• 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!

Better off 4 years from now if Romney or Obama wins

Better off 4 yrs from now if Romney wins If Obama wins

  • Romney

    Votes: 10 22.7%
  • Obama

    Votes: 17 38.6%
  • little difference

    Votes: 14 31.8%
  • other

    Votes: 3 6.8%

  • Total voters
    44

listener

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
52
Reaction score
4
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That is the question. My thought is with Obama.
 
Depends on what "better off" is.

To quote myself:

No matter which one is elected, the spending spree will continue, only some beneficiaries will change.

For some people, one or the other will be better. For most of us, it won''t make a bit of difference.
 
I selected Romney, but I have a big caveat:

Romney needs a Republican House and Senate or all bets are off.

Obama, of course, will screw us over either way. He's already proven that.
 
**** will still be the same regardless of which liberals wins.
 
I selected Romney, but I have a big caveat:

Romney needs a Republican House and Senate or all bets are off.

Obama, of course, will screw us over either way. He's already proven that.

Same rhetoric..no facts to back it up
My personal thoughts...both will have similar result
Just that Romney will royally screw over middle class
EDIT--if he follows Ryan's ridiculous "plan"
 
Last edited:
That is the question. My thought is with Obama.

My guess is that Romney/Ryan would be better for the health and economic stability of the country.

And Obama would/will make a lot more individuals happy.
 
if you re looking to vote for someone who is going to make you life better... you might want to think about voting for yourself... you're the only one that can make it actually happen.

if you are depending on a president to do it for you, you'll not be better off in 4 years... you'll never be better off.
 
if you re looking to vote for someone who is going to make you life better... you might want to think about voting for yourself... you're the only one that can make it actually happen.

if you are depending on a president to do it for you, you'll not be better off in 4 years... you'll never be better off.

Of course, this gets to the crux of the whole question.

Someone who is “depending on a president to do it for you” is going to vote for Obama; as he very solidly represents that mindset. Not that government can or will make anyone's lives better, but those who think it can, will and should, are going to see Obama as the President to make that happen.

Though not nearly as far as I would like, Romney more represents the idea that it is up to us to make what we can of our own lives, and not to depend on government to do it for us.
 
Mitt will do essentially nothing to solve the approaching fiscal crisis, and Barack will do even less. But if we drive off the cliff and a Republican is in the White House, the electorate will immediately claim that because the crisis went unsolved, Romney was obviously too extreme a right-winger and will tarnish the name of fiscal conservatism for decades.

Better off in four years? Romney, by a miniscule margin. Better off in the long term? Obama.
 
Romney will be slightly less inept than Obama. Gary Johnson would do us a world of good if there was any chance house/senate would actually work with him. Too bad both parties would be childish and work to make sure the libertarian party wouldn't get a foothold.
 
We'd be better off if both simply dropped out of the race and we could nominate two candidates who aren't simply "talking heads" or "empty suits." :shrug:
 
Better off... hmmm...

Maybe we ought to figure out who is going to make us face the facts sooner rather than later. Obama, being completely oblivious to the pain the debt increase is going to cause us, will not avoid steps to get us there. In fact, he's said that short-term and intermediate-term, debt is not a concern, with which I vehemently disagree.

Romney, however, says he understands the damage that the debt will cause us. But he hasn't said what he'll do about it. I suppose he will do something, but not enough, because doing 'enough' would mean taking away from a lot of people... and I don't think he has the stones to be that guy that we need.

So either way, we end up worst. I'm starting to wonder if Obama would put us in the better position. His ignorance may rip off the band-aid quickly rather than slowly, putting us in a better place to KNOW the path we need to take to climb out of this mess. And if I'm wrong and he is right, that the debt truly isn't a concern, then his election may be better off anyway (so long as they can get a long-term tax plan so corporations know how much money they can spend).

I'm ready for the nation to start from the bottom. And I know that the best wake-up isn't going to be if we gently slide into bottom (Romney) which may encourage us to just settle in. The best wake up will be slamming into it face-first via Obama.
 
Romney will be slightly less inept than Obama. Gary Johnson would do us a world of good if there was any chance house/senate would actually work with him. Too bad both parties would be childish and work to make sure the libertarian party wouldn't get a foothold.

I dont think it would matter with Johnson as he would veto every bill that came out of congress anyway. That would be the best thing about his presidency.:)
 
That is the question. My thought is with Obama.

Doesn't matter who gets elected this election cycle. We're in the outhouse regardless of who wins. Know why? Because today's politicians don't give two craps about anyone but themselves.
 
Of course, this gets to the crux of the whole question.

Someone who is “depending on a president to do it for you” is going to vote for Obama; as he very solidly represents that mindset. Not that government can or will make anyone's lives better, but those who think it can, will and should, are going to see Obama as the President to make that happen.

Though not nearly as far as I would like, Romney more represents the idea that it is up to us to make what we can of our own lives, and not to depend on government to do it for us.

Gary Johnson is getting my vote. I am in California so it aint gona matter anyway. But he's the guy that best represents that philosophy. Rommeny not so much.
 
Truth be told my income has tripled under Obama so I can only hope things go so well with him in his next term :p

It feels good to no longer live paycheck to paycheck, but I could hardly credit the president of either party for my fortune or misfortune, people talk about the president like he can wave a magic wand and fix anything, he can't his power is rather limited to impact your life directly...

.as for me I am still mad that nieither Clinton nor Bush bought me a Miata yet, didn't they realize I wanted one, there is still time Obama, I expect you to rectify this situation.
 
The president will have little effect if my life will be better four years from now. That is all on me.
 
Ronald Reagan who for many could do no wrong asked the question are you better off today than you were four years ago with the asumption that if the answer was no that would suggest Democrats had not done a good job and that electing him would make things better. Romney has asked the same question for the same reason a few times. I agree Presidents can not do much but they do play a part in how successful our country and therefore all of us can be. For me the question will you be better off four years from now is a better question and is not a question of self reliance over dependency. Except in very rare circumstances self reliance is always best and can not be profitably abandoned even if one finds themselves dependent on others more than they can help.
 
I think it's a false dilemma anyway. ;)
 
**** will still be the same regardless of which crony capitalist wins.

Note I said crony capitalist, not capitalist. There's a big difference.
 
Same rhetoric..no facts to back it up
My personal thoughts...both will have similar result
Just that Romney will royally screw over middle class
EDIT--if he follows Ryan's ridiculous "plan"


how does that happen? by not soaking the rich he hurts the middle class?
 
That is the question. My thought is with Obama.

If you mean economically better, we'll be better off no matter who is elected, because the normal cycle will have been on the rise from where it is now.
 
Back
Top Bottom