US Presidential debate thread

As I didn't see it posted yet, here is a thread for those of us wishing to comment on the US Presidential debates going on now.

Ill start: that guy is the very definition of 'smarmy'. And word to the wise: don't try to talk over the moderator.

Post mortem: Romney turned into a windsock blowing hither and yon. An etch a sketch of a man, questing to please everyone at whatever cost to facts.

The very definition of 'smarmy'.

I know that most of you will express indifference to politics, apathy even. You are still doomed to live under the policies of the victor and his political party. Even in the fiction, the Jedi serve at the request or demand of the Republic, then Empire (kind of) then Rebellion. Our reality is even more stark. Politics pervades nearly every single thing that you do, at least in this country. And to express anger and discontent over the outcome of our politics, while simultaneously trying to keep your hands clean and float above the fray is disingenuous at best.

I will not tell my son, when he asks me years from now why things are so messed up, how did they get this way, why didn't you do something, I will NOT tell him anything less than I did all I could do to leave a better world for you. But I was adrift in a sea of idiocy and apathy, and it eventually drowned me.

No. I'm a strong swimmer. I will be able to look him in the eye and respond with pride.

Desolous wrote: I know that most of you will express indifference to politics, apathy even. You are still doomed to live under the policies of the victor and his political party.

I guess that would depend on your definition of "doomed". I very rarely see the POTUS actually change anything, for better or worse, that would doom us to anything. If they make a decision that congress does not agree with, it will typically be shot down. In a worst case scenario, if both congress and the president make a decision that the entire country can not support, there are more than enough gun-toting civilians out there that would probably start another civil war. Few things could be done by one man to "doom" us which could not be undone by the people if they so choose.


Part of the message is hidden for the guests. Please log in or register to see it.

Woooh! Go Canada! No presidents!

Haha,,,I remember that episode, where they are trying to pick a new school mascot. Love that show. I can't believe its still on after all these years.

As far as Canada, doesn't the Prime Minister serve essentially the same purpose as the President? I was always kind of confused on the difference.

As to 'doomed' as word choice, it is apt for a number of reasons.

First, I finished reading a book called 'Drift:the unmooring of American Mil Power' by Rachel Maddow last month (good book). In it, she talks about the disconnect between the US populace and the military as a whole, and how the President now has nearly unparraleled executive authority to level war machines. For example, we have been at war, by any sense of the word, since we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq in the early 2000's. Has congress officially voted to declare war, as called for by the Constitution and (somewhat) the declaration of independence? No. So for guys like me, the President can doom you to go to war. Some (far too many) never come back, or come back missing something.

That is one examle. There are many more, particularly in this era of extreme partisan bickering resulting in a gridlocked congress.

romney is too far detached from the poverty stricken...i think his 47% speech doomed his campaign...

i would rather deal with 4 more years of someone wanting to help and being actively undermined by the rich beurocrats, thus achieving nothing, than to deal with 4 years of the "billionaires club" running the show giving their rich buddies more breaks...trickle down economics (aka laissez faire economics) failed under reagan, failed under bush senior, and failed under bush junior...what makes anyone think they'd work under anyone else...

how can he not be detached? he is a product of his raising, as they say around here.

i remember ann romney claiming they had it so hard as a young couple in college, having to eat poorly and study so hard. she omitted working, cuz she didnt. they lived off of a large stock bequest from daddy, selling some off as needed.

how terrible for them.

i have family who literally would have starved to death had it not been for outside intervention. simply starved to death. and this woman has the audacity to claim that she and her silver spoon-fed husband had it hard in any way growing up. that is a sheer insult. a slap in the face to the 47% he so obviously scorns.

I struggle to understand the hate for "evil federal taxes" in the US at the moment. It almost seems as though people see an increase in federal taxes as devil worshiping... But the US have had extremely high taxes for the rich in the past, when the economy was in ruins...