Mitt Romney Will Be President. Its Decided! SovietSexKitten: There appears to be a concerted and deliberate effort to declare Mitt Romney the winner of the American election. He was declared the winner before the first Presidential debate even occured last Thursday October 4th, 2012. Stories of people killing themselves and family members for fear of the re-election of Obama are being sensationalized by the media, and there are disturbing cases of wealthy individuals resorting to fear mongering and public threats to support the Romney agenda. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/bush-backer-us-business-tycoon-threatens-terminate-staff-052733598.html  veronica: they were trying to paint Obama as Jimmy carter , im still wondering why no one has questioned romney on his religious views , veronica: Next presidential debate is on foreign policy ... but this election is about the economy stupid  (Post deleted by Mask Of Dionysus ) Sarcastic Dots: It's more fun for the media to paint political campaigns as close. I think it's entirely possible that Mitt Romney can win the popular vote, but he'd need a huge swing in key states to win the electoral one (the one that matters).  davidk14: . The debate tomorrow night between Biden and Ryan should be hopefully educational if not entertaining. Joe may not be able to keep his comments focused.  .  Deus Ex Machina: The idea that Romney "won" the first presidential debate vs Obama is a blatant farce. I watched it live. I had to wake up in the middle of the night to watch it, but I did. I admit I was surprised at how clear and circumstancialy coherent Romney was. Most of the european media has a clear prejudicial stand against Romney, so they enjoy portraying him as a puppet with no ideas and a moron, much in the line of what "Dabya" proved to be. But he clearly is (a bit) better then that. That said, Obama was performing at something like 20% of his political and argumentative ability, while i believe Romney was doing much more of an effort to place his arguments on the table and be really blunt. The next debates will show an escalade in Obama's agressiveness and he will force Romney to show his true intentions. The issue is, though, wether a large number of people really care about their intentions. Both Obama's and Romney's. Most current western culture is not about the values that should be present when you elect a president with as much power (and as little, too) as the american. People are drawn - by the influence of the media, entertainment and products they consume - to value characteristics of the candidates that have little to do with the outcomes of their politics, both in the economic and the social arenas. People can not ask themselves the simple questions that should steer their decisions: - What will the REALLY EXPECTABLE outcome of this guy's proposed policies be like, to me and to the people arround me and the next generations? - Am I being influenced by a long aquired (maybe even inherited) prejudice against (or for) an ideology that is less and less meaningful? - What examples are there in the world that I can think about, of the application of these proposed lines of action? Are those REAL? or just mistifications presented to me by the media? What was the outcome? - Is my religion or are my political beliefs blinding me from seeing the truth behind this candidate's intentions? Am I really reasoning as hard and deep as I CAN about these proposals? Or am I just following what other people are telling me.? Have those people been right or wrong in the past? And ultimately: Who will REALLY WIN and who will REALLY LOSE from the implementation of these or those politics.. and .. DO I CARE? .. to be continued davidk14: . Deus said: "...Obama was performing at something like 20% of his political and argumentative ability." David responds: After watching numerous, perhaps dozens of speeches by Obama, without a teleprompter, without a written speech in front of him, he is exactly what you saw in the first debate. Just ask yourself this question, why has Obama only had one news conference this entire year? Answer: He can't answer the questions honestly. . Deus Ex Machina: David, What is it with some people and the use of teleprompters? Does its abolition make the speeches more genuine? If we type something in here that we read and think doesen't really convey our exact thoughts and go back and re-write that in a different way that is closer to what we mean, are we being less then entirely honest? I doubt someone like Obama needs a written speech in front of him except for getting some figures and intricate numbers right. And the fact he uses a teleprompter is obviously a sign of respect for the audiences he approaches. I've seen a few interviews with him during the last year and he was keen to answer any question he was posed, and he was clear about his answers too, as clear as possible when talking about proposals and how he expects to achieve some of his promises. Far more clear then his opponent. Please bare in mind I do not vouch for all of Obama's choices. I think, for one, he should be a lot more pro-active in wall street and markets regulations. I believe he should promote a complete re-thinking of the finantial system and probably strip it from artificial means of engorging already enormous wealths through clever usage of artifacts like CDS's and other derivatives or even just "short-selling" in the stock market. Those tools are designed to promote speculation and ARE the cause of most of the crisis we're enduring world wide. But these things are not easy to fight. The lobby interests are very powerful. Yet he talks against them, and that's a position I chose over defending them with all you got, like his opponent does. In the end, a democratic election is a CHOICE between proposals. Maybe you have your own view of how eonomy should be run, or how your society should be organised, and maybe it's different in its details to either of the candidates. But you are not running for president (or are you?). I am not claiming either, or ANY of the candidates is perfect. I'm only claiming the result of what can be expected from Obama's policies is better for the middle class and for people in general then what can honestly and evidently be expected from Mitt Romney's and Paul Ryan's policies. And, of course (and that is my stake in it) in a globalized economy they WILL be better for open-market countries like the one I live in. The only points you make about Obama are that he uses a teleprompter, he hasn't had enough press conferences and then you state he can't answer questions honestly. Do you think Mitt Romney is answering questions honestly? Do you believe he will not reduce the taxes paid by the wealthy ? Do you believe he will balance the budget without raising the taxes for the middle class? You see, I live in a country whith a RIGHT WING, CONSERVATIVE government that promised EXACTLY all that, in order to win the last elections, and then did exactly the oposite, behaving in a much more government-control and "socialist" way then the previous socialist government, so forgive me for being skeptical when I hear tycoons talk about "free market economies".  _CaNkER_: A newspaper here in Australia reports that Obama didn't realise he lost the 1st debate till he got of a plane somewhere. Media here reported how his performance in that debate was not so much weak, but non-existant. It won't make any difference to me who the yanks elect. The yanks elected W.Bush second time round. And it's done nothing of benefit to anyone. If and I mean "if", they're serious about repairing the damage caused by George-"look What I can do daddy" Bush, then they may want to think twice before giving their vote to a guy who apparently hates 47% of them. Health care is expensive. I don't disagree. But Trillions of $$$$ on half arsed wars that achieved nothing, have cost more. (Post deleted by Mask Of Dionysus ) (Post deleted by Mask Of Dionysus ) (Post deleted by Mask Of Dionysus ) (Post deleted by Mask Of Dionysus ) (Post deleted by Mask Of Dionysus ) | Politics Chat Room 79 People Chatting
Similar Conversations |
