The First 2012 Presidential Election Thread

[imaplanner]

Cain's campaign seems to be a bit strange as well. It almost seems like he entered the race to build up name recognition so he can sell more copies of his book.

Wow. Good call

Herman cain uses campaign funds to buy his own book from himself

[kalimotxo]

Made the mistake of turning on the Republican debate. These people are certifiably batshit crazy.

[illinoisplanner]

Newt was right...the bickering route is not the way to the White House. Rick Santorum and Rick Perry especially need to cut the attacks...they look so foolish doing so. Mitt Romney hired illegals?...really? He's really bringing up that conspiracy theory again? Rick Santorum also needs to leave the race...he's absolutely ridiculous and stands no chance and makes the party look foolish. He also lost by like 20 points in 2006...go home and go back to private life.

Usually I keep more of an open mind when looking at candidates in presidential primaries. But in this race, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney are the only candidates I would consider.

[kalimotxo]

Newt was right...the bickering route is not the way to the White House. Rick Santorum and Rick Perry especially need to cut the attacks...they look so foolish doing so. Mitt Romney hired illegals?...really? He's really bringing up that conspiracy theory again? Rick Santorum also needs to leave the race...he's absolutely ridiculous and stands no chance and makes the party look foolish. He also lost by like 20 points in 2006...go home and go back to private life.

Usually I keep more of an open mind when looking at candidates in presidential primaries. But in this race, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney are the only candidates I would consider.

Santorum is amazingly unethical for such a judgmental guy. Funny how he served as Senator from Pennsylvania while he and his entire family lived full-time down the road from the house I grew up in... in Virginia. His inclusion in these debates definitely ups the freakshow factor.

Perry and, increasingly, Herman Cain are looking completely out of their elements. Their simpleminded rebuttals and difficulty in formulating policy positions (rather than catch-phrases) is probably a pretty good indication that their high poll numbers won't survive many more of these debates. Then again, I've heard folks argue that Cain's ignorance is an advantage, because it shows how much of any outsider he is! I'm sorry, if you are a Republican presidential candidate and you don't know what a neoconservative is and/or you think Uzbekistan is a minor country in terms of our foreign policy, you aren't simply an outsider - you're a dumbass.

The side-show atmosphere does nothing to help. I'm probably among the small minority of non-Republican folks who watch these debates, but the audience cheers at some of the most shameful stuff. Truly disturbing.

IP, at least we can agree that Newt and Romney are head and shoulders above the rest in terms of having a command of the issues. I'd never vote for either one, but a debate between the two would be lively and borderline intelligent. I think Ron Paul has well-formed policy positions, but he clearly doesn't prepare for the debates. Thus he comes off as a stuttering cross between James Stockdale and Grandpa Smurf. Not a good look.

[illinoisplanner]

Santorum is amazingly unethical for such a judgmental guy. Funny how he served as Senator from Pennsylvania while he and his entire family lived full-time down the road from the house I grew up in... in Virginia. His inclusion in these debates definitely ups the freakshow factor.

Perry and, increasingly, Herman Cain are looking completely out of their elements. Their simpleminded rebuttals and difficulty in formulating policy positions (rather than catch-phrases) is probably a pretty good indication that their high poll numbers won't survive many more of these debates. Then again, I've heard folks argue that Cain's ignorance is an advantage, because it shows how much of any outsider he is! I'm sorry, if you are a Republican presidential candidate and you don't know what a neoconservative is and/or you think Uzbekistan is a minor country in terms of our foreign policy, you aren't simply an outsider - you're a dumbass.

The side-show atmosphere does nothing to help. I'm probably among the small minority of non-Republican folks who watch these debates, but the audience cheers at some of the most shameful stuff. Truly disturbing.

IP, at least we can agree that Newt and Romney are head and shoulders above the rest in terms of having a command of the issues. I'd never vote for either one, but a debate between the two would be lively and borderline intelligent. I think Ron Paul has well-formed policy positions, but he clearly doesn't prepare for the debates. Thus he comes off as a stuttering cross between James Stockdale and Grandpa Smurf. Not a good look.

Good take. In addition, I think Cain's lack of experience in public office is not an advantage at all. Minimal experience in leadership roles certainly hasn't helped Obama in his presidency...and he at least had a few years as a Senator.

Our country is in such dire straits that we need a president that has had experience and a track record for getting things done as a leader. That's why I like Romney and Gingrich. In addition, they are articulate, mostly calm & collected, reasonable, and have formed good sensical policy proposals, characteristics that I really can't apply to the rest of the experienced candidates.

[Hink]

I watch all the debates.... I am strong independent, and strongly anti- far left or right people...

My take aways:

- Perry is out of his league. His attacks didn't do much of anything to Romney. They did make him look silly and uninformed.
- Cain, for all the business proess he professes, is not a good salesman. If someone says that there have been 3 reports by economists that state your plan isn't what you say it is - don't say, look at OUR analysis and make up your mind - you are not going to win.
- Bachmann / Santorum / Newt are completely pointless. Bachmann is crazy. Santorum is a religious nut. And Newt is a whiner who just had to get in the final jab about bickering. TAKE YOUR BALL AND GO HOME ALREADY. Seriously. If you don't like the way the debates are set up, boycott them. See how that goes...
- Paul is still pointless, but an enjoyable pointless... much more than Bachmann / Santorum / Newt pointless.
- I think it was a bad move for Huntsman to skip Nevada. He is already fairly irrelevant, and now he is even more irrelevant....

[imaplanner]

Made the mistake of turning on the Republican debate. These people are certifiably batshit crazy.

Interesting times we are living in.

[Blide]

I think it says more how uncertain the political environment is, particularly for Republicans. This seems to be an election where the Republicans are sending out a sacrificial lamb for a candidate rather than risk a viable candidate. Ideology is more important to Republicans now than actually winning the White House... There's no better time to demonstrate this than against an incumbent.

I think people are coming to the realization that both parties have no idea how to deal with our current economic situation though. What this will mean in an election, I have no idea.

[Dan]

I watch all the debates.... I am strong independent, and strongly anti- far left or right people...

I missed it. Was Gary Johnson forgotten again?

In my uninformed opinion, Johnson, Huntsman and Paul seem like the most transparent and intellectually honest Republican candidates. They don't water down their messages or say what they think the base wants to hear, and for that, they earn my respect.

2016: if Obama serves a second term, it'll come down to Cuomo (D) vs Christie (R). You heard it here first.

[Blide]

Buddy Roemer seems like an honest Republican too but they're not even letting him show up to the debates. His big issue is campaign finance reform so he's only taking up to $100 dollars from individuals. Of course he has like no money to mount a campaign.

[Hink]

I missed it. Was Gary Johnson forgotten again?

Yes. He was at the last one though. They asked him maybe 2 questions... but he was there...

Of course he has like no money to mount a campaign.

Unless we get campaign finance reform, no one will ever be able to mount a campaign without a PAC or lots of important friends. Ironic... don't ya think?

[Blide]

Yup and it's Wall Street and Big Business that have all the money... Quite a conundrum we're in.

[Hink]

Michele Bachmann’s manicure: Tasteful? Tacky? Totally off-limits?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...prss=arts-post

I find it amazing that I never even noticed that she had nails.... is this really a story?

[wahday]

I missed it. Was Gary Johnson forgotten again?

In my uninformed opinion, Johnson, Huntsman and Paul seem like the most transparent and intellectually honest Republican candidates. They don't water down their messages or say what they think the base wants to hear, and for that, they earn my respect.

I respect Johnson for his very engaging work to stimulate a mature and valuable discussion on drugs, decriminalization, etc. - discussions we REALLY need to have in this country. But I see him largely as a one trick pony. As governor of my fair state, I found him to be decidedly ineffectual. He is really a libertarian who runs on the Republican ticket. And like many libertarian politicians (as opposed to citizens that call themselves libertarians, some of which are not so much this way) he tends to be a little more reasoned and intellectual about his conservatism. At least as I see it. But he's not really presidential material. IMHO. Indeed, I don't really see anyone in the Republican field I feel is presidential material. Ture, I am not a Republican and I am not looking to vote for one, but my feeling is that there is no one out there who seems like a viable candidate to me. Romney will get the nod, I predict, and he has the best composure (usually) but I still can't see him getting elected.

I have to agree that I feel the Republicans have been led astray by the tea partiers and with that, serious intellectual discussions about how conservatives might try to save the economy, create jobs, etc. have fallen by the wayside. Everyone seems to be positing the "easy fix" for things as if the rest of us are just idiots for not seeing the obvious. 9-9-9? REALLY?! That is not a serious plan. That's something a teenager might come up with. Do these folks not retain the services of economists to develop these plans?

I am very disappointed in the level of serious public discourse on the issues that re really so important right now. Its all sniping and griping and blame with little to no discussionon how to create jobs, how to stimulate the economy. Just broad strokes and vagueries. Eck - gotta go wash the bad taste from my mouth now...

[Blide]

I think Gary Johnson is running just to try to position himself as Ron Paul's successor in the Libertarian movement.

[Hink]

Perry says it was a ‘mistake’ for him to participate in 2012 debates
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/p...125805254.html

Or was it a mistake to be horrible at debating? Not sure...

[michaelskis]

2016: if Obama serves a second term, it'll come down to Cuomo (D) vs Christie (R). You heard it here first.

If President Obama serves another term we are all screwed. However, I fear that there are more structural issues at play hear beyond the general rhetoric from the republican candidates. None of them have addressed any of the true foundational issues that have caused us to get where we are. In 1913, three factors were put into place that changed the fundamental structure of the federal government. The adoption of sixteenth amendment which permitted the federal government to acquire funds directly from the general public, the seventeenth amendment which changed the way senators were elected into office from a state government appointment to general electorate, and the creation of the Federal Reserve which took the control of the Country’s financial system out of the hands of the people, and placed it into a collection of private banks.

These three actions created a substantial shift in power from the states to the federal level which is exactly what the majority of the founding fathers did not want to happen. We no longer had adequate checks and balances between the house (the people’s house) and the senate and the spending is out of control, regardless of what letter is behind a politician’s name. It limited the ability for people to create small jobs while massive multinational corporations started to gain control. The IRS was restructured and tax codes, loop holes, and the general April 15th chaos was created. Before that the balance was the states having the ability to limit funding for programs that were in the best interest of the people and not the feds.

Frightening thing is it is happening again. Author Oliver DeMille notes in his book Freedom Shift, these types of things happen around once a century but the timing varies from one nation to the next. We are on the verge of another shift and for the first time in recorded history, it will be a global shift caused by the policies of the American government. If things progress in the direction that they are going, this might be as good as it gets in the US and we might spiral into structural collapse while China becomes the new dominate world leader.

[Mastiff]

If President Obama serves another term we are all screwed. However, I fear that there are more structural issues at play hear beyond the general rhetoric from the republican candidates.

So why didn't you just say, "We are all screwed." I find it reprehensible that the GOP has done everything within their power to harm the economy simply to regain power. In fact, our wonderful Tea Party came up with this:

Once again, the Tea Party zealots are holding a gun to our economy. This time, they're demanding all small businesses go "on strike" and refuse to hire anyone, as a protest against President Obama.

They're asking businesses to sign an anti-job creating pledge posted on the website of Tea Party Nation, the group that featured Sarah Palin as its keynote speaker. It's a diatribe reminiscent of their refusal to compromise over the debt ceiling.

And it's no joke. Tea Partiers have made it perfectly clear they will do anything to prove their point. Remember that in the name of deficit reduction, they were ready to allow a federal default that economists warned would lead to economic catastrophe and massive job losses.

So, the country is run by corporations and Wall Street, and uses wing nuts like these people to further their agenda that is designed to screw over 99% of the population. Now tell me, why are we only screwed if Obama is re-elected, and not some bought and paid for politician from the GOP? Because the Republicans will keep doing harmful things to our country in protest? That the only reason I can see.

[Blide]

Yeah, I think the biggest problems facing the United States are related to healthcare costs and our tax revenue being insufficient.

I honestly fail to see how cutting government, taxes, and regulations will improve anything. The most important thing is to get people working again so they can drive demand in the private sector. If the government has to be the one to do this since the private sector refuses to, so be it. It definitely wasn't government involvement or taxes that caused this mess to be begin with.

[ddomin4360]

Yeah, I think the biggest problems facing the United States are related to healthcare costs and our tax revenue being insufficient.

I honestly fail to see how cutting government, taxes, and regulations will improve anything. The most important thing is to get people working again so they can drive demand in the private sector. If the government has to be the one to do this since the private sector refuses to, so be it. It definitely wasn't government involvement or taxes that caused this mess to be begin with.

I agree that the government isn't to blame for this mess, but it is impossible to say whether or not the policies enacted by the government have had some impact in how it was progressed. For starters businesses and entrepreneurs want a stable business climate. With the government constantly talking about raising taxes the people with money are afraid to try and turn it into more money if bigger taxes are on the way. In this situation it would have been better to actually raise them from the get go and set the climate. Instead (I feel that) Obama uses it as a rallying cry to energy his base, and thus has actually damaged the economy by calling for more taxes every once in a while and never delivering.

If anything meaningful tax cuts would set the stage for a healthy period of steady growth like we had Reagan-Clinton. And while, sure taxes aren't as crazy high as they were when Reagan came to power I still think there is room to go down. I believe in the Laffer curve, and that cutting taxes on the wealthy will tend to a point (I think Laffer and Jerry Brown came up with 22% when Brown tried to win the Democratic nomination for 92) will actually increase the amount of revenue that they put into the system because they are more willing to spend, and risk their money. We live in a risk=reward economy and thus it is vital that people are willing to take such chances.

The government has need to reign in it's spending. It's unfortunate that Obama is catching this when he didn't start it, but he certainly shares blame. Since it wasn't dealt with in the past, it needs to be dealt with now.

[michaelskis]

So why didn't you just say, "We are all screwed." I find it reprehensible that the GOP has done everything within their power to harm the economy simply to regain power.

I said it because I believe that most of the GOP candidates would do a better job than Obama. Heck, I think Al Gore and Hillary Clinton could have done a better job than Obama. As for the comment about the GOP, I guess I don't fully understand how 'they' are harming the economy to regain power any more than any other politician.

So, the country is run by corporations and Wall Street, and uses wing nuts like these people to further their agenda that is designed to screw over 99% of the population. Now tell me, why are we only screwed if Obama is re-elected, and not some bought and paid for politician from the GOP? Because the Republicans will keep doing harmful things to our country in protest? That the only reason I can see.

Obama said he would veto any bill containing pork. Every bill he has signed has been full of pork.

Obama said that he would fix health care. All of the local hospitals have put a freeze on hiring or laid-off staff and the majority of polls showed that the majority of Americans did not want Obama care.

On June 22, Al Gore commented "President Obama has thus far failed to use the bully pulpit to make the case for bold action on climate change," and that it has been nothing more than the status quo.

Tax situations have continued to become more complex and costly for all American

American Federal Debt at 14 TRILLION and when you factor in the progression of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicare part B, the Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher said the debt is actually 99 Trillion. He had promised to reduce the national debt and federal deficit without raising taxes… both taxes and the debt were increased.

He promised to create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners and put $10 bullion into it. Turned out to only help a handful of his friends and not the general public. He also promised to allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage… he hasn't

Cash for clunkers took usable used cars off the road and some environmentalists note that it actually caused more harm in terms of increased drive times, disposal of the existing vehicles, and production costs for the new vehicles resulting in an increase carbon footprint per consumer. Furthermore, Kelly Blue Book and several other automotive oriented economists noted that there was a substantial increase in the cost of used cars and referenced basic economics 101… supply and demand.
He said that he would restructure capital gains taxes and dividends… he hasn't.

He promised that he would crack down on lobbyists and establish regulations to prevent former officials from becoming lobbyists

[ColoGI]

Yeah, I think the biggest problems facing the United States are related to healthcare costs and our tax revenue being insufficient.

I honestly fail to see how cutting government, taxes, and regulations will improve anything. The most important thing is to get people working again so they can drive demand in the private sector. If the government has to be the one to do this since the private sector refuses to, so be it. It definitely wasn't government involvement or taxes that caused this mess to be begin with.

You likely fail to see it as you pay attention to facts and reality. In fact, they are making things worse. We've seen this before and yet we don't know how to act. Our political economy is broken.

[ColoGI]

I said it because I believe that most of the GOP candidates would do a better job than Obama. Heck, I think Al Gore and Hillary Clinton could have done a better job than Obama. As for the comment about the GOP, I guess I don't fully understand how 'they' are harming the economy to regain power any more than any other politician.


Obama said he would veto any bill containing pork. Every bill he has signed has been full of pork.

Obama said that he would fix health care. All of the local hospitals have put a freeze on hiring or laid-off staff and the majority of polls showed that the majority of Americans did not want Obama care.

On June 22, Al Gore commented "President Obama has thus far failed to use the bully pulpit to make the case for bold action on climate change," and that it has been nothing more than the status quo.

Tax situations have continued to become more complex and costly for all American

American Federal Debt at 14 TRILLION and when you factor in the progression of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicare part B, the Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher said the debt is actually 99 Trillion. He had promised to reduce the national debt and federal deficit without raising taxes… both taxes and the debt were increased.

He promised to create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners and put $10 bullion into it. Turned out to only help a handful of his friends and not the general public. He also promised to allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage… he hasn't

Cash for clunkers took usable used cars off the road and some environmentalists note that it actually caused more harm in terms of increased drive times, disposal of the existing vehicles, and production costs for the new vehicles resulting in an increase carbon footprint per consumer. Furthermore, Kelly Blue Book and several other automotive oriented economists noted that there was a substantial increase in the cost of used cars and referenced basic economics 101… supply and demand.
He said that he would restructure capital gains taxes and dividends… he hasn't.

He promised that he would crack down on lobbyists and establish regulations to prevent former officials from becoming lobbyists

Standard template of plaints notwithstanding, I don't think BHO deserves reelection**, but I also think the country (and the world) deserves Romney.

**not for the reasons listed, but for poor politics and not hitting the bully back and instead rolling over.

[Mastiff]

I said it because I believe that most of the GOP candidates would do a better job than Obama.

Michele Bachmann... game, set, match.

As for the comment about the GOP, I guess I don't fully understand how 'they' are harming the economy to regain power any more than any other politician.

Really? You don't remember the whole debt ceiling escapade? How about this quote, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." That was Mitch McConnell. How about the most recent move to block trade deals with South Korea, Panama and Colombia, that the GOP has been after for a long time? It's a concerted effort, Mike. If you don't see it, well, I guess you don't. Most others do, though.

Obama said he would veto any bill containing pork. Every bill he has signed has been full of pork.

Obama said that he would fix health care. All of the local hospitals have put a freeze on hiring or laid-off staff and the majority of polls showed that the majority of Americans did not want Obama care.

On June 22, Al Gore commented "President Obama has thus far failed to use the bully pulpit to make the case for bold action on climate change," and that it has been nothing more than the status quo.

Tax situations have continued to become more complex and costly for all American

And? You're mistaking me for someone who thinks Obama has done a good job. I think he did a crappy job with health care in particular, doing nothing but adding millions of "clients" to the already bloated insurance industry that the middle class will have to finance. If that's not socialized medicine, I'm not sure what you'd call it. Only the people who own stock or work as CEOs will make more money off of us. There are simply some things that people do not need to use to take a profit.

American Federal Debt at 14 TRILLION and when you factor in the progression of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicare part B, the Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher said the debt is actually 99 Trillion. He had promised to reduce the national debt and federal deficit without raising taxes… both taxes and the debt were increased.

Again... and? Got news for you, Mike, both R's and D's are responsible for this mess. My point is that everything Obama has tried has been met with resistance instead of assistance from the GOP. My issue with Obama is that when it became clear that the other side of the aisle wasn't going to help, but instead stand in the way of his efforts, he rolled over. At least Bush wasn't such a pussy. He was a bought and paid for war hawk who was in it to make rich people richer, but he wasn't a punk.

He promised to create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners and put $10 bullion into it. Turned out to only help a handful of his friends and not the general public. He also promised to allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage… he hasn't

Cash for clunkers took usable used cars off the road and some environmentalists note that it actually caused more harm in terms of increased drive times, disposal of the existing vehicles, and production costs for the new vehicles resulting in an increase carbon footprint per consumer. Furthermore, Kelly Blue Book and several other automotive oriented economists noted that there was a substantial increase in the cost of used cars and referenced basic economics 101… supply and demand.
He said that he would restructure capital gains taxes and dividends… he hasn't.

He promised that he would crack down on lobbyists and establish regulations to prevent former officials from becoming lobbyists

And what? I'm not touting Obama as having done great things. I'm saying the GOP has done nothing to help us with this mess, that was created by R's and D's alike, and won't do anything to help the middle class if elected. They don't care about us... and by us, I mean you and me. I'm almost certain that the number of people who do care about us at the national level is either minimal or non-existent. Sure, they pander to you at election time, and then go off to make life better for themselves.

Obama being re-elected screws us all? No Mike, we're all screwed no matter who gets in office.

[ColoGI]

Standard template of plaints notwithstanding, I don't think BHO deserves reelection**, but I also think the country (and the world) deserves Romney.

**not for the reasons listed, but for poor politics and not hitting the bully back and instead rolling over.

Whoopsie - second error today from typing too fast. Should read:

I don't think BHO deserves reelection, but I also think the country (and the world) doesn't deserve Romney.