| Forum Index > General Forum |
Hey guys! We'll be closing this thread shortly, but we will make an American politics megathread where we can continue the discussions in here. The new thread can be found here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=383301 | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:22 Jormundr wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt About the same level of experience P.S. he was white But he's not black. Edit: What does "in modern times" refer to? Post-Goldwater era? | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:15 Swazi Spring wrote: That's not true, Obama has been very 'cloak and dagger' as president, especially for someone who ran their entire campaign in 2008 as being "transparent." He made several campaign promises about transparency, such as how he would publicly post a full copy of every single bill that hit his desk on his website for people to read and share their thoughts on. He never did that. He then used executive privilege to classify the Operation Fast and Furious documents, which is an abuse of executive power. No he hasn't, and yes what I said was true. We were talking about Obama being transparent about himself. If you want to talk about being transparent when conducting his job as president, he still as been at least as transparent as any other president - and certainly more than Bush. On October 25 2012 03:15 Swazi Spring wrote: Okay, I see what you're saying, he didn't come out of nowhere, you're right. I really hate to bring race into this, but it's an unfortunate fact. What I'm trying to say is that no white politician could have done what he did with such little experience. Even Obama's own party leaders said he wasn't "ready" or "experienced" enough to be president. There is nothing to suggest that "no white politician" could have done what he did. By the way, if Romney is elected, he will have held a federal office for... four years, just like Obama before he was elected. | ||
|
Swazi Spring
United States415 Posts
That's what he was saying, that Roosevelt wasn't black and became president without a lot of experience. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:26 kwizach wrote: No he hasn't, and yes what I said was true. We were talking about Obama being transparent about himself. If you want to talk about being transparent when conducting his job as president, he still as been at least as transparent as any other president - and certainly more than Bush. There is nothing to suggest that "no white politician" could have done what he did. By the way, if Romney is elected, he will have held a federal office for... four years, just like Obama before he was elected. But that's as governor and he did something with the olympics and was a businessman with multinational experience. Way more than Obama. Edit: On October 25 2012 03:27 Swazi Spring wrote: That's what he was saying, that Roosevelt wasn't black and became president without a lot of experience. It was sarcasm. My fault for expecting it to translate over the internet, considering how many times I've missed its use. | ||
|
dp
United States234 Posts
This is just something used to rile up the uninformed or unintelligent. Its a smokescreen to the issues at hand, and every minute spent on it is a wasted one. Also, this whole experience argument is funny as well. George W. Bush. How is that for modern? More? Ronald Reagan, Dwight Eisenhower, JFK, Jimmy Carter. etc etc etc. All white. | ||
|
Zaqwert
United States411 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro That's actually one reason he's having so much difficulty this time around. People are majorly disappointed in the idiotic expectations they built up for him. They had no idea he was just another random politician, a product of the Chicago political machine, every bit as corrupt and soul-less as any other politician. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:27 dp wrote: Swazi Spring, the things you are interested in, namely college papers and records might have been something to add to your reasoning for voting.. when he first ran. They don't matter now. You can piss and moan that they do, but that doesn't make it so. You have his first stretch as president to make an informed decision on how to vote. If he gets another four years, do you really think he is going to revert from his current ideologies to the ones he held in college? This is just something used to rile up the uninformed or unintelligent. Its a smokescreen to the issues at hand, and every minute spent on it is a wasted one. Also, this whole experience argument is funny as well. George W. Bush. How is that for modern? More? Ronald Reagan, Dwight Eisenhower, JFK, Jimmy Carter. etc etc etc. All white. I'm not saying Obama's the antichrist... I'm just saying... he came out of nowhere and is propped by mysterious powers. | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:27 Risen wrote: But that's as governor and he did something with the olympics and was a businessman with multinational experience. Way more than Obama. We were talking about holding a federal political office. Since when does being a businessman at Bain capital make you well-known amongst the electorate? Do you know any other businessman at Bain capital by name? edit: ok, you were being sarcastic? :p with the kind of posts from Swazi Spring I'm responding to right now, I'm having some trouble differentiating >< | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:29 Zaqwert wrote: Obama was the least vetted and most mysterious candidate ever in 2008. That's a large portion of why he won. He was a Rorschach blotch, he ran on "Hope and Change" and people saw in him whatever they wanted to see, that combined with the fact he was the first black to be a nominee made people believe he was somehow different. Obviously all the minorities were excited, but a ton of whites were too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro That's actually one reason he's having so much difficulty this time around. People are majorly disappointed in the idiotic expectations they built up for him. They had no idea he was just another random politician, a product of the Chicago political machine, every bit as corrupt and soul-less as any other politician. Point to Obama's corruption for me? Point to where he's soulless? You say a lot, but you don't actually have anything to back those points up. You have "feelings". Try using your brain, bud. He hasn't been able to do anything b/c he's been obstructed the entire way. I had a dream last night where I voted Romney just to watch the country burn. It's tempting. 4 more years of Obama and another run of the mill Republican candidate, or let the Republicans take office and watch everything burn so in 4 years we can have a landslide Democratic victory. This way the Republican party HAS to change. It gets me where I want to be faster, but I don't know if it's the better way to do it. | ||
|
Swazi Spring
United States415 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:29 Risen wrote: I'm not saying Obama's the antichrist... I'm just saying... he came out of nowhere and is propped by mysterious powers. Please, read Zaqwert's post, it's immediately above yours. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46215 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:29 Zaqwert wrote: Obama was the least vetted and most mysterious candidate ever in 2008. That's a large portion of why he won. He was a Rorschach blotch, he ran on "Hope and Change" and people saw in him whatever they wanted to see, that combined with the fact he was the first black to be a nominee made people believe he was somehow different. Obviously all the minorities were excited, but a ton of whites were too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro That's actually one reason he's having so much difficulty this time around. People are majorly disappointed in the idiotic expectations they built up for him. They had no idea he was just another random politician, a product of the Chicago political machine, every bit as corrupt and soul-less as any other politician. You've got to be kidding me. Please explain how he was so mysterious. Did he not take part in any debates or interviews? Was he never on television? Was there no Wikipedia entry on him? Did he not write books and have other people write about him? If people are disappointed in him now, it's because of his failed policies and because he didn't live up to his own hype. But that's typical of plenty of presidents who say they'll do a lot and don't get everything done. It has nothing to do with being a magical negro. | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
Keep up the good work. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:33 Swazi Spring wrote: Please, read Zaqwert's post, it's immediately above yours. If your backup is some random dude who likes to take a shit in this thread every so often, I'd reconsider your strategy of argumentation. | ||
|
Zaqwert
United States411 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:32 Risen wrote: Point to Obama's corruption for me? Point to where he's soulless? You say a lot, but you don't actually have anything to back those points up. You have "feelings". Try using your brain, bud. He hasn't been able to do anything b/c he's been obstructed the entire way. I had a dream last night where I voted Romney just to watch the country burn. It's tempting. 4 more years of Obama and another run of the mill Republican candidate, or let the Republicans take office and watch everything burn so in 4 years we can have a landslide Democratic victory. This way the Republican party HAS to change. It gets me where I want to be faster, but I don't know if it's the better way to do it. You actually think the country will be significantly different in 4 years with Obama vs. Romney? That's kinda cute. The Republican/Democrat right/left paradigm is a false construct designed to make you root for your "team" | ||
|
Swazi Spring
United States415 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:27 dp wrote: Swazi Spring, the things you are interested in, namely college papers and records might have been something to add to your reasoning for voting.. when he first ran. They don't matter now. You can piss and moan that they do, but that doesn't make it so. You have his first stretch as president to make an informed decision on how to vote. If he gets another four years, do you really think he is going to revert from his current ideologies to the ones he held in college? This is just something used to rile up the uninformed or unintelligent. Its a smokescreen to the issues at hand, and every minute spent on it is a wasted one. Also, this whole experience argument is funny as well. George W. Bush. How is that for modern? More? Ronald Reagan, Dwight Eisenhower, JFK, Jimmy Carter. etc etc etc. All white. I've seen Obama's first term and I don't like what I've seen. I don't like our economy in shambles. I don't like our civil liberties being stripped away. I don't like America looking weak on the international stage. I don't like having American citizens being extra-judicially executed by our head of state. I don't like America abandoning our long-time allies (Israel and the UK). I don't like our president's constant attacks on hard-work and success. I don't like the massive expansion of the entitlement culture. What makes you think his ideology ever seriously changed from when he was in college to today? What makes you think he isn't just hiding his true intentions until after the election? | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:36 Zaqwert wrote: You actually think the country will be significantly different in 4 years with Obama vs. Romney? That's kinda cute. The Republican/Democrat right/left paradigm is a false construct designed to make you root for your "team" What designates a construct as "false"? | ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19368 Posts
Mitt Romney has mentioned several opinions on abortion, hospitals, woman's rights, and gay rights. That being said does anyone truly believe that what he has said about these issue will actually have the laws he wants passed on them if he was in office? Who has the best tax policy for a person on a 50k income with no property ownership? Is anyone aware that our taxes for 50% of America will go up in the spring next year regardless of who is president? Can you detail this for me and when can that be change by either person? (I think the rise is due to social security I'm not sure) Thank you in advance for any time put into this. As a former student with loans, is either president looking to help out the payments or interest of those loans? Or will they be only focusing on future students? Other then tax, for some one with job security and no stock investment are there any pressing issues that either future president will encounter that will affect my life at home? This question is disregarding foreign policy | ||
|
Swazi Spring
United States415 Posts
On October 25 2012 03:32 Risen wrote: Point to Obama's corruption for me? Point to where he's soulless? Solyndra. The Porkulus. Handing GM over to the United Autoworkers Union. Bribing the owners of Latino TV channels in order to make them shut up about Fast and Furious. Using executive privileged to classify the Fast and Furious documents. Lying to the American people about the Benghazi attack. Shall I continue? | ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
He's operating under the assumption that Romney and obama = politicians and that politicians =/= their campaign. promises. | ||
|
jdsowa
405 Posts
The average voter is a middle-aged person who just wants to go to and from work, take their kids to soccer practice and come home and fall alseep in front of the TV without any hassles along the way. They don't want government supports taken away, they don't want the concept of marriage as they know it to change overnight, and they don't want to worry that other countries might attack us. If a politician proposes any policies that would even possibly suggest to threaten that lifestyle with even a very slight hiccup, then the average voter will simply reject that politician. The two party system completely covers the spectrum of acceptable mainstream politics, and exceeds it in many cases. The fact that it exceeds it at all--that there are Democrats and Republicans that have views that lie far outside of the mainstream--is evidence that a national 3rd party candidate can never truly be viable. You can buy TV time and generate temporary amusement, but a majority will never cast their vote for you. Since a national politician can't afford to express too many views outside of the status quo, they have to spend a great deal of their time pretending. And since each guy does an equal share of pretending, and because their policies can't diverge too far from the mainstream, the American people make their decision based on which guy is more charismatic while still being adequately presidential. Ultimately, Barack Obama is that guy. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Clem vs Lambo
Scarlett vs Cure
CranKy Ducklings
IPSL
Dragon vs Hawk
RSL Revival
Classic vs Trap
herO vs SHIN
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
