Romney VS Obama: The Megathread

[Flaxxony-Setram]

I wish Ron Paul fans would vote for Gary Johnson as he is actually a nominated candidate.

I like Ron Paul, but why waste your vote? If the Ron Paul supporters joined the libertarians they could actually make a reasonably good dent in this election.

[Farnhamia]

Ahem, the big banks that were going under in 2008? You need to get out more.

Wasn't that Bush?

That was Bush.

[Wamitoria]

I wish Ron Paul fans would vote for Gary Johnson as he is actually a nominated candidate.

I like Ron Paul, but why waste your vote? If the Ron Paul supporters joined the libertarians they could actually make a reasonably good dent in this election.

Yeah. They might break 3%.

[Corrian]

I wish Ron Paul fans would vote for Gary Johnson as he is actually a nominated candidate.

I like Ron Paul, but why waste your vote? If the Ron Paul supporters joined the libertarians they could actually make a reasonably good dent in this election.

My dad and I have both said that Gary Johnson is like a more sane Ron Paul, pretty much on all of his policies, personality, and so on.

[Vetalia]

Like the regulations that the Republicans in the House refuse to allocate money for? Yeah, uh huh. And the TARP bailouts were Bush, not Obama.

Dodd-Frank is one of the biggest windfalls to the SIFIs in recent history; its complex and burdensome regulations restrict competition against them from smaller banks that couldn't hope to assemble the army of lawyers they can to sift through it, to say nothing of the compliance costs. And, of course, that brilliant cap on interchange fees was a nice touch to make it even tougher.

And, of course while Bush initiated TARP Obama expanded it; now, personally speaking I do feel this was a necessary evil given how broken the financial system was prior to the financial crisis, but so far he's done nothing to address the substantial risks the program has created.

[Flaxxony-Setram]

I wish Ron Paul fans would vote for Gary Johnson as he is actually a nominated candidate.

I like Ron Paul, but why waste your vote? If the Ron Paul supporters joined the libertarians they could actually make a reasonably good dent in this election.

Yeah. They might break 3%.

Not really. But whatever you say you obviously don't have poll stats or anything to back that up.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gary-j ... onal-poll/

He already is at 6 without RP dropping.

[Jefferson and Paul]

Ron Paul

[Laerod]

Like the regulations that the Republicans in the House refuse to allocate money for? Yeah, uh huh. And the TARP bailouts were Bush, not Obama.

Dodd-Frank is one of the biggest windfalls to the SIFIs in recent history; its complex and burdensome regulations restrict competition against them from smaller banks that couldn't hope to assemble the army of lawyers they can to sift through it, to say nothing of the compliance costs. And, of course, that brilliant cap on interchange fees was a nice touch to make it even tougher.

And, of course while Bush initiated TARP Obama expanded it; now, personally speaking I do feel this was a necessary evil given how broken the financial system was prior to the financial crisis, but so far he's done nothing to address the substantial risks the program has created.

How exactly is he supposed to do this? Congress will not work with him, as the House has a "party of no" majority and the Senate has a "party of no" filibuster. You want signing statements back?

[Flaxxony-Setram]

I wish we had preferential voting in the USA. Why? Because do you know how many people say "I don't like Romney, but he isn't as bad as Obama" or "I would vote third party but it would be a waster of my vote."

I wish people would vote for who they really wanted instead of compromising based on "electability".

[Zaklen]

Romney's entire campaign is based on lies, exaggeration, and hypocrisy. You know what Obama Care is based on? Something Romney came up with! Also, I can't remember the exact percentages, but Romney said something like this:

"Any unemployment rate higher than 4.5% is a failure for the President."

And then...

"My personal goal is to get the unemployment rate to 6%"

All of the Republican canidates have also been hell-bent on repealing Obama Care, and due to a medical condition I have, no sane insurance company would insure me without it being on the books.

And because I must...

Will the Real Mitt Romney Please Stand Up?

[Wamitoria]

Yeah. They might break 3%.

Not really. But whatever you say you obviously don't have poll stats or anything to back that up.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gary-j ... onal-poll/

He already is at 6 without RP dropping.

Read the rest of that article.

[Wamitoria]

"My personal goal is to get the unemployment rate to 6%"

The funny part? If he actually uses the policies of the current congress, we'll be lucky not to hit 25% unemployment.

[Evraim]

He should run in the next Democratic primary in 2016. He stands a better chance then.

He should get out there and run for Congress, and encourage other people in the Libertarian Party to do so, too. Congress and the state legislatures. Grassroots, people, come on, this is not rocket science.

State congresses and county positions would be more reasonable. After they have built a reasonable support base, a national campaign might actually yield some fruit.

"My personal goal is to get the unemployment rate to 6%"

The funny part? If he actually uses the policies of the current congress, we'll be lucky not to hit 25% unemployment.

What policies?

[Flaxxony-Setram]

Ron Paul

I wanted him too but I advise against writing him in vote for GJ if you like Ron Paul.

[Evraim]

Ron Paul

I wanted him too but I advise against writing him in vote for GJ if you like Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is not a true Libertarian. He's a Non-Interventionist States' Rights Conservative Republican.

[Wamitoria]

The funny part? If he actually uses the policies of the current congress, we'll be lucky not to hit 25% unemployment.

What policies?

Paul Ryan budget.

[Flaxxony-Setram]

Not really. But whatever you say you obviously don't have poll stats or anything to back that up.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gary-j ... onal-poll/

He already is at 6 without RP dropping.

Read the rest of that article.

Yeah. I know that a lot of his support want him because both options suck. Your point? Obama and Romney are more similar than most elections. Any sane liberal would recognize Obama has fulfilled almost no promises (troop withdrawal, Guantanamo) and any sane conservative could like Romney's healthcare and abortion record.

[Flaxxony-Setram]

I wanted him too but I advise against writing him in vote for GJ if you like Ron Paul.

Ron Paul is not a true Libertarian. He's a Non-Interventionist States' Rights Conservative Republican.

He isn't a true libertarian but in reality there is not one SINGLE correct libertarian ideology.

All I know is gary Johnson and RP are damn similar, similar enough to united forces.

[Daihan]

I am disappointed that Aleister Crowley (my candidate) and Vermin Supreme were not listed as candidates. Clearly, this thread reflects the biases and assumptions of the OP and the political system in general, i.e. that candidates must be "serious" and "alive"; that the American political process "works" and the outcome of this election "matters". Well, let me state right now that I reject these assumptions as undemocratic and unamerican.

Aleister Crowley in 2012: Why Vote for the Lesser Evil, when you can vote for the "Wickedest Man in the World"?

[Merodin]

My sister told me this guy came up in her history review during class and that some of the kids thought that it was a younger Romney.

Scary....

Obama for re-election. Honestly, his plans are working albeit slowly. If we elect Mittens Romnety then I believe we will be worse off.

[The Black Forrest]

Ron Paul

I wanted him too but I advise against writing him in vote for GJ

George Jetson?

[Evraim]

What policies?

Paul Ryan budget.

The one that will never get past the Senate?

[Farnhamia]

Like the regulations that the Republicans in the House refuse to allocate money for? Yeah, uh huh. And the TARP bailouts were Bush, not Obama.

Dodd-Frank is one of the biggest windfalls to the SIFIs in recent history; its complex and burdensome regulations restrict competition against them from smaller banks that couldn't hope to assemble the army of lawyers they can to sift through it, to say nothing of the compliance costs. And, of course, that brilliant cap on interchange fees was a nice touch to make it even tougher.

And, of course while Bush initiated TARP Obama expanded it; now, personally speaking I do feel this was a necessary evil given how broken the financial system was prior to the financial crisis, but so far he's done nothing to address the substantial risks the program has created.

How did Obama expand TARP? As I recall, not all of the TARP money was given out. If Dodd-Frank were properly implemented and the SEC given ... well, here, have an editorial from The New York Times:

Lost the Vote? Deny the Money
Published: June 9, 2012 365 Comments

If you wanted to reproduce the conditions that led to the Great Recession in 2007, the easiest way would be the plan unveiled last week by House Republicans: gut the regulators who are supposed to keep the worst business practices in check.

At a time when the economy is still reeling from the downturn, House Republicans released a spending bill that would severely cut the budget of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which would keep it from regulating potentially toxic swaps and other derivatives. It refused to give the Securities and Exchange Commission the extra money it needs to carry out the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill.

And the bill would cripple the Internal Revenue Service, limiting its ability to detect tax avoidance, particularly by businesses and the wealthy. (The I.R.S. cut, designed to impede the agency’s role in health care reform, will inevitably increase the deficit.)

The proposed cuts are the latest in a long series of efforts by Republicans to keep the government from tempering even the most economically dangerous desires of business. Having failed to prevent the enactment of Dodd-Frank and the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, they are imposing their will with what may be their most effective weapon — choking off the air supply of regulators by limiting the money they can spend. These agencies had already been hesitant to impose a real crackdown; the cuts will make the situation worse.

The appropriations bills will have to be negotiated with the Senate, but House leaders have often shown a willingness to let agencies and even the entire government shut down if such negotiations do not go their way.

With 710 employees, the C.F.T.C. staff is barely big enough for its current responsibilities, let alone its new mission under Dodd-Frank to oversee the huge over-the-counter swaps market. Its budget is $205 million, which President Obama proposed increasing to $308 million for 2013 to deal with swaps. The House Appropriations Committee has proposed slashing next year’s budget to $180 million.

The agency’s chairman, Gary Gensler, said: “The result of the House bill is to effectively put the interests of Wall Street ahead of those of the American public, by significantly underfunding the agency Congress tasked to oversee derivatives — the same complex financial instruments that helped contribute to the most significant economic downturn since the Great Depression.”

As Mr. Gensler pointed out, the market in swaps, at $300 trillion, is eight times larger than the futures market his agency has been regulating, and yet the House wants to cut the agency’s budget significantly. The House committee chairman, Harold Rogers, said the agency should return to its “core duties,” a statement that brazenly ignores a new set of duties Congress put on the books.

The securities industry has already gone to federal court to prevent the C.F.T.C. from imposing limits on commodities trading that can lead to excessive speculation, which can drive up the price of oil and other goods. With good friends on the Appropriations Committee, however, the industry may not even need a favorable court ruling.

For the Securities and Exchange Commission, whose role protecting investors was also enhanced by the reform law, the House provided only an extra $50 million (far less than the $245 million increase requested by the president) but limited the money to technology expenses. None of it can pay for new watchdog employees. The committee is clearly listening to Wall Street lobbyists who do not want the agency to enforce planned new regulations on money-market mutual funds.

The I.R.S. said it needed $945 million more in 2013 to make sure people have health insurance beginning in 2014, and to keep up with tax cheats. (It already cut its staff by 5,000 last year.) The House provided none of that increase. It is hard to believe that Republicans are serious about reducing the deficit if they will not let the government’s revenue agency do its job.

A few weeks ago, JPMorgan Chase, a too-big-to-fail bank, lost at least $3 billion trading in derivatives. Regulators might have halted that if Dodd-Frank were fully in place. The Republican response is to hobble the regulators even further — an invitation to another financial disaster.

[Farnhamia]

I wish we had preferential voting in the USA. Why? Because do you know how many people say "I don't like Romney, but he isn't as bad as Obama" or "I would vote third party but it would be a waster of my vote."

I wish people would vote for who they really wanted instead of compromising based on "electability".

Get going on a constitutional amendment.

[Wamitoria]

Paul Ryan budget.

The one that will never get past the Senate?

Unless they get control of it.

That's unlikely, but it's still possible.