Watch the video… 
How could you not vote for this guy??? This is REAL change. 
As sombody who is looking at this from the outside I appreciate your view. I don’t like either side but you are right when you say the Obama supporters are SMUG. My facebook is only filled with anti-Mitt people melting.
I, too, appreciate your thoughts ICC. Of course, people always think the side they don’t agree with seems smug. I definitely see Romney as smug. Ryan seems as smug as can be. GW Bush was the absolute smugest… and I’m sure a person or two on the right found Slick Willy kinda smug, no?
A person whom one does not agree with that exudes confidence will always be perceived as smug.
But, again, I respect all your opinions. I think you’re all completely nuts-- seriously-- but I respect you and I’m sure you think I’m nuts too, so hey… it’s all perception. Since I would have to El Bastarde style multiquote about a million things I disagree with within ICC’s and Goldy’s posts, I’ll just offer my respect and agree to disagree (and maybe wonder a little why you can’t read graphs or charts… 
).
I can’t vote for GJ (or Jill Stein, who I apparently agree with on more issues than any of them) because I’m not willing to toss my vote to someone that cannot win.
Anyways, good stuff guys. I’m glad people care about it, even if they feel differently than I do. We have it damn good in the US and the UK and, regardless of this outcome, it will probably stay that way for a good while. I have been to a fuck-ton of countries in the last couple of years on pretty much every continent and I am constantly reminded how lucky I am to live on the left-coast of the United States of America.
I always appreciate hearing the thoughts of those in other countries, and I tend to agree with you on a lot of things lately, Glenn, this being one of them.
Dooj, the problem with graphs like the one you posted is that they only tell a very small part of the story. There are a shitload of different economics theories that run the gamut from Keynesian to Austrian, but if you even begin to read about these things, you’ll find solid evidence to support the fact that economic decisions made during one administration can carry over years down the road. The argument has been made that Clinton’s economic policies contributed to the eventual crash because he was running surpluses while not enough private sector businesses were running down their savings. I’m not adept enough with macroeconomic theory to know what I think about that, but it goes to show you that saying “The economy is better under Democrats” is a grossly oversimplified statement.
That said, since I am not an economist and only dabble in macro theory, I choose to look at the overall big picture from a simplified, common-sense perspective. Common sense dictates that running a 16 trillion dollar deficit is reckless, plain and simple. And the plan laid out by the President does not attempt to reconcile that by making difficult cuts. Ryan’s plan, while it has some unpleasantness about it, is simply a far more responsible, realistic way of looking at it. The way we’re doing things now reminds me of my dear hippie friends in Asheville who would never, ever think about the consequences of things, and always strove for a blissful, Utopian “now”. These ideas being put forth by the Democrats are beautiful ideas in theory, and they seem to benefit everyone. That should be your first hint that they simply will not work.
Obviously, politics is about more than economics, but in an economy like this one, economics trumps all in my book. As I see it, the number one problem we are faced with is reigning in our debt and fixing our economy, and that is what the Romney ticket is based on. The Obama ticket has spent far, far too much time distracting from that by talking about social issues that, in my opinion, can wait until we’ve fixed this mess we made.
That’s basically my stance on the thing. I hope it doesn’t sound like regurgitating conservative talking points, because that certainly is not what it is. I thought it up all by myself. 
It is attitudes like this that is the reason they can not win.
The fact that the majority of the country thinks it is a “two-party race” is fucked.
^The real problem is that the majority of this country doesn’t ‘think’ at all about candidates and simply votes for the one party they’ve always voted for because ‘that’s their team’.
Unfortunately it will take some ‘superhero’ candidate that can overpower the media to overcome the current biases in our political system in order to lay waste to the two party system.
If a guy like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs wanted to spend a billion of his own dollars to become president on a third party platform, I think either could’ve be elected easily. But as I said in an earlier post, people like this are smart enough to know that they wouldn’t want the job, ever.
^^^Appreciated… but, yeah, I think we all kinda see what we wanna see and don’t see what we don’t wanna see. At least, that’s how the posts in this thread (mine and yours included) read to me. In the end, I posted everything I needed to post before this thread even started. 
^Agreed, Bill.
^The anti gay thing really gets me. I have too many friends that are affected by this part of our governmental laws to really justify voting for someone who wants to oppress people. In Indiana, we have a guy running for Gov. that wants to put an amendment into the Indiana Constitution stating marriage is between a “Man and a Woman”. The whole Arizona immigration law falls into the same category for me. I really will never back someone whose ideology is oppressive to any people.
I really would like it if goldphish or whoever else in here that really is supporting Romney to explain your rationale for doing so. There are very intelligent people on both sides and I really do want to understand why people feel the opposite as I do. It’s hard for me to wrap my head around it simply because of who I am as a person, but I would love for you to tell me why and at least give me a good idea why you support him. All I see from people I know is a bunch of Obama bashing and no real logic. So if you have the time if you wouldn’t mind just filling me in on your ideas it honestly would be greatly appreciated it. No matter who wins the election, 45%+ are going to disagree and as a nation we have to move forward and not forget that a lot of people disagree with us. The best way to make things better is by taking a look at both sides and trying to find a middle ground that will essentially move all of us forward, not backwards.
Thanks in advance if you do post that gold, its much appreciated 
The logic is fine in what he said. The current way our two party system is set up dictates this. The time to make a change is not in the month before an election, but in the 4 years leading up to it. More people have to push for a more party system, and vote that way in other elections, such as the House/Senate. I agree with Stein more than Obama, but is it logical to vote a 18% gap between the two, or vote a 67% gap between the two candidates that actually have a chance to win? There is a bigger difference between Romney/Obama than the Green party and Dem’s for me so I have to vote for the side that actually has a chance at winning the election and is very closely aligned with my ideology.
^^Read the thread…
and THIS!!!
Yeah, to be fair… I think they’ve explained themselves pretty well, whether or not we agree with them.
Col Phorbin read ICC’s and Ship of Fools latest posts for “clues”.
But here’s a quicky. Just now I saw an “Obama approved” ad bashing Romney for supporting capital gains taxes… putting him down for “supporting lower taxes for him and higher taxes for us”. If you go back to the previous page I posted an article that explains capital gains and why that tax rate is less. I don’t support the liberal spin on the issue nor do I support policies demonizing capitalism, rich folks while making the middle class out to be victims. I disagree because that kind of policy/ideology lean towards socialism/communism. I have nothing against that but I don’t support those views or policies. It’s that simple. Do you know where you stand? I’d be willing to guess your ideology falls somewhere in that camp… again thats cool, that is what makes our country great, we can have opposing views, opinions and all co-exist. But if you want to understand… well there is only so much i can do.
Also, I forgot to add that if I voted for someone that is willing to drill our shores, it would go against everything my wife has worked tirelessly for over the last decade and I refuse to do that to her, let alone our shores themselves.
Gay marriage, abortion and legalization of drugs are non issues. No president is going to single-handedly change any of these issues in this country, especially not if they want re-election once they are in office. So worrying about Romney and Ryan because of their personal stances on theses types of issues is of very low priority in my mind. It will take acts of congress to even attempt changes to Roe vWade for instance and that will never happen.
What is of importance is the debt, the economy and the rising tensions in the world over many issues and their ability to either maintain or improve these things. Under Obama for the past four years, things have deteriorated in these areas. Everyone thought that having a less hawkish president would improve our standing in the world and it really hasn’t. We are no more respected than we were under Bush, and as a matter of fact we’re even less so because Obama has managed to alienate Israel, our only ally in the Middle East.
Don’t need to talk about the debt and the economy because these problems are evident. I can’t buy the sales pitch of a guy who’s has had four years to remediate the problems even a little bit, but has failed miserably. You don’t insititute a new national health care program in the midst of economic turmoil and expect things to get better. The thinking is flawed and so was the way he and the democratic congress passed the law in record time without intelligent review and discussion. These policies and methods of governing have scared all of the major and minor companies and corporation to become ultra cautious in expanding their businesses and the wealthy to ditch their money into investment vehicles that will keep if from losses inherent in the current plans.
The wealthy people and corporations became so because they are smarter than politicians. You don’t grow the economy by forcing them to invest elsewhere. You work at doing the things that will make them want to expand here. Obama has not accomplished this, and that has mostly to do with his lack of experience and knowledge in the business world. The man never had the experience to be president, no leadership or business background. Sure he was a Harvard progressive well versed in forwarding social changes that certainly the country needs. But these things cannot impose strain on the national debt in a time like this, and he failed to understand this mostly because he had to ‘repay’ his supporters in some way as to keep them aligned.
I don’t know if Romney’s plans, if he has anything that well defined yet, will resolve our economic problems, but I know for sure Obama’s made things worse. Romney has had business and government managerial experience, and seems to have a much better handle on the data than the president does off the cuff. This was apparent in both debates.
These are the reasons, my dear Col, that I’m leaning toward Romney at the moment. This and the fact that if, gawd forbid, something happens to Obama, I DO NOT want a President Biden. The man has been losing it for many years now. As inexperienced as Ryan is, he’s a detailed guy who would not attempt to pontificate his way through his responsibilities the way Biden does.
Completely disagree on the social end fone… But gotta jump on a plane and keep the old economy going! 
^^Great overview Bill. I approve that message.
You guys on the right have done an exceptional job stating your views while avoiding so much of the kool-aid talking points, I really appreciate it! Seriously. I have a better understanding of the “other side” thanks to you guys, Edward, Bill, Glenn, Jeff.
I also wanted to quickly speak to the idea that we simply have differing ideologies, and that I disagree with that assessment. I’d offer that instead we have the same ideals, but differing takes on the facts and on reality, what is and what isn’t, what works and what doesn’t.
For instance, I think we all believe in hard work and justice, and nobody likes the idea of being taken advantage of. But the left thinks the rich are taking advantage; the right thinks it’s the poor. To paint a broad-brush example.
My perspective is more about that I have an inherent suspicion of the GOP, and I recognize that deep down I don’t trust their agenda. To me their platform and rhetoric sound regressive and ignorant. While Bill, for instance, might not agree that the health care issue is a priority in such an economic mess, I’d volley back that neither are two wars, you know? It’s perspective.
I’m disappointed too, that Obama’s administration seems so freaking unproductive. Hard for me to accept that the only answer can be that he’s inept, though, when there are gigantic factors at play that are not to be dismissed.
The economy is at the center of my concerns as well, and I absolutely have become convinced that the wealth divide is an unjust travesty, an abomination - a blemish on our society I guess I’d say. From my perspective, the way money has evolved over time has just turned into a mess of injustice. I believe the wealth gap between the rich and poor will be exacerbated by the Romney ticket, and I think that’s a huge problem we need to solve as a society.
If we could end the wars we’d be gettin’ somewhere with regard to taxation and the deficit. I think it’s kinda laughable that the poor and middle class are in their situation because they’re all lazy. If laziness were so rampantly problematic, we wouldn’t have a lack of jobs, we’d have too many jobs, wouldn’t we? My contention is that we can just work less! How bout a 30 hour work day? I don’t know. Seems to me our system is just crazy in the first place. Money doesn’t adequately represent the value of people’s time and work as it should, and so how do you make it just? That’s partly why we tax the shit out of each other, isn’t it?
I don’t know why I’m rambling on, I literally just wanted to thank you righties for being so cool and so clear.
Thought both men saw a withdrawal from Afghanistan as the goal, so I didn’t raise the issue for comparison. Revision of the nation’s health care system is certainly more important than having the US mediating in the internal struggles of other countries, so please don’t draw the wrong conclusion. But timing is everything, and the manner in which the healthcare reform act was rammed through congress at a time when the country was going through a major financial crisis seemed much more like partisan politics than it did intelligent leadership.
My personal positions are conservative when it comes to finances and the size of government, but liberal when it comes to social programs and the need for the governments, federal, state and local to stay out of the individual affairs of its population.
And although I agree with you that if we could end all wars, we might get somewhere with the deficit, but who drove planes into the world trade center, and how much of a defensive response is enough. What is the cost of taking the stick out of your attacker’s hands, and how can you know when enough is enough?
I believe we’re done in Afghanistan, and should have never gone into Iraq in the first place. But I’m not so sure of redirection of all DoD money into social programs and deficit reduction is quite an intelligent thing to do either. A good leader will have a grasp of the balance of these things. I didn’t see leadership in the previous four years. Am not thoroughly convinced either candidate can give it to us over the next four.
Me neither fone. I agree with that post. Wasn’t trying to actually argue that bit about health reform & wars, just making an example of what I see as a difference in perceptions, understandings. I would guess we’re all for small government and conservative spending, and we all feel like our social obligations are important. We just can’t agree on how we perceive reality, problems, would-be solutions.