Obama or Romney ?

[mdude77]

As stated in my other post, the problem is the mentality of the individuals.  Politics is the problem.  If you had selfless individuals, they'd be statesmen.  Politicians = money and lies.  Statesmen = serving the country.

Find me an election process that selects for selfless individuals, rather than those best at lying through their teeth, and I will heartily support that governing system. Until then, I'll stick to market anarchy.

Today's elections are rigged.  At the national level (US) you're told you have two choices, one clown, or another, both from competing circuses run by the same corporation.  The joke's on anyone who participates!

It's all money and power related of course.

M

[notme]

I'm not the one claiming this would "change the face of government". If you think it won't make any difference, then you agree with my criticism.

Not really.  My way would decrease the likelihood of career politicians getting in. 

Those that are wealthy are probably the brightest and most capable of running for public office.  They wouldn't be there to increase their wallet size, which should weed out a lot of the miscreants we have today.

Why wouldn't they be there to increase their wallet size? I think a lot of wealthy people join government for just that reason, expecting that they'll have much more lucrative careers when they leave government. (That doesn't always make them bad people or bad politicians, of course.)

All reducing politician's salaries will do is make it harder for people who have more financial obligations and less personal wealth to enter politics. If you think that's a good thing, then you're welcome to advocate for lower salaries for politicians. But it won't make politicians more honest and could do the reverse.

As stated in my other post, the problem is the mentality of the individuals.  Politics is the problem.  If you had selfless individuals, they'd be statesmen.  Politicians = money and lies.  Statesmen = serving the country.

M

If career politicians are an issue, why not just add term limits?  Limiting our representatives to those with independent (or family) wealth is not a good plan IMO.

Speaking of representation, did you know the house of representatives used to grow with the population?  There used to be an upper limit of 60k people per representative.  In order to be that close to direct representation today would require 30,000 representatives rather than the measly 435 we have today.  It seems to me that this is why only the powerful can influence politics... each representative has too much to handle to deal with the issues of the average constituent.

[timeshareafrica]

Im an aussie so I just watch the show from the outside, but Id say Obama could say nothing for the next ~2+ months and still win - Romney is just so... ugh.

Are this free elections you talking about, what is the chance of a 50/50 votes like we had it with Bush first election?
If we talk statistics the chance are this elections were 95% rigged.

 

[CoinDiver]

I may very well end up voting for Romney. As a hardcore anarcho-capitalist, that's hard to admit. Mainly, I see opportunity to make money off the public perception of the economy in a Romney term. Secondly, I like some of Romney's rhetoric. He is at least talking about some capitalist ideals, and decentralization of government.

That being said, they're both puppets. It's far too late to recover. Hyperinflation is the only way out.

[C10H15N]

I'm hedged financially. An economic screwing of the middle class is going to happen no matter who is elected. I'm going for Obama since I refuse to go back to the 1950s on human/gay/women's rights.

[notme]

I'm hedged financially. An economic screwing of the middle class is going to happen no matter who is elected. I'm going for Obama since I refuse to go back to the 1950s on human/gay/women's rights.

That's his strongest point for me as well.  Romney can school him in domestic economics, but his economic approach to esp. China would be a disaster.

Romney: Hey China, quit printing currency... it's not fair.
China: You first asshole.

[RicRock]

Today's elections are rigged.  At the national level (US) you're told you have two choices, one clown, or another, both from competing circuses run by the same corporation.  The joke's on anyone who participates!

It's all money and power related of course.

M

QFT

[CoinDiver]

I'm going for Obama since I refuse to go back to the 1950s on human/gay/women's rights.

Yeah, better to kill Americans with drones without trial.

[Atlas]

I'm hedged financially. An economic screwing of the middle class is going to happen no matter who is elected. I'm going for Obama since I refuse to go back to the 1950s on human/gay/women's rights.

What restrictions will Obama reduce for gays and women?

[C10H15N]

Continue to refuse to enforce and work for the elimination of DOMA.  Most importantly, chose the next two or three supreme court justices.

[CoinDiver]

...gays and women?

It is amazing to me that the country can be $16,000,000,000,000 in debt, and the big stories of the year are Chick-fil-a and Planned Parenthood.

"Pay no attention to the impending doom, watch these dancing monkeys!"

[Atlas]

...gays and women?

It is amazing to me that the country can be $16,000,000,000,000 in debt, and the big stories of the year are Chick-fil-a and Planned Parenthood.

"Pay no attention to the impending doom, watch these dancing monkeys!"

It's very intentional and people buy into it. Divide and conquer.

[C10H15N]

...gays and women?

It is amazing to me that the country can be $16,000,000,000,000 in debt, and the big stories of the year are Chick-fil-a and Planned Parenthood.

"Pay no attention to the impending doom, watch these dancing monkeys!"

It becomes much more personal (and important) when you're one of the monkeys.  I can understand throwing the gays under the bus from a percentage of population standpoint, but women? The neocons have lost their mind. 

[bitcoinbear]

...gays and women?

It is amazing to me that the country can be $16,000,000,000,000 in debt, and the big stories of the year are Chick-fil-a and Planned Parenthood.

"Pay no attention to the impending doom, watch these dancing monkeys!"

That equates to about 50,000 usd per person in the US. 

[Atlas]

...gays and women?

It is amazing to me that the country can be $16,000,000,000,000 in debt, and the big stories of the year are Chick-fil-a and Planned Parenthood.

"Pay no attention to the impending doom, watch these dancing monkeys!"

It becomes much more personal (and important) when you're one of the monkeys.  I can understand throwing the gays under the bus from a percentage of population standpoint, but women? The neocons have lost their mind.  

Nobody is throwing women under the bus. Denying women an entitlement to contraception is not oppression in any sense of the word. What is oppressive is increasing health care costs by making everyone pay for something by government decree.

[CoinDiver]

It becomes much more personal (and important) when you're one of the monkeys.  I can understand throwing the gays under the bus from a percentage of population standpoint, but women? The neocons have lost their mind. 

The state has no business in marriage. Period. I will not support any legislation that defines anything to do with marriage, as it will only legitimize the states domain over it.

I'm not sure how you think women are under attack by anyone. Abortion is a matter of belief of when a person/body/fetus has enough rights to be protected against destruction. I don't fault either side for their belief in the matter.

The whole "war on women" is a fabrication. It's playing to the emotional nature or women. Don't fall for it.

[C10H15N]

That equates to about 50,000 usd per person in the US. 

I can cover my part, how about you!   

Actually, over 40% of that debt is owed to American citizens and corporations (no, they are not the same).  Love my T-Bills 

[CoinDiver]

Actually, over 40% of that debt is owed to American citizens and corporations (no, they are not the same).  Love my T-Bills 

You do know it's a negative equity investment, right?

[C10H15N]

Of course.  Backed by my faith in the American taxpayers.

[bitcoinbear]

Actually, over 40% of that debt is owed to American citizens and corporations (no, they are not the same).  Love my T-Bills 

You do know it's a negative equity investment, right?

This means the return interest rate is lower than the rate of inflation, so it is worth less at the end than at the beginning, right? Why would anybody buy such a thing?