Romney VS Obama: The Megathread

[Dustistan]

I'll be happy when a conservative gives me an argument I can't rebuke.

One of them argued that liberals spend way too much and we're destroying our nation by trying to help the poor without first trying to help ourselves.

I agreed, because I had no argument to counter that.

I suggest you look up the data on deficits and spending under Clinton, Bush Jr and Obama - especially spending data that excludes the automatic "safety net" transfer payments that kick in during recessions.

Then you'll have a very powerful counter-argument.

You should also look up the actual data on how much the USA spend on foreign aid, comparing it to what the USA spends on its military. Powerful counter-argument #2.

[The Ethereal Wombat]

I am normally a lurker, but this thread and its many characters and great amount of boisterous debate and argument has brought me out of the woodwork with a long post in hand, so hold on for the ride:

--EDITED TO ADD: This will extend to multiple posts, the first of which is completely off-topic. I apologize in advance.

To get the off-topic bits out of the way:

Regarding the OP, "The United Soviet Socialist Republic":

Alright time for the usual anti Obama pro Romney post.

Anybody reading this thread already knows you love Mitt Romney since the first post, 164 pages ago. I suspect these types of repeat "bump" posts on a thread already stickied are part of the cause of the ill will you seem to have engendered, which is why I am pointing them out to you.

Why do Liberals ignore reality so much? If you are going to ignore facts, sources, and reality I'm not even going to bother debating with you.

One example of many, many, many such posts, yet you are still here, 164 pages later. Aside from lumping all liberals into a generalized category, proclaiming that they ignore reality, you have repeatedly stated that you didn't want to bother debating with them, while you continue to post on this stickied megathread where you must know that this debate will continue between liberal, conservative, capitalist, socialist, and even the odd anarcho-communist atheist muslim extremist.

I'm heavily in favour of higer taxes on the rich, free healthcare, nationalisation, more done for the poor, and other Socialist things. Last time I checked those were left wing. Also look at my compass.

Yet you support a candidate whose voting record and scarcely-revealed plan for the next four years involves raising the tax burden on the middle and lower class while cutting taxes on the rich and eliminating social programs that they (the rich) don't use anyways, and call Obamacare one of the greatest blunders of all time? One would presume that your actions don't support your words. Also, in reviewing the political compass site, one might question their accuracy; placing Obama and Mitt Romney in nearly the very same region on their political chart. (Don't believe me? Check for yourself.)

Good.

So does Mitt.

Incorrect. He has spent less than every previous Republican president for the past few decades.

He hasn't.

The fuck?

I didnt post for liberals like you to say those are good. I disagree with those. Also Obama has cut billions of the military budget, thats fact. Please dont reply to this.

In fact, in light of your intense desire to protect yourself from the replies of other users of this public forum, I would like to help you by recommending certain mediums for you to accomplish your desire to speak your mind with no reply:

1) Shouting out over the Grand Canyon.
2) Writing your thoughts down in a journal.
3) Fox News.
4) Bumper stickers.

Marrige is a bond between one man and one woman, it has been that way for well over a thousand years. I for one want the definition of marrige to stay the same. But I'm fine with gays being together.

Other things that were the same way for thousands of years (or more!):

Slavery
Human Sacrifice
Torture
Foot Binding

Some might say that change is good.

On to your issues with all those damn atheists disrespecting your religion:

You do know this never happens, right?

It happens all the time, you always insult the Bible when we are talking about it, you always say there isnt a God or Heaven, it gets annoying. I'm not all in your face with my "There is a God" now am I? So I expect you and other atheists to be the same.

If I were a believer in the Bible, the story of Jesus and his teachings, I might be tempted to refer you to the many passages in which Christ himself states to turn the other other cheek, conquer your enemy through unexpected kindness, and spread the word of God through love, not hate and intolerance. The simple fact is that people will always have different beliefs, Christianity is not a private exclusive club, and one should always remember that Jesus himself went among the dregs of society, the drunkards, gamblers, prostitutes and thieves, in his effort to save all that he could.

Gays can be together in my book, I dont want gays thrown in ghettos but no no thats not enough because they just HAVE to have a ring on they're finger. That is not gays not having equal rights.

Its not mother freaking homophobia you blah. Rick Santorum and George W Bush are homophobes, I am not.

Women just wanted to vote, black people just wanted to drink from the same water fountains and attend the same schools, and the Irish just wanted to work, same as the Mexicans want to today. If you assert that marriage is not a religious institution, and agree that homosexuality is legal in the United States, but wish to deny homosexuals the right to what you have already agreed is a civic institution, then homophobic or not, you are prejudiced against them.


In closing, I hope that I have helped to show you the reason why, as you might feel, you get a large amount of criticism in your posts, and hopefully helped you to develop strategies to prevent such things from happening in the future.


ON TO ANOTHER OFFTOPIC:

For those who spoke of disbanding the government currently at hand, or of the ineptitude and hopeless obsolescence of the two-party system, quit bitching about it and do something. Form the Centrist party, or the Moderate party, or the Wombat party for all I care, and get a candidate on the ballot who is more than just another third party. Aside from the brief blurb of the Occupy movement, Americans as activists and revolutionaries have done precious little but complain from their collective keyboards for the past few decades. With the instantaneous connectivity of the Internet, it should be a piece of cake to organize like-minded individuals to form a political force to effect change in our government, if only we have the will to step out of our fat, all-consuming, hypercritical comfort zones and into a process dominated by individuals who are only there because the rest of us can't be bothered to take their places away from them.


-Back on-topic in the next post

[Alien Space Bats]

Obama said rather clearly in his recent speech in Salem that business owners didnt build they're business.

Why is the entire Romney campaign built on a pile of lies?

Obama was echoing a speech by Elizabeth Warren, in which she pointed out how nobody succeeds on their own. The society within which we live creates the conditions we need to be able to succeed: The courts, the laws, the infrastructure, all of that has to be there before we can succeed.

There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.

You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.

Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.

- Elizabeth Warren

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me -- because they want to give something back. They know they didn't -- look, if you've been successful, you didn't get there on your own. You didn't get there on your own. I'm always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don't do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

- Barack Obama

It's a lie to say that it's "rather clear" that Obama gave no credit to business owners for their own hard work. In fact, it's not just a lie, it's what Benjamin Disraeli called a "damned lie", and you should be ashamed for repeating it.

"The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together." Does that sound like the President is giving business owners no credit for their own work? Only if you're an absolute fucking idiot.

What the President said was that business owners didn't build the roads and bridges that our nation uses to support its businesses; they didn't build the internet that businesses use to communicate with customers and sell their goods. They didn't create the police forces, the fire brigades, the courts, the laws, or any of the rest of "this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed [them] to thrive". America built all those things as a united society, and so those who succeed on the backs of the entire American community owe a piece of what they've made back to that community in payment for its contribution to their success.

But in Romneyland, statements can be taken out of context, so go ahead and shame yourself by lying all you want. If you do, however, don't be surprised when the rest of us decide that you have no honor because you'll lie for your side in a shameless attempt to win at all costs.

[The Ethereal Wombat]

Now, as far as it relates to the candidates and the upcoming presidential election, I would tend to agree that no matter which candidate, it will be largely more of the same. Congress will block most effective legislation with filibustering (possibly one of the worst ideas to ever cross the legislative floor), few if any campaign promises are ever delivered upon, and anybody who promises to "close the loopholes in taxes" is either an idiot or a liar.

Personally, I will be voting for Obama. He is a known quantity, he is telegenic, diplomatic, and I honestly believe that he is trying his best to make the most of the bad situation he has been handed from our previous President. I believe that, as with previous economic recessions and depressions, continued spending will be necessary to bring us fully out of this downturn. I also believe that the one pitfall that faces American democracy is the ability of the people to, in reactionary fear, flip-flop between the two parties to try and solve one problem in two completely opposite ways, usually to the failure of both solutions.

I feel that Romney, as a candidate, has failed on the most critical aspect that a candidate can fail: he hasn't told us just what he plans to do. Whether this is because he is waiting for Obama's plans to open up so he can make a move, he doesn't have a plan yet, or he already knows that we won't like his plan, his broad generalizations and over-simplification of a strategy leave me suspicious and wary. I doubt I am the only one to feel this way, especially in light of the allegations against Mr. Romney regarding his business dealings, and this trumps any feelings I might have regarding the personality or convictions of either man.

So anyways, I apologize for the length of my posts, particularly the offtopic one, but hope you find them enjoyable.

[Laerod]

Alright time for the usual anti Obama pro Romney post.

Obama will bury the nation in debt,

Less so than Romney:

In the above clip from "Fareed Zakaria GPS," Krugman weighs in on the economic plans of President Obama and Mitt Romney. One [Obama], he says, is talking economic sense while the other one [Romney] is talking "utter nonsense."

reckless spending is bad,

Gonna have to show it was reckless.

the stimulus gave lots of money to foreign nations,

Mostly a lie

Mitt Romney’s ad said that stimulus dollars paid for windmills from China.

By depicting dollars going up in flames, the ad suggests that the U.S. gained nothing from the stimulus spending, and the money largely went to countries such as China.

In reality, many American firms connected to the wind industry expanded during the years of the stimulus. Only a small fraction of the money spent on wind energy went to China.

This statement contains a grain of truth but ignores other information. We rate it Mostly False.

The Romney campaign ad said that stimulus dollars paid for jobs in Finland. There is nothing accurate in this claim. The federal loan guarantees the company received were not part of the stimulus, and there is no evidence that any government dollars paid for work done by Finnish workers.

Ornisher, the company spokesman, told us the contract to produce the cars in Finland had been signed before the federal loan was approved. Also, measures were put in place to ensure that taxpayer dollars only went for work done in America.

Fisker Automotive has yet to open the factory in Delaware but it also hasn’t received the large government loan needed to do that.

The ad’s suggestion that the Fisker loan was a reward to a political supporter also falls flat. The program was approved initially by the Bush administration.

We rule the claim False.

In the cases where stimulus money went to foreign nations, it did so because there were no places in America it could go to at the time and in return allowed for more jobs in the US.

Romney said, "This president has been outsourcing a good deal of American jobs himself by putting money into energy companies, solar and wind energy companies that end up making their products outside the United States."

There is some truth to Romney's statement because stimulus dollars did go to foreign companies, largely because there was a shortage of American firms producing key components for generating wind and solar power. But given that situation, it is inaccurate to call it "outsourcing" because there is not a source domestically.

Also, it's important to note that domestic manufacturing tied to wind power benefited considerably from the stimulus. Thanks to the Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit, the domestic sector was growing before Obama took office and accelerated during his first three years. However, federal policy has been less effective in the area of solar power.

We rate the claim Half True.

Obamacare is unconstituational and bad for the economy,

The former statement is false, the latter requires proof. Not that it's likely you'll be able to prove that having a healthy workforce is worse for the economy than one wrought with anxiety and untreated health problems.

Romney will lower the debt and create jobs,

Four out of four economists who's findings support Romney's conclusions about his plans vs. Obama's point out that their findings don't actually support his conclusions.

Romney will protect the US from terrorists,

Obama had Osama bin Laden killed and has actually suggested that America might actually do something to prevent terrorist attacks like the ones in Colorado and Wisconsin. Romney hasn't done shit besides suggesting we do the equivalent of writing angry letters to people telling them just how angry we are.

Romney is a good candidate.

Which is why he lags several points behind "generic Republican", am I right?

Yes, I'm aware you put those out there to goad angry responses, but I felt some people might learn something from me addressing your falsehoods.

[Laerod]

Now, as far as it relates to the candidates and the upcoming presidential election, I would tend to agree that no matter which candidate, it will be largely more of the same. Congress will block most effective legislation with filibustering (possibly one of the worst ideas to ever cross the legislative floor), few if any campaign promises are ever delivered upon, and anybody who promises to "close the loopholes in taxes" is either an idiot or a liar.

Well more than a third promises kept or over half kept or compromised on is not "few if any" by any reasonable standard.

[The Rogueish Megalodon]

Now, as far as it relates to the candidates and the upcoming presidential election, I would tend to agree that no matter which candidate, it will be largely more of the same. Congress will block most effective legislation with filibustering (possibly one of the worst ideas to ever cross the legislative floor), few if any campaign promises are ever delivered upon, and anybody who promises to "close the loopholes in taxes" is either an idiot or a liar.

Well more than a third promises kept or over half kept or compromised on is not "few if any" by any reasonable standard.

Credit where credit is due, Obama has done a remarkable job of attempting to maintain transparency and keep his promises to the American people.

That said, if I only kept one-third of my promises, most people wouldn't find me very reliable or trustworthy. Why should we expect any less from the people who lead our country? Best in show with 37% is still a poor showing, and reflects on the severity of the problem with our leadership and the political power pool in general.

-EDITED FOR TRANSPARENCY:
The Rogueish Megalodon and The Ethereal Wombat are both administered with tender loving care by the same benevolent dictator.


-EDITED AGAIN FOR CLARITY:
I would also like to make it clear that I will still be voting for Obama this upcoming election, just like I did last election, with the hope that he can improve upon his last term's "Promises Kept" rate in spite of the difficult legislative environment.

[Laerod]

Well more than a third promises kept or over half kept or compromised on is not "few if any" by any reasonable standard.

Credit where credit is due, Obama has done a remarkable job of attempting to maintain transparency and keep his promises to the American people.

That said, if I only kept one-third of my promises, most people wouldn't find me very reliable or trustworthy. Why should we expect any less from the people who lead our country? Best in show with 37% is still a poor showing, and reflects on the severity of the problem with our leadership and the political power pool in general.

-EDITED FOR TRANSPARENCY:
The Rogueish Megalodon and The Ethereal Wombat are both administered with tender loving care by the same benevolent dictator.


-EDITED AGAIN FOR CLARITY:
I would also like to make it clear that I will still be voting for Obama this upcoming election, just like I did last election, with the hope that he can improve upon his last term's "Promises Kept" rate in spite of the difficult legislative environment.

Right, we need to be clear that Obama isn't a dictator. He cannot fulfill these promises on his own and has to rely on Congress to help him do it and plenty fall apart when confronted with political reality. And we shouldn't forget that the second half of his term was fraught with the most obstructive congress since that time part of the representatives went off to found their own country, or possibly even (going by the use of filibusters in the senate) ever.

Whether "37% is poor showing" requires some comparisons to previous administrations. You only keeping a similar fraction of your promises isn't a valid comparison because the promises Obama made are not promises of things he will do, but things he and congress will do, because those are the kind of promises expected from a president on the campaign trail.

[Jefferson Confederacy]

Are you kidding me? Both of the candidates are barely human beings. Obama should be charged with war crimes, as should every president after JFK. Romney will continue the same murderous policies, and both have horrible economic ideologies that are fueled by corruption. Both are bought out by Goldman Sachs/big banks/etc. Ron Paul/Gary Johnson personally, but I'd settle for at least anyone who is going to uphold the constitution.

[Quebec and Atlantic Canada]

Are you kidding me? Both of the candidates are barely human beings. Obama should be charged with war crimes, as should every president after JFK. Romney will continue the same murderous policies, and both have horrible economic ideologies that are fueled by corruption. Both are bought out by Goldman Sachs/big banks/etc. Ron Paul/Gary Johnson personally, but I'd settle for at least anyone who is going to uphold the constitution.

Lame hipster thinks he's being cool by playing the "BOTH PARTIES R TOTAL SHIT LULZ" card. In other news, bears shit in woods.

[The Archregimancy]

It's a lie to say that it's "rather clear" that Obama gave no credit to business owners for their own hard work. In fact, it's not just a lie, it's what Benjamin Disraeli called a "damned lie", and you should be ashamed for repeating it.

Very minor point of order...

Disraeli likely never said 'lies, damned lies, and statistics'.

The earliest known use of the phrase post-dates Disraeli's death, and wasn't attributed to the late Earl of Beaconsfield at the time.

The popularisation of the association with Disraeli, and the source of the phrase's broader popularisation outside of the UK, came courtesy of Mark Twain, who wrote in an autobiographical essay in the North American Review in 1906 (itself excerpted from his autobiography):

I was deducing from the above that I have been slowing down steadily in these thirty-six years, but I perceive that my statistics have a defect: three thousand words in the spring of 1868 when I was working seven or eight or nine hours at a sitting has little or no advantage over the sitting of to-day, covering half the time and producing half the output. Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

But it seems Samuel Clemens was mistaken here (though the above seems to be the source of the occasional American attribution of the quote to Twain). The actual original source of the quote remains unknown.

This article may be of interest: http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/maths/histstat/lies.htm

[Cancerous Conservatism]

Oh what to say, what to say...

[Frisbeeteria]

Listen here, 'buddy', you can debate all you like, but little shits like you are the reason why honest Christians are ashamed to hold their heads high.

This plus several of your other posts have earned you a *** Warning for flaming ***. Perhaps you would benefit from a careful reading of the forum rules before posting again.

[Libertas Liber]

Are you kidding me? Both of the candidates are barely human beings. Obama should be charged with war crimes, as should every president after JFK. Romney will continue the same murderous policies, and both have horrible economic ideologies that are fueled by corruption. Both are bought out by Goldman Sachs/big banks/etc. Ron Paul/Gary Johnson personally, but I'd settle for at least anyone who is going to uphold the constitution.

Lame hipster thinks he's being cool by playing the "BOTH PARTIES R TOTAL SHIT LULZ" card. In other news, bears shit in woods.

Two men do not represent the entire political views of America. There is more than Left and Right.

[The Nuclear Fist]

Lame hipster thinks he's being cool by playing the "BOTH PARTIES R TOTAL SHIT LULZ" card. In other news, bears shit in woods.

Two men do not represent the entire political views of America. There is more than Left and Right.

There's also Up and Down. And even Diagonal.

[Alien Space Bats]

But it seems Samuel Clemens was mistaken here (though the above seems to be the source of the occasional American attribution of the quote to Twain). The actual original source of the quote remains unknown.

MARK TWAIN MISTAKEN?!?!?!? Oh, them's fightin' words, Limey!

[Tmutarakhan]

Much as Kim Jong-Un Likes to Look at Things, it turns out that Mitt Romney Likes to Stand on Things. Is he unable to display his condescension fully unless he is literally looking down at everybody?

[Capitalist Running Dogs]

Reading the above, I am struck by the amazing disconnect with reality Obama supporters have to engage in to even believe that Obama is good for the economy and future of America.

Let's see: the worst recession recovery in U.S. history, 42 consecutive months of 8+% unemployment, declining economic growth, increased enrollment in food stamps/assistance, increase healthcare costs (along with the largest tax increase in history looming), and increased disability enrollment. All that for the cost of an additional $5 trillion of accumulated debt! That must be why he can't really talk about his achievements, there aren't any, and focus on class/race warfare and wage a campaign of scorched earth.

Someone above was trying to sell the Democrat talking point that Romney's running on lies. Last I checked he wasn't saying Obama was linked to death squads, killing people with cancer, or dodging taxes (unlike many of Obama's Treasury Secretary) without any proof and any of that. Like most Democrats and Liberals, lying is okay if it serves your needs. Otherwise it is disgusting and evil!

All Romney needs to focus on is where America stands after four years of Obama's Progressive ideology. The ideology of 'You didn't build that" (if played in context that quote takes on an even more disturbing tone) and "The private sector is doing fine" and "I think that when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody" is not the governing philosophy that Americans want.

I, for one, can't wait for November. It's Romney's to win if he just focuses on the facts and rubs Obama's nose in his own words.

[Mavorpen]

Much as Kim Jong-Un Likes to Look at Things, it turns out that Mitt Romney Likes to Stand on Things. Is he unable to display his condescension fully unless he is literally looking down at everybody?

"The campaign can’t be going around poking holes in people’s upholstery."

Why not? Fuck their upholstery. It'll be much easier with the holes in them due to Mrs. Romney's heels.

[Wamitoria]

I, for one, can't wait for November. It's Romney's to win if he just focuses on the facts and rubs Obama's nose in his own words.

Uh... it really isn't...

[Mavorpen]

Let's see: the worst recession recovery in U.S. history, 42 consecutive months of 8+% unemployment,

Right, not Obama's fault. By the way, his stimulus added millions of jobs.

declining economic growth,

Source?

increased enrollment in food stamps/assistance,

How dare people want to eat!?

increase healthcare costs (along with the largest tax increase in history looming),

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/sta ... s-gop-us-/
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/bigges ... n-history/

and increased disability enrollment. All that for the cost of an additional $5 trillion of accumulated debt! That must be why he can't really talk about his achievements, there aren't any, and focus on class/race warfare and wage a campaign of scorched earth.

Last one.

Someone above was trying to sell the Democrat talking point that Romney's running on lies. Last I checked he wasn't saying Obama was linked to death squads, killing people with cancer, or dodging taxes (unlike many of Obama's Treasury Secretary) without any proof and any of that. Like most Democrats and Liberals, lying is okay if it serves your needs. Otherwise it is disgusting and evil!

I too like pie.

All Romney needs to focus on is where America stands after four years of Obama's Progressive ideology. The ideology of 'You didn't build that" (if played in context that quote takes on an even more disturbing tone) and "The private sector is doing fine" and "I think that when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody" is not the governing philosophy that Americans want.

I'm sorry you can't handle the truth. You DIDN'T build your business without help. The private sector IS doing fine compared to the public sector. Spreading wealth around and closing gaps in income IS good. I'm sorry you don't want the philosophy the developed world adheres to.

I, for one, can't wait for November. It's Romney's to win if he just focuses on the facts and rubs Obama's nose in his own words.

Oh good, America's going to plummet.

[Tmutarakhan]

Someone above was trying to sell the Democrat talking point that Romney's running on lies. Last I checked he wasn't saying Obama was linked to death squads

Romney raising funds from the Salvadorans who ran the death squad is a fact, not a lie, however rude you think it is to point it out.

[Wamitoria]

Someone above was trying to sell the Democrat talking point that Romney's running on lies. Last I checked he wasn't saying Obama was linked to death squads

Romney raising funds from the Salvadorans who ran the death squad is a fact, not a lie, however rude you think it is to point it out.

This is where the problem comes from. The line between facts and spin is blurred on the right, while on the left it's somewhat more defined.

[Mavorpen]

I swear, that guy's someone's well designed puppet. He never stays online to see his posts being refuted.

[Ashmoria]

Someone above was trying to sell the Democrat talking point that Romney's running on lies. Last I checked he wasn't saying Obama was linked to death squads

Romney raising funds from the Salvadorans who ran the death squad is a fact, not a lie, however rude you think it is to point it out.

of course its rude to tell the truth about republicans! geeez if we all relied on the truth they would never have a chance to win. thats not fair now is it?