Well, this thread idea hasn't exactly caught fire, has it? Oh well, that in itself says something interesting, I think, but I'm not sure what, just yet. :)
Let's see.. what is there about Romney that folks know or not.
-He's the son of a Governor of Massachusetts as well as one himself.
-He's Mormon. Did 30 months in France as Mormon Missionary
-Instituted one of the first state based medical care programs as Governor
-He brings in most of his income from equity interest and is believed to be the richest man to run for president. (Ranked around 12th among politicians currently holding or seeking office, Bloomberg is #1)
-Bain Capital is one of the companies he's run and worked with and they have a history of layoff/sell offs when they buy out businesses but do to their privacy policies there is no reliable way to say that Bain grew or eliminated jobs overall.
Thanks for the review, Callie, it's quite helpful to be reminded of these facts. I think I've encountered most of these facts somewhere over the last few months, but I couldn't have summarized them so neatly and rapidly -- I envy your ability for such things.
An interesting prospect. Trying to get someone to change your mind by asking for only positive comments because it's going to be pretty much impossible to swim through the sea of negative comments in a forum which predominantly sways to the left at all times. It warms my heart to see: a lot of people I know who are truly Left or Right don't want to actually debate.
I'm glad someone else likes the idea of such a forum existing. So far you're the only person to post here and voice viewpoints that might diverge from what I imagine to be the predominant views of most Elliquiy people, so I'm grateful for that.
So, the question of voting for Romney vs. Obama. For now, I'll assume not voting third party. I can get into that on another thread (and think I have), but I want to get this out before the sleepy meds kick in. However, for me, Romney only came in third in desirability for the four Republican candidates, so I'll be a hard one to sell you.
Are you happy with Obama and his actions so far?
Considering the overall quietness of this thread so far, I wouldn't blame you for wanting to keep your personal views to yourself about who you plan to vote for (if you've decided yet, that is), but I noticed that you fell short of endorsing any particular candidate yet in your initial post here.
I consider myself ill-informed about Obama's term in office, so I don't feel qualified to endorse him or advocate on his behalf, but I am nevertheless planning to vote for him at this point, unless my opinion changes between now and November. I keep up with politics and news headlines in a cursory way without studying them enough to have firm views. On the other hand, I imagine that I'm at least as well-informed as the average American voter, and maybe a little better, considering how much misinformation gets happily consumed and regurgitated throughout the campaign season.
I'll tell you one thing that I like about Obama, and anyone out there who can shoot down this view with authoritative dissent is welcome to do so -- I'm open to having my ill-informed views swayed here. Actually, it seems that you already see this issue differently from me, AndyZ, as you said here --
Do you like bipartisanship? Obama talks about it a lot, and his budget plan got a unanimous House vote, but they unanimously voted against it. Back in 2008, when the major media folks were calling Obama a centrist, it was such a great thing because he'll reach across the aisle and all such. We've now seen Obama's actual stance firsthand.
I take this to mean that you consider Obama's bipartisan rhetoric empty based on his behavior in office thus far. I came to the opposite conclusion, that he made some honest bipartisan efforts that were rebuffed by the opposite party. I've heard both viewpoints from talking heads in the media. The reason I've come to believe that Obama probably made some genuine efforts to reach out to the other side is because he paid a well-documented political price for the general impression that he did so. He's been branded as ineffective or spineless by members of both parties. That criticism must have some basis in fact, I would think, and if so, it doesn't make sense to me that he took a hard partisan line and then got completely misunderstood by everyone on both sides, who took him as being overly conciliatory and not hardnosed enough. It's always a pain in the ass to figure out who's telling the truth about political developments when one side says black and other says white with equal vehemence and self-certitude, but assuming that politicians generally act in their own self-interest, I think it's safe to also assume that they're most likely to get criticized for personal weaknesses rather than strengths. If Obama is a closet hardliner who sometimes masquerades as a centrist, why is he so often charged as being the exact opposite, as being too much of a pushover for his political opponents?
I'm sure that whole debate can be much better addressed by others here, and hopefully given specific examples to support the various sides, but as I indicated before, I'm far too much of a dilettante to discuss politics with great clarity and detail.
Personally, I was nervous even before his attacks on the Supreme Court and his words to Russia about how he'll be more "flexible" after the election, but I'm always nervous when officials try to make deals away from the eyes of the public.
Here are two good examples. I might have heard of the developments you are referencing here, but they don't ring a bell, so any additional info would be appreciated. I heard that the possibility of the Court striking down his healthcare reforms has recently put him in the uncharacteristic position of criticizing so-called "judicial activism," traditionally a rallying cry of his staunch political opponents. Is that what you're referring to here? Did you see his statements as sincere or hypocritical, and where do you come down on the healthcare bill and the Court's response to it? All I have to say about it, based on my limited knowledge, is that I don't understand how the executive and legislative branches didn't anticipate or prepare better for such a huge threat to the legislation coming from the judicial branch; it makes all of the branches appear incompetent, as if the stupid hydra is fighting with itself while the public gapes and stands repulsed, no matter which side of the debate we come down on. Business as usual in Washington, you say? Blech
Voting is the ultimate polling machine. If you believe that Obama is already a shoe-in (as even he does), but you want him to fix up his act, then having people vote against him to make it sweat it out in November might give enough of a wake-up call to have an epiphany.
Is this an approach you consider prudent -- meaning that you support Obama but want to make sure he sweats a little, earns his victory? The American public often swings back and forth politically and endorses checks and balances between the various branches and parties, especially from one election to the next, but I don't know that I see the swinging as healthy for the country or helpful in its governance (I don't have a clear view one way or the other).
As to Obama being a
sure thing, I haven't heard that view coming from anyone in the media in a long, long time; rather, people seem to predict that the price of gas and unemployment rate could very well prove Obama's undoing. Or is that media-hypester bullshit, just a way of artificially stoking interest in a one-sided election? If you think so, please help to convince me.
I don't really expect we'll find out Romney's actual stances on matters until he's guaranteed the Republican candidacy, though. Until then, he's going to act as though he's much farther Right than he actually is. That may sound like a negative comment, but if you want someone who's not going to act, how many politicians can you vote for?Ach
, such cynicism! Such disillusionment! What's the world coming to? :) I wonder if Romney's supporters see him this way and forgive such political expediency as a matter of course, an inevitability, as it sounds like you do. How distasteful! Not that I would look down on anyone for seeing things as that bleak if they really are ...
Tiberius -- thanks for the comment -- remarks of any and all kinds are welcome here.
Republican partisans at Elliquiy? The snipe hunt continues ... :)