• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Stupidity of the American Voter?

Sure, cite the law(s) he's broken. Good luck in court.

Refusing to enforce our immigration laws for one. Using the IRS to target Tea Party groups....Fast as furious. I don't have time to list them all.
 
The hell it would. You do not know what red lining is. It was a racist business policy that would lay a map on the table and say "we will not give loans to anyone within these red lines. Basically carving out the black neighborhoods. Unlike what the right wing propaganda says, the anti-redline policy didn't force anyone to give loans to people who couldn't afford it. It said you couldn't use red lines as an excuse to deny someone a loan who is eminently qualified for that loan.

You're welcome for this enlightenment. You and your cohorts would have so much more credibility and intelligence had you followed evidence rather than starting with the political angle that "It's the gubamints fault!!!!1!111!!!.... now how can I prove this?" then fabricate lines to support your
conclusions.

You are clueless. Prior to the Community Re-investment act signed into law by Carter. Home loans were awarded based on credit history and income. Banks preferred that you actually could pay back the loan.
 
If you think I for one second care what the president does behind close doors sexually, you're insane. Infidelity is not the most becoming of traits, but it's not the worst either.
kma

Nice try...however the crime was not having illicit sex behind closed doors. It was perjuring himself in Grand Jury testimony. You and I would go to jail or prison for it.

And... get away with what? Benghazigate? Who gives a ****?

I do. A US ambassador was murdered as were three other Americans.
 
About whether or not he cheated on his wife. Yeah, no ****. Who wouldn't lie about that? LOL

Which part of "Perjury in grand jury testimony is a felony" do you not understand? It does not matter what the lie was about. It was a crime.
 
When you vote for the lesser of two evils, you're still voting for evil. When Americans wake up to that, we might see some actual change in how things are done in Washington.
When you vote for the greater of two evils, Obama, you are still voting for the (greater) evil.
 
The Democrat Party tag line "There is such a thing as a free lunch, and soon we are adding tacos to the menu."

The Republican Party tag line "Yes, we are liars and progressives too, but we are the lesser of two evils."

No thanks.
If your erection lasts longer than 4 hours you ought to see a doctor.
 
Much of that was clever refocusing by the Romney campaign to not totally alienate Republican small-government types.

Lastly, what you probably mean is "Healthcare ought to be a state issue, not a Federal one." Healthcare can be either, but you prefer it be closed to the purview of the state.
Which enumerated power in the US Constitution gives any branch of the federal government a national role?
 
The new Republican Party tag line should be "The Lesser of Two of Evils"

Not exactly sure what you are talking about, Romney would have made a great President due to his leadership skills and executive experience. The new Democrat Motto, For a massive Central govt, one size fits all, nanny state, vote Democrat. For states' rights vote Republican.
 
That's such a revisionist history. They tried to create a government with no strong federal presence, and it was a massive failure. True they wanted to give the states power, and provide checks and balances, but they clearly learned their lessons from the Articles of Confederation. A strong federal government was necessary to make us a country, and not a series of states.
Strong, but limited, in what it was allowed to do by a US Constitution. Why do some of you always miss the second, most important part?
 
I don't you know that you can have any idea what the founding fathers would have thought about health care.

Our Founders created a part time Congress and forced the Congressional Representatives to go home and live under the laws they created. That means states' rights were prevalent and not the massive central govt we have today. I would have thought that basic civics and history would have told you that. The country was built on personal responsibility and risk taking. Healthcare is a personal responsibility.
 
Because they can get low wage workers, often illegals. Yes.

Really? You think Fortune 500 employ illegals? You think Fortune 500 companies pay low wages? You really don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. What is happening in TX is millions have moved here in the last decade and apparently liberal arrogance says they moved here for low wages, no insurance, poor environmental record, and poor education for their kids? Do you realize that Gruber was talking about liberals when he was talking about stupidity?
 
Not exactly sure what you are talking about, Romney would have made a great President due to his leadership skills and executive experience. The new Democrat Motto, For a massive Central govt, one size fits all, nanny state, vote Democrat you stupid voter. For states' rights vote Republican.

There! Fixed it for ya.
 
The fact of the matter is that this law was rammed through on Christmas eve at midnight, with a straight party line vote, by having to actually bribe its own caucus members through promises of individual deals to individual congresscritters to get the vote over the top...We conservatives said from the beginning that it was a lie. Now we've been proven correct, and what do liberals do? Well, what they always do, move the goal posts, lie some more, and when that fails, start in with the snark, and call names...

Why anyone would allow these reprobates in any position of power is beyond me at this point.

And these are the same people who feel they are smart enough to change or ignore the the US Constitution as well as the responsibilities of the House and Senate. Gruber was being too kind.
 
Well said. And the country is worse for having elected him.

Thinking back in history, which other 'leaders' had the same style and substance? Can you think of them?
I think this may very well be why we shouldn't elect charismatic 'empty shirts' to leadership positions, and why sometimes they do get elected.



Very much on point, the core of the problem is the fact the American people elected an ad campaign; star making machinery, Madison Avenue convinced most of America that, yes ladies and gentlemen, it's true....cigarettes cure cancer.

I saw him as an image, a card board cut out who wouldn't dare speak without a teleprompter, with an amazing speechifying ability and nice suits. Even his hype was hyped. I wrote, comparing him to past presidents before the election, that where Kennedy [to whom he had compared himself earlier] claimed "I am an idealist with no illusions", Obama had shown he was an illusion with no ideas.

It is the result of several years of erosion of actual principles, the nation, and soon ours I am afraid has stropped looking at character, stopped examining the issues and suffers with 144 character over-simplifications of such simple topics as the difference between deficit "reduction" and debt reduction. Decisions are made based on what a made up talking head says, even if it is Saturday Night Live! It has to be true, it's on TV.

I believe it stared with Kennedy, most observers thought Nixon won the first televised debate, I recall how pissed off was my father, the loyal UAW tool and die worker..."that union busting bastard" was, I think a tame example. But then the pundits realized that Kennedy had "won" on appearance, Nixon had the "five o'clock shadow"
Carter again, all image and no substance, wow, he walked to the White House after being inaugurate....oh and wore sweaters...
The Reagan, a beautiful mix of showman, pitchman, and experience politician. So few Americans realize he cause a student revolt in collage as student council president, went on to help improve an actors and film workers union all the while a card carrying member of the Democratic Party.

However, not one of them, even Nixon, ever brought the level of arrogance to the office as has Obama. Believing his own hype, he saw himself as invulnerable and strutted into the White House, put his feat up and declared every Republican on the planet to be his "enemies". Where Clinton had to work with a core of obstinate Republicans, Obama created them, and didn't learn when the electorate sent him a message in 2010 and 2012 to cool it and start working with the people THEY chose for you to work with. Instead he unleashed Harry Reid and the "nuclear option"

having read the biographies of Eisenhower, several on Kennedy [he was a terrible president], Carter, and Reagan, I am struck by the relationships those men had with their adversaries, Tip O'Neil and Ronnie were fast friends, Reagan respected him greatly. Eisenhower, the man who pulled together the egos of generals from a list of nations, did the same with Democrats, he even visited some of them at home.

What I have seen of this guy is any 'meetings' seem to be more like lectures, he treats Republican congressmen like second class citizens, which says a lot about what he thinks of Americans who don't vote for him.

What he missed with his so heralded education was that even Caesar got knifed in the back
 
Our Founders created a part time Congress and forced the Congressional Representatives to go home and live under the laws they created. That means states' rights were prevalent and not the massive central govt we have today. I would have thought that basic civics and history would have told you that. The country was built on personal responsibility and risk taking. Healthcare is a personal responsibility.

So you vote Republican because there's no career politicians on that side? :lamo:lamo
 
So you vote Republican because there's no career politicians on that side? :lamo:lamo

I vote Republican because they are closer to my Conservative Ideology than today's Democrat Party. I won't waste my vote on a third party candidate and since the only perfect candidate is me and I am not running the only vote that makes any sense is Republican
 
Where Clinton had to work with a core of obstinate Republicans, Obama created them

As if the repubs were *ever* going to work with the 1st black president. No way in hell that was gonna happen, and don't pretend the senate has had a higher approval rate than bubonic plague during obama's presidency. What is he supposed to learn from 2012 either like you claim, when he was *reelected*? How is that a message of discontent?
 
As if the repubs were *ever* going to work with the 1st black president. No way in hell that was gonna happen, and don't pretend the senate has had a higher approval rate than bubonic plague during obama's presidency. What is he supposed to learn from 2012 either, when he was *reelected*? How is that a message of discontent?
Why mention "Black"? Are you one of those who believes anyone who opposes Obama's policies is 'racist'?
 
I can tell without even reading any but the last page that "stupid american voter" = "those who don't vote for the party i did." Given the prevailing animosity towards the state of politics, i try to be consistent and dismiss all who vote for *either* party or *any* incumbents as stupid.
 
Back
Top Bottom