cancel out mine, since your vote weighs less than 9/10ths as much as mine does in Maryland. Gotta love that Electoral College.

Your understanding of the electoral college is weak. Think about when the last time Florida was a deciding state, versus when Maryland was..

No, you completely missed my point. I wasn't talking about battleground states. My point was that different states' voters are represented very much unequally in the electoral college.
Go back four pages and read:
http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 40#p626661

And, you aren't telling me anything I don't already know. I find that the slight adjustment of voting power from large population states to smaller population states is eminently reasonable. It makes a fair bit of sense when you view the entirety of the system and note that it is a federal system of several states. A pure popular vote is not the only reasonable system, and the EC rationally addresses a legitimate concern that smaller states had and still have concerning the attention their interests get in Washington DC. There are interests other than population.

Because me and pretty much every single other person in my 2000-employee building could be making considerably more money in the private sector than we're making now, but we do our work because we understand its importance.

I doubt people with that self important an attitude could get jobs in the private sector at all.

You have no earthly clue what I do. I can barely even talk about the tip of the iceburg here.

When comparisons can be made, federal employees earn about 20% less than private sector counterparts doing similar work. And some of us (like me )don't even have private sector counterparts.

Citation needed. You'll no doubt fill us in as to which comparisons are legitimately to be made, and those that only ignorant teabaggers will make. No doubt the former will be those which support your position, and the latter will be any that don't support your position.