ACF 2012 Presidential Election Poll

[Shaun__]

The previous administration wasn't forcing Obamacare TAXES upon U.S. citizens. Businesses already admit not expanding due to Obamacare.

Businesses are sitting on record profits, the rich are getting richer, and the sock market is soaring. When will Obama's rain of terror end?

 

[Kradek]

and the sock market is soaring

I know a few models that will be very happy about this.

 

[ScarletVixen]

...and the sock market is soaring. When will Obama's rain of terror end?

Yea, SOCKS! Woo! Finally a Market I can get interested in

 

[Bocefish]

Can you honestly and quickly name 5 things the U.S. government does well aside from writing checks to those on welfare all the way up to supporting other countries while giving themselves raises?

If the government wasn't so friggin' huge, full of corruption, fraud & abuse... we wouldn't have to pay such high taxes and use that money for healthcare.

While I agree with you on this bit... Government has been doing pretty damn shitty at these things ever since the Republicans took over from Clinton. Clinton started this country in the right direction after years of Republican control, and he almost had it before he got impeached. Then Bush came in and screwed everything up, and Obama is doing his best to put it back to rights, but can't get anywhere because Republicans like things the way Bush had them, even though Bush's policies were throwing the country down the toilet.

Don't forget Clinton benefited hugely from the financial blockbuster that he had absolutely nothing to do with when the dot com industry fluorished so greatly.

 

[Mirra]

Can you honestly and quickly name 5 things the U.S. government does well aside from writing checks to those on welfare all the way up to supporting other countries while giving themselves raises?

If the government wasn't so friggin' huge, full of corruption, fraud & abuse... we wouldn't have to pay such high taxes.

I can think of a lot of things the government is good at doing that aren't good things for the government to be doing but I'm assuming you mean positives.

The government is great at war/the military. The government did pretty well with infrastructure when it was being funded properly. At one point the government was pretty good at mail delivery. I still don't think it does too bad but some people disagree. The government also seems pretty good at law enforcement when it's not bogged down with a war on drugs. That's only four things but I reckon the first two are pretty big.

I should have been more specific in stating positive things the federal govevernment has done instead of the U.S. government. States are responsible for their individual infrastructure and law enforcement.

There are federal Law Enforcement Agencies... which are often more capable than local agencies due to increased scope and resources. There are also parts of our infrastructure which are at least mostly federally funded and maintained.

The previous administration wasn't forcing Obamacare TAXES upon U.S. citizens. Businesses already admit not expanding due to Obamacare.

You don't believe the government? Well I don't believe businesses. They weren't expanding before because of the recession. They still weren't expanding as we started leveling out because they needed more stability. Now that we've made positive strides for quite a while now it's Obamacare. Sounds like a convenient excuse if I've ever heard one... and not only have I heard a few but I've used a few myself.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

...and the sock market is soaring. When will Obama's rain of terror end?

Yea, SOCKS! Woo! Finally a Market I can get interested in

Lets not forget about the sock exchange. http://arthur.wikia.com/wiki/Sock_Exchange

The Sock Exchange is a large organization open 24/7 that was founded by The Furmasons that provides services for pets to buy and trade socks to help stimulate the economy.

During its first appearance in The Great Sock Mystery, Pal was brought by his friend, Amigo, to the hideout to explain and show how socks have disappeared. In The Great Lint Rush it closed down due to a sly businesstoad, Mr. Toad. When he became convinced that lint was worth more money the market was reopenned.

 

[Bocefish]

The previous administration wasn't forcing Obamacare TAXES upon U.S. citizens. Businesses already admit not expanding due to Obamacare.

Businesses are sitting on record profits, the rich are getting richer, and the sock market is soaring. When will Obama's rain of terror end?

Rain of terror?

Sock market?

I'm sure the record breaking number of people on food stamps can really appreciate his shitstorm raining upon them in their sock markets.

 

[Nordling]

The US Highway system, Roads, Bridges, firefighting, forest service, Veteran's did pretty well until the Republicans started defunding them, Social Security, The National Park Service, rural electrification--we could make a list that would fill a dozen pages on here easily. Are you not happy that your water is drinkable? That food isn't poisonous?

The postal service is still doing a good job, their problems is about the Republicans forcing them to fund retirement benefits for 75 years in the future.

The US government does a pretty good job when Republicans aren't allowed to screw it up. (not to say there's no corruption, but considering the scope and size--it's pretty amazing.)

 

[Nordling]

The previous administration wasn't forcing Obamacare TAXES upon U.S. citizens. Businesses already admit not expanding due to Obamacare.

Businesses are sitting on record profits, the rich are getting richer, and the sock market is soaring. When will Obama's rain of terror end?

Rain of terror?

Sock market?

I'm sure the record breaking number of people on food stamps can really appreciate his shitstorm raining upon them in their sock markets.

Yeah, pretty bright, trying to win an argument by pointing at typos. :lol:

 

[Bocefish]

The previous administration wasn't forcing Obamacare TAXES upon U.S. citizens. Businesses already admit not expanding due to Obamacare.

Businesses are sitting on record profits, the rich are getting richer, and the sock market is soaring. When will Obama's rain of terror end?

Rain of terror?

Sock market?

I'm sure the record breaking number of people on food stamps can really appreciate his shitstorm raining upon them in their sock markets.

Yeah, pretty bright, trying to win an argument by pointing at typos. :lol:

Excuse me for pointing out grade school mistakes. Where are these businesses with record profits and which stock market is soaring due to Obama's failures?

 

[Jupiter551]

Don't forget Clinton benefited hugely from the financial blockbuster that he had absolutely nothing to do with when the dot com industry fluorished so greatly.

Don't forget Obama was burdened hugely from the 4 trillion dollar series of wars that he had absolutely nothing to do with in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the subprime mortgage crisis which was also a result of policies and actions before he was ever voted in.

 

[Bocefish]

Don't forget Clinton benefited hugely from the financial blockbuster that he had absolutely nothing to do with when the dot com industry fluorished so greatly.

Don't forget Obama was burdened hugely from the 4 trillion dollar series of wars that he had absolutely nothing to do with in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the subprime mortgage crisis which was also a result of policies and actions before he was ever voted in.

I'll give Obama $1 trillion for inheriting Bush's problems, but the other $5 trillion is on him, give or take a few billion.

 

[Bocefish]

The US Highway system, Roads, Bridges, firefighting, forest service, Veteran's did pretty well until the Republicans started defunding them, Social Security, The National Park Service, rural electrification--we could make a list that would fill a dozen pages on here easily. Are you not happy that your water is drinkable? That food isn't poisonous?

The postal service is still doing a good job, their problems is about the Republicans forcing them to fund retirement benefits for 75 years in the future.

The US government does a pretty good job when Republicans aren't allowed to screw it up. (not to say there's no corruption, but considering the scope and size--it's pretty amazing.)

Last time the US infrastructure was graded, it received a D-. The postal system is failing, National Parks are reducing staff, hours, and cutting benefits while raising fees. Social Security is soon to be a joke, but keep your blinders on and continue to blame the other political party.

 

[Nordling]

Don't forget Clinton benefited hugely from the financial blockbuster that he had absolutely nothing to do with when the dot com industry fluorished so greatly.

Don't forget Obama was burdened hugely from the 4 trillion dollar series of wars that he had absolutely nothing to do with in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the subprime mortgage crisis which was also a result of policies and actions before he was ever voted in.

I'll give Obama $1 trillion for inheriting Bush's problems, but the other $5 trillion is on him, give or take a few billion.

Only in the sense that Obama put Bush's debt on the books, where Bush hid it off the book.

 

[Nordling]

The US Highway system, Roads, Bridges, firefighting, forest service, Veteran's did pretty well until the Republicans started defunding them, Social Security, The National Park Service, rural electrification--we could make a list that would fill a dozen pages on here easily. Are you not happy that your water is drinkable? That food isn't poisonous?

The postal service is still doing a good job, their problems is about the Republicans forcing them to fund retirement benefits for 75 years in the future.

The US government does a pretty good job when Republicans aren't allowed to screw it up. (not to say there's no corruption, but considering the scope and size--it's pretty amazing.)

Last time the US infrastructure was graded, it received a D-. The postal system is failing, National Parks are reducing staff, hours, and cutting benefits while raising fees. Social Security is soon to be a joke, but keep your blinders on and continue to blame the other political party.

Damn right...and yes I will blame the "other party" since it's them who defunded the infrastructure.

Social security is just fine. With NO changes it's good for at least 27 years.

 

[Bocefish]

The US Highway system, Roads, Bridges, firefighting, forest service, Veteran's did pretty well until the Republicans started defunding them, Social Security, The National Park Service, rural electrification--we could make a list that would fill a dozen pages on here easily. Are you not happy that your water is drinkable? That food isn't poisonous?

The postal service is still doing a good job, their problems is about the Republicans forcing them to fund retirement benefits for 75 years in the future.

The US government does a pretty good job when Republicans aren't allowed to screw it up. (not to say there's no corruption, but considering the scope and size--it's pretty amazing.)

Last time the US infrastructure was graded, it received a D-. The postal system is failing, National Parks are reducing staff, hours, and cutting benefits while raising fees. Social Security is soon to be a joke, but keep your blinders on and continue to blame the other political party.

Damn right...and yes I will blame the "other party" since it's them who defunded the infrastructure.

Social security is just fine. With NO changes it's good for at least 27 years.

First you say the infrastructure is great, but now it sucks because the Republicans defunded it. Which is it?

How about providing some proof validating your claims since you're so sure.

 

[LadyLuna]

Ah good, my post did as it was intended to do and put this back to the debate about Republican policy vs Democratic policy.



When the Rebuplican party decided to attack abortion and gay marriage, they lost my vote. When the economy went downhill under Bush's watch, I vowed to never root for them again. When the Bush administration decided to spend money like it could appear out of nowhere, I knew it was at that horrible point, where it has to get worse before it can get better.

So go ahead and proclaim that Obama is fucking things up with what he's doing. I'll take re-breaking the bone so it can set properly over a lifetime of bandaid wraps.

 

[Bocefish]

Ah good, my post did as it was intended to do and put this back to the debate about Republican policy vs Democratic policy.



When the Rebuplican party decided to attack abortion and gay marriage, they lost my vote. When the economy went downhill under Bush's watch, I vowed to never root for them again. When the Bush administration decided to spend money like it could appear out of nowhere, I knew it was at that horrible point, where it has to get worse before it can get better.

So go ahead and proclaim that Obama is fucking things up with what he's doing. I'll take re-breaking the bone so it can set properly over a lifetime of bandaid wraps.

The bleeding has to stop at some point, both parties are responsible for the mess we're in. Tough decisions have to be made and a true leader with experience in doing so with a record of success reaching across party lines is the person I'll be voting for. Obama has proven he doesn't have the ability to get things done across party lines.

Gay marriage will ultimately end up in the SCOTUS and hopefully be a non-issue in favor of it. Abortion is already a non-issue due to the Supreme Court.

 

[LadyLuna]

Gay marriage will ultimately end up in the SCOTUS and hopefully be a non-issue in favor of it. Abortion is already a non-issue due to the Supreme Court.

Tell that to the Republican Party, because they're still trying to overturn the Supreme Court Rulings on Abortion and fighting really damn hard against the idea of Gay marriage.

 

[Nordling]

Ah good, my post did as it was intended to do and put this back to the debate about Republican policy vs Democratic policy.



When the Rebuplican party decided to attack abortion and gay marriage, they lost my vote. When the economy went downhill under Bush's watch, I vowed to never root for them again. When the Bush administration decided to spend money like it could appear out of nowhere, I knew it was at that horrible point, where it has to get worse before it can get better.

So go ahead and proclaim that Obama is fucking things up with what he's doing. I'll take re-breaking the bone so it can set properly over a lifetime of bandaid wraps.

The bleeding has to stop at some point, both parties are responsible for the mess we're in. Tough decisions have to be made and a true leader with experience in doing so with a record of success reaching across party lines is the person I'll be voting for. Obama has proven he doesn't have the ability to get things done across party lines.

Gay marriage will ultimately end up in the SCOTUS and hopefully be a non-issue in favor of it. Abortion is already a non-issue due to the Supreme Court.

Your first statement is pile of talking points and generalities.

Do you ever read the news? Ever since Roe v Wade, state Republican governments have been making it harder and harder for women to get abortions. Check out some of your right wing pals like Todd Akin, who is claiming that women are getting abortions when they aren't pregnant. The party you're apparently doing apologetics for is full of nut bags. Makes one almost miss Nixon. In today's world, he'd have been considered a commie pinko by the average Republican in office today.

 

[Bocefish]

Gay marriage will ultimately end up in the SCOTUS and hopefully be a non-issue in favor of it. Abortion is already a non-issue due to the Supreme Court.

Tell that to the Republican Party, because they're still trying to overturn the Supreme Court Rulings on Abortion and fighting really damn hard against the idea of Gay marriage.

That's what the SCOTUS is for, although they weren't originally intended to be legislaters.

Personally, I think abortion laws should be a state issue while gay marriage is more of a civil rights issue.

 

[Bocefish]

Ah good, my post did as it was intended to do and put this back to the debate about Republican policy vs Democratic policy.



When the Rebuplican party decided to attack abortion and gay marriage, they lost my vote. When the economy went downhill under Bush's watch, I vowed to never root for them again. When the Bush administration decided to spend money like it could appear out of nowhere, I knew it was at that horrible point, where it has to get worse before it can get better.

So go ahead and proclaim that Obama is fucking things up with what he's doing. I'll take re-breaking the bone so it can set properly over a lifetime of bandaid wraps.

The bleeding has to stop at some point, both parties are responsible for the mess we're in. Tough decisions have to be made and a true leader with experience in doing so with a record of success reaching across party lines is the person I'll be voting for. Obama has proven he doesn't have the ability to get things done across party lines.

Gay marriage will ultimately end up in the SCOTUS and hopefully be a non-issue in favor of it. Abortion is already a non-issue due to the Supreme Court.

Your first statement is pile of talking points and generalities.

Do you ever read the news? Ever since Roe v Wade, state Republican governments have been making it harder and harder for women to get abortions. Check out some of your right wing pals like Todd Akin, who is claiming that women are getting abortions when they aren't pregnant. The party you're apparently doing apologetics for is full of nut bags. Makes one almost miss Nixon. In today's world, he'd have been considered a commie pinko by the average Republican in office today.

First of all, I do believe getting an abortion should be difficult. Ending a life should not be as easy as going to the dentist. Secondly, right wingers are not automatically my pals, I don't even register as a Republican. Thirdly, no, I never read the news, nor do I have any idea of what's going in the world. The truth is finally revealed. :lol:

 

[spikyhaired]

Ok, as a non-American, who has lived with a government-subsidised healthcare system his entire life, will someone please explain to me what's so bad about it? It seems to be such a huge issue that your country has been arguing back and forth over since (at least) the 1960s.

:twocents-02cents:
For me, the concern is not specifically taxes, the free-rider problem, or anything related to economics. At a fundamental level, I don't believe in giving other people more power of myself and my loved ones than absolutely necessary. Taxes fall under the idea of "loss of control" only as they limit a person's ability to decide for himself to what ends he will focus his efforts.

Police and an army: Necessary because I can't do those things for myself.

Medical care: I can (generally) handle that myself.

The obvious response to the above comparison is the question, "But what about people who can't handle things themselves due to outside circumstance (misadventure, illness, force majeure, etc.)" For example, one of the largest segments of the homeless population in the US is comprised of people with mental disabilities. Natural disasters, such as hurricane Katrina, are another. As a third, even unexpected loss of employment will cause many families hardship.

I think there is a reasonable case for those of us who can contribute to the common good to do so, both for others who have issues now and, potentially, for ourselves in the future should our situations change.

At a very high level, I believe:
1) People don't like feeling they are not in control of their own lives.
2) At a certain perceived level of loss of control, people react unreasonably and often violently.
3) Imposing governmental rules, almost always of a one-size fits all approach, can be perceived by many people as a loss of control.

Given the above, we (collectively, as a country) hurt ourselves when we stack the deck such that people always feel "the government is the problem". "The government" is not something most people feel they can change. I think this leads to people expressing their dissatisfaction in a more extreme manner (riots, hate speech, general extremism) than they might if they felt they had more control of their lives.

Basically, even though people might "fall through the cracks" (suffer hardships without governmental assistance) if there is less governmental control of individuals, I think it is easier for people to feel a collective sense of purpose when their are fewer laws (that is, less restrictions on personal freedoms).

The above is in no way comprehensive and could not be even if I typed 20,000 words, but I hope it provides a view into one person's instinctive negative reaction to the concept of expanding governmental power.

tl;dr:
Some people dislike any program that will expand governmental influence in their lives, regardless of the intent of the actual program.

 

[Bocefish]

tl;dr:
Some people dislike any program that will expand governmental influence in their lives, regardless of the intent of the actual program.

The federal government has such an impressive track record of not wasting tax monies, fraud and corruption... it's really a mystery why some people are against funding more government control and expansion. :whistle:

 

[Nordling]

First of all, I do believe getting an abortion should be difficult. Ending a life should not be as easy as going to the dentist. Secondly, right wingers are not automatically my pals, I don't even register as a Republican. Thirdly, no, I never read the news, nor do I have any idea of what's going in the world. The truth is finally revealed. :lol:

This then is a fundamental discussion. We tend to mix too many things in these discussions. I believe abortions should be free, easy and without question, and I believe that because I don't classify a fetus as "life." My yardstick for when life begins is: When the host, the mother decides it's life--prior to that, it's no different than a benign tumor. The only argument for it being life other than that is a religious one, and I have no desire to get into that since I am an atheist. If you want to discuss/argue religion, we should do it in a thread reserved for that.

 

[Bocefish]

First of all, I do believe getting an abortion should be difficult. Ending a life should not be as easy as going to the dentist. Secondly, right wingers are not automatically my pals, I don't even register as a Republican. Thirdly, no, I never read the news, nor do I have any idea of what's going in the world. The truth is finally revealed. :lol:

This then is a fundamental discussion. We tend to mix too many things in these discussions. I believe abortions should be free, easy and without question, and I believe that because I don't classify a fetus as "life." My yardstick for when life begins is: When the host, the mother decides it's life--prior to that, it's no different than a benign tumor. The only argument for it being life other than that is a religious one, and I have no desire to get into that since I am an atheist. If you want to discuss/argue religion, we should do it in a thread reserved for that.

Atheists don't believe in science or the reality of how a human life is created?

Sounds to me like you choose to reject reality and substitute your own "yardstick" reality.

 

[Mirra]

The bleeding has to stop at some point, both parties are responsible for the mess we're in. Tough decisions have to be made and a true leader with experience in doing so with a record of success reaching across party lines is the person I'll be voting for. Obama has proven he doesn't have the ability to get things done across party lines.

Wait wait... so you want to rip control away from Obama to give it to the party that refused to work with him? Hand it to the party that insisted on stonewalling him at every turn AND ADMITTED IT PROUDLY?!?!? My mind is officially blown. Your statement that the bleeding has to stop at some point is so incredibly true yet your conclusion is like saying "Well the finger won't stop bleeding, you'll have to lose the arm." I'm flabbergasted.

Medical care: I can (generally) handle that myself.

And you still have the right to handle that yourself. The government option is simply another one you can choose. The only option compulsory health care (i.e. individual mandate) removes is the option to have no health care. People that can handle it themselves are encouraged to handle it themselves.

I suspect you've heard all of the reasons for the individual mandate so I won't get into that. I just felt I had to point out that the government isn't taking away your ability to choose your own health care. They aren't forcing you into their system.

tl;dr:
Some people dislike any program that will expand governmental influence in their lives, regardless of the intent of the actual program.

The federal government has such an impressive track record of not wasting tax monies, fraud and corruption... it's really a mystery why some people are against funding more government control and expansion. :whistle:

And businesses are free of fraud and corruption? And while greed and profits may reduce waste, it often reduces service. It's not good for the bottom line to actually pay claims.

 

[Nordling]

First of all, I do believe getting an abortion should be difficult. Ending a life should not be as easy as going to the dentist. Secondly, right wingers are not automatically my pals, I don't even register as a Republican. Thirdly, no, I never read the news, nor do I have any idea of what's going in the world. The truth is finally revealed. :lol:

This then is a fundamental discussion. We tend to mix too many things in these discussions. I believe abortions should be free, easy and without question, and I believe that because I don't classify a fetus as "life." My yardstick for when life begins is: When the host, the mother decides it's life--prior to that, it's no different than a benign tumor. The only argument for it being life other than that is a religious one, and I have no desire to get into that since I am an atheist. If you want to discuss/argue religion, we should do it in a thread reserved for that.

Atheists don't believe in science or the reality of how a human life is created?

Sounds to me like you choose to reject reality and substitute your own "yardstick" reality.

Most scientists that I read, generally agree with me, that human life does NOT begin at conception. Sure, a fetus, if allowed to come to term becomes a person...but to call a blastocyst a human is absurd--unless it's a religious thing.

 

[Bocefish]

First of all, I do believe getting an abortion should be difficult. Ending a life should not be as easy as going to the dentist. Secondly, right wingers are not automatically my pals, I don't even register as a Republican. Thirdly, no, I never read the news, nor do I have any idea of what's going in the world. The truth is finally revealed. :lol:

This then is a fundamental discussion. We tend to mix too many things in these discussions. I believe abortions should be free, easy and without question, and I believe that because I don't classify a fetus as "life." My yardstick for when life begins is: When the host, the mother decides it's life--prior to that, it's no different than a benign tumor. The only argument for it being life other than that is a religious one, and I have no desire to get into that since I am an atheist. If you want to discuss/argue religion, we should do it in a thread reserved for that.

Atheists don't believe in science or the reality of how a human life is created?

Sounds to me like you choose to reject reality and substitute your own "yardstick" reality.

Most scientists that I read, generally agree with me, that human life does NOT begin at conception. Sure, a fetus, if allowed to come to term becomes a person...but to call a blastocyst a human is absurd--unless it's a religious thing.

If there is a heart beating, I consider it a life.

 

[Nordling]

First of all, I do believe getting an abortion should be difficult. Ending a life should not be as easy as going to the dentist. Secondly, right wingers are not automatically my pals, I don't even register as a Republican. Thirdly, no, I never read the news, nor do I have any idea of what's going in the world. The truth is finally revealed. :lol:

This then is a fundamental discussion. We tend to mix too many things in these discussions. I believe abortions should be free, easy and without question, and I believe that because I don't classify a fetus as "life." My yardstick for when life begins is: When the host, the mother decides it's life--prior to that, it's no different than a benign tumor. The only argument for it being life other than that is a religious one, and I have no desire to get into that since I am an atheist. If you want to discuss/argue religion, we should do it in a thread reserved for that.

Atheists don't believe in science or the reality of how a human life is created?

Sounds to me like you choose to reject reality and substitute your own "yardstick" reality.

Most scientists that I read, generally agree with me, that human life does NOT begin at conception. Sure, a fetus, if allowed to come to term becomes a person...but to call a blastocyst a human is absurd--unless it's a religious thing.

If there is a heart beating, I consider it a life.

IMHO what makes a human or a person, is a human mind. A fetus with a beating heart doesn't really have a brain developed to that extent yet; however, I'm not averse to limiting late term abortions--that, what you're saying, is what was once the standard for human life..."the quickening."