The Progressive Case Against Obama

[No1]

You said something along the lines of blacks unconditionally supporting the Democrats since the early 60s.

Whatever breh.

Trust Obama more than Bush? That's your reasoning for supporting Obama and doing these things? What about the things where Obama went above and beyond what Bush did?

You're a funny guy bro, a really funny guy. I just said "I never said they were right for doing so" and then you post this nonsense. You're currently doing what I HATE about people I debate with. The type of cat that argues for the sake of arguing instead of making any type of point

The system is flawed because partisan hacks like you are willing to let "your guy" get away with whatever they want as long as the "other guy" doesn't win. YOU are the reason the system is broken.

The system is broken because of numerous reasons, but the kid who has worked on campaigns for both major parties and independents is certainly not it. This is how I know you're arguing for the sake of arguing, you keep trying to frame me as a blind Dem, where were you last month when it was literally me vs. EVERY liberal/Dem on this board? This is your arrogance it's the same shyt you tried to pull in that other thread when you got called out on it. You overstate your intelligence and you think that people that agree with you are less intelligent and have less legitimate motives.

If I went outside right now, and polled a million people, who do you think more people would find as reasonable - the guy who acknowledges the shyt you do and then make sacrifices for the greater good or the guy who acknowledges that shyt and supports positions and people that cannot effectuate any change at all? This is what you just don't get. Take out the bull-moose party, and pure-wealth and every other rise of a third party has been based on a grassroots movement. I've always said that until that is feasible try to build up those grassroots bases but don't ignore what happens at the national level.

Here's the real world application of how your logic affects Americans that I care about (you obviously don't...JUST ADMIT this...your beliefs do not reside in providing the greatest possible good for the most people possible at any given time): We elect Romney: McCain-Feingold? Never coming back. Citizens United? Forget it. Affirmative Action? In the bushes. Parts of the Civil Rights Act? Done. So why in the world would I advocate voting for a third party to anyone voting in a swing state when that is what is at stake?

You complain about your issue and fail to realize that there is no way of it getting repealed by a challenge at all if we have a conservative court.

No problem solving skills? Coming from the guy who thinks they system is going to get fixed by keeping it alive? That's problem solving to you? I offered my solution: I won't support candidates who I feel don't represent me as much as possible. You have admitted countless fukking times to going against your ideals to vote for the lesser of two evils. The only lacking any solutions is you.

So what you're saying is that I recognize like every rational individual from the founders of the constitution until now that everything I want can't happen? Oh shyt. Did I ever say that the current system will get fixed by keeping it alive? No. I said the idea that voting for someone at the national level that has no chance of changing anything is idiotic. That's not what problem-solving skills are by the way. It's clear that you don't know what the term even means. You're currently arguing with me about policy positions. Problem-solving skills are fixing PROBLEMS. We disagree about what the biggest problem even is.

As far as the current system, how many times must I say that you have to build up third parties at the local level where most political talent is drawn from? How many times have I talked about reinstating McCain-Feingold? How many times have I talked about greater transparency and eliminating the fillibuster procedure as is, etc? Please stop. It's like you're forgetting who you're debating. NONE of that applies to me.

I'm against Obama on a lot of issues, but civil liberties is the main one. That is important to me.



I voted for Obama in 2008 and actually volunteered for his campaign. His rhetoric and voting record did not come to fruition as president. I'm talking about actions OUTSIDE of the congressional gridlock.

And? When did I say that's not what you're talking about? Cotdamn, you're being purposefully obtuse.

So if you're choice was Romney or Bachman, you'd willingly go vote for Romney?

Let's deal with real life situations. But I understand someone whose way of thinking is in extremes would have to resort to this.

 

[Blackking]

The only reason a third party seems so appealing, is because they are a third party. The more mainstream they become, the more they will have in common with repubs, and dems.

animal farm.. i feel like the third parties could be great in power... but possibly worse. maybe it's my conditioning is why i think this way.

 

[Type Username Here]

I disagree with this statement, most all issues he ran his campagn on have been at least addresss. Things may not be totally fixed, or he didn't get some stuff done, but his overall ideologies, and concerns have not changed.
How does his rhetoric and record as president differ, from when he was a candidate?

Here is Obama in his own words, not mine sir:

Barack Obama told a cheering crowd at a town hall meeting in Casper today that he would restore respect for law in the White House by reviewing every executive order issued by President George W. Bush and discarding any deemed unconstitutional.
Obama's comments came in response to a question from a man in the audience who said he worried that presidents sometimes consider themselves above the law.
Obama's rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton is scheduled to speak in Casper this evening.
Both made appearances in the state in advance of Wyoming's caucuses Saturday. The state will award 12 pledged delegates.
In his speech, Obama praised the libertarian spirit of Westerners —
— and condemned the Bush administration's use of warrantless wiretaps and a willingness to hold prisoners without charges.
"There's nothing Republican about that. Everyone should be outraged by that," he said.
As president, he said he would ask his attorney general "to review every executive order" of the Bush administration. "We are going to overturn those that were unconstitutional. We are going to overturn those that are unnecessary."

SOURCE

Just one example.

 

[Type Username Here]

Whatever breh.

Love you too princess

You're a funny guy bro, a really funny guy. I just said "I never said they were right for doing so" and then you post this nonsense. You're currently doing what I HATE about people I debate with. The type of cat that argues for the sake of arguing instead of making any type of point

You aren't doing the same thing? I have legitimate gripes with the President I voted for. You act like I am not allowed to. You act like I am idiot for choosing not to support him again. Very immature.

The system is broken because of numerous reasons, but the kid who has worked on campaigns for both major parties and independents is certainly not it. This is how I know you're arguing for the sake of arguing, you keep trying to frame me as a blind Dem, where were you last month when it was literally me vs. EVERY liberal/Dem on this board? This is your arrogance it's the same shyt you tried to pull in that other thread when you got called out on it. You overstate your intelligence and you think that people that agree with you are less intelligent and have less legitimate motives.

Isn't that what you are doing? Saying others are not as pragmatic as you?

Here's the real world application of how your logic affects Americans that I care about (you obviously don't...JUST ADMIT this...your beliefs do not reside in providing the greatest possible good for the most people possible at any given time): We elect Romney: McCain-Feingold? Never coming back. Citizens United? Forget it. Affirmative Action? In the bushes. Parts of the Civil Rights Act? Done. So why in the world would I advocate voting for a third party to anyone voting in a swing state when that is what is at stake?

It's ALWAYS at stake. When will it NOT be a stake?

Let's deal with real life situations. But I understand someone whose way of thinking is in extremes would have to resort to this.

I'm just following your argument to its logical conclusion.

Where do YOU draw the line?

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Here is Obama in his own words, not mine sir:




SOURCE

Just one example.

That's one issue, and his ideals havn't changed, just his priorities. Fighting to change wire tapping laws Isnt going to help the economy or the average person. He did address waterboarding and gitmo, it's easy to make promises on the campaign trail, but when it comes time to actually make the changes it's not so easy.

 

[No1]

Love you too princess

I don't know who turned you out, but I'm not about that life.

You aren't doing the same thing? I have legitimate gripes with the President I voted for. You act like I am not allowed to. You act like I am idiot for choosing not to support him again. Very immature.

Not remotely comparable. My gripes are not with your opinion, my gripes have always been with your insinuation that anyone who doesn't take your extreme stance is somehow "a sheep" "a hack" or perpetuating the system willingly. Is that what you were when you voted for Obama 4 years ago? I act like you're an idiot for acting like others are idiots for thinking that one person isn't clearly worse for issues that matter to most of them and most people. You keep ignoring those issues and you're whining, but the issue you're whining about is probably about 30th on the list of reasons why he was elected. Which is why people are willing to bend on it, that's what you're not getting. You vote for a supposedly progressive president and don't care about any "progressive" issues. It's confusing. If you feel this way then you were uninformed when you voted for him the first time.

You have never and never do respond to my accusation that you don't care about the other issues: education, healthcare, taxes, etc., because they have little effect on you. No one who those issues effect would take your stances. I just keep trying to get you to realize that most people don't have the luxury of thinking and acting the way you do. You in months have never responded to that accusation, I can only assume that I'm right.

Isn't that what you are doing? Saying others are not as pragmatic as you?

Nope, because most people in here understand my point and are agreeing with me. It's only you and a handful of others that believe in cutting off your nose to spite your face. So I'm saying you're not being pragmatic using an actual analysis of what you want and the odds of it resulting given your vote. It's not a reference to my overall acumen. It's a referendum on your strategy and claims.

It's ALWAYS at stake. When will it NOT be a stake?

No they are not always at stake. The Civil Rights Act and AA only recently have come under attack. Supreme Court Justices sit for a lifetime. So now is a more crucial time than ever. The next person will probably get to appoint two people. Do you research any issue besides the one issue you care about? This isn't even me trying to diss. That is a serious question. All those things are under greater jeopardy with a conservative court. You know it too. This is what I mean about arguing for the sake of arguing. It's childish.

I'm just following your argument to its logical conclusion.

Where do YOU draw the line?

Following my argument to its logical conclusion is irrelevant when it's not applied to an actual real world circumstance. For those two candidates to be the only options would require an extreme shift to the right. But the actual demographics of our country point to a shift to the left. The country will naturally becomes center-left over the next 15 years.

I see what you're trying to do but I don't deal with political hypotheticals that don't exist out of my undergraduate philosophy classes.

 

[Type Username Here]

I don't know who turned you out, but I'm not about that life.

My apologies, with all the Obama dikk riding you do on here its easy to be confused on your sexual orientation. Matter of fact, the ONLY topic you actively contribute to on this forum you moderate is your defense of the President at whatever the cost. That and the Law School thread. Nothing else.

Not remotely comparable. My gripes are not with your opinion, my gripes have always been with your insinuation that anyone who doesn't take your extreme stance is somehow "a sheep" "a hack" or perpetuating the system willingly. Is that what you were when you voted for Obama 4 years ago?

Yes, I was.

I act like you're an idiot for acting like others are idiots for thinking that one person isn't clearly worse for issues that matter to most of them and most people. You keep ignoring those issues and you're whining, but the issue you're whining about is probably about 30th on the list of reasons why he was elected. Which is why people are willing to bend on it, that's what you're not getting. You vote for a supposedly progressive president and don't care about any "progressive" issues. It's confusing. If you feel this way then you were uninformed when you voted for him the first time.

His voting record, memoirs, rhetoric, and political stances did not match what he did as President. Even the other Obama supporters here had at least the dignity to be upfront about it.

You have never and never do respond to my accusation that you don't care about the other issues: education, healthcare, taxes, etc., because they have little effect on you. No one who those issues effect would take your stances. I just keep trying to get you to realize that most people don't have the luxury of thinking and acting the way you do. You in months have never responded to that accusation, I can only assume that I'm right.

I've been on this forum for 3 years. People here know me. I care about those issues deeply. I came here as an immigrant, to a poor family. I've been working since I was 14 and earned everything, including my citizenship and college education. I'm currently in school right now, with a family, and I absolutely have to deal with those issues. Everyday god damn day. Even the people on here who have the biggest issues with me will have to admit that those issues matter to me and that I constantly advocate improvement in those sectors.

Nope, because most people in here understand my point and are agreeing with me. It's only you and a handful of others that believe in cutting off your nose to spite your face. So I'm saying you're not being pragmatic using an actual analysis of what you want and the odds of it resulting given your vote. It's not a reference to my overall acumen. It's a referendum on your strategy and claims.

Most people on this site agree with you about Obama? I'm shocked. Wish you could have seen KTL during the Bush years. You'd be surprised how many people flip-flopped on the issues when it was their guy doing it.

Do you research any issue besides the one issue you care about? This isn't even me trying to diss. That is a serious question. All those things are under greater jeopardy with a conservative court. You know it too. This is what I mean about arguing for the sake of arguing. It's childish.

Of course I do. I put civil liberties at the very top. Is that hard for you to understand?

I see what you're trying to do but I don't deal with political hypotheticals that don't exist out of my undergraduate philosophy classes.

Another shot at me. I minor in philosophy. I currently Major in a STEM field in one of the top 5 sought majors in this country from a top university.

The 15 Most Valuable College Majors - Forbes

Don't try to belittle me with your nonsense.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

What has he accomplished for liberals during his term?

"For liberals?" He's made significant accomplishments for the country during his term and failed in significant areas too. I don't feel like derailing the thread and running through a laundry list again, but if you follow politics you should know.

And you live in a world of cynicism + defeatism. If you are a liberal, it doesnt make much sense to me to vote for someone who has demonstrated they don't care about your ideals, even if they are on your ticket. What good is a "liberal" candidate who has demonstrated he doesn't care about the liberal agenda? And just cause Republicans are essentially doing that doesn't mean its a good idea, they are just as stupid to support candidates who are not 100% in line with their agendas. Note, I'm not supporting either agenda, just speaking practically.

No, I live in a world of reality. The nation we have is the nation we have. What I said is true. This country will not elect a far left wing President because it isn't a far left wing country. You can only try your best to foster an environment where the country becomes more educated and the political center moves to a position more rooted in reason and sanity.

I don't give a shyt about the "liberal" label, I only want someone who I think will be the best option for the country. I'm not sure why you keep talking about what liberals should do or want, when you don't even consider yourself liberal (I don't think). It seems to be a bit of a disingenuous position to argue from.

Likewise if Libby Stein votes Democratic because the Republicans are "ignorant imperialist racists", despite the fact that Obama has intensified many of the racist + imperialist programs they villified Bush for, shes not doing much good for the progressive agenda either, despite identifying as a progressive. Theres no excuse for this gross hypocrisy. People are more concerned w/rhetoric than results.

I don't see your point all. This just seems to like false equivalency to prove....I don't know what exactly. I described a scenario of someone being in the dark and voting against their own interest, and you counter with an example of an imaginary person who votes for the lesser of two evils in her view. Obama would still be the better of the two options based on the beliefs of your hypothetical liberal.

My point was that we have ignorant, ill-informed electorate and that along with big monied influence is the roots of the problem with our political system...not liberalism, or conservatism, or anything else. You're not going to remedy shyt by voting for a liberal 3rd party if the electorate is not only dumb as fukk, but not where the positions of that liberal 3rd party candidate is.

I just saw a sign on a busy road today with Obama's face that said "End socialism on Nov. 6th." This is the level of political discourse in this country. Until people become more educated and aware, this is what we have. You can't close your eyes and throw some hail mary pass to some 3rd party candidate who nobody gives a fukk about and think that will change anything.

If people had this attitude during... say... the Civil Rights era, we'd still be living as second class citizens. As long as you think something is impossible, it is. We have supported this political duopoly for decades to no positive effect. The only way forward is out.

I'm not sure why you would mention the Civil Rights era because that's a horrible example to try and support your argument. The Civil Rights movement was a grassroots movement of people power that was centered around goals and speaking moral truth to power. They obviously overwhelmingly voted Democrat, but it wasn't about electing a certain candidate. You're making my case for me by mentioning that. If they took your advice, they would've said JFK and LBJ don't give a damn about them and voted for 3rd parties. That's the type of awareness and civic engagement that could prove fruitful today as opposed to getting scorned about whether candidate A or B supports a certain issue enough.

Speak out? What is that going to do? Obama doesn't even stick to what he himself said during his '08 run... what makes you think he cares what you have to say? If you aren't in a swing state you don't exist. But you want to "speak out" lol.

What's that going to do? Uh, this is how participatory politics in this nation has worked in this country since day one, bruh. You don't see a role for any sort of civic engagement outside of voting for one president over another? People organized and raised awareness of issues, try to get initiatives on ballots and change the political dialogue not only so that the politicians have to acknowledge their concerns, but so that the citizenry at large start to care about those issues. That's how you move shift the political center to where you want it to be.

What is voting for a 3rd party candidates who nobody gives a fukk about and will garner less than 1% of the vote going to do other than possibly guarantee an election for the worst of the two candidates who actually have a chance at winning?

As long as the country supports this duopoly, things will only change for the worse. These guys have demonstrated time and time again they don't care about their constituents or the claimed ideologies of their parties. Its all about consolidating power and maintaining the status quo. Getting through the next election cycle. We have to fight with the only weapon we have... the third party.

If you mean a weapon that backfires and blows your face off, yeah.

Voting for a 3rd party in this election is retarded if you live in a swing state. None of them are going to win. None of them have a movement with any momentum behind it to build anything for the future. All a liberal in a swing state voting for a 3rd party in this election would be doing is helping to hand over a state to Romney.

If a viable 3rd party candidate does emerge with the potential to shake up the duopoly, you'll know it when you see it. They will catch a fire, their message will resonate with people and you will see it reflected in the polls. There is no one like that in this election...Not Gary Johnson, or Jill Stein, or any of them. If you want to try and argue that it's just the media holding them back, that's as illogical as underground rap fans who try and say Immortal Technique or MF Doom would blow up if they just got airplay. Nobody cares about Immortal Technique and nobody cares about Jill Stein. If there is a viable 3rd party candidate, it will be undeniable especially in the social media age, and you will see it reflected in the polls.

I'm not sure what you think voting for a 3rd party will actually accomplish. All 3rd parties are not the same first of all. But since we're talking about liberals, if a significant number of liberals started to vote for say Jill Stein en masse, all that would do is split the liberal vote and guarantee a dynasty of Republican a$$holes. Where is logic in that?

If your argument is "Well then the Democrats would have to absorb some of the 3rd parties ideas since they lost," well that's already proven to be bullshyt. We already have a test case scenario for that. It's called the 2000 presidential election. Ralph Nader got 97,000 votes in Florida. Even if they wouldn't have all went to Gore, surely more than 537 would have, which would've been enough to win. Well that sure did a helluva a job of moving the Democratic Party to the left, didn't it?

 

[No1]

My apologies, with all the Obama dikk riding you do on here its easy to be confused on your sexual orientation. Matter of fact, the ONLY topic you actively contribute to on this forum you moderate is your defense of the President at whatever the cost. That and the Law School thread. Nothing else.

LOL, not only are you unsufferable. You're not funny. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BarNone you don't participate in all my threads.........WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BarNone you constantly shyt on my logic. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH...you get the point that's all you said. I've participated heavily in all of the largest threads in this forum. The problem is that you only care about your third party agenda so you don't notice it. I'm sorry if I'm not interested in participating in every rehashed topic. That was actually the beef we had a month ago when I was getting at how tedious shyt had become. Are you in the threads talking about the inner city? The threads on Africa? The role of African-Americans in the black community? The election threads? Education threads? I started 90% of the education threads on this forum, but no one participates. I highlighted important SCOTUS cases that we all should be watching....INCLUDING stuff about your NDAA complaints. That was literally two weeks.

But keep lying, it gives you something to talk about.

Yes, I was

.Well then we both agree because I said at 19 that people were getting carried away.

His voting record, memoirs, rhetoric, and political stances did not match what he did as President. Even the other Obama supporters here had at least the dignity to be upfront about it.

This is what makes you hilarious. Seriously hilarious, you honestly don't know what you're talking about. I spent an entire thread last month shytting on liberals, Dems, and whoever. I've gotten at Obama all the time. I've called him soft, etc. But in your mind, anyone who doesn't critique him the way you want is a jocker. All jokes aside, seriously, are you dsylexic? You do know this is ME you're arguing with right? Not one of the 100% Team Obama guys in the TLR? Are confused? I defend voting for him as a progressive vs. your stance of voting for a third party in a swing state and that's it.

Name me the most recent thread that critiqued Obama in a novel way and then tell me my stance. I'll wait.

I've been on this forum for 3 years. People here know me. I care about those issues deeply. I came here as an immigrant, to a poor family. I've been working since I was 14 and earned everything, including my citizenship and college education. I'm currently in school right now, with a family, and I absolutely have to deal with those issues. Everyday god damn day. Even the people on here who have the biggest issues with me will have to admit that those issues matter to me and that I constantly advocate improvement in those sectors.

I've been on this forum longer than that. Watched you post on the old boards and I don't buy it. No one who truly cares about those issues would take your stance. Not my friends who just got out of the military or anyone else. That's why I say what I say. I seriously can't fathom someone with those beliefs taking your stance. I've never met anyone like that. It leaves my mind-boggled. Those issues are important to you yet you're willing to vote in THIS ELECTION for a third party that will have no impact when the winner of this election will likely put two people on the SCOTUS and decide the trajectory of this country for a generation.

You saw what happened when Thurgood stepped down and the shift the country took aided by the courts. Wasn't in the courts that helped promote the CRM? No, I refuse to believe anyone who deeply cares about this issues will take your stance. I don't care about your "earned" everything story. So did I, so did my parents, and when I vote the way I do it is because of the people who did NOT make it. It's for the Dream Act for the kids that I work with. For greater funding to impoverished areas. Not because of me. God-willing when I graduate from law school in two years I will EXACTLY the guy that Obama is raising taxes on, the guy who all those regulations on Wall Street will effect as a corporate attorney, etc., and I refuse, knowing where I come from, to not give THIS generation and people NOW the opportunity to make it where I did. So yes, I have a problem with ANYONE who fronts like their for that and then stands solely on one issue that will not effect 98% of those people.

BTW, Obama has addressed everything he promised in some way. I never imagined that everything he wanted to do would be possible. I was taught better. You say expect better out of our politicians, I'll start that when we start expecting better out of our voters.

Most people on this site agree with you about Obama? I'm shocked. Wish you could have seen KTL during the Bush years. You'd be surprised how many people flip-flopped on the issues when it was their guy doing it.

You said you were only on that board for three years. That would be 2009. But anyway, I joined that site in 08 and had lurked it quietly while posting on AHH for a couple years prior. No one switched, some of the guys you're talking about don't even post like that anymore. I haven't seen people like Mr. Lion since he was schooling an 18 year old me on law school. I am one of those people you're referring to as having switched. We didn't, it's just that people don't hate Obama on here the way they hated Bush. I was trying to explain their psyche to you and you weren't listening. Did we not all shyt on the NDAA? What more do you want? Daily posts? Has anything changed recently? No one on there was against Bush SOLEY for that issue. It was just a major one. People have decided that the other issues weigh more heavily. How many times must I say this to you? How many times must I tell you to stop making up false arguments?

Of course I do. I put civil liberties at the very top. Is that hard for you to understand?

Yes, I just explained to you why.

Another shot at me. I minor in philosophy. I currently Major in a STEM field in one of the top 5 sought majors in this country from a top university.

The 15 Most Valuable College Majors - Forbes

Don't try to belittle me with your nonsense.

Get over yourself. This is ANOTHER example of your overinflated ego and paranoia. Maybe, just MAYBE, the guy who was a well KNOWN philosophy minor on the last site could be talking about his actual undergraduate experience. Stop wasting my time, you've taken my critiques far too personal and this is the result. We're done here, agree to disagree and move on. I can't debate with people who argue for the sake of arguing.

 

[No1]

@VictorVonDoom, they don't get it. They don't understand that I'm giving them the recipe of how pure-democratic systems work in the rest of the world. It's like these guys don't get that European Nations end up with similar policies to us with a completely different system? WHY? Because major parties still have the most funding and most people still identify with one of them? So what does voting for other parties do there? It forces that party's platform onto the agenda because you need them for the majority. I keep telling them vote third parties at the local and Congressional level to essentially have the same effect and they're not listening. This can't be life. Yes, let's do it at the national level before they have any sort of base in congress or anywhere in the country. Everyone gets fukked but we stood on principle though. Goodness. I'm done with this subject until after the election. It's making my head hurt.

 

[Broke Wave]

I actually LIVE in a country where the THIRD PARTY, the NDP, is poised to take over the country after years of ineptitude and malaise by the Centre-Left Party, the Liberals. Does this mean Canada has moved to the Left? Not Necessarily, this simply is a function of the ability of many underlying factors which have created this phenomenom. The NDP became a viable alternative to the Liberals, but they've also been a political organization for a hundred years, and we come from a totally different electoral system.

Presidential systems create two parties. That is the way it naturally works. When you disagree with both candidates, you are literally agreeing with both of them by not voting. If you are so ideologically charged that you believe a vote for Obama is wasted, then vote for someone else, but do not dismiss all the people who will vote for Obama because of their RIGHTFUL assertion that he is FUNDAMENTALLY better than Mitt Romeny, and has clearly improved the status of America both economically and in terms of security. That is an indisputable notion.

I heard someone compare this to Bachmann vs Romney, and tried to make that argument, which is completely laughable. By that impossible rationale, why not Zombie Hitler vs Zombie Moussolini? Why not Rachel Maddow vs Glenn Beck? Obscene hypothetical. Furthermore, there would most certainly be a candidate which most closely represented my views in the third party, and I would vote for them. How simple was that?

 

[No1]

I actually LIVE in a country where the THIRD PARTY, the NDP, is poised to take over the country after years of ineptitude and malaise by the Centre-Left Party, the Liberals. Does this mean Canada has moved to the Left? Not Necessarily, this simply is a function of the ability of many underlying factors which have created this phenomenom. The NDP became a viable alternative to the Liberals, but they've also been a political organization for a hundred years, and we come from a totally different electoral system.

Presidential systems create two parties. That is the way it naturally works. When you disagree with both candidates, you are literally agreeing with both of them by not voting. If you are so ideologically charged that you believe a vote for Obama is wasted, then vote for someone else, but do not dismiss all the people who will vote for Obama because of their RIGHTFUL assertion that he is FUNDAMENTALLY better than Mitt Romeny, and has clearly improved the status of America both economically and in terms of security. That is an indisputable notion.

I heard someone compare this to Bachmann vs Romney, and tried to make that argument, which is completely laughable. By that impossible rationale, why not Zombie Hitler vs Zombie Moussolini? Why not Rachel Maddow vs Glenn Beck? Obscene hypothetical. Furthermore, there would most certainly be a candidate which most closely represented my views in the third party, and I would vote for them. How simple was that?

Amen. But I thought the NDP was about to lose to the Liberals? Maybe I read that article wrong a few days ago and that was just a province. I admit that Canada and Mexico (crazy because they are in North America) and contemporary Austrailia politics are the three areas I never studied in school.

 

[Broke Wave]

Amen. But I thought the NDP was about to lose to the Liberals? Maybe I read that article wrong a few days ago and that was just a province. I admit that Canada and Mexico (crazy because they are in North America) and contemporary Austrailia politics are the three areas I never studied in school.

NDP is actually winning in every province that isn't Alberta (Canada's Texas)

 

[Type Username Here]

LOL, not only are you unsufferable. You're not funny. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BarNone you don't participate in all my threads.........WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BarNone you constantly shyt on my logic. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH...you get the point that's all you said. I've participated heavily in all of the largest threads in this forum. The problem is that you only care about your third party agenda so you don't notice it. I'm sorry if I'm not interested in participating in every rehashed topic. That was actually the beef we had a month ago when I was getting at how tedious shyt had become. Are you in the threads talking about the inner city? The threads on Africa? The role of African-Americans in the black community? The election threads? Education threads? I started 90% of the education threads on this forum, but no one participates. I highlighted important SCOTUS cases that we all should be watching....INCLUDING stuff about your NDAA complaints. That was literally two weeks.

But keep lying, it gives you something to talk about.

.Well then we both agree because I said at 19 that people were getting carried away.




This is what makes you hilarious. Seriously hilarious, you honestly don't know what you're talking about. I spent an entire thread last month shytting on liberals, Dems, and whoever. I've gotten at Obama all the time. I've called him soft, etc. But in your mind, anyone who doesn't critique him the way you want is a jocker. All jokes aside, seriously, are you dsylexic? You do know this is ME you're arguing with right? Not one of the 100% Team Obama guys in the TLR? Are confused? I defend voting for him as a progressive vs. your stance of voting for a third party in a swing state and that's it.

Name me the most recent thread that critiqued Obama in a novel way and then tell me my stance. I'll wait.

I've been on this forum longer than that. Watched you post on the old boards and I don't buy it. No one who truly cares about those issues would take your stance. Not my friends who just got out of the military or anyone else. That's why I say what I say. I seriously can't fathom someone with those beliefs taking your stance. I've never met anyone like that. It leaves my mind-boggled. Those issues are important to you yet you're willing to vote in THIS ELECTION for a third party that will have no impact when the winner of this election will likely put two people on the SCOTUS and decide the trajectory of this country for a generation.

You saw what happened when Thurgood stepped down and the shift the country took aided by the courts. Wasn't in the courts that helped promote the CRM? No, I refuse to believe anyone who deeply cares about this issues will take your stance. I don't care about your "earned" everything story. So did I, so did my parents, and when I vote the way I do it is because of the people who did NOT make it. It's for the Dream Act for the kids that I work with. For greater funding to impoverished areas. Not because of me. God-willing when I graduate from law school in two years I will EXACTLY the guy that Obama is raising taxes on, the guy who all those regulations on Wall Street will effect as a corporate attorney, etc., and I refuse, knowing where I come from, to not give THIS generation and people NOW the opportunity to make it where I did. So yes, I have a problem with ANYONE who fronts like their for that and then stands solely on one issue that will not effect 98% of those people.

BTW, Obama has addressed everything he promised in some way. I never imagined that everything he wanted to do would be possible. I was taught better. You say expect better out of our politicians, I'll start that when we start expecting better out of our voters.


You said you were only on that board for three years. That would be 2009. But anyway, I joined that site in 08 and had lurked it quietly while posting on AHH for a couple years prior. No one switched, some of the guys you're talking about don't even post like that anymore. I haven't seen people like Mr. Lion since he was schooling an 18 year old me on law school. I am one of those people you're referring to as having switched. We didn't, it's just that people don't hate Obama on here the way they hated Bush. I was trying to explain their psyche to you and you weren't listening. Did we not all shyt on the NDAA? What more do you want? Daily posts? Has anything changed recently? No one on there was against Bush SOLEY for that issue. It was just a major one. People have decided that the other issues weigh more heavily. How many times must I say this to you? How many times must I tell you to stop making up false arguments?



Yes, I just explained to you why.



Get over yourself. This is ANOTHER example of your overinflated ego and paranoia. Maybe, just MAYBE, the guy who was a well KNOWN philosophy minor on the last site could be talking about his actual undergraduate experience. Stop wasting my time, you've taken my critiques far too personal and this is the result. We're done here, agree to disagree and move on. I can't debate with people who argue for the sake of arguing.

Listen, you are going to be a future lawyer who doesn't put the law first. It's plain and simple. You fall into a portion, a major portion, of the electorate that falls into the Bread and Circuses mentality. It doesn't matter what laws the government and the President breaks, as long as you have a job and healthcare everything is ok. As long as it's someone else's rights being violated, who cares right? I don't like the President having the ability to assassinate anyone he deems as a vocal threat. You might be okay with that because the President is a Democrat or you "trust" him, but that isn't the case with some of us.

I've been posting here for a couple of years, and have been lurking for more than that. The things that were said on this forum back then could easily be replaced with what Obama has done, not just on the Civil Liberties front either.

Your guy is going to win, and you can live another 4 years under cognitive dissonance. Maybe when a Republican is elected in 2016, and he continues Obama's policies, you can revert back to rightfully criticizing them as illegal.

 

[Type Username Here]

I heard someone compare this to Bachmann vs Romney, and tried to make that argument, which is completely laughable. By that impossible rationale, why not Zombie Hitler vs Zombie Moussolini? Why not Rachel Maddow vs Glenn Beck? Obscene hypothetical. Furthermore, there would most certainly be a candidate which most closely represented my views in the third party, and I would vote for them. How simple was that?

It's not a hypothetical, it's a thought experiment in following this two party system argument to its logical conclusion. If the spectrum becomes more and more shifted to the right, which it is, where does one draw the line?

I am precisely advocating what you said: seek third party candidates. I'm not voting for Romney and I sure as hell am going to vote.