President bush set a record deficit of $482 billion US money

[xxManBeaterxx]

Bloomberg.com: Worldwide

Im no genius when it comes to american politics and government. I've heard "things" by folks who are no experts in this topic either, "things" such as it takes a president years to see its effects on the economy, so what we are seeing today is the result of former president clintion, whattt~?? How? Who could let this happen!? Gas prices are up, Food prices in the super market are rising, people are getting laid off left and right hence unemployment is up up up, the stock market recently hit a HUGE plumage downward... ok anyways

My question is HOW!? I know its a mixture of problems such as the war which everyone knows the US is spending $1 billion a day on it, etc... so who would you vote for now? Mccain or Obama?

 

[Shimmer]

Considering Obama and McCain both aren't Bush, and neither has a concretely outlined platform, I'm reserving judgment.

 

[lanslady]

I agree with Shimmer. But I'm always the one who says during local elections when asked who i'm voting for i'll say "the lesser of 2 evils". My husband is republican, I know shocking..hehe..but he's voting for Obama, and I'm leaning toward him too because I believe in more of what he has to say.

 

[Shimmer]

But what exactly does Obama have to say?
Change for the sake of change because our change needs changing? o.0

 

[Beauty Mark]

I vote third party.

Besides, it was a group effort to get ourselves into this mess. House and Senate, too.

I think whoever is the next president probably can make things better or worse, but I'm not expecting a miracle in terms of the economy.

 

[lanslady]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer But what exactly does Obama have to say? Change for the sake of change because our change needs changing? o.0

The main thing he's for is getting our troops out, and that means a lot to me for personal reasons. But like I said for the elections here where I live, it is the lesser of 2 evils in the end. In my experience here in Louisiana, they say what you want to hear then get into office and bam, change opionions/views. Which is what happens everywhere. And heck, Obama could change his mind on removing the troops, I know in the past he supported the war. So yeah, like I said, say what they want to hear, hook them in to vote then change when you get elected. It's a sad thing, but it happens.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lanslady The main thing he's for is getting our troops out, and that means a lot to me for personal reasons.

Can't mean anymore to anyone on this site than it does to me.


That said, I'm not particularly fond of destabilizing the entire area, opening it up to Iran to seize control through the domino effect, then have to deal with a land mass roughly the size of North America with bad intentions and ICBM capability.

I'm far more concerned with stabilizing the area than I am with troop withdrawal. The area needs to be stabilized, and a solid plan of action defined to make that happen, before anyone considers removing military presence.

 

[lanslady]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer Can't mean anymore to anyone on this site than it does to me. That said, I'm not particularly fond of destabilizing the entire area, opening it up to Iran to seize control through the domino effect, then have to deal with a land mass roughly the size of North America with bad intentions and ICBM capability. I'm far more concerned with stabilizing the area than I am with troop withdrawal. The area needs to be stabilized, and a solid plan of action defined to make that happen, before anyone considers removing military presence.

I totally agree with the need to stabilize, then remove troops. I want that done, not the troops just taken out, trust me I totally understand what needs to be done. Just looking at the end product, I didn't explain myself properly, sorry about that.

 

[TUPRNUT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauty Mark Besides, it was a group effort to get ourselves into this mess. House and Senate, too.

Very important (and often forgotten) point!

I'm not 100% decided on my vote, yet. A big concern of mine is the political history of these two candidates... McCain has a long political history and Obama is kinda new to the game. But, is that a negative for Obama? Right now, it is a negative for me... he doesn't have a long political past which means I can't really feel out what it is he stands for, except for "change", which in my mind is just politcal talk.

I respect McCain's military background... he gave up a lot for his country, which means to me that he (at least at one time) has a strong commitment for the US' successful future. I'm more in line with McCain's plan for Iraq. Like Shimmer, I have personal connection in this area. I'd rather my husband help to stabilize a region then fight in a much larger war with a lot more at stake.

We have a lot to learn about these two candiates.

 

[rbella]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer But what exactly does Obama have to say? Change for the sake of change because our change needs changing? o.0

I agree. I'd like to see what his ideas are for actually "instituting change" and in what specific areas. He is way too vague.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauty Mark I vote third party. Besides, it was a group effort to get ourselves into this mess. House and Senate, too. I think whoever is the next president probably can make things better or worse, but I'm not expecting a miracle in terms of the economy.

I second this, strongly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer That said, I'm not particularly fond of destabilizing the entire area, opening it up to Iran to seize control through the domino effect, then have to deal with a land mass roughly the size of North America with bad intentions and ICBM capability. I'm far more concerned with stabilizing the area than I am with troop withdrawal. The area needs to be stabilized, and a solid plan of action defined to make that happen, before anyone considers removing military presence.

Exactly what would happen if we pull out too early. I know it sucks ass that we are in this situation, but we can't deny that we are in it. We inserted our troops to institute a major change in Iraq, we can't just leave without finishing what we started. JMO.

 

[Beauty Mark]

Well, I'm personally a fan of make it an international effort to stabilize the area. What goes on there isn't just going to affect the US.

I think both candidates know/should know that immediate withdrawal is foolish (I wasn't even for Iraq in any sense, and I don't think it's smart). I think the bigger question is how they plan on doing it.

 

[concertina]

Obama has pretty clearly outlined plans; one has to be willing to do the research or listen to his speeches.

Considering McCain will do more of the same shit we've been dealing with for the past 8 years and who wants to keep my currently deployed husband continuously deploying for at least the next 10 years does not get my vote.

 

[rbella]

I must first state that I was never a fan of going into Iraq. But, we have done so & cannot & should not abandon them.

I have researched both candidates & am not very thrilled with either.

 

[depecher]

I wonder if those who voted for Bush are happy now? We are going to be in a financial mess for years to come. Sigh! Neither Presidential candidate impresses me. I am going to write in a name come November. What a mess!

 

[user79]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauty Mark Well, I'm personally a fan of make it an international effort to stabilize the area. What goes on there isn't just going to affect the US.

The international community except for a few countries, some of which have already jumped ship, are going to steer clear of Iraq for a long time to come. It's such a mess down there, the invasion and occupation has created more problems than it has solved, the MIddle East has become less stable. I mean, it's pretty much a bloody civil war with terrorist insurgency and sectarian violence by now. Iraq has never had anything close to democracy, or even sectarian peace, since its inception, what makes people think it can turn into a stable democracy within a few years? Yes, stability in the Middle East affects us all, but I don't see why the UN should have to clean up the mess the Bush admin (and I say that because I know many Americans were also against this war) caused down there, when the UN was originally against the invasion with a clear position, yet the US went in there anyway. Sorry, but I don't see why the rest of the world should clean up this mess, when their opinions were clearly disregarded during the decision to go to war in the first place.

 

[Shadowy Lady]

I'm Canadian but if I had a right to vote in the US, i would stay clear of McCain. It may for personal reasons though. I saw a video of him on Youtube saying he will kill Iranians and he thought it funny.

My parents came from Iran to this country (Canada), I still have so many relatives back there. We are all against Iranian Government's policies but how is killing the people funny and how is it going to help anybody?

Sorry if it was slightly off topic, it's just a subject that always gets me....

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauty Mark I vote third party. Besides, it was a group effort to get ourselves into this mess. House and Senate, too. I think whoever is the next president probably can make things better or worse, but I'm not expecting a miracle in terms of the economy.

Ding ding ding! Beauty Mark is right as always! Plus, there is definite truth to the cycles of the economy and the idea of delayed consequences to some economic policies. I don't believe, though, that everything happening right now is a result solely of policies from the Clinton days. Nor do I sign on to the popular current opinion that George Bush caused the sub-prime mortgage mess.

As for who I'm voting for, it won't be Obama. I had not ruled him out until very, very recently. That doesn't necessarily mean I'll vote for McCain, though. I'm still pondering the third party option.

 

[xxManBeaterxx]

Someone is selling this obama button online, joke or not, this is pretty pathetic. You know the other day my guy friend PMed me on skype and out of the blue said I f--king hate Christians, i just broke up with my girlfriend because i found out shes christian and i f--king hate all Christians. I asked why.. He said he was bullied as a child his whole life until he finally attempted suicide and had to be home schooled, and you all guessed it, a group of christian boys emotionally scarred him for life. I was really shocked when he said this... I cant believe there are still people out there ignorant enough to say that. Just because a group of young christian boys bullied you, doesn't mean everyone who is christian acts that way. No matter what ethnicity, nationality, religion, orientation, or sex, there are good people and bad people in this world. If an asian guy treats you like shit, doesn't mean you have the right to hate on every single asian person out there, you hate that person not because hes asian, but because of who he is. --sorry that was a little off topic, but it pissed me off

and the photo

 

[*Stargazer*]

The thing about that button is that if it's supposed to be some kind of racist joke, then the person who came up with it is an idiot. It doesn't even make any sense as an "insult."

It IS pathetic because the idea of making the presidential race about race or gender is stupid. But if I'm supposed to look at that button and find some kind of enlightenment regarding Obama, well, EPIC FAIL.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissChievous The international community except for a few countries, some of which have already jumped ship, are going to steer clear of Iraq for a long time to come. It's such a mess down there, the invasion and occupation has created more problems than it has solved, the MIddle East has become less stable. I mean, it's pretty much a bloody civil war with terrorist insurgency and sectarian violence by now. Iraq has never had anything close to democracy, or even sectarian peace, since its inception, what makes people think it can turn into a stable democracy within a few years? Yes, stability in the Middle East affects us all, but I don't see why the UN should have to clean up the mess the Bush admin (and I say that because I know many Americans were also against this war) caused down there, when the UN was originally against the invasion with a clear position, yet the US went in there anyway. Sorry, but I don't see why the rest of the world should clean up this mess, when their opinions were clearly disregarded during the decision to go to war in the first place.

It's quite easy for the rest of the world to jump ship when American soldiers are there to pick up their slack.

The problem with the UN position is quite simply that the UN proved itself an 'ineffective parent', by telling Hussein "You better stop or you'll get a spanking" for years and never carried through with the threat. The UN put the sanctions and rules down on the Iraqi regime but never ONCE enforced them in a manner the powers in that country gave a flying hoot about.

And, generally speaking, it's not 'the rest of the world' that shoulders the burden of cleaning up everywhere. It's the US.