Presidents

[Peace Alliance]

Oops, just realised the topic was split.


So I'll post on topic. Do you guys really think that Romney could defeat Obama, or did you just vote for him because you want him to beat Obama?

[Sharptooh]

I don't think Romney will win; he just seems to sleazy to me, if I was voting I doubt he'd get mine.

Saying that I don't really know too much about his policies, which could sway me.

[Peace Alliance]

It's hard to pin down his policies. His campaign remains vague on a lot of issues, and much of what he says is genuinely in direct contradiction to his (rather moderate) policy decisions in the past.

I did think it was odd that in the last debate he tried to call out Santorum for supporting 'Obamacare' (Santorum supported a guy who 4 years later supported obama... pretty big disconnect there!). Meanwhile 'Romneycare' seems even more progressive then 'Obamacare...'

[Sharptooh]

Are all the candidates like that? Because I for one would definitely not one someone running my country, if they didn't outline what they planned to do beforehand.

[Peace Alliance]

They have to be vague and broad enough to ensure that they don't alienate certain voters. But to a certain extent this is just superficial, because the candidate does have particular goals, and when you look at their past you can observe how they attempt to achieve those goals.

For example, most politicians say they are going to improve education - but they don't always tell you how that will happen. When Bush got in he started No Child Left Behind, which was basically a system of standardized tests that would determine public funding (consequently it left lots of kids behind, but oh well). Obama also had the same goal, and he has followed suit with an equally horrible method.
Politicans often tell you what their goals are, but not how they will do it.

Furthermore, by avoiding specifics, a politician get avoid being pressed on unflattering details. If Obama had outlined his public health care plan during the campaign it would have been held to scrutiny.

It also avoids admitting that the president can't do anything they want. Politicians what you to believe they will make your dreams come true. They don't want you to know that the political system prevents them from accomplishing everything you want to do.

[Briar]

About Romneycare: The difference is that that was a STATE thing. Obamacare is a NATIONAL thing as in states have no choice in the matter.

Romney gets things done. He is given a task, he does it. He was told to make Mass. economy better, he did. That is one reason ppl can't really pin his policies. He has been given diverse tasks and had to solve them with diverse ways.

And yes, I do believe Romney can beat Obama.

[Kyrolin Zenyar]

I love how you misspelled both Romney and Barack.  ha.

[Neobaron]

I missed you so much Kyro. I was thinking about you on the bus this morning.

No lie.

[Dark Claws]

I think people just don't like Obama. So they will vote for Romney. Don't have anything against either, I just think people blame Obama for us being in debt.

[Peace Alliance]

Who do they blame for the rest of the world being in debt?

[Dark Claws]

Not them. Duh.

[windhound]

Who do they blame for the rest of the world being in debt?

Kinda of a silly argument.
Are Greece's problems not their government's fault?
There are countries in the world not in debt.  Or atleast not nearly as bad.  There are also those worse off.

The bailouts that Bush started were continued to a massive extent under Obama.  Trillions and trillions added to the national debt in a couple years.  Not even Bush added to the debt that fast, and with the Iraq and Afghanistan wars he added quite a lot.
Democrats, Obama among them, really like social programs.  The Republicans really like the military.  Neither have the balls to cut their own programs enough or to raise enough taxes to cover them.  They instead demand the other cut their programs, allowing their pet projects to continue.  Both sides are to blame, iirc Obama had a democrat majority in both the House and Senate when he started.  Nothing of note got accomplished. 

Also Sharpy -

Are all the candidates like that? Because I for one would definitely not one someone running my country, if they didn't outline what they planned to do beforehand.

These are called Campaign Promises, and are broken fairly regularly.

[Peace Alliance]

lol, windy this is a global economic issue. I think there are many, many, (ok maybe like 147) people at fault.

iirc Obama had a democrat majority in both the House and Senate when he started.  Nothing of note got accomplished.

Isn't that when he got the health care through?!?

[Neobaron]

The health care that went though wasn't the health care that would have made a difference. Instead, we just got an unconstitutional decree that forced us to buy insurance, which is itself a horrible legalized racket.

[Peace Alliance]

I agree that it wasn't a very good system, but it was a huge project, so I wouldn't say obama was idle in the 2 years before he lost the senate.