• 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!

For Obama voters only!

Vote now:


  • Total voters
    57
I agree. I think incumbents usually have an advantage, unless they are royal **** ups. If the economy keeps getting better, Obama will be in a good position.

Well, the incumbent is a royal **** up so he's hurting. President Obama has broken a lot of promises, made a poor attempt at reenergizing the economy at the expense of trillions in debt, and really has nothing to tout besides the decision to kill Bin Laden. I would also say his handling of Libya was pretty good. I believe Romney would be smart to steer clear of President Obama's foreign policy. He's done a decent job of it, if you're a neocon or militant that is. Of course, besides the way he's treated Israel.
 
I believe Romney would be smart to steer clear of President Obama's foreign policy. He's done a decent job of it, if you're a neocon or militant that is. Of course, besides the way he's treated Israel.

Well, that's sort of up to Iran.
 
Well, that's sort of up to Iran.

I won't be a hack and say he hasn't done well with them as well. The dude is threatening them with the hardest sanctions to date. Yeah, it's just a threat, but it's more than any other POTUS has done. However, he still sucks so it doesn't matter lol.
 
I won't be a hack and say he hasn't done well with them as well. The dude is threatening them with the hardest sanctions to date. Yeah, it's just a threat, but it's more than any other POTUS has done. However, he still sucks so it doesn't matter lol.

Meh - I think you can't separate US policy to Iran from US policy to Israel. They see us as divided and they can steal our s--t; so we project weakness. At least with the previous administration (whose policy was no treat, either) we were just projecting ambivalence :2razz:


But I meant more to the tune of how foreign policy is perceived - if Iran successfully comes out with a nuke prior to Election Day, the parallels with Jimmy Carter are going to be hard to tamp down.
 
Last edited:
Well, the incumbent is a royal **** up so he's hurting. President Obama has broken a lot of promises, made a poor attempt at reenergizing the economy at the expense of trillions in debt, and really has nothing to tout besides the decision to kill Bin Laden. I would also say his handling of Libya was pretty good. I believe Romney would be smart to steer clear of President Obama's foreign policy. He's done a decent job of it, if you're a neocon or militant that is. Of course, besides the way he's treated Israel.

Everybody knows he wouldn't keep every promise he made. All politicians do it. McCain was guilty of making impossible promises on the trail too. He is hurting, because the economy is still hurting. I wouldn't call Obama a royal **** up though, because he really hasn't ****ed anything up. The Obama Admin has a lot of foreign policy successes so far.

When Obamacare goes into affect, and it's proven to be a massive failure, then you can fairly say he ****ed something up.... until then, the only folks going to call him a royal **** up are super Conservative/hacks who gave Bush a second term.
 
Everybody knows he wouldn't keep every promise he made. All politicians do it. McCain was guilty of making impossible promises on the trail too. He is hurting, because the economy is still hurting. I wouldn't call Obama a royal **** up though, because he really hasn't ****ed anything up. The Obama Admin has a lot of foreign policy successes so far.

When Obamacare goes into affect, and it's proven to be a massive failure, then you can fairly say he ****ed something up.... until then, the only folks going to call him a royal **** up are super Conservative/hacks who gave Bush a second term.

lots of hard core lefties say you Obama voters gave Bush a third term.

the obama health care plan is most likely to die a quick death in a couple months.
 
lots of hard core lefties say you Obama voters gave Bush a third term.

That doesn't make sense... but it's funny to see conservatives make that attack. I don't see how Obama is like Bush personally.
 
That doesn't make sense... but it's funny to see conservatives make that attack. I don't see how Obama is like Bush personally.

war continues
Bush tax rates continue
Gitmo continues
 
That doesn't make sense... but it's funny to see conservatives make that attack. I don't see how Obama is like Bush personally.

Bailouts for Banks
Bailouts for Auto Industry
Gitmo still open
Huge Deficits
Lower Taxes
War in Iraq on Bush Schedule
Surge in Afghanistan
Pro-Amnesty for Illegal Aliens....

etc.

there is a reason Dittohead Not has the avatar he does.
 
Everybody knows he wouldn't keep every promise he made. All politicians do it. McCain was guilty of making impossible promises on the trail too.

McCain promised to reunite us, change Washington, lower the oceans, and heal the sick?

When Obamacare goes into affect, and it's proven to be a massive failure, then you can fairly say he ****ed something up.... until then, the only folks going to call him a royal **** up are super Conservative/hacks who gave Bush a second term.

Most Americans think the Stimulus Failed.
Most Americans want Obamacare Repealed.
Two-Thirds of Americans think the economy is "fairly" or "very" bad.
A Majority of Americans think that the country is on the wrong track.
83% of Americans think we are still in a Recession.


That sure is alot of conservative hacks...
 

He promised to win the wars and to balance the budget. A deficit isn't a Bush hallmark, nor are low tax rates... Reagan, Clinton, etc. all deficits and cut taxes somewhere.
 
I think Obama is the likely winner. The biggest threat to his re-election is voter turnout. I don't think Romney will be able to keep up with him in debates. I also think it's fairly easy to hurt Romney by pointing to his flip flopping record. Therefore, if Obama's campaign focuses on getting people to vote, Obama will take the win.

It more likely that it is where Romney has "flopped" to that will be his downfall. He is radically right of the mainstream at the moment. Obama will not let him weasel his way out of it either.
That and all the fired/laid off employees from his days at Bain. The flood is just beginning.
 
Both Romney and Obama suck, so there really isnt going to be the overwhelming support that Romney needs to oust the incumbent. And IMO it looks like Romney isnt going to fair well during the heaviest part of the fight. Personally I think that we should only allow one term for presidents. Then at least there would be a slight chance that the Dems would have came up with some better.
 
Meh - I think you can't separate US policy to Iran from US policy to Israel. They see us as divided and they can steal our s--t; so we project weakness. At least with the previous administration (whose policy was no treat, either) we were just projecting ambivalence :2razz:


But I meant more to the tune of how foreign policy is perceived - if Iran successfully comes out with a nuke prior to Election Day, the parallels with Jimmy Carter are going to be hard to tamp down.

Is that what you dream about at night? That Obama will lose because he didn't got to war with Iran? That's a riot but you are right about one thing, it will take that or an alien invasion for Romney to have even a chance. Nite nite.
 
Incumbents have won close to 2/3 of the time. This is even more common in the last century. I have little doubt that Obama will win. I have even less doubt that we will be better off for it.
 
I don't know. Claims that we have turned an economic corner and are headed up are the ads that so far poll the worst (from what I understand). The American people are more likely to think that we are currently in a recession than currently in a recovery.

Well, an ad saying we had turned the corner would probably be pretty clearly false. Saying things are improving as opposed to getting worse, that would be accurate. Can you link to what you have heard on ad polling?

And you think that people will buy that? You think Europe will last through the summer?

Things are improving. That is factual. I am not going to make any prediction about Europe, neither you nor I know nor can predict accurately what will happen there.
 
probably very few :) we humans are notorious for our confirmation bias.

I base mine in part on betting odds which have Obama at 59.1 % to win re-election. Also looking at electoral maps. It is too far out right now to make good predictions however.
 
Incumbents have won close to 2/3 of the time. This is even more common in the last century. I have little doubt that Obama will win. I have even less doubt that we will be better off for it.

Oop You are right of course.
 
Last edited:
Well, an ad saying we had turned the corner would probably be pretty clearly false. Saying things are improving as opposed to getting worse, that would be accurate. Can you link to what you have heard on ad polling?



Things are improving. That is factual. I am not going to make any prediction about Europe, neither you nor I know nor can predict accurately what will happen there.

But we ARE doing better than Europe, where Right wing policies have failed miserably.
 
Obama has a few advantages over Romney at this point:

-Obama is a war-time President
-Obama currently has the vast majority of minority likely voters, and this trend hasn't really been bucked at any point the past year
-Obama has a bigger war chest
-The economy has improved
-Osama bin Laden dead when he is president
-Wants to raise taxes on the rich

Things going aginst Obama:
-He is black
-THe economy hasn't improved like most had hoped
-Added more short term spending
-Wants to raise taxes on the rich, Republicans spend a lot of time and money trying to convince people they are either getting higher taxes too, or that taxing the rich will somehow personally hurt them


I think however, he has the best chance out of the two with a win similar to the 96 election.
 
Everybody knows he wouldn't keep every promise he made. All politicians do it. McCain was guilty of making impossible promises on the trail too. He is hurting, because the economy is still hurting. I wouldn't call Obama a royal **** up though, because he really hasn't ****ed anything up. The Obama Admin has a lot of foreign policy successes so far.

When Obamacare goes into affect, and it's proven to be a massive failure, then you can fairly say he ****ed something up.... until then, the only folks going to call him a royal **** up are super Conservative/hacks who gave Bush a second term.

I disagree wholeheartedly. President Obama has done a lot of things I would consider a **** up. Obamacare is a massive failure whether it goes into effect or not. The CBO has already shown we can't afford it 10 years from now. Not to mention it's unconstitutional. The debt is also a huge screw up. Yes, it was big before, but President Obama has put it into the unsustainable category with nothing to show for it besides a stagnant economy and unemployment rate. If unemployment was at 3-4% right now and the economy was booming, that would be a different story. He has doubled down on an unwinnable war. He has executed an American citizen with no trial. I could keep going. All of those go into a cumulative jacked up presidency. And I don't consider myself a super conservative or a hack nor did I vote for Bush either time.
 
I disagree wholeheartedly. President Obama has done a lot of things I would consider a **** up. Obamacare is a massive failure whether it goes into effect or not. The CBO has already shown we can't afford it 10 years from now. Not to mention it's unconstitutional. The debt is also a huge screw up. Yes, it was big before, but President Obama has put it into the unsustainable category with nothing to show for it besides a stagnant economy and unemployment rate. If unemployment was at 3-4% right now and the economy was booming, that would be a different story. He has doubled down on an unwinnable war. He has executed an American citizen with no trial. I could keep going. All of those go into a cumulative jacked up presidency. And I don't consider myself a super conservative or a hack nor did I vote for Bush either time.

The healthcare act has not failed. Unemployment regardless is down, and the recovery act has helped many people and many states. That doubling down wasn't just his doing, it was generals and people that would have been in charge regardless of president. The military budget for the first time in 10 years hasn't grown, and by 2016 will be even lower.
 
The healthcare act has not failed. Unemployment regardless is down, and the recovery act has helped many people and many states. That doubling down wasn't just his doing, it was generals and people that would have been in charge regardless of president. The military budget for the first time in 10 years hasn't grown, and by 2016 will be even lower.
I'd say it's a failure. The link is to yahoo news but it has the link to the CBO study entailed in the story.
President Obama's landmark healthcare overhaul is projected to cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, reports the Congressional Budget Office, a hefty sum more than the $940 billion estimated when the healthcare legislation was signed into law. To put it mildly, ObamaCare's projected net worth is far off from its original estimate -- in fact, about $820 billion off.
CBO: ObamaCare Price Tag Shifts from $940 Billion to $1.76 Trillion - Yahoo! News
I never said the recovery act didn't help people or lower unemployment. However, he will have spent 6 trillion dollars in taxpayer money to do it. There's no bang for the buck.
Afghanistan is his war. No two ways about it. He could've denied them the surge and brought us home whenever he wanted to. Instead, guys like me have gone over and fought with one hand tied behind our back just so it wouldn't look like we gave up too quickly. Blame Generals all you want. It wasn't their decision. It was their recommendation. He didn't have to take it.
Sorry, but I'll be impressed with military spending cuts when we stop funding shrimp on treadmills and Pakistani Sesame Street projects.
 
I'd say it's a failure.

It sure isn't perfect, but then perfection is the enemy of progress. Here's a few of the benefits...

-No more denial of claims after paying premiums for decades

-No more denial of health insurance for PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS

-Coverage for your kids until 26 years old

-Free health checkup every 6 mopnths

-Free preventative health screening procedures for cancer and heart like mammograms, colonoscopies etc.

-Lower seniors' prescription-drug prices by beginning to close the donut hole.

-no lifetime caps anymore.

-most policies have no annual caps

And then there's this...

Health Plans Will Pay $1B Obamacare Rebate For Not Spending Enough On Care - Forbes


That's a tidy billion dollars in the hands of Americans instead of for-profit insurance investors in London, Tokyo and Hong Kong.

Personally, I advocate Medicare for All.
 
Back
Top Bottom