• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Ten reasons why I am not voting for Romney

IndepCentristMA - You're right; only a small handful of states decide elections. Some of you would be wise to realize that, and be a little nicer to those of us swing staters who are undecided and likely know many other undecided voters. :cool: Though, I've pretty much 100% decided I will not vote for Obama, I've declared in the past I won't vote for someone, and change my mind. There is one event that I can think of that would push me to vote for Obama. I admit I can be mean when I'm pushed, but otherwise I'm a nice, moderate person who changes on issues and open to changing her mind. That is why I like the political climate I'm in; people have strong beliefs but also are open-minded to change - to change on issues, to change whole political parties. That's partly why several people here have rubbed me the wrong way, and, yeah, their tactics of gang-banging and baiting, too. Really doesn't do much for their side. They're probably turning off way more people than they know. Romney should be paying some of them, lol!

I wish I was in that position... I'm a centrist from MA, and every vote I've cast in a Presidential Election is essentially a wasted vote.

I think there are a lot of moderate democrats in your same shoes right now. Average Americans who are onto the false prophet that Obama portrayed himself to be. They aren't completely sold on Romney, but they don't like Obama.

As a major supporter of Romney, for the fact that when he ran Massachusetts, he ran it with a results oriented inclusionary approach, which brought all sides together (and I dont mean bi-partisan, I mean he brought business professionals, non-profit organizations, watch dogs, etc.) to make the right decision, then went after that doggedly to get it accomplished... I personally feel, that these middle ground Republicans and Democrats will flock to the polls, voting their wallets, and voting their conscience, by supporting Romney as the more qualified candidate for fixing the finances of the US Govt. However, there are going to be some very targeted battles in several key swing states, which will likely go back and forth down to election day, based on biased media report battles from each side...

You will be the target of those campaigns. You will be among those who get to decide the election.
 
Are you serious? Hitler was an atheist. He hated Catholics. He put many in the chambers for standing up for Jews. Try again!
No he was a christian and he was explicit on why he committed the holocaust. He says he was a christian so he is christian.

"Therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's work." Mein kampf
 
Also, 99percenter, not a great debate tactic to toss out ridiculous crap when you don't have any other recourse. It's best to just keep quiet, dear. Schools as employers house 100x more pedophiles than the Church. Also, as far as the Church and Hitler, um, the Catholic Church did more than any other institution to try to stop the Nazis. Our last Pope was recently recognized by a Jewish group for it, actually.

The catholic church approved of nazism. Let's not try to rewrite history.

Hitler%20and%20church%202.jpg
 
None of the nazis were lutherans? stalin was an atheist or a closet Russian orthodox, Mao?
its silly to blame a faith for one of the dickheads who claimed to be a member

Yes some of them were lutheran but christian none the less. The holocaust was one of the most heinous crimes ever committed by Christianity.
 
Those are good reasons. However, my number one reason is I think he'll start an unnecessary war with Iran that will end up destroying our country as we know it.

ten reasons why I will vote for Romney

4) I oppose socialism-universal healthcare is socialism

An oft-repeated myth. Universal health care simply means everyone has it. It could be achieved via socialism or via other means. The system in Great Britain actually is socialist since the government owns it. However, the one in Switzerland is not. They use private non-profit companies regulated by the government. That's not socialist. That's not my opinion; it's a fact.
 
Yes some of them were lutheran but christian none the less. The holocaust was one of the most heinous crimes ever committed by Christianity.

what faith are you may I ask? we can find most groups responsible for some nastiness
 
Are you serious? Hitler was an atheist. He hated Catholics. He put many in the chambers for standing up for Jews. Try again!

Re-learn your history. Hitler grew up Catholic and was not ex-communicated in his lifetime.
 
Those are good reasons. However, my number one reason is I think he'll start an unnecessary war with Iran that will end up destroying our country as we know it.



An oft-repeated myth. Universal health care simply means everyone has it. It could be achieved via socialism or via other means. The system in Great Britain actually is socialist since the government owns it. However, the one in Switzerland is not. They use private non-profit companies regulated by the government. That's not socialist. That's not my opinion; it's a fact.

Odd part is romney and obama have the same health care plan.
 
Odd part is romney and obama have the same health care plan.

Exactly. When Romney does it, he's creatively regulating industry to cause near-universal coverage. When Obama does it he's doing some kinda commie plot.
 
Exactly. When Romney does it, he's creatively regulating industry to cause near-universal coverage. When Obama does it he's doing some kinda commie plot.

This is a republican plan. I wanted single payer. Some how they turned this plan into socialism. And the worst part is they dont even have anything to replace it with.
 
Bump for ICMA...

Romney has said he would not increase spending unless growth increased revenue in order to create that spending... So the whole premise of that argument is flawed...
.....Link.


NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Mitt Romney is campaigning on a platform that emphasizes less spending, smaller deficits and renewed fiscal responsibility.
But in one budget area, Romney is running the opposite direction. The former Massachusetts governor wants to increase defense spending by leaps and bounds. By one estimate, additional spending would exceed $2 trillion over the next decade.

Romney's plan calls for linking the Pentagon's base budget to Gross Domestic Product, and allowing the military to spend at least $4 dollars out of every $100 the American economy produces.
With the Pentagon's base budget -- which does not include war costs -- forecast to hit 3.5% of GDP in 2013, a jump to 4% would mean an increase of around $100 billion dollars in defense spending in 2013.
The additional spending really piles up in future years.
Compared to the Pentagon's current budget, Romney's plan would lead to $2.1 trillion in additional spending over the next ten years, according to an analysis conducted for CNNMoney by Travis Sharp, a budget expert at the Center for a New American Security.
And that number assumes a gradual increase to 4% of GDP. The additional spending would hit $2.3 trillion over a decade if the Pentagon's budget were to immediately jump to 4% of GDP.
Sharp said the United States could certainly ramp up spending to meet Romney's target. But the bigger question, he said, is whether the investment would be worth the cost.
"Romney's plan might reduce military risk in some areas," Sharp said. "But you can never eliminate all the risk -- no matter how much you spend."
Romney appears willing to foot the bill. "This will not be a cost-free process," his campaign website says. "We cannot rebuild our military strength without paying for it."
The fiscal picture
Romney's plan to spend more at the Pentagon adds yet another layer of complexity to a set of proposals that would remake the fiscal landscape.
Romney has proposed a slew of tax cuts, and plans to cap federal spending at 20% of GDP. But in both cases, the Romney campaign hasn't fully explained how those provisions will be paid for.
The lack of detail means that Romney's claim of moving toward a balanced budget requires a great deal of trust.
Defense spending: Slaying the sacred cow
"Romney has listed a few specific cuts he would make in discretionary spending, but they are a fraction of the extra defense spending he proposes," said Jeffrey Vanke, a senior policy analyst at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Other budget experts expressed similar concerns about Romney's proposal, including Peter Singer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, who said the plan for additional spending does not "reflect fiscal reality."
4% for Freedom
The 4% idea is not a new one. Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen have endorsed the idea. And conservatives have occasionally used the slogan "4% for Freedom."

But some analysts questioned the wisdom of tying military spending to economic production.
"GDP rises and falls. Do you really want your defense budget falling in a recession?" said Todd Harrison, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
"Spending should be determined by the security environment -- not the size of your economy," he suggested.
Asked if the military needs to spend 4% of GDP, Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress who advocates for lower military spending, said "of course not."
"These artificial ways to decide the defense budget make no sense," Korb said. "And if you pursue this, how are you going to balance the budget?"
Politics of defense budgeting
On the campaign trail, Romney frequently says that the Navy has fewer ships now than in 1917, and that the Air Force is smaller than any time since 1947. The additional funding would provide funds to bolster the fleets, Romney says.
The anecdote is largely dismissed by military experts as irrelevant, since today's Navy and Air Force are the most advanced and versatile on the planet. Non-partisan fact checkers have looked on the claim, and its associated insinuations, with scorn.
The $1 million soldier: What's wrong with how we budget war
But Romney is not alone in his desire to spend more on the military. In Congress, the Republican nominee is likely to find many allies, especially conservative lawmakers from districts with military installations.
But with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan winding down, there is an emerging coalition of liberal Democrats and Tea Party Republicans who have other priorities.
A Romney campaign official told CNNMoney that "reversing Obama-era defense cuts" is the "first step toward the 4 percent GDP benchmark."
It's true that Obama policies have slowed the rate of growth at the Pentagon. But spending on defense is still projected to grow over the next half decade.
"The Pentagon is in no danger of losing its pre-eminence under the current budget plan," Sharp said. "Romney's plan would make the military even more pre-eminent, but you can never eliminate all the risk no matter how much you spend."
Defense spending to spike by $2.1 trillion under Romney - May. 10, 2012
 
Re-learn your history. Hitler grew up Catholic and was not ex-communicated in his lifetime.

He did not identify as Catholic, and IDC what he grew up as. Irrelevent. If he didn't identify that way, he's not one. Nice use of technicalities. Only an atheist would say that. Also, to hate religion so much, you should learn more about it. I'm quite sure few churches would recognize Hitler as a Catholic at that time. He certainly wasn't publicly recognized as one during the Nazi era. Anyway, like Turtle said, why is his religion relevant at all esp since he did not identify as Catholic at that time? Also, on pedophilia - schools house the most pedophiles of any institution by far. Why aren't you crusading against schools if you care so much about pedophilia?
 
Last edited:
100% Godless

ah the same "faith" as Mao, pol pot, and stalin

say 60 million dead bodies attributed to the 100% Godless

your denomination has the papists and protestants beat by a couple nations's worth of dead bodies
 
1. He wants to repeal all sorts of environmental protection legislation
2. He wants to increase the already way too high defense budget
3. He panders to whoever is in the room. He contradicts himself all the time in order to tell people what they want to hear.
4. He is against universal healthcare
5. He is against gay marriage and has conservative stances on other social issues
6. He supports the prison at Guantanamo Bay and thinks it should be expanded
7. He tried to reinstate the death penalty in Massachusetts when he was governor
8. He was against the building of a wind farm in Cape Cod because it would create a "visual detriment", but supports allowing oil drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge in Alaska
9. His views on foreign policy are incredibly outdated. He thinks that Russia is still our #1 geopolitical enemy.
10. His ideas on how the tax code should be changed would favor the wealthiest Americans while hurting everyone else

I think wind farms are pretty and interesting to look at... :shrug:
 
I think wind farms are pretty and interesting to look at... :shrug:


the kennedys sure didn't want those things cluttering up their pristine ocean view

there is a stretch on the highway that runs from Indy to Purdue and up to Chicago that as about 450 or so of those suckers-we go up to Rensselear Indiana (NW Corner) every summer and each year there are more

some say those things are hell on distracted birds though
 
He did not identify as Catholic, and IDC what he grew up as. Irrelevent. If he didn't identify that way, he's not one. Nice use of technicalities. Only an atheist would say that.

Not according to his biographer, John Toland. Hitler remained in the church to use it for propaganda purposes. He was never an atheist at any time in his life. A Catholic is someone who's a member of the Catholic Church. He was a member. It's a fact. Stop re-writing history.

You should also look up "ad hominem" attacks. You used one. It's a logical fallacy.
 
Not according to his biographer, John Toland. Hitler remained in the church to use it for propaganda purposes. He was never an atheist at any time in his life. A Catholic is someone who's a member of the Catholic Church. He was a member. It's a fact. Stop re-writing history.

You should also look up "ad hominem" attacks. You used one. It's a logical fallacy.

Oh, his friend who wrote a book. Great source. You're the one re-writing history, babe. Anyway, again, why do you care? What do you have against the Catholic Church? Why do you want in it so bad if you hate it? Get back to the issue, my original post, at least. Come on. I TRIED to get 99percenter to do that. You guys got nothing...
 
I seriously would like to know why this administration is all up the Catholic Church's behind. Talk about pedos. Are you attacking us because we're the largest denomination? Why not attack Mormons or Muslims? They're the fastest growing. No one is addressing the core issue/question, except to say, "The Catholic Church needs it - they're pedos na na boo boo!" Enlighten me, I want to know from atheists who support Christian haters like Bill Maher, Obama's big contributer. Like I said, there are things that could put me back in the Obama corner, but you guys aren't helping here. You're only attacking something I care about - not really smart persuasion. At least when I said I don't care for Jews/Judaism, it had something to do with the discussion.
 
John Toland is a great source. His biography of Hitler is one of the most respected ones out there. The original version came in two volumes totaling over a thousand pages.
And, no, I didn't know him.

John Toland (author) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I recommend the read, and to pay attention to the parts where the Catholic Church cooperated with the Nazis and did not kick him out of the church in his lifetime. They did ex-communicate him posthumously. I guess they deserve some credit for that.
 
Oh, and, another thing, the Hitler thing isn't a big insult to me or Catholicism, IMO, if that is the purpose here. It's really.. not a big insult to me. I'm no Hitler fan, but I have little regard for Jews, too since their Zionism rivals Nazidom in its radicalism, and they believe they are superior to Gentiles. They also murdered our savior, and most Jews today think that's a riot... etc... Not getting the purpose? Catholics need the govt in their Church because we produced Hitler? How does that have anything to do with the war on religion in the U.S?
 
I'm kind of a centrist in the sense that I believe strongly in things like SSM and promoting the general welfare, but I prefer facts over the propaganda about taxes like "the rich don't pay their share". Unfortunately, I often have to choose the lesser of evils. In this election, I'm leaning towards Romney.

Obama hasn't taken or even promised action on the SSM issue. He just says he's for it. Romney says it's a state issue, which I disagree with, but it's better than promising action to stop it. That means we are on even ground there.

Neither candidate is offering UHC. Obamacare is a wretched attempt that has few benefits and insane costs. I do believe this one to be a state issue, but think the federal government should require some system from the states that allows for pre-existing conditions and is income scaled.

Flip-flopping is just politics as usual. Obama is just as bad or worse than Romney. Tough call between the two.

I would like to see defense cut a bit, but it has to be done smartly and I don't trust Obama or Romney to do that.

EPA does need severe cuts. Again, it needs to be done intelligently, but it needs to be done.

GITMO is a necessary evil.

Obama gets the win on death penalty, but it's a state issue.

Wind energy is inefficient and my personal opinion is that it's ugly.

Obama hasn't exactly inspired me with his foreign policy and I'm unsure about Romney here. Obama has gotten his wins by following policies from his predecessor or ignoring due process.

Taxes and spending aren't even close to a toss up. Countless threads here have shown the propaganda on this for what it is. The rich pay a similar percentage of FIT to the percent of wealth they hold. Redistribution is not only a bad idea, but a smokescreen. The money may be taken from the wealthy and offered to the poor, but that doesn't actually happen. Obama's record is to provide very poor benefits for truly extreme spending.

I'm leaning towards Romney, obviously. It seems like I might have to sit this one out, though. He doesn't thrill me, either.
 
ten reasons why I will vote for Romney

1) environmental extremism has become a front for those who want more government control of private property. It is a refuge of luddites, marxists and other scum

Environmentalist extremists might be left wing nut jobs, but the current protection for the environment are sane and necessary protective rules which should not be abolished for making a few fast bucks that we will later regret.

2) I think we need to cut the defense budget as well as social spending budget. He is slightly better than bumble on that

Why save that much money on either, make rich and filthy rich people pay the fair share that they should pay and a lot of the US's financial problems would go away. Fiscal responsibility is nice and needed but by just cutting those programs which protect the people who need it most is just foolish and will lead to disaster.

3) he is a politician but he is not anti success like Obama is

You mean he is a power hungry buddy to big business? He could care less for success. Romney has always been about his ridiculous cult and money money money money. He is the ultimate example of anti-success because for him to have success (read money and power) he has doomed thousands and thousands to utter misery.

4) I oppose socialism-universal healthcare is socialism

There is nothing socialist about universal health care, there is something anti-social though about opposing it so vehemently as the republicans have been doing.

5) non issue to me, he does not bash the rich like Obama does

How is it bashing the rich if you expect them to pay their fair part? How is it fair if someone as filthy rich as Romney has to pay less taxes than a cop or fire-fighter?

6) some people need to be executed. Has obama ever made a statement on that

There is no need to execute anyone, it is not a deterrent for crime, it is just some vindictive exercise of government licensed murder. Life in jail is every bit as justified and maybe even a worse punishment than death.

7) where else should terrorists be housed

Why not in jails in the US? Or are you afraid water boarding and stuff like that would be prohibited there?

8) taxing the rich more only encourages government bloat and the masses to think they have no duty to pay for what they want

No, fiscal responsibility can remedy that.

9) silly envious parasites dislike Romney-that is a very good reason to vote for him

You might say, parasites know a fellow parasite like Romney, who lives off the hard work of others and bleeds it dry for making a lot of cash and then plunging the people he bled dry into unemployment and poverty.

10) he won't appoint people like Kagan to the USSC

I think Kagan was a good choice and won the support of 63 of the 100 senators, including several republicans, you might not like her but I guess that is 95% political bias.

also we should drill in the AWR[/QUOTE]

And no, we should not drill in the AWR if this is not also combined with oil reducing measures and every possible protective measure to ensure no environmental protection and if it is found out to devastating to the environment it should be halted.
 
1. He wants to repeal all sorts of environmental protection legislation
2. He wants to increase the already way too high defense budget
3. He panders to whoever is in the room. He contradicts himself all the time in order to tell people what they want to hear.
4. He is against universal healthcare
5. He is against gay marriage and has conservative stances on other social issues
6. He supports the prison at Guantanamo Bay and thinks it should be expanded
7. He tried to reinstate the death penalty in Massachusetts when he was governor
8. He was against the building of a wind farm in Cape Cod because it would create a "visual detriment", but supports allowing oil drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge in Alaska
9. His views on foreign policy are incredibly outdated. He thinks that Russia is still our #1 geopolitical enemy.
10. His ideas on how the tax code should be changed would favor the wealthiest Americans while hurting everyone else

Huh, I'm not voting for Romney simply because I don't think he's going to improve the US in any way, which is also why I won't be voting for Obama, either.
 
Oh, and, another thing, the Hitler thing isn't a big insult to me or Catholicism, IMO, if that is the purpose here. It's really.. not a big insult to me. I'm no Hitler fan, but I have little regard for Jews, too since their Zionism rivals Nazidom in its radicalism, and they believe they are superior to Gentiles. They also murdered our savior, and most Jews today think that's a riot... etc... Not getting the purpose? Catholics need the govt in their Church because we produced Hitler? How does that have anything to do with the war on religion in the U.S?

The gentiles murdered your saviour. He wanted to die anyway and in the process saved you, so what's your issue with the Jews?

Do you reckon gypsies and genetically disabled nailed him to the cross too?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom