How 'bout them liberals?

[Dark]

So... Obama's approval ratings are in the dumps right now. I was watching CNN, and what, 60% of the country doesn't want Obama to serve a second term? This is coming from a country that has more liberals than conservatives, so those are devastating poll numbers.

Jokes aside (Palin will win the 2012 election and the world will subsequently end), how do you feel about Obama potentially not serving a second term? Or do you want him to serve a second term?

Personally, we wouldn't have been better off with McCain, but I didn't think Obama would be a godsend and solve all of our problems. I'd evaluate the 2012 election the same way: which candidate will screw us over [i]the least[/i]?

Also, apparently (according to my dad), the Independants have the best chance they've ever had to win this election. lulz

[CrabHelmet]

Obama still could win a second term. The Republican Party has been becoming more and more extreme for the last decade, and the Mad Tea Party is just the latest step in that direction. This means that someone like Sarah Palin could have a decent chance of winning the Republican primary, which would in turn alienate everyone who isn't a wingnut.

Really, the underlying problem is that, while the Democrats have had power, the Republicans have been in full troll stance, doing nothing but mindlessly opposing anything they try to do. With the entire party in whatever-Obama-says-I-say-the-opposite mode, it's hard to get much done. So then the Republicans point to Obama not being able to get much done and call him ineffective, even though 1) it's their fault that not as much was done as should have been done, and 2) the things the Republicans want to get done are not the things anyone who wanted Obama to do anything would support anyhow. So they go out of their way to create problems and then blame Obama for those problems and tell the country that those problems aren't going to get fixed until the country gives them back the power they've horribly misused for the last few decades; it's like a protection racket.

The choice will come down to what it always comes down to: do you want people who are really good at doing bad stuff or people who are really bad at doing good stuff? It's the same as ever - the Republicans are still evil and the Democrats are still incompetent - except now that Obama's been in office for two measly years people have magically forgotten what Bush was like.

Also, don't be fooled by the fact that this is allegedly a "country that has more liberals than conservatives"; while that may be true on the surface, self-proclaimed Independents are more likely to vote Republican than Democrat, and registered Republicans are more likely to actually vote Republican than registered Democrats are to vote Democrat. It turns out that having a voter base fueled by paranoia, misinformation, xenophobia, and general hatred of everyone else in the world inspires greater party loyalty. (Not to mention that America is so conservative compared to most of Europe that what we call liberals are often what they call moderates.)

[Luna Lovegood]

Donald Trump '12!

[Tentacruel]

I don't care how bad Obama's rep is, the day Palin wins is the day George Bush gets a Nobel Prize.

And wow is Crab correct. The Republican Party has really gone downhill lately. I mean REALLY far downhill. The Democratic Party has too, just not nearly to the point of mindlessly trolling.

[Flinsbon]

Honestly, Obama will probably win the next election because everyone in the Tea Party originated from the Republican Party, so the Republican Party will lose a lot of votes that they would have had otherwise.

[CrabHelmet]

[quote name='Flinsbon' timestamp='1288132376' post='4740028']
Honestly, Obama will probably win the next election because everyone in the Tea Party originated from the Republican Party, so the Republican Party will lose a lot of votes that they would have had otherwise.
[/quote]
Uh, the Mad Tea Partiers are still in the Republican Party; in fact, some of the midterm elections' Republican candidates are Mad Tea Partiers (most famously Delaware's O'Donnell). Amazingly, they're somehow not quite stupid enough to split the ticket.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Kind of a shame what happened to the Tea Party Movement, I wonder if some of the original members still support it.

[Dr. Cakey]

Pity the Coffee Party never caught on.

If you don't get the joke, the Coffee Party was a bunch of guys who noticed the Tea Party was, um...odd. Because tea was a large part of the grievances against England, it became symbolic of the motherland and aristocracy, and America started switching to coffee. You can imagine the state of 'drinking tea' as being a brick wall, 'tea party' as beating your head against it, and 'coffee' as using your intangibility power to pass through the wall. Or something.

Well, to take the broad view, no party should control 75%+ of the Senate. On the other hand, since Democrats vote together in much the same way black widows form intimate marital bonds, the Democratic Party could more or less qualify as its own political spectrum of left and right.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

[quote name='Dark' timestamp='1287803505' post='4727570']
This is coming from a country that has more liberals than conservatives, so those are devastating poll numbers.
[/quote]
This is just plain false. It may have more democrats than republicans (I don't believe that, but it might be), but by no means are most democrats liberal. Most democrats would, for instance, get laughed off the Norwegian Conservative Party for being too far on the right.

[Luna Lovegood]

[quote name='GenzoTheHarpist' timestamp='1288910503' post='4761962']
This is just plain false. It may have more democrats than republicans (I don't believe that, but it might be), but by no means are most democrats liberal. Most democrats would, for instance, get laughed off the Norwegian Conservative Party for being too far on the right.
[/quote]

this

[Catterjune]

[quote name='Crab Helmet' timestamp='1287856480' post='4729019']
Really, the underlying problem is that, while the Democrats have had power, the Republicans have been in full troll stance, doing nothing but mindlessly opposing anything they try to do. [/quote]

While I'd be all for the whole "blame the right wing" thing, the liberal left hasn't done much of anything to keep the Republicans from wasting time or for pushing their own agenda. They had a huge majority for the past two years and nothing they have done stands out in recent memory. When your only vote is either between the guys who don't do anything and the guys who do terrible things you can tell the future of the country is pretty damn bleak. (inb4lolthirdparty)

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

[quote name='GenzoTheHarpist' timestamp='1288910503' post='4761962']
This is just plain false. It may have more democrats than republicans (I don't believe that, but it might be), but by no means are most democrats liberal. Most democrats would, for instance, get laughed off the Norwegian Conservative Party for being too far on the right.
[/quote]
I understand what you're getting at, and it's to be expected of a country that was made under the principle of meritocracy and equal opportunity(though I think they're currently achieving the opposite), but that's a bit of an exaggeration.


While Republicans are mostly to blame for halting anything from getting done, Obama was quiet about the things he did. It allowed some morons on the right to lambast anything he did and come up with phrases like Death Care. And while you're also gonna' have people attacking him for having his family not go on vacation in the US and stuff like that, people that care about that are already beyond hopeless anyways.

[quote name='PikaPerson01' timestamp='1289079939' post='4766670'](inb4lolthirdparty)
[/quote]
Or, better yet, the party system gets abolished.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

[quote name='Vuvuzela of Triumph' timestamp='1289139648' post='4768328']
I understand what you're getting at, and it's to be expected of a country that was made under the principle of meritocracy and equal opportunity(though I think they're currently achieving the opposite), but that's a bit of an exaggeration.


While Republicans are mostly to blame for halting anything from getting done, Obama was quiet about the things he did. It allowed some morons on the right to lambast anything he did and come up with phrases like Death Care. And while you're also gonna' have people attacking him for having his family not go on vacation in the US and stuff like that, people that care about that are already beyond hopeless anyways.
[/quote]
That doesn't really counter what I was saying. I wasn't saying republicans were solely responsible (that was the opposite of what I was saying). If democrats were the "liberal" party, by international standards we would have had single-payer single payer health care last year with zero democratic opposition. Instead everyone who suggested it were not taken seriously at all, and lots of democrats didn't go for the watered-down version.

They are not liberals, and republicans are not conservatives. By international standards, democrats are "far right" and conservatives are "absolutely lunatic fringe right".

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Only my first paragraph was addressing your post, my second was a response to how Republicans are opposing everything Obama tries to do.

When it comes to government involvement and how to monitor the economy, American democrats have thoughts very much in alignment with those oversea. I think they'd fall under the moderate party if anything.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

Moderates in Europe all would have favored more radical health care reform.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

[quote name='GenzoTheHarpist' timestamp='1289185933' post='4770860']
Moderates in Europe all would have favored more radical health care reform.
[/quote]
The reform proposed was more than likely an attempt to appeal to Republicans with a less drastic change. This was early on in the presidency, before we had become certain of the game the Republicans were playing at.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

[quote name='Vuvuzela of Triumph' timestamp='1289192314' post='4771077']
The reform proposed was more than likely an attempt to appeal to Republicans with a less drastic change. This was early on in the presidency, before we had become certain of the game the Republicans were playing at.
[/quote]
Maybe, but really there is nothing to suggest that democrats would have sprung for single-payer if it had been a legit option. With 60 in the senate, if they were all liberals they could have done whatever they wanted.

[Flinsbon]

Honestly the whole problem at this point is that power keeps switching between Democrats and Republicans. If anything significant is to happen, we need to have 1 party that stays in power for a while. Power shouldn't switch every 8 years. Nothing gets done that way. 1 president is in power and does stuff for 8 years to try to help the economy. However, the opposite party doesn't like what the last president did, so when they gain control, they take down everything the last president did and start fresh. Then after 8 more years, power switches again, all progress is taken down, and we are back to square one. Again. It will never end, nor will it get better, while control of the government keeps alternating. We need a string of Democrats or a string of Republicans in office.

Now I admit that I am a Democrat, but I will say this with no intention of any bias. To all of America - in the 2012 election, reelect Obama. In the 2016 election, elect another Democratic president and keep him in for 8 years. Then elect another Democratic president and keep him for 8 years. Honestly, just keep electing Democrats into office until we get this economy fixed. I'm not saying a string of Republican presidents wouldn't be able to do the same thing, but right now Obama is a Democrat and we cant afford any more delays on our economy's repair by electing a Republic president only to have him destroy everything Obama has done and try to start fresh. There just isn't any more time for these games. We need a bunch of Democrats to carry on what Obama has started. That way, something might actually get FINISHED around here. Electing a Republican at this point would only delay our recovery.

Once again, I am stating this with no bias whatsoever. I am following the path of logic here. Please elect Obama again in 2012 and continue to elect Democratic presidents until our economy is fixed. After that, everyone can vote for whomever they want. But until then, please just put an end to the bickering and delays and lets stick with what we have.

P.S. To any of you who still want to elect a Republican president in 2010 just to get Obama out, I say this. Go away and don't vote. You're being selfish at this point. You don't want this economy fixed quickly. You just want a Republican in office. You're not even considering what's best for the country right now. Obama started something to repair the economy, so let him and the Democrats who will follow finish what he started. You think Obama is doing terribly and that he's doing nothing but hurt the economy even more, but you need to give this stuff some time. 4 years is not enough to change anything significant, nor is 8 years, but that doesn't mean things won't get better after 12 years or 16 years. Just let the Democrats finish what they started and don't try to get in the way by electing a Republican. At this point, electing a Republican would only hurt us. Leave the Democrats in power and they'll figure it out eventually.

[GenzoTheHarpist]

[quote name='Flinsbon' timestamp='1289197725' post='4771157']
Honestly the whole problem at this point is that power keeps switching between Democrats and Republicans. If anything significant is to happen, we need to have 1 party that stays in power for a while. Power shouldn't switch every 8 years. Nothing gets done that way. 1 president is in power and does stuff for 8 years to try to help the economy. However, the opposite party doesn't like what the last president did, so when they gain control, they take down everything the last president did and start fresh. Then after 8 more years, power switches again, all progress is taken down, and we are back to square one. Again. It will never end, nor will it get better, while control of the government keeps alternating. We need a string of Democrats or a string of Republicans in office.

Now I admit that I am a Democrat, but I will say this with no intention of any bias. To all of America - in the 2012 election, reelect Obama. In the 2016 election, elect another Democratic president and keep him in for 8 years. Then elect another Democratic president and keep him for 8 years. Honestly, just keep electing Democrats into office until we get this economy fixed. I'm not saying a string of Republican presidents wouldn't be able to do the same thing, but right now Obama is a Democrat and we cant afford any more delays on our economy's repair by electing a Republic president only to have him destroy everything Obama has done and try to start fresh. There just isn't any more time for these games. We need a bunch of Democrats to carry on what Obama has started. That way, something might actually get FINISHED around here. Electing a Republican at this point would only delay our recovery.

Once again, I am stating this with no bias whatsoever. I am following the path of logic here. Please elect Obama again in 2012 and continue to elect Democratic presidents until our economy is fixed. After that, everyone can vote for whomever they want. But until then, please just put an end to the bickering and delays and lets stick with what we have.

P.S. To any of you who still want to elect a Republican president in 2010 just to get Obama out, I say this. Go away and don't vote. You're being selfish at this point. You don't want this economy fixed quickly. You just want a Republican in office. You're not even considering what's best for the country right now. Obama started something to repair the economy, so let him and the Democrats who will follow finish what he started. You think Obama is doing terribly and that he's doing nothing but hurt the economy even more, but you need to give this stuff some time. 4 years is not enough to change anything significant, nor is 8 years, but that doesn't mean things won't get better after 12 years or 16 years. Just let the Democrats finish what they started and don't try to get in the way by electing a Republican. At this point, electing a Republican would only hurt us. Leave the Democrats in power and they'll figure it out eventually.
[/quote]
I have got to say, that's the lamest idea i've ever heard in my life. Does it not occur to you that, in long periods in office, policies can cause declines rather than benefits?

[CrabHelmet]

The problem is that both parties suck and the voterbase is composed of idiots. Fiddling with the term length numbers won't change that.

[Tentacruel]

[quote name='Crab Helmet' timestamp='1289254528' post='4772347']
The problem is that both parties suck and the voterbase is composed of idiots. Fiddling with the term length numbers won't change that.
[/quote]
Oh my god this.

[Flinsbon]

I'm not saying the term lengths must be changed. They're fine. It's just that we need multiple presidents in a row that are from the same party or nothing will ever get completed. However, the first half of your statement couldn't be more right.

@GenzoTheHarpist - Yes I know too much of anything is bad, but we need a significant period of time for anything to be finished. My point is that the constant alternating of the government needs to stop. Right now, the majority of America doesn't want Obama back in office. But if a Republican is elected in 2012, then 4 years from now everything will be reversed and the Republicans will be under fire from the Democrats. Then the Democrats will regain control and everything will repeat itself. Meanwhile, nothing will actually get done to help the economy.

[CrabHelmet]

The Democrats still suck slightly less. If my car swerves off the road and crashes, the Democrats will stand around it and nod sagely and maybe form an interdepartmental committee to examine the possibility of taking some as-yet-unspecified action in the dueness of time. Meanwhile, the Republicans will be laughing because they sabotaged my brakes for being a Kinsey 1 and therefore TEH DEVIL.

[Flinsbon]

This is true. Plus, I don't remember the Democratic Party ever trolling the Republicans or, at least, not to the extent that the Republicans are trolling right now.

[.Starrk]

I'd say that both parties are s***. Why? All republicans do is lie, cover ups, and try to make Obama look bad. And the Democrats are bad too. No matter what they do, even if its trying to do good, it never works because they are too complacent.