Unfortunately I bet Obama gets the minority vote because he’s black. People are completely voting for the wrong reasons. But who cares when you have two parties that just want to have a different plan than the other guy. As opposed to saying “Hey, you know what? That is actually I good idea, I think we should go from there and iron everything out”. The debate was a lot of bland answers from my observation. It was a lot of My play will do this and mine will do that…Yeah but how, and at what cost? I did like the point I believe Obama made about offering a refund on health insurance if the Administrative costs of providers outweighs the actual medical aspect.
Let me just point out that it is equally as absurd to believe in God & heaven as it is to believe in social utopia, human equality & societal fairness. The only difference is that those who are religious (mostly Republicans) recognize that “heaven” or “utopia” cannot be reached in real life (and must happen after we die, if at all) where as progressives / liberals ignore the fact that humanity is inherently flawed while trying to work towards a flawless “utopia” or “heaven” here on earth.
Or in short, a Catholic bumper sticker about heaven is no more fantasy than a coexist bumper sticker or Madonna talking about world peace; Even if your intentions are good, neither morality is based in reality.
Once you see that this logic exists on both sides you can easily negate them and focus on other issues.
The republicans are generally in support of antidisestablishmentarianism. I can get behind the idea of a “prefect society” more so than one god ruling us all. Church and state are supposed to be separate. This can affect other social issue like abortion. Why does Romney not support gay marriage, or abortion? On the other hand anyone who expects gas to go down to $1.00 and taxes to decrease, and free health care for everybody, and rainbows and lolipops from the election of one guy is clearly retarded. You are electing the lesser of two evils that is going to fuck you in the ass the least.
Kind of off topic but there was a post on NYSPEED a while back about not believing in the Bible/Jesus because it was only in books and stories passed down, not on film, etc. So I guess by this logic, that poster doesn’t believe in the US Civil War or for that matter anything before photography. LMAO
Republican’s do not generally support antidisestablishmentarianism. No one is trying to setup a state religion, lol. If you believe that you might as well buy into the meme that ALL Republicans want to fire teachers, police officers, bring back air pollution, hate black people, force women into back-alley abortions, etc.
And Romney is no more going to base his decisions in the morality of his religion than Obama bases his decisions in the morality of his “religion” of social equality. Any of us for that matter would draw on our backgrounds for answers.
Why though when both are equally irrational? A priest telling you there is a God is just as silly as a professor telling you utopia is achievable. Romney’s belief in God is just as silly as Obama’s belief in arbitrary societal fairness.
History has tried societies based on both and both have failed miserably.
My point is that the irrational “faith” on both sides cancels out and leaves a more clear debate about growing job employment, finance issues, foreign policy, etc.
I choose to make voting decisions based on tangible things like science and economics rather than a candidates religion or philosophy.
Definitely don’t disagree with you. I’ve stated before that while social issues are important, I think economic, health care, etc. issues far outweigh the debate on gay marriage per say. While both religion and a utopia seem far-fetched, I won’t dismiss them. Just because I don’t believe in them doesn’t make them wrong. The point I was trying to make was that wanting a better (not perfect) society seems more plausible and agreeable than religion. That’s really what you want to be voting on, whomever will provide a higher quality of life.
“Forty-four percent of the American population is convinced that Jesus will return to judge the living and the dead sometime in the next fifty years. According to the most common interpretation of biblical prophecy, Jesus will return only after things have gone horribly awry here on earth. It is, therefore, not an exaggeration to say that if the city of New York were suddenly replaced by a ball of fire, some significant percentage of the American population would see a silver lining in the subsequent mushroom cloud, as it would suggest to them that the best thing that is ever going to happen was about to happen—the return of Christ. It should be blindingly obvious that beliefs of this sort will do little to help us create a durable future for ourselves—socially, economically, environmentally, or geopolitically. Imagine the consequences if any significant component of the U.S. government actually believed that the world was about to end and that its ending would be glorious. The fact that nearly half of the American population apparently believes this, purely on the basis of religious dogma, should be considered a moral and intellectual emergency.” - Sam Harris
^^ Boxxa is illustrating my point. Stuff like what he just posted is white noise and pointless to debate. What someone believes as a matter of faith isn’t going to change. So if you focus on it, get worked up about someone’s faith and argue which side’s morality is better when neither can be proven better because they’re not based in reality, you’re simply wasting your time.
You can make political decisions any way you want, I’m just pointing out that discounting the ideas of one side over the other based on stuff like what he posted doesn’t make sense. At least to me it doesn’t, but maybe that’s why I actually like politics rather than get frustrated with it, lol.
I agree that everyone wants a “better” society, but let’s agree that advancing society isn’t going to come from religion or utopian dreams but rather things like the invention of the internet, physics of flight, etc.
One thing I did notice but haven’t heard any commentary on is the fact that when Romney mentioned the Constitution and Bill of Rights, Obama had no response. It seems like in a debate if one comments on a subject the other responds. Just something I noticed because I think that is one area where Obama and Bush agree, “It is just a God Damn piece of paper”.
if we stuck to The Constitution like we were supposed to there would be much less debate. My 2 cents.
That wasn’t limited to that one comment. Both guys basically ignored the questions from the moderator and the opponent and just talked about whatever they wanted.
Not one mention of the Constitution… Once again? But typical BS talking points piled high.
I really, really wish I could have been sitting between them especially during the non discussion about China. So frustrating!
And not one mention of the world food supply? Wasn’t tonight’s theme supposed to be global?
That was a funny line, but Romney’s broader point that the Navy’s mission as currently defined can’t be fulfilled with a smaller number of ships is still valid.
If Obama wants to task the rest of the world with maintaining the openness of international waterways or as the first response for tragedy (like in Indonesia for example) he should say so. But until then, like it or not, the United States Navy does the bulk of this work.
Obama’s inference that Romney views the Navy as a war / “Battle” machine simply because he mentions the number of ships is shallow at best.
When you have nothing intelligent to add, make a joke… and be the condesending prick that you are. It seems to work for BHO.
Well, one of Barry-O’s objectives last night was to try to paint Romney as a cowboy or warmonger à la Bush. This was just one of a few attempts to do that. In the same vein Romney made just as much of an effort to deflect this with lines like “we can’t kill our way out of this mess."
they basically agreed on everything anyways.
i thought that sequence of comments was incredible, some of the most exciting TV ever.
Do we have an election 2012 thread?
The unemployment rate ticked up to 7.9 percent in October, from 7.8 percent in September.
Obama calls this real progress. I guess now he is depending on his supporters not knowing even simpple math. lol
The unemployment rate ticked up because more people were looking for work and not all of them found it :bloated: The economy added 171,000 new jobs in October.
So 171000 is good enough? How do you arrive at that? I don’t care if 1 or 1 million people found jobs and neither do the unemployed.
Nothing is ever good enough. But it is progress. Simple math says X + 171,000 is > X.