Santorum Drops Out

[Figment]

The whole mudslinging already is in Obama's favour. How many Reps will trust the Rep candidates? How many on-the-edge-Democrats would vote Romney after such a slaughter of a pre-election? Not many!

[Natir]

One thing you won't see in a democratic primary is what has been happening now. It has all been about who is more conservative than the other. That is about one of the dumbest arguments ever. This primary has not really been about who has better policies, but who the tea party will like more. Because when it comes to the general election, all that matters is the tea party and the extreme right, right?

This primary has forced Romney, who had a better chance, go more towards the far right just to get the crazy vote. That will hurt him in the long run. I believe one can flip flop on certain issues given a decent explanation. But Romney, has flip flopped on issues just to try to appeal to other voters. He will win the primary but will have a tough time in the general election. What will hurt him more is if it goes to the convention, that will only be taking more time away from campaigning in the general election.

On a side note, I was curious to see what a porn prohibition would have been like.

[Effective]

[WildGunsTomcat]

Meh.

All I know is I'm voting for Romney...because Obama sucks.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

Meh.

All I know is I'm voting for Romney...because Obama sucks.

Be specific. You will find most conservative complaints against Obama have been found to be fabricated. Remember always be suspicious of what you hear during the election and double check things. You'll be surprised what Romney has gotten away with saying. Check out this site.

Also Effective, that was amazing. I love the Onion.

[Malorn]

Meh.

[Goku]

All I have to say is Paul will never ever come close to being President. I still cannot believe people think he is going to get the nomination at this point...

[Ale]

Thread title: EEeeeewwwwWWww.

I, for one, am pissed off that Santorum is out. Frothing mad, actually.

[Goku]

Failed socialist policies? Please enlighten me on that.

[Vash02]

Hey America,

Obama isnt a socialist. We know socialists.

Signed,
Europe. xx

Really, you know when a person says that Obama is a socialist, they havent just drunk the republican kool aid, they have dunked themselves into a bath tub of it.

[Goku]

Exactly Vash. Nothing Obama has done is close to socialism IMO.

[Malorn]

Meh.

[Goku]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Government-funding private businesses (the "green" work he's done, like Solyndra and other failures)

Well that is incentives to get those businesses going. We aren't going to be able to use fossil fuels forever, so it has to get kick started somehow. We're a super power, rather stupid we import so much oil from over seas isn't it?

Re-distribution of wealth from the wealthy to the not-so-wealthy

Explain more please? I fail to see where Obama has done this thus far in his first term. He didn't even let the Bush tax cuts expire.

Forcing Americans to buy a service (health care, which is likely to be struck down by Supreme Court)

Hot button issue yes. Although action is needed to slow down and reverse health spending. Thats the point of the health care reform. Besides you are already paying for services via the government. There isn't a major difference with health care if this is enforced. I can't say I agree with this being the method to fix all this though.


Continued bailouts (the "stimulus")

The majority of those bailouts prevented even further economic collapse. Do you have any major understanding of how Macroeconomic policies put in place by government/fed help the economy?

Increased government spending

This isn't going away until the economy is back to normal. Feel free to slash everything have a balanced budget. You will easily see economic collapse that makes the recent one look small.

Wrong direction.

Like I said before. This isn't socialism at all.

[Sirisian]

Woah, someone is on the offensive.

Originally Posted by Malorn

Obama wants a nanny socialist state with wealth redistribution and "social justice".

Having fair taxes isn't socialism. Socialism is generally controlling the means of production and distribution to control companies. If you call every tax that isn't a fixed rate socialist you have a poor understanding of where taxing doesn't cause harm.

Originally Posted by Malorn

Romney needs to embrace his capitalist past and run on that. He knows economy, he knows how to make businesses successful and prosperous.

You can't really sell the government. I don't see how his usual strategies would work. His pas with businesses is questionable at best and if anything shows a careless understanding for employees.

Originally Posted by Malorn

Convincing people like Sirisian is neither possible nor necessary.

Because I don't listen to statements with no backed up proof. Seriously what you just said are the cries of an ignorant voter. It's very tiring to see people like yourself in the US voting without knowing anything about government policies or researching their candidates.

Originally Posted by Malorn

Government-funding private businesses (the "green" work he's done, like Solyndra and other failures)

I think this was because of the threat of foreign expansion into green energy. I'm with you on the Solyndra problem. I'm not sure how they thought they could defeat Chinese manufacturing directly. They were already years ahead. Kind of a naive move on Obama's part.

Originally Posted by Malorn

Re-distribution of wealth from the wealthy to the not-so-wealthy

Providing government services so the poor don't stay poor and have a chance makes economical sense. Unless you're referring to the buffet rule, which while it'll take in very little money for the government, is a simple change until the broader tax problems are fixed. (Referring to the people that take in 1 million a year). Not sure what else you're referring to. Unless you're against the current progressive tax code which isn't really progressive for the extreme.

Originally Posted by Malorn

Forcing Americans to buy a service (health care, which is likely to be struck down by Supreme Court)

It's the only compromise Republicans would make. They blocked a single payer initiative since healthcare to become anything like a human right is anti-capitalist. I don't trust private insurance industries to decide who gets care and what quality. Forcing people to buy a private service or implementing single-payer is the only way to take pressure away from the current healthcare system such that it can lower premiums after its own insurance isn't so stressed from providing free health-care to the uninsured. (Overall the current system is extremely broken, and most people have realized that. The solution to it isn't agreed upon). Obama is really doing the best he can modeling the Massachusetts' system.

Originally Posted by Malorn

Continued bailouts (the "stimulus")

Stimulus did have a general positive impact on unemployment if you look at the numbers. Regarding the bailouts it really did help GM which is now back on track and strong (making billions in profit). Check this page out. Most Republicans didn't realize a lot of the bailout is being paid back and has helped companies get back on their feet after huge restructuring. Now whether the government should help large companies that fail is up for debate, but keep in mind what we don't create things at home (like cars) we import, and Obama has a strong policy on imports/exports. (You probably already know he's on track right now to doubling exports).

Originally Posted by Malorn

Increased government spending

Most of that was for Medicaid and Social Security. Something he didn't have much control over. Unless you're referring to something else?

[Malorn]

Meh.