The 2012 Three Ring Circus AKA The US Presidential Election

[Frisivisia]

Everything you said, including the quote, was ignorant. Displaying a lack of understand of politics in general, American politics in particular, and the parties of the United States in specific. You assert that the president doesn't matter, well we know that's bullshit. If it was true then there'd be no difference between America 2006, and America 1996, or if you prefer America 1986.

Now it's completely true that the President's power is limited by Congress, but historically the president has been called factually mind you, the most powerful man in the world. The reason for this is because until recent Republican party obstructionist assholism the president could bargain and barter and connive to steer the direction of the country. Your assertion that it doesn't matter is factually wrong and displays ignorance or deception. I was charitable and said ignorance.

Wow, you certainly use a lot of big words to say almost nothing...

I guess you have trouble differentiating between tongue and cheek remarks, and literal remarks?

Of course the office of POTUS is important, and it should be filled by someone who can, and will get things done that matter. My opinion is that Mr. Obama has failed, and Mr. Romney shouldn't be given the chance.

As for the quote, well I personally feel that it is spot on, and Mr. Mencken was a man of remarkable foresight.

When unemployment is at 15% like it would have been if not for the stimulus and other bills, and when the Dow isn't 13,000, then we can say Obama failed.

[Khadgar]

Everything you said, including the quote, was ignorant. Displaying a lack of understand of politics in general, American politics in particular, and the parties of the United States in specific. You assert that the president doesn't matter, well we know that's bullshit. If it was true then there'd be no difference between America 2006, and America 1996, or if you prefer America 1986.

Now it's completely true that the President's power is limited by Congress, but historically the president has been called factually mind you, the most powerful man in the world. The reason for this is because until recent Republican party obstructionist assholism the president could bargain and barter and connive to steer the direction of the country. Your assertion that it doesn't matter is factually wrong and displays ignorance or deception. I was charitable and said ignorance.

Wow, you certainly use a lot of big words to say almost nothing...

I guess you have trouble differentiating between tongue and cheek remarks, and literal remarks?

Of course the office of POTUS is important, and it should be filled by someone who can, and will get things done that matter. My opinion is that Mr. Obama has failed, and Mr. Romney shouldn't be given the chance.

As for the quote, well I personally feel that it is spot on, and Mr. Mencken was a man of remarkable foresight.

Ah, the Just Joking Justification, hallmark of the well and truly cornered.

[Death Metal]

and Mr. Mencken was a man of remarkable foresight.

As remarkable as paint drying, and with the foresight of Mister Magoo.

[Farnhamia]

Everything you said, including the quote, was ignorant. Displaying a lack of understand of politics in general, American politics in particular, and the parties of the United States in specific. You assert that the president doesn't matter, well we know that's bullshit. If it was true then there'd be no difference between America 2006, and America 1996, or if you prefer America 1986.

Now it's completely true that the President's power is limited by Congress, but historically the president has been called factually mind you, the most powerful man in the world. The reason for this is because until recent Republican party obstructionist assholism the president could bargain and barter and connive to steer the direction of the country. Your assertion that it doesn't matter is factually wrong and displays ignorance or deception. I was charitable and said ignorance.

Wow, you certainly use a lot of big words to say almost nothing...

I guess you have trouble differentiating between tongue and cheek remarks, and literal remarks?

Of course the office of POTUS is important, and it should be filled by someone who can, and will get things done that matter. My opinion is that Mr. Obama has failed, and Mr. Romney shouldn't be given the chance.

As for the quote, well I personally feel that it is spot on, and Mr. Mencken was a man of remarkable foresight.

Mr. Mencken was an inflexible elitist. As Edmund Wilson said, "The striking thing about Mencken’s mind is its ruthlessness and rigidity . . . Though one of the fairest of critics, he is the least pliant . . . . [I]n spite of his skepticism, and his frequent exhortations to hold his opinion lightly, he himself has been conspicuous for seizing upon simple dogmas and sticking to them with fierce tenacity . . . true skeptics . . . see both truth and weakness in every case."

[Terraveritas]

Wow, you certainly use a lot of big words to say almost nothing...

I guess you have trouble differentiating between tongue and cheek remarks, and literal remarks?

Of course the office of POTUS is important, and it should be filled by someone who can, and will get things done that matter. My opinion is that Mr. Obama has failed, and Mr. Romney shouldn't be given the chance.

As for the quote, well I personally feel that it is spot on, and Mr. Mencken was a man of remarkable foresight.

When unemployment is at 15% like it would have been if not for the stimulus and other bills, and when the Dow isn't 13,000, then we can say Obama failed.

Unemployment is over 15% in reality... the Dow going up means nothing... it went up and up just before the Great Depression.

Obama has done a great job. Just keep telling yourselves that...

Time will tell, who is correct.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Everything you said, including the quote, was ignorant. Displaying a lack of understand of politics in general, American politics in particular, and the parties of the United States in specific. You assert that the president doesn't matter, well we know that's bullshit. If it was true then there'd be no difference between America 2006, and America 1996, or if you prefer America 1986.

Now it's completely true that the President's power is limited by Congress, but historically the president has been called factually mind you, the most powerful man in the world. The reason for this is because until recent Republican party obstructionist assholism the president could bargain and barter and connive to steer the direction of the country. Your assertion that it doesn't matter is factually wrong and displays ignorance or deception. I was charitable and said ignorance.

Wow, you certainly use a lot of big words to say almost nothing...

I guess you have trouble differentiating between tongue and cheek remarks, and literal remarks?

Of course the office of POTUS is important, and it should be filled by someone who can, and will get things done that matter. My opinion is that Mr. Obama has failed, and Mr. Romney shouldn't be given the chance.

As for the quote, well I personally feel that it is spot on, and Mr. Mencken was a man of remarkable foresight.

Lol guys just kidding.

[Enadail]

Under Obama, the DREAM Act nearly got passed, and I would have stopped being punished for something I didn't do. And he actually did get some action pushed through that'll give me some normalcy to my life even if not actually solving the problem. Ignoring EVERY OTHER DIFFERENCE¹ between them, that alone is enough for me to push for his reelection.


¹ Such as their stance on war, on healthcare, on medicare, on foreign policy, on business, on personal rights, etc.

And under a true Libertarian... you wouldn't need the DREAM act, because you would be welcomed with open arms from the get go...

Nearly passed isn't the same as passed, btw.

Bullshit. No congress would pass unanimous amnesty for a bunch of people, nor should they. Immigration laws exist for a reason, and though I believe the US immigration laws are fucked up as hell, they need to continue to exist (though in a more properly formatted manner). The idea that a Libertarian president would just come in and fix things with a wave of a magic wand is laughable and displays a complete lack of knowledge as to what a president does.

Not to mention, most libertarian ideas fit best into fantasy books and often don't apply to the real world.

And the DREAM Act failed not because of Obama but because of 2 Democrats from red states, and 3 Republicans who were for the DREAM Act until a Democratic president was for it. The most you could blame Obama for on it is that Republican politicians will do anything to make sure Obama is unsuccessful, even betray their own values. A reelection of Obama, with hopefully some more blue throughout the senate and congress could mean good news for me. A Libertarian would mean Congress could care less about him and there'd be no unity/push to get stuff done.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Mencken came up with some excellent epigrams, and his take on the Scopes "Monkey Trial" was enjoyable, but his political insights were nothing more than insufferable elitism masked by humorous cynicism.

[Farnhamia]

And under a true Libertarian... you wouldn't need the DREAM act, because you would be welcomed with open arms from the get go...

Nearly passed isn't the same as passed, btw.

Bullshit. No congress would pass unanimous amnesty for a bunch of people, nor should they. Immigration laws exist for a reason, and though I believe the US immigration laws are fucked up as hell, they need to continue to exist (though in a more properly formatted manner). The idea that a Libertarian president would just come in and fix things with a wave of a magic wand is laughable and displays a complete lack of knowledge as to what a president does.

Not to mention, most libertarian ideas bit best into fantasy books and often don't apply to the real world.

And the DREAM Act failed not because of Obama but because of 2 Democrats from red states, and 3 Republicans who were for the DREAM Act until a Democratic president was for it. The most you could blame Obama for on it is that Republican politicians will do anything to make sure Obama is unsuccessful, even betray their own values. A reelection of Obama, with hopefully some more blue throughout the senate and congress could mean good news for me. A Libertarian would mean Congress could care less about him and there'd be no unity/push to get stuff done.

Amnesty? Congress passed it in 1986, and President Reagan signed it.

[Death Metal]

Mencken was a Rand crony. That's all you need to know about how much of a dunce he truly was.

[Terraveritas]

Gosh, you guys are right...

I just had an epiphany... H.L. Menchen sucked. Obama is great. Libertarianism, true libertarianism is bullshit, wow. All these years of reading, observing, and living in the USA, and watching it go to hell under the current two party system have been for nothing, because it isn't true. Wow!

Four more years of Obama, yeah. All the problems will be fixed for sure. *cough*, *cough!

A bunch of true believers we have here, lol.

[Frisivisia]

When unemployment is at 15% like it would have been if not for the stimulus and other bills, and when the Dow isn't 13,000, then we can say Obama failed.

Unemployment is over 15% in reality... the Dow going up means nothing... it went up and up just before the Great Depression.

Obama has done a great job. Just keep telling yourselves that...

Time will tell, who is correct.

Dow went up before the depression = Dow going up makes depression ?

You do realize that the Dow is the litmus test for business? Our economy isn't doing well, but President Obama pulled it out of cardiac arrest pretty damn well, avoiding the depression that austerity measures like the ones Johnson or Romney would have put in place would have caused and did cause in Europe. President Obama also granted amnesty to the DREAMers, struck down DADT, killed Bin Laden, and passed the health care bill that Bill Clinton didn't get done.
If not for republicans in the media constantly shouting about how terrible it is, people would wake up and realize that this President has gotten a lot of good stuff done, despite the most obstructionist reactionary congress we've ever seen.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Gosh, you guys are right...

I just had an epiphany... H.L. Menchen sucked. Obama is great. Libertarianism, true libertarianism is bullshit, wow. All these years of reading, observing, and living in the USA, and watching it go to hell under the current two party system have been for nothing, because it isn't true. Wow!

Four more years of Obama, yeah. All the problems will be fixed for sure. *cough*, *cough!

A bunch of true believers we have here, lol.

Magical Negro Fallacy.

Believe it or not, Captain Curmudgeon, we believe in the path, not the man. It's what he's actually asked us to do, believe in the path, not him.

[Frisivisia]

Gosh, you guys are right...

I just had an epiphany... H.L. Menchen sucked. Obama is great. Libertarianism, true libertarianism is bullshit, wow. All these years of reading, observing, and living in the USA, and watching it go to hell under the current two party system have been for nothing, because it isn't true. Wow!

Four more years of Obama, yeah. All the problems will be fixed for sure. *cough*, *cough!

A bunch of true believers we have here, lol.

Well, libertarianism is bullshit, and the world hasn't gone to hell. Jesus Christ, you libertarians sound like 14-year-olds who just got dumped by their first girlfriend when you talk about the world. I'm not saying Obama will fix all our problems, but he'll do a better job than Mitt Romney. I wish there was room for third parties, I could use a Social Democratic Party, but in reality, fighting the two-party system is Quixotic, and you have to realize that.

[Khadgar]

Gosh, you guys are right...

I just had an epiphany... H.L. Menchen sucked. Obama is great. Libertarianism, true libertarianism is bullshit, wow. All these years of reading, observing, and living in the USA, and watching it go to hell under the current two party system have been for nothing, because it isn't true. Wow!

Four more years of Obama, yeah. All the problems will be fixed for sure. *cough*, *cough!

A bunch of true believers we have here, lol.

It's amazing how resistant to learning you are.

[Death Metal]

Gosh, you guys are right...

I just had an epiphany... H.L. Menchen sucked. Obama is great. Libertarianism, true libertarianism is bullshit, wow.

Yep. Menchen was just another Ubermench baby, Obama has improved our country, and Libertarianism is a step towards economic and social slavery.

Four more years of Obama won't solve everything, but will do better than any possible candidate could. Also Paul, because he's not a possible candidate anymore, but he was the absolute shit worst of all the people who tried to run anyway.

[Enadail]

Bullshit. No congress would pass unanimous amnesty for a bunch of people, nor should they. Immigration laws exist for a reason, and though I believe the US immigration laws are fucked up as hell, they need to continue to exist (though in a more properly formatted manner). The idea that a Libertarian president would just come in and fix things with a wave of a magic wand is laughable and displays a complete lack of knowledge as to what a president does.

Not to mention, most libertarian ideas bit best into fantasy books and often don't apply to the real world.

And the DREAM Act failed not because of Obama but because of 2 Democrats from red states, and 3 Republicans who were for the DREAM Act until a Democratic president was for it. The most you could blame Obama for on it is that Republican politicians will do anything to make sure Obama is unsuccessful, even betray their own values. A reelection of Obama, with hopefully some more blue throughout the senate and congress could mean good news for me. A Libertarian would mean Congress could care less about him and there'd be no unity/push to get stuff done.

Amnesty? Congress passed it in 1986, and President Reagan signed it.

I know. I missed qualifying for that just barely. But I meant I don't think it would pass in today's congress. I apologize for the confusion.

---

Gosh, you guys are right...

I just had an epiphany... H.L. Menchen sucked. Obama is great. Libertarianism, true libertarianism is bullshit, wow. All these years of reading, observing, and living in the USA, and watching it go to hell under the current two party system have been for nothing, because it isn't true. Wow!

Four more years of Obama, yeah. All the problems will be fixed for sure. *cough*, *cough!

A bunch of true believers we have here, lol.

Obama isn't great. Hes just better then the alternative, by leaps and bounds. The idea that he sucks is stupid and ignores everything he has done for some magical fantasy situation where everything is fine.

Libertarianism doesn't suck, its just too idealistic to work. I challenge you to name 3 libertarian ideals different from the other parties that are practical and can't be ripped to shreds by anyone with basic knowledge of the topic.

The US hasn't gone to hell just because of the two party system. We have a culture of supremacy, even when its not earned. We fight stupid fights, be it literal in the form of wars, or just preening our feathers. We say everyone can be successful even if its not true, we value sports and entertainment over education and research. The two party system is a by-product of our failures; its not the cause.

And of course 4 more years of Obama won't fit everything. Only the most blinded and deluded supporters believe that, and they are rare and far between. Instead, we believe Obama is the best choice of the choices given. I find its the non-Democrats who have a tendency to paint the stroke much broader then it is. How many posts can you find on this thread, or on the most common posters history, that claim that Obama will solve everything? Other then yours of course.

[Frisivisia]

Gosh, you guys are right...

I just had an epiphany... H.L. Menchen sucked. Obama is great. Libertarianism, true libertarianism is bullshit, wow. All these years of reading, observing, and living in the USA, and watching it go to hell under the current two party system have been for nothing, because it isn't true. Wow!

Four more years of Obama, yeah. All the problems will be fixed for sure. *cough*, *cough!

A bunch of true believers we have here, lol.

It's amazing how resistant to learning you are.

To be fair, online forum gangbangs do not tend to sway people ideologically.

And I just used the word "gangbang" in the same sentence as the word "ideologically".

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Gosh, you guys are right...

I just had an epiphany... H.L. Menchen sucked. Obama is great. Libertarianism, true libertarianism is bullshit, wow. All these years of reading, observing, and living in the USA, and watching it go to hell under the current two party system have been for nothing, because it isn't true. Wow!

Four more years of Obama, yeah. All the problems will be fixed for sure. *cough*, *cough!

A bunch of true believers we have here, lol.

You do know how this is supposed to work, don't you? People on one side of an issue state a point and source their evidence, then people on the other side do the same, and it keeps going until November 6th, when it starts over with a new set of candidates.

People are saying that H.L. Mencken sucked, yes, at least in terms of his political viewpoints. Talented writer, horrible person in many ways. Go ahead and tell us why his viewpoints make sense.

Obama is great in comparison to the other candidates running.

Libertarianism, true libertarianism....you'll have to tell us what you mean by "true" libertarianism.

It isn't enough to say that the two-party system is the cause of things going to hell. It isn't even enough to show why this is the case. You have to show why your ideas are better.

Nobody thinks that all of the problems will be fixed in the next four years under Obama. They will, however, be objectively worse under Romney for all but a very small percentage of the American populace. How would Gary Johnson be preferable, especially considering that the GOP would still likely block every proposal except tax cuts?

Name-calling in a debate is counterproductive, at least name-calling to the others taking part. I'm not a "true believer". I do find the incumbent to be the best of the lot. Make your case rather than putting down the other person's case.

[The Emerald Dawn]

It's amazing how resistant to learning you are.

To be fair, online forum gangbangs do not tend to sway people ideologically.

And I just used the word "gangbang" in the same sentence as the word "ideologically".

And I applaud you for it.

[Death Metal]

And fuck it, I'm going to just outright say it:

The two party system by itself is fine.

The real problem is growing extremism, from all ends.

All extremes: Pure Left, Pure Right, Pure Free-Market Capitalist, Pure Marxist-Communist. All equally invalid and all should be shunned.

Centrism has historically been the route of success. The extremes pull everyone out of center, to the point where what makes a two-party system work- That is, the ability and willingness to compromise- A bogeyman to be avoided at all costs.

And THAT is the real problem.

[Frisivisia]

And fuck it, I'm going to just outright say it:

The two party system by itself is fine.

The real problem is growing extremism, from all ends.

All extremes: Pure Left, Pure Right, Pure Free-Market Capitalist, Pure Marxist-Communist. All equally invalid and all should be shunned.

Centrism has historically been the route of success. The extremes pull everyone out of center, to the point where what makes a two-party system work- That is, the ability and willingness to compromise- A bogeyman to be avoided at all costs.

And THAT is the real problem.

Except that there is no US Communist Party, and if there is, it's two teenagers in California. However, the GOP has been commandeered by free-market lunatics who believe poor people just aren't as good as rich people.

[Death Metal]

And fuck it, I'm going to just outright say it:

The two party system by itself is fine.

The real problem is growing extremism, from all ends.

All extremes: Pure Left, Pure Right, Pure Free-Market Capitalist, Pure Marxist-Communist. All equally invalid and all should be shunned.

Centrism has historically been the route of success. The extremes pull everyone out of center, to the point where what makes a two-party system work- That is, the ability and willingness to compromise- A bogeyman to be avoided at all costs.

And THAT is the real problem.

Except that there is no US Communist Party, and if there is, it's two teenagers in California. However, the GOP has been commandeered by free-market lunatics who believe poor people just aren't as good as rich people.

I'm not saying that all sides are equally complicit in the culture of extremism. I'm saying no side has clean hands.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Romney doesn't understand economics as well as he thinks he does. I just looked at what he says is his tax plan, and it is scary.

He says that closing "loopholes" without adding new taxes on the middle class or the rich while cutting spending will balance everything.

So...this is your "plan", guv? You're going to...do nothing?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

And fuck it, I'm going to just outright say it:

The two party system by itself is fine.

The real problem is growing extremism, from all ends.

All extremes: Pure Left, Pure Right, Pure Free-Market Capitalist, Pure Marxist-Communist. All equally invalid and all should be shunned.

Centrism has historically been the route of success. The extremes pull everyone out of center, to the point where what makes a two-party system work- That is, the ability and willingness to compromise- A bogeyman to be avoided at all costs.

And THAT is the real problem.

The pure left has been politically impotent since before Clinton got into office, and his election pushed them into the wilderness. The Democrats have moved significantly to the right since then, and the GOP has...done the same. Marxists and Communists exist on the internet, not in the halls of power. The Democrats have tried to compromise. Where the party of the 1970s and 1980s would have tried to push a higher tax rate on top earners with no spending cuts, they have now proposed a balance between the two. The GOP, with Grover Norquist leading the way, has absolutely insisted on no tax hikes on top earners, and for everything to be balanced with budget cuts, a plan that no economist outside of the Cato Institute or the Heritage Foundation finds the least bit feasible.