Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Obama or Romney

Posted Jun 25, '12 at 4:17pm

ethan3300

ethan3300

78 posts

Please debate here.

 

Posted Jul 7, '12 at 10:49am

Pieguyme

Pieguyme

560 posts

Romany has the best chance I think. He has much more money for ads and media connections, he has more government experience, as well.

On the other hand though, Obama has more ads running and bribes the media with money so that we, the citizens, know only the bad things about Romany and the good things about him and his party.

Romany also helped get the U.S. Olympic team out of debt. Here's a site that helped my group and I on a school project. USE ALL TABS. http://www.livebinders.com/play/play/364282

 

Posted Jul 7, '12 at 11:25am

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,164 posts

Knight

On the other hand though, Obama has more ads running and bribes the media with money so that we, the citizens, know only the bad things about Romany and the good things about him and his party.

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how a candidate who has constantly outspent others on ads in the media is actually not the one who is bribing the media with the money. Both candidates use their money to besmear each other, don't be a narrow minded fool and think only Obama does it.

he has more government experience, as well.

Disagree whole-heartedly. Obama already has a whole term behind him; Romney has no Presidential experience whatsoever.

 

Posted Jul 7, '12 at 12:40pm

ethan3300

ethan3300

78 posts

The both could be good but they both have there downfalls

 

Posted Jul 7, '12 at 12:54pm

Pieguyme

Pieguyme

560 posts

nichodemus, I mis-said that first statement. I know both candidates do it. However, yes now that he has four years behind him, Obama has more experience. But, before the presidency was given to him in '08, he was a Senator who hardly showed up on time for any thing. Romany was a Governor before he ran for president.

 

Posted Jul 7, '12 at 1:26pm

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,164 posts

Knight

But, before the presidency was given to him in '08, he was a Senator who hardly showed up on time for any thing. Romany was a Governor before he ran for president.

Excuse me, but if you're going to claim Obama ''hardly showed up on time for anything'', you better be there with solid evidence to prove so, unless you want to be known as someone who likes to pull random, unproven arguments from your behind, just to wildly and illogically justify a hyperbolic statement.

 

Posted Jul 7, '12 at 9:18pm

Pieguyme

Pieguyme

560 posts

OCTOBER 30TH 2008. READ IT AND WEEP FOOL.   

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/video_obama_shows_up_late_again_and_again_for_senate_committee_on_foreign_r/

 

Posted Jul 7, '12 at 10:20pm

loloynage2

loloynage2

3,106 posts

The fact that you use Obama's late arrival at meetings as an excuse/argument is really pathetic, but then again, so is pretty much everyone that supports Romney. Rather have a average late president then a horrible on time president.

 

Posted Jul 7, '12 at 11:03pm

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,164 posts

Knight

Whilst you use tardiness as an excuse to slam Obama, how about we use the fact that Romney is a hypocrite (Hires illegals), can't connect to the people (Repeatedly and insensitively flaunts his wealth), forgetful (Can't even remember his own first name)?

Also, since almost everyone has been late before, we're all going to be condemned.

Read, weep, and maybe weep a little more.

 

Posted Jul 7, '12 at 11:16pm

Salvidian

Salvidian

3,950 posts

I don't really like either candidate. It's times like these I want a true democracy, where we don't have a true leader, or president. I don't pay much attention to politics, so I can't really give you many specifics on the two. I am, however, pretty fluent with the two main presidential parties so I guess I can base a little bit off of that.

Obama being a democrat is split right down the middle for me. We need immigrants to come to America, because that's one of the reasons why it was formed. I'm Catholic, but I'm for gay marriage. Most republicans need to realize that this is not the 1800's and same-sex marriage doesn't deliver any negativity. It's against the Bible, but I'm with "Don't ask, don't tell, don't look, don't yell." I'm pretty indifferent about the topic. I hate the idea of abortion because it is deliberate murder of a fetus. I'm with stem-cell research, but only until a way to do it without sacrificing fetuses is found. I live by the Bible for the most part, but during the times it isn't helping us, it can be ignored. Besides, there aren't any deliberate teachings of homosexuality, stem-cell research, etc. Health care sin't a good idea because it violates our civil liberties by disallowing our choice of medicinal junk. On the other hand, it helps the poor, so, meh.

Romney might be good for reducing the national spending, but only by raising taxes. Sometimes a sacrifice must be made for the good of the people, but only when it is most necessary. Stem-cell research isn't necessary, so it doesn't follow this pattern. Sending troops away... Well... No idea there. I don't see anything else he good do that will help the country.

I'm kind of split down the middle, but Romney might be better now to clean up, with a president like Obama to come in and take over.

 
Reply to Obama or Romney

You must be logged in to post a reply!