Obama won, Hooray for Socialism in America! -.-

 

 

 

All I'm saying on the subject.

 

 

 

-Pasty

 

hooray! with equal enthusiasm. :roll:

Obama was the better candidate and he won. I don't understand the people who think otherwise.

 

 

 

I totally agree.

 

We're called Republicans. Geez.

He predicted their attacks, actually. They made ads about him changing the dollar bill with his face on it, among other things.

 

 

 

And I think it's awesome \

 

 

 

 

 

Even if you take that one out he still did it.

Gawrsh, a genius, or a man with some sense and understanding of what causes terrorism?

 

 

 

http://www.dawn.com/2008/11/10/top5.htm

 

 

 

Excerpt:

 

 

 

That means bringing in the neighbouring countries: Iran, India, and the five Central Asian states, and then resolving some of these regional problems like the disputes between India and Pakistan, between Iran and the Americans, between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

 

 

Washington-based South Asia analyst Marvin Weinbaum, who advised Mr Obama on Afghanistan and Pakistan during the campaign, told Dawn he was confident that Mr Obama would not follow the policies of the Bush administration.

 

 

 

The Obama administration, said Mr Weinbaum, would increase the number of US troops in Afghanistan but he would also negotiate and seek compromise where possible.

 

 

 

There is a consensus, even in the American military, that there is no, strictly speaking, military solution. It is one which may involve the military in order to be in a position to negotiate without having to concede surrender to your enemy, Mr Weinbaum said.

 

 

 

Mr Weinbaum noted that in his latest interview on this issue, Mr Obama also urged the Afghan government to improve governance, provide security and jobs to its people and to expand its reign beyond Kabul.Exc

 

 

 

Treating it as a regional issue?!?!!? ZOMG!

 

 

 

Finally! I'm glad that his campaign rhetoric about Pakistan was just that, rhetoric. I was wary about him being so aggressive towards Pakistan, but as I figured, it was "hard on terror" rhetoric that Americans "need" to hear because they don't understand that military solutions don't dissolve terrorism, they amplify the causes.

 

 

 

Securing the water in Kashmir is definitely something that must be done.

 

 

 

I this man.

That wasn't rhetoric. If he was lying about killing Bin Laden even if he is in Pakistan then the man should not be President. I'll believe him over you though.

Obama was the better candidate and he won. I don't understand the people who think otherwise.

 

 

 

I totally agree.

 

We're called Republicans. Geez.

 

 

 

Being a democrat or a republican doesn't mean you have to throw critical thinking into the trash bin. Countless republican politicians and newspapers endorsed Obama in this campaign, simply because he was the better candidate. Even Palin's native newspaper which is republican-leaning, Anchorage Daily News, endorsed Obama.

 

 

 

Likewise, if the democrats field a crappy candidate in the next elections, while republicans field a popular, liked candidate such as Ron Paul, you can bet your money a lot of democrats will also endorse the better candidate regardless of party affiliation.

 

 

 

Some people really ought to think again, just how much do party labels mean anymore?

Some people really ought to think again, just how much do party labels mean anymore?

 

Erm... a lot. Where did Ralph Nader finish again? Doing YouTube videos with Obamagirl?

 

 

 

You need a party machine to drive you forward in democratic politics. That also explains Obama's victory. Considering he was up against an ex-Vietnam vet, his ground operation simply dwarfed McCain's.

I meant: How much does it mean to the voter? I personally couldn't care less if Obama was a democrat or a republican, he was the right candidate for this election.

liked candidate such as Ron Paul

 

 

 

You realize that he's only liked among teenagers because essentially what he stands for is a United States with no laws, rules, and no Federal government, right? People like him believe that time is static, and that changing times don't require changes in infrastructure, regulation, and government.

 

 

 

I mean...the gold standard? Really? Anyone with a mild understanding in economics would realize why we left the gold standard...but not Ron Paul. I suppose he enjoys unusually high unemployment due to a lack of liquidity, and an amazingly high deflation (unemployment would probably be in the 40%'s nowadays because of how large the population is).

 

 

 

Every Ron Paul supporter I found in real life wasn't registered to vote, either.

 

 

 

Right now the front-runner for 2012 in the Republican Party, is Sarah Palin.

 

Right now the front-runner for 2012 in the Republican Party, is Sarah Palin.

 

 

 

Throwing all objectiveness and party affiliations aside, may god have mercy on our planet if that hag gets anywhere near the white house.

Though I don't live in the USA, I'm glad Obama won, or at least, I'm glad McCain didn't, as then Sarah Palin would have been Vice President- and I'm strongly against Creationism.

We're called Republicans. Geez.

 

 

 

Being a democrat or a republican doesn't mean you have to throw critical thinking into the trash bin. Countless republican politicians and newspapers endorsed Obama in this campaign, simply because he was the better candidate. Even Palin's native newspaper which is republican-leaning, Anchorage Daily News, endorsed Obama.

 

 

 

Likewise, if the democrats field a crappy candidate in the next elections, while republicans field a popular, liked candidate such as Ron Paul, you can bet your money a lot of democrats will also endorse the better candidate regardless of party affiliation.

 

 

 

Some people really ought to think again, just how much do party labels mean anymore?

 

I like Obama in a great many ways, and I find that the impact that he's going to have on the US, both internally an internationally, for the most part should be good. The only problem is that my political views are just too conservative for voting for him (translating into me being a Republican). From what I've seen on this forum that somehow translates to me being a worthless [wagon] in the eyes of not a few members, but that's what I am. Hell, I was even considering voting for Obama, if only for a second. That's how good a president I think he's going.

 

 

 

On the point of party labels, they only mean something only insofar as they represent the views of the voter. I am a Republican because of my views, not the other way around.

We're called Republicans. Geez.

 

 

 

Being a democrat or a republican doesn't mean you have to throw critical thinking into the trash bin. Countless republican politicians and newspapers endorsed Obama in this campaign, simply because he was the better candidate. Even Palin's native newspaper which is republican-leaning, Anchorage Daily News, endorsed Obama.

 

 

 

Likewise, if the democrats field a crappy candidate in the next elections, while republicans field a popular, liked candidate such as Ron Paul, you can bet your money a lot of democrats will also endorse the better candidate regardless of party affiliation.

 

 

 

Some people really ought to think again, just how much do party labels mean anymore?

 

I like Obama in a great many ways, and I find that the impact that he's going to have on the US, both internally an internationally, for the most part should be good. The only problem is that my political views are just too conservative for voting for him (translating into me being a Republican). From what I've seen on this forum that somehow translates to me being a worthless [wagon] in the eyes of not a few members, but that's what I am. Hell, I was even considering voting for Obama, if only for a second. That's how good a president I think he's going.

 

 

 

On the point of party labels, they only mean something only insofar as they represent the views of the voter. I am a Republican because of my views, not the other way around.

 

 

 

I'm just curious... Is he too socially liberal or economically liberal for you? I personally believe in fiscal conservatism (reducing the national debt and balancing the federal budget) but am very liberal when it comes to social things such as abortion, gay marriage, etcetera (these things matter a lot to me).

 

 

 

However, I am what you could call a deficit hawk. I'm more willing to raise taxes if we also cut spending. Great way to reduce the national debt.

 

 

 

Obama was the natural choice for me.

Obama? Cut spending? And on the point of taxes, isn't everyone raving about how he's only taxing the rich?

 

 

 

...? Confuzed.

 

 

 

Oh, and too economically liberal. I'm pretty socially liberal overall, much like the rest of this generation.

Obama? Cut spending? And on the point of taxes, isn't everyone raving about how he's only taxing the rich?

 

 

 

...? Confuzed.

 

 

 

Oh, and too economically liberal. I'm pretty socially liberal overall, much like the rest of this generation.

 

 

 

Yes, I totally support taxing the rich harder.

 

 

 

Universal health care also seems to be the only solution for America's glaringingly terrible health care at this point. It seems to work well for Europe. Americans have this strange fear of socialism even though much of our society is already socialized: plumbing, fire department, police, etc. Obama, in my eyes, knows what to spend taxpayer money on better.

 

 

 

You see... I don't support the Republican party and its advocation of corporate socialism. Not to mention its majority stance on foreign policy.

 

Right now the front-runner for 2012 in the Republican Party, is Sarah Palin.

 

 

 

No she's not. Your just going off some poll that was taken days after the election. Do you think anything will change by then? It's going to be...

 

[hide=]Mike Pence, the third ranking House Republican

 

Piyush Jindal, Governor of Louisiana

 

Eric Cantor, House minority whip(not one of my favorites.)

 

or Tim Pawlenty, Governor of Minnesota.[/hide]

 

 

 

I guess Allen West is out. :x He'd have even less experience than Obama, even if he won in 2010.

Tbh I'm Alaskan, and hardly anyone [in alaska] wants Palin back, seeing as she went back on things she said in her campaign for Gov. (ie she said she was non-partisan, notice anything different now?). Obama was my choice simply because I agreed with him on most issues. If your vote is changed by anthing other than that and felonies, theres something wrong with you.

^^ Considering her approval rating is still just below 70% even after being raped by the media nonstop I'd doubt that. Not to mention that the drop was mainly among democrats after she ran against Obama which would be expected. And if you are refereeing to Ted Stevens. I don't care what kind of felonies the guy has. With a man like Danny Inouye vouching for you, your set in my book. Forget Harry Reid. He's nothing compared to Sen. Inouye.

 

 

 

edit: I left one guy off my list of 2012 candidates. Hopefully he runs for something in 2 years as well. Michael Steele, former Lt. Gov of Maryland.[hide=][/hide]