Jump to content

Welcome to Rune Tips, the first ever RuneScape help site. We aim to offer skill guides, quest guides, maps, calculators, informative databases, tips, and much more to help you get the most from the Massive Online Adventure Game, RuneScape, by Jagex Ltd © 2009.

Report Ad

Welcome to Forum.Tip.It
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

2012 U.S. Elections - President Obama Re-elected


  • Please log in to reply
638 replies to this topic

#61
Assume Nothing
[ Display Name History ]

Assume Nothing

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,191 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Places.
  • Joined:23 November 2008
  • RuneScape Status:Semi-Retired
It sounds as though you're persuaded by his apologies rather than his positions. I'll briefly clarify that I have little political knowledge of the US systems, but that doesn't sound like a great reason to vote, to me.

#62
Crocefisso
[ Display Name History ]

Crocefisso

    Il Barone

  • Members
  • 1,718 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Grande-Bretagne
  • Joined:21 March 2011
  • RuneScape Status:Retired

Are you disagreeing with his positions or his experience?
He was a US Representative for 6 years, and was a US Senator from Pennsylvania for 12 years. That makes him more qualified than Barack Obama was in 2008.

In my mind, Santorum has been much more consistent with his positions than Romney. When asked about bad legislation (or endorsement), he apologizes for it. When Romney is asked about Romneycare, he makes a small distinction. Santorum was also able to pull his campaign from obscurity 6 months ago into the national spotlight, while to date spending about a sixth of what Romney spent.

The Republican Presidential candidate needs to be able to stand next to Obama and describe everything wrong with his policies, without worrying about Obama saying "his legislation inspired me."


My problem with Santorum is the ludicrous and reactionary nature of his policies. Looking from the outside in, I cannot see a single positive with this man. Let us not forget he was anti-gay, a destructive environmental policy, a silly immigration policy, pledging to repeal Obama's attempt at bringing European-style health care to the USA and the rest. I found a nice little link that isn't, as far as I can tell, too partisan, though correct me if I'm wrong: http://elections.msn...Rick-Santorum/.

And in the areas where he's not entirely backwards, his ideas are still markedly less sensible than those of other candidates.


"Imagine yourself surrounded by the most horrible cripples and maniacs it is possible to conceive, and you may understand a little of my feelings with these grotesque caricatures of humanity about me."

- H.G. Wells, The Island of Doctor Moreau


#63
obfuscator
[ Display Name History ]

obfuscator

    Tanned Caveman

  • Members
  • 20,231 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:6 March 2008
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
Didn't Santorum withdraw anyway?

polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti


#64
Danqazmlp
[ Display Name History ]

Danqazmlp

    To Ass!

  • Members
  • 8,492 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:7 November 2005
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • RSN:Danqazmlp
I'm not American, but I hope to god that Obama wins as I'm scared shitless of all the Republican candidates.
Want to be my friend? Look under my name to the left<<< and click the 'Add as friend' button!
Posted Image
Big thanks to Stevepole for the signature!^

#65
Alg
[ Display Name History ]

Alg

    Troll General

  • Editorial Panel
  • 10,880 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:California.
  • Joined:5 August 2006

Didn't Santorum withdraw anyway?

Earlier this week, I think.

#66
sees_all1
[ Display Name History ]

sees_all1

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,962 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:26 June 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None

My problem with Santorum is the ludicrous and reactionary nature of his policies. Looking from the outside in, I cannot see a single positive with this man. Let us not forget he was anti-gay, a destructive environmental policy, a silly immigration policy, pledging to repeal Obama's attempt at bringing European-style health care to the USA and the rest. I found a nice little link that isn't, as far as I can tell, too partisan, though correct me if I'm wrong: http://elections.msn...Rick-Santorum/.

And in the areas where he's not entirely backwards, his ideas are still markedly less sensible than those of other candidates.


What I don't understand is why you're trying to debate the qualities of a candidate from a party you're diametrically opposed to anyway.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪


#67
Hawks
[ Display Name History ]

Hawks

    The Goalie

  • Editorial Panel
  • 3,963 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:the great white north, eh?
  • Joined:24 August 2006
  • RuneScape Status:Semi-Retired
  • RSN:Hawk0078


Nobody likes Obama's "Free Healthcare Shit Trololololo" if they aren't freeloaders.

Except, you know, the millions of previously uninsured children that his health plan covers. Oh no, those damn freeloading 6 year-olds :rolleyes:


No. 6yr olds could easily get coverage in the previous system - it's called Medicaid or Children's Special Health. For people whose employers don't offer insurance or those who don't make enough. I know because I was on it for a span of about three months where my family didn't have health insurance because my dad had just switched jobs and the new insurance didn't kick in for 90 days. Having a pre-existing condition (type 1 diabetes) I desperately needed coverage - 3 mo of supplies are easily over 10k, although we paid 1k for my insurance for a year - that I don't get.

I will probably vote for Ron Paul unless it seems like the Rep nominee has a good likely hood of winning. There is no way in hell I want to see Obama reelected.

#68
Crocefisso
[ Display Name History ]

Crocefisso

    Il Barone

  • Members
  • 1,718 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Grande-Bretagne
  • Joined:21 March 2011
  • RuneScape Status:Retired


My problem with Santorum is the ludicrous and reactionary nature of his policies. Looking from the outside in, I cannot see a single positive with this man. Let us not forget he was anti-gay, a destructive environmental policy, a silly immigration policy, pledging to repeal Obama's attempt at bringing European-style health care to the USA and the rest. I found a nice little link that isn't, as far as I can tell, too partisan, though correct me if I'm wrong: http://elections.msn...Rick-Santorum/.

And in the areas where he's not entirely backwards, his ideas are still markedly less sensible than those of other candidates.


What I don't understand is why you're trying to debate the qualities of a candidate from a party you're diametrically opposed to anyway.

This is the funny thing: in principle, I shouldn't be. Since I got British citizenship, I voted for the Conservative Party in the 2011 local elections, and plan to do so again in the general election a few years hence unless they trip up badly. Of all the developed democracies in the world, I fall on the left only in America, and it is because the right there is so very far to the right that, in Britain for example, it would be considered a fringe/extreme party.

Therefore, my rather simple question was: why vote for Santorum? I was just curious as to why you supported him, because you seem sensible and he is backwards and unable to grasp the concept of secularism. I've not been debating, just making the question longer each time so you've got something to respond to.


"Imagine yourself surrounded by the most horrible cripples and maniacs it is possible to conceive, and you may understand a little of my feelings with these grotesque caricatures of humanity about me."

- H.G. Wells, The Island of Doctor Moreau


#69
Jonanananas
[ Display Name History ]

Jonanananas

    Varrock Guard

  • Members
  • 1,308 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany
  • Joined:14 November 2009
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • RSN:Jonanananas
  • Clan:World60pengs



My problem with Santorum is the ludicrous and reactionary nature of his policies. Looking from the outside in, I cannot see a single positive with this man. Let us not forget he was anti-gay, a destructive environmental policy, a silly immigration policy, pledging to repeal Obama's attempt at bringing European-style health care to the USA and the rest. I found a nice little link that isn't, as far as I can tell, too partisan, though correct me if I'm wrong: http://elections.msn...Rick-Santorum/.

And in the areas where he's not entirely backwards, his ideas are still markedly less sensible than those of other candidates.


What I don't understand is why you're trying to debate the qualities of a candidate from a party you're diametrically opposed to anyway.

This is the funny thing: in principle, I shouldn't be. Since I got British citizenship, I voted for the Conservative Party in the 2011 local elections, and plan to do so again in the general election a few years hence unless they trip up badly. Of all the developed democracies in the world, I fall on the left only in America, and it is because the right there is so very far to the right that, in Britain for example, it would be considered a fringe/extreme party.

Therefore, my rather simple question was: why vote for Santorum? I was just curious as to why you supported him, because you seem sensible and he is backwards and unable to grasp the concept of secularism. I've not been debating, just making the question longer each time so you've got something to respond to.


Yeah it's quite funny how in America Obama is often portrayed as a socialist/commie by those who like to attack persons instead of their programs, when here he would definitely be in the conservative party, and probably be even one of the more rigid ones in that party.

#70
aspeeder
[ Display Name History ]

aspeeder

    Retired Crew

  • Members
  • 3,083 posts



Nobody likes Obama's "Free Healthcare Shit Trololololo" if they aren't freeloaders.

Except, you know, the millions of previously uninsured children that his health plan covers. Oh no, those damn freeloading 6 year-olds :rolleyes:


No. 6yr olds could easily get coverage in the previous system - it's called Medicaid or Children's Special Health. For people whose employers don't offer insurance or those who don't make enough. I know because I was on it for a span of about three months where my family didn't have health insurance because my dad had just switched jobs and the new insurance didn't kick in for 90 days. Having a pre-existing condition (type 1 diabetes) I desperately needed coverage - 3 mo of supplies are easily over 10k, although we paid 1k for my insurance for a year - that I don't get.

I will probably vote for Ron Paul unless it seems like the Rep nominee has a good likely hood of winning. There is no way in hell I want to see Obama reelected.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but from the looks of things the Children's Special Health program only covered children with recognized pre-existing conditions. While that does cover a lot, if something happened to an uninsured child like, say, a broken bone that doesn't qualify for CSH then the family is shit-out-of-luck.


Then it's only the bad half of "big government". Canada's government is bigger than the states, yet the much stricter regulations we have over the banking industry prevented banks from handing out these kinds of mortgages.

Croce's point was that big government couldn't effectively deal with failing banks. What he didn't mention is that big government caused the problem in the first place, which is why I brought it up. I could bring up dozens of more examples of big government failing in a spectacular way, but that isn't the point of this thread. If you still need an example of why small government is better than big government (which there are very few examples of), look at Taiwan.

You know what, if our country was only slightly larger than Maryland, with 2/3rds the population of California, produced less than 1/15th of our total GDP, and was under the boot of a vast global power that forced us to severely limit the possibilities that the government can do I'd agree with you. But you know what, America isn't in a similar situation to Taiwan, at all. Oh, and if you knew anything about Taiwan's politics then you'd know that they have been supporting more progressive governments over the past 30 years, so if you actually were in a government similar to Taiwan's I'm sure you would be raging about how the country is turning socialist.

Siggy_zpsewaiux2t.png


#71
sees_all1
[ Display Name History ]

sees_all1

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,962 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:26 June 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None

You know what, if our country was only slightly larger than Maryland, with 2/3rds the population of California, produced less than 1/15th of our total GDP, and was under the boot of a vast global power that forced us to severely limit the possibilities that the government can do I'd agree with you. But you know what, America isn't in a similar situation to Taiwan, at all. Oh, and if you knew anything about Taiwan's politics then you'd know that they have been supporting more progressive governments over the past 30 years, so if you actually were in a government similar to Taiwan's I'm sure you would be raging about how the country is turning socialist.

That's fine. Except you're ignoring how an area with a GNP of $170/person, with no natural resources to speak of, grew into a country with a GNP of about $37,000/person in about 50 years. Socialism didn't get them there, free markets did.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪


#72
aspeeder
[ Display Name History ]

aspeeder

    Retired Crew

  • Members
  • 3,083 posts


You know what, if our country was only slightly larger than Maryland, with 2/3rds the population of California, produced less than 1/15th of our total GDP, and was under the boot of a vast global power that forced us to severely limit the possibilities that the government can do I'd agree with you. But you know what, America isn't in a similar situation to Taiwan, at all. Oh, and if you knew anything about Taiwan's politics then you'd know that they have been supporting more progressive governments over the past 30 years, so if you actually were in a government similar to Taiwan's I'm sure you would be raging about how the country is turning socialist.

That's fine. Except you're ignoring how an area with a GNP of $170/person, with no natural resources to speak of, grew into a country with a GNP of about $37,000/person in about 50 years. Socialism didn't get them there, free markets did.

And it had nothing to do with massive amounts of US aid sent in by the US to counter Mainland communist influence, the massive influx of intellectuals escaping the Great Leap Forward, or the fact that the Taiwanese government did massive amounts of planning and greatly supported universal education to shift the workforce away from agriculture and towards technology.

Siggy_zpsewaiux2t.png


#73
sees_all1
[ Display Name History ]

sees_all1

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,962 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:26 June 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None
The other example to look at is Hong Kong.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪


#74
aspeeder
[ Display Name History ]

aspeeder

    Retired Crew

  • Members
  • 3,083 posts

The other example to look at is Hong Kong.

If you're referring to the policy of positive non-internention, it's important to remember that he government was still important in creating and maintaining physical and regulatory infrastructure in order to strengthen healthy decision-making, which is absent in the truly lassiez-fairre future that I imagine you're dreaming of. And once again, that's a city-state less than half the size of Rhode Island and the population of Virginia with little to no military concerns, these two examples where "small" government works is unsurprisingly in small countries. And you know what's one of the first things we could cut from the government to become more like the countries you listed? The military.

Siggy_zpsewaiux2t.png


#75
Range_This11
[ Display Name History ]

Range_This11

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,427 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wisconsin
  • Joined:25 January 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None
The only problem I see with downsizing the U.S. military is that the U.S. has angered many, many nations over the last century. Showing signs of weakness (aka, slashing military funding) could encourage possible hostile nations to attack. Pure speculation here of course. Take it with a grain of salt.

That being said, I think that the best bet is to bring our men and women home from any and all combat situations. I mean for god's sake, we spent $20 billion on air conditioning alone in ONE year in Iraq and Afghanistan.

phpFffu7GPM.jpg
 

"He could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder."


#76
Riku3220
[ Display Name History ]

Riku3220

    Dragon Slayer

  • Members
  • 7,800 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:26 February 2006
  • RuneScape Status:None
There's also hundreds of thousands of jobs that are supplied through the military. Downsizing would really screw a lot of people.
Posted Image

#77
Celt23
[ Display Name History ]

Celt23

    Demon Vanquisher

  • Members
  • 2,357 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Washington State, USA
  • Joined:5 January 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None
  • RSN:Celt23

There's also hundreds of thousands of jobs that are supplied through the military. Downsizing would really screw a lot of people.

Paul wouldn't kill the current military jobs, he would move all of our troops from bases overseas back to the US. I didn't check to see if this was already mentioned, but he has more support from active military than any other candidate.

#78
aspeeder
[ Display Name History ]

aspeeder

    Retired Crew

  • Members
  • 3,083 posts

There's also hundreds of thousands of jobs that are supplied through the military. Downsizing would really screw a lot of people.

And you think downsizing any other part of the government wouldn't come with either loss of jobs or loss of resources that could make people more vulnerable? It was a rhetorical situation at most, I realize that as hegemon downsizing our military at the moment is a precarious situation at best (Especially with all the North Korea nonsense of late). I was mostly trying to point out the differences between Taiwan/Hong Kong and the US.

Siggy_zpsewaiux2t.png


#79
Crocefisso
[ Display Name History ]

Crocefisso

    Il Barone

  • Members
  • 1,718 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Grande-Bretagne
  • Joined:21 March 2011
  • RuneScape Status:Retired

The only problem I see with downsizing the U.S. military is that the U.S. has angered many, many nations over the last century. Showing signs of weakness (aka, slashing military funding) could encourage possible hostile nations to attack. Pure speculation here of course. Take it with a grain of salt.


That really depends on how much the military budget gets cut by. For example, the US defence budget is still four times the size of its nearest competitor, so catch-up is very difficult. Even China, which is militarising rapidly, predicts it will take 20-30 years to catch up with the US in terms of military prowess.

And then it's worth considering that many of the big and emerging powers need the US and the trade it provides to continue their economic growth: China, India, Brazil etc. The only potential agitators are Russia, Iran, and maybe some dysfunctional Arab and/or African countries with strong anti-US sentiments, all of which pose no real threat to the USA.

EDIT: It's also worth noting, in the conversation between sees_all1 and aspeeder, that all the Asian countries regardless of size are involved in a massive arms race at the moment. For example, Singapore has the fourth highest arms spending per head (or however it's expressed technically). It seems all the territorial disputes are contributing to a massive build up of tension there.


"Imagine yourself surrounded by the most horrible cripples and maniacs it is possible to conceive, and you may understand a little of my feelings with these grotesque caricatures of humanity about me."

- H.G. Wells, The Island of Doctor Moreau


#80
sees_all1
[ Display Name History ]

sees_all1

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,962 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:26 June 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None


The other example to look at is Hong Kong.

If you're referring to the policy of positive non-internention, it's important to remember that he government was still important in creating and maintaining physical and regulatory infrastructure in order to strengthen healthy decision-making, which is absent in the truly lassiez-fairre future that I imagine you're dreaming of. And once again, that's a city-state less than half the size of Rhode Island and the population of Virginia with little to no military concerns, these two examples where "small" government works is unsurprisingly in small countries. And you know what's one of the first things we could cut from the government to become more like the countries you listed? The military.

The Department of Education. The Department of Energy. The Department of Health and Human Services.
Merge the Department of Defense with the Department of Homeland Security. Merge the Department of the Interior with the Department of Agriculture.

Also cut the number of rules and regulations (loopholes, really) in half, from around 80,000 pages to about 40,000. Some laws just don't make sense in every state, so leave those laws to the states.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users