ForumsWEPRObama, 2012-2016 President of the United States of America

255 21644
superbobdabest
offline
superbobdabest
306 posts
175

Well he won.

274-203

Romney got more votes but Obama got more elecrol votes.

COMMENT!

  • 255 Replies
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,471 posts
24,700

This China bashing is crazy. Sweatshops exist in part because of our demand, until we stop demanding such goods with such cheap prices the problem won't be solved.

Also, sweatshops are in part created by foreign companies. Foxconn anyone?

Also, "throwing huge sums of money" is just a crude way of explaining monetary and fiscal policy. These Keynesian methods were what built the world economy in the 1950s and 1960s and are proven to work.

Xzeno
offline
Xzeno
2,305 posts
390

FactCheck is a left-leaning but pretty neutral group that, well, checks 'facts'.
Fixed that for you. It is a good website, but it's not perfect, and its bias is worth mentioning.

Why do people keep on thinking he was going to? Are you afraid of the (sorta) black man stealing your guns? Are you clinging to them so tightly that you just hallucinate these ideas? No president will ever 'take away guns'.
The president doesn't have the power to enact such legislature... or indeed do anything about most of the social policies or economic issues people like blabbing about.

Still, the president is relevant to the issue of gun control because of his ability to appoint members of the supreme court, whose job it is to interpret the constitution. Honestly, this "the president doesn't have the power" stuff is a little silly because he has the same power over gun control as he does over abortion and gay marriage and all that other stuff he won't do anything about but the supreme court might.

Anyway, this whole thing was kinda fun, and now that it's over, hopefully people are a little bit calmed down. In the post-election atmosphere, I'll say stuff about candidates.

First of all, to all the people concerned about Romney's views on women, gays and abortion: You know that he didn't actually care, right? Like, he just straight up doesn't care about abortion or gay marriage. Just like Obama. Even if he personally cares, he's not gonna even try to do anything about it. Mitt Romney believed he wanted to be the president of the United States, and that's about it. Gotta respect that, at least.

Anyway, both candidates would do the following on hotbutton issues:
Gay marriage. Romney would say he's against it and that's it. Obama will say he's for it and that's it.
Abortion: Both candidates would let precedent (Roe v. Wade) to dictate this matter while states enacted their own policies. Duh. So we'll still have the thing that most of us seem to like by our moral intuition: abortion law based on trimester. If this seems to you like it's arbitrary and a stupid attempt at being moderate for no reason, so that it can somehow be inconsistent with every rational view on the morality of abortion, that's because it is and democracy is terrible.
Pot legalization: That was actually a surprise and I'm sure it will start a larger conversation about the federal government's role in drug control that Obama will have nothing to do with. Still, kinda neat that this is happening in our lifetimes. History bein' made.
Gun control: both Obama and Romney support arbitrarily tyrannical gun control, such as the ban on assault weapons, which, as we all know, is a ban on weapons which sound scary. The reason they do this is because a lot of people like the ban on assault weapons, because people assume it's the logical middle ground (it isn't) or because they sound scary. In essence, because democracy sucks.

So it seems that most people have a decent handle on the fact that Romney was basically evil. But, uh, you guys know Obama is as bad, right? Like when Nemo comes in and complains about how Obama's a warmongering monster who looks nice to only morons, that's true.

I'm not saying there aren't sorta reasons to vote for one or the other, I guess. I mean, I'm just trying to make sure we're all on the same page. They're both pretty crap.
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,540 posts
2,210

Fixed that for you. It is a good website, but it's not perfect, and its bias is worth mentioning.


So far I've only seen this accusation as a means to ignore the facts they provide.
TheMostManlyMan
offline
TheMostManlyMan
5,485 posts
5,495

So far I've only seen this accusation as a means to ignore the facts they provide.

Because people would be all over it and outraged if they agreed with them and they were somewhat biased.....
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

we would be short on jobs because nobody has the money to start a big business hat creates jobs?


thats why we invented the stock market for the VOC

The problem is that those rich guys move their business in China so that they don't have to respect security norms,

not true. it's all about profits. it's just cheaper to make something in china. and beside that do the chinese not protest for more loan or better work situations. the people in western nations are demanding to much. or atleast way more then the chines. it's cheaper and easyer to produce in china.

If those rich guys would stay here and employ people then it would be fair to give them a tax break

the rich guy or the company?
giving the guy a tax cut wont change anything for the employees. only the rich guy benefits from it.
giving the company a tax break can go 2 way's. more profit so better salary for the rich man. or more profit that can be put back in the company to grow.
the best way to keep those companies production. is for employees to ask less money. and not to sue the company for every little mistake they make.

Because people would be all over it and outraged if they agreed with them and they were somewhat biased.....

next time put a fact checker on the fact checker of the fact checker.
Devoidless
offline
Devoidless
3,712 posts
3,620

Fixed that for you. It is a good website, but it's not perfect, and its bias is worth mentioning.


The only people I have noticed calling the site biased are Glenn Beck, sore losers and those aligned with the the far-right.

Show me how they are biased, explain to me. Show me proof that they are. Come on, do it. Don't just let your unsupported supposition dangle in the breeze like that.
bigjacob
offline
bigjacob
580 posts
2,195

Well, I'm happy that he won, is all I have to say.

TheMostManlyMan
offline
TheMostManlyMan
5,485 posts
5,495

next time put a fact checker on the fact checker of the fact checker.

Because fact check would be sure to tell us if they were biased.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

Because fact check would be sure to tell us if they were biased.

if you got a republican checking a democrat checking a republican... (or the other way around) then yea it should.

anyway
saying it's bias... don't you need something to back this up?
i would like to see your facts that it is bias.
couldn't it just be that 1 candidate made more mistakes on the facts then the other did?
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,540 posts
2,210

The only people I have noticed calling the site biased are Glenn Beck, sore losers and those aligned with the the far-right.


After a bit of Googling, that still seems to be the case. Better put than the way I stated it.
TheMostManlyMan
offline
TheMostManlyMan
5,485 posts
5,495

anyway
saying it's bias... don't you need something to back this up?

I don't know weather or not it's biased, all I was saying is that they could easily just make another website or something that says that they're not biased or some such thing.

For those of you who might think that there should be more gun control...
http://www.cleanfunnypics.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Julie-B.L.5.jpg?ref=nf

After all this defending Obama and saying he's done such a good job, you still seem to ignore what I pointed out about him printing so much money causing all this inflation. I would assume that you're ignoring this because it's completely inexcusable. But if he's done as good as you say and he was such a better choice then you should have no problem explaining how the inflation of the dollar has been a good thing.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
4,560

For those of you who might think that there should be more gun control...

here is one for you
TheMostManlyMan
offline
TheMostManlyMan
5,485 posts
5,495

here is one for you

Not sure if supporting or a feeble attempt of retaliating. If it's the feeble attempt that I suspect it is, then read it again. You could take away out guns, but what would compel a criminal to give up his gun? I'm not saying that everyone should have a gun, some people who are, let us say, not all there should never be allowed to own guns.
Jacen96
offline
Jacen96
3,113 posts
5,600

Well, although he has been elected, everyone remember, in 2016, vote

GANDALF FOR PRESIDENT
http://www.collecttolkien.com/images/Other/Misc%20Bumper%20Sticker%20LOTR%20Gandalf%20for%20President%201984.jpg

Also, I do not understand the reasoning behind the argument "oh he did so great in the last year, and if he continues that he will save America", what you have to remember though, is that in his first term, Obama's primary objective was to be reelected, and since he can't be now, what reason is their for him to continue his policies.

(I predict the debt will be over 18 trillion by this time next year)

~~~Darth Caedus

jeol
offline
jeol
3,842 posts
6,080

Well, although he has been elected, everyone remember, in 2016, vote

GANDALF FOR PRESIDENT

I endorse Panda 2016.

He's black.

He's white.

He's Asian.

Plus, he loves hugging. Nobody can resist a good ol' genuine bear hug. In case you haven't heard his slogan, I'll repeat it here:

"He cares!

P.S. if you try to beat him, you're beating an endangered species, so unless you want humane society on your tail, you should probably try not to beat him.

P.P.S. He still cares."

You could take away out guns, but what would compel a criminal to give up his gun? I'm not saying that everyone should have a gun, some people who are, let us say, not all there should never be allowed to own guns.

Not to mention the fact that you could easily make a gun yourself (not that hard, so I hear) or smuggle them over the border. I mean, look how easy it is to smuggle drugs over the border... You're taking guns out of the hands of people who need to defend themselves and enabling the criminals to win at their intentions that much easier.
Showing 91-105 of 255