I'm more concerned about the quality of voters...
| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| The Quality of a President https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=5170 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Rynar [ Thu Jan 06, 2011 8:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | The Quality of a President |
I have gotten the feeling that some of our more liberal posters have been shying away from a Hellfire conversation about the quality and legacy of this President, so I figured I'd give the conversation a go in here, where the gloves are on. Line by line, either defend or oppose the actions of this President and his administration. |
|
| Author: | Lenas [ Thu Jan 06, 2011 9:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Not much to defend or argue about, because he hasn't really done anything. Yep, I voted for him. |
|
| Author: | Lex Luthor [ Thu Jan 06, 2011 9:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I didn't vote for him because I didn't support him then, and still don't now. He's only good at one thing, which is campaigning. I would characterise his presidency as "going with the flow". There's many great things he could do as President, but he is apparently incapable of taking any initiative. |
|
| Author: | Rodahn [ Fri Jan 07, 2011 12:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I voted for him and started out as a supporter, but I've grown pretty neutral about Obama, tbh. Then again, I am a centrist, so /shrug On one hand, those political opponents who seem intent on ***** about his character and policies don't seem to want to work with him, but on the other hand, Obama himself doesn't seem to want any help from anyone else. Unstoppable force meets the immovable object scenario. I think he'll ultimately go down as a mediocre president, unless something major happens in the later half of his term. *Reply edited for clarity. |
|
| Author: | Wwen [ Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm more concerned about the quality of voters...
|
|
| Author: | Rodahn [ Sun Jan 09, 2011 1:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Wwen wrote: I'm more concerned about the quality of voters... While I agree that there are probably a good number of uninformed/sheep voters out there, I will say that it's not really the voters' fault if they are baited and switched. All voters really have to go on is the word of the candidate. Could happen in any election (hell, look at our last administration). On a related note, I may very well be exercising my right to NOT cast a ballot next election, if the choices seem dismal again. |
|
| Author: | Dash [ Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
As far as uninformed/sheep voters, I would venture to say the majority of voters dont really follow day to day politics very closely. Doubt they could tell you much other than they heard about the healthcare bill... but dont understand what it did. Which frankly, not many people do in any great detail including myself. I wouldnt call them sheep and I wouldnt say uninformed is a slight on them either for the most part. Most people only know if their day to day lives have changed and if so is it for better or worse. They also seem to go along with general themes like the current fiscal problems on the local and federal level. What I gather talking to the non-political wonk voters I know, is that they believe it's not a big difference who wins. Lesser of two evils usually, and they are mostly right in my opinion. |
|
| Author: | Rodahn [ Sun Jan 09, 2011 10:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Dash wrote: What I gather talking to the non-political wonk voters I know, is that they believe it's not a big difference who wins. Lesser of two evils usually, and they are mostly right in my opinion. Exactly. Which is why I think that arguing about politics is, ultimately, pointless. This country will continue to function as it has since Day 1 regardless of who is in office. |
|
| Author: | FarSky [ Mon Jan 10, 2011 12:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
What are wonk voters? 
|
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Mon Jan 10, 2011 12:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | The Quality of a President |
Rodahn wrote: Dash wrote: What I gather talking to the non-political wonk voters I know, is that they believe it's not a big difference who wins. Lesser of two evils usually, and they are mostly right in my opinion. Exactly. Which is why I think that arguing about politics is, ultimately, pointless. This country will continue to function as it has since Day 1 regardless of who is in office. We've come a ways away from our founding. So it hasn't run the same from day 1. The problem with politicians truly is that they are reflective of the electorate from which they are drawn. We (collectively/nationally) have gotten largely what we are sadly. |
|
| Author: | Wwen [ Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
It's not sheepdom, but apathy and sloth. Taking for granted what they have. Giving it away for nothing. Saying people are sheep is a smug bullshit thing to say. I don't consider myself particularly better than anyone. Except for some of the people I work with. What **** morons. |
|
| Author: | Xequecal [ Mon Jan 10, 2011 2:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Quality of a President |
He's exactly the same as Bush on any issue that really matters. We differentiate our Presidents mostly on stupid niche issues like gay marriage and then pretend that they're important. Obama kept tax policy the same as Bush. Fiscal policy is the same, Bush was for bailouts, so is Obama. He treats enemy combatants the same as Bush. Extraordinary rendition, indefinite detention are all still fine. He's pretty much continued Bush's plan for Iraq and Afghanistan. In science, federal funding for embryonic stem cells is still banned. As far as environmentalism goes, we still don't have cap and trade, and haven't signed Kyoto. So, same as Bush. The only two areas his administration has deviated from what Bush would do are the health care bill and DADT......and the health care bill is going to be dismantled before anything takes effect. |
|
| Author: | Rodahn [ Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
@ Rorinthas: Maybe not Day 1, but the fundamentals of democracy itself haven't changed all that much. What I was really getting at was that the real power is from the American citizenry at large, not just the elected officials. @ Wwen: What I mean by "sheep," are those voters who go out and vote simply because their parents/peers/siblings/whoever think they should to fit in. In other words, sheep voters don't make any real personal decisions based upon what the candidate stands for into their choice -- they just push the button for whomever they feel some other influence in their lives wants them to. They may be perfectly aware of each candidates' platform, as well as current events, but they don't really factor into their minds. |
|
| Author: | Raltar [ Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Quality of a President |
Xequecal wrote: He's exactly the same as Bush on any issue that really matters. We differentiate our Presidents mostly on stupid niche issues like gay marriage and then pretend that they're important. Obama kept tax policy the same as Bush. Fiscal policy is the same, Bush was for bailouts, so is Obama. He treats enemy combatants the same as Bush. Extraordinary rendition, indefinite detention are all still fine. He's pretty much continued Bush's plan for Iraq and Afghanistan. In science, federal funding for embryonic stem cells is still banned. As far as environmentalism goes, we still don't have cap and trade, and haven't signed Kyoto. So, same as Bush. The only two areas his administration has deviated from what Bush would do are the health care bill and DADT......and the health care bill is going to be dismantled before anything takes effect. And it's hilarious because he got elected because "Hey! I'm not Bush! Vote for me!" |
|
| Author: | Talya [ Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
A good leader of a country is defined more as knowing what NOT to do, as opposed to knowing what TO do. You can rarely go wrong with inaction, but any change needs to be done perfectly or else it becomes a disaster. In this respect, I still hold Clinton up as a relatively good president. Related to this, any leader needs to put the freedoms of the individual ahead of any plans to fix problems in society. It is not inherently wrong to fix a broken system, so long as you don't trample all over everyone's freedoms to do so. Lastly, and specifically for the president of the USA, as opposed to leaders of countries in general, it is good to remember that as president, you cannot really do anything. Your real power is in preventing other politicians from doing things that you don't like. Now, due to the amount of political power a president has, they can carry a lot of influence with lawmakers, and with dealmaking can get laws passed that they like, and so they really can accomplish a lot that a lone congressperson cannot. But a president can never forget their primary duty - stopping bad legislation from ever getting through. I would argue that liberal use of a veto is a good sign that a president is on the right track, although stupid partisan politics can skew that, too. |
|
| Author: | Sam [ Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Lenas wrote: Not much to defend or argue about, because he hasn't really done anything. Yep, I voted for him. I voted for him also. No, I am not happy with the results so far. Yes, I would vote for him again if the alternative was McCain/Palin........ |
|
| Author: | Wwen [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
That's part of the problem... |
|
| Author: | Lenas [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm not sure there really is a problem. My quality of life hasn't changed at all from the last presidency to the current. |
|
| Author: | Sam [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Wwen wrote: That's part of the problem... You'd have to expound before I would waste time rebutting this. |
|
| Author: | Wwen [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't want to waste time expounding only to have to respond to your wasted rebuttal. So, lets just agree to disagree. |
|
| Author: | Rorinthas [ Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think what he's getting it is the only differences if McCain had gotten elected would be that there might be tort reform and clear no abortion funding in the health care bill. He may or may not have killed START and DADT too. Minor league stuff all around. |
|
| Author: | Sam [ Fri Jan 14, 2011 10:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Wwen wrote: I don't want to waste time expounding only to have to respond to your wasted rebuttal. So, lets just agree to disagree. So, you just wanted to waste time making a vague one liner in response to my post, but explaining your intent is too much work.......got it. 
|
|
| Author: | Khross [ Fri Jan 14, 2011 2:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Quality of a President |
Sam: The problem is that despite the obvious failures of Obama's presidency, you refuse to accept that the alternative could have been superior. It's an unknown quantity at this point, but it's irrational and unintelligent to suggest that an unchosen alternative must of necessity be inferior to the already flawed choice you made. In short, you're buying into the false dilemma of America politics. You believe you only have two viable choices; and you believe that the choice you did not make must be worse than one you made. Neither of these things are true or rational in any sense. |
|
| Author: | Sam [ Fri Jan 14, 2011 6:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Quality of a President |
Khross wrote: Sam: The problem is that despite the obvious failures of Obama's presidency, you refuse to accept that the alternative could have been superior. It's an unknown quantity at this point, but it's irrational and unintelligent to suggest that an unchosen alternative must of necessity be inferior to the already flawed choice you made. Despite the "obvious" failures, I do refuse to believe the McCain/Palin would be better. You can call that irrational and unintelligent if you wish....... The unknown quantity is not that unknown, given McCain has been in politics a long time, and the fact that party lines are what they are. 8 years of Republican leadership won't suddenly change from black to white just because it becomes McCain instead of GWB. Khross wrote: In short, you're buying into the false dilemma of America politics. You believe you only have two viable choices; and you believe that the choice you did not make must be worse than one you made. Neither of these things are true or rational in any sense. Until someone can show me where there has been a 3rd viable, electable alternative to the two major parties.......I do only have two options. While we here may be smarter than the average bear, the game is set up for all to play. And the vast majority of the voters in this country will not change to allow someone outside two parties to be elected POTUS. History does not lie. You either vote for one of the two and see your vote actually count, or you vote for a 3rd option and see it do nothing more than perhaps take a vote away. Either way, a 3rd option vote dies. |
|
| Author: | Midgen [ Fri Jan 14, 2011 6:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
If faced with the same congress, McCain/Palin would have accomplished absolutely nothing of merit. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|