Our Political Leanings

[Burning Love]

I dunno, just based on the last few election cycles, no part has one more than two consecutive terms in a long time, plus Obama's numbers are low. As unpopular as Romney was, Obama barley beat him.

John McCain: 59 million
Barack Obama: 69 million

Mitt Romney: 61 million
Barack Obama: 66 million

A 10 million swing and a 5 million swing is not exactly what I would call "barley", Obama was super powered enough that he could lose 3 million, the other guy could gain 2 million, and Obama -still- comes out on top.

If that trend remained (and I suspect Hillary would win by a wide margin because of who she is), Hillary would still be at least neck-and-neck with the Republican opposition.

Further, both parties have gone more than two consecutive terms at least winning in the past few election cycles.

Reagan - Reagan - H.W. Bush
Clinton - Clinton - Gore (by popular vote, Florida's electoral votes fraudulently given to Bush II)

In the past 6 elections, Republicans have won the popular vote in 1. One time since 1988. Let that sink in for a minute.

 

[Holdek]

I was curious as to what people's thoughts were about Hillary Clinton? Whether love her or hate her she certainly is controversial. Do people here like her? Would she make a fantastic next president of the U.S.A?

She is NOT going to win a general election. That's my thoughts on her.

Keep dreaming. You really think Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, or any of the other right-wing losers are going to take the 2016 election? Not a chance. The best the right-wingers can do is take the Senate this fall. The Presidency is locked down for Democrats.

The Presidency is never "locked down," especially three years before an election.

I dunno, just based on the last few election cycles, no part has one more than two consecutive terms in a long time, plus Obama's numbers are low. As unpopular as Romney was, Obama barley beat him.

John McCain: 59 million
Barack Obama: 69 million

Mitt Romney: 61 million
Barack Obama: 66 million

A 10 million swing and a 5 million swing is not exactly what I would call "barley", Obama was super powered enough that he could lose 3 million, the other guy could gain 2 million, and Obama -still- comes out on top.

If that trend remained (and I suspect Hillary would win by a wide margin because of who she is), Hillary would still be at least neck-and-neck with the Republican opposition.

Further, both parties have gone more than two consecutive terms at least winning in the past few election cycles.

Reagan - Reagan - H.W. Bush
Clinton - Clinton - Gore (by popular vote, Florida's electoral votes fraudulently given to Bush II)

In the past 6 elections, Republicans have won the popular vote in 1. One time since 1988. Let that sink in for a minute.

So what? Presidential elections aren't determined by popular vote.

 

[Burning Love]

If Republicans take the Senate in November, I'm just going to go stay with Canadian friends. So ultimately it doesn't matter to me.

All Democrats can do is delay the inevitable anyway. Republicans in power will just speed up America's downfall. If the American people wish to fall faster, hey, who am I to argue? Let's see some catastrophe!

 

[The Dude]

I've pretty much given up on politics. Both major American parties suck. Republicans are Red, Democrats are Blue. Neither one gives a shit about you.

 

[Burning Love]

I've pretty much given up on politics. Both major American parties suck. Republicans are Red, Democrats are Blue. Neither one gives a shit about you.

No, you did that wrong, it's actually...

Roses are red,
violets are blue,
I'm a libertarian
and I don't give a shit about you.

 

[Surtur]

Five million votes is VERY close. Remember, Obama's biggest advantage is that his opponant was extremely unpopular and only beat him by five million votes. No one in either party is getting much love, Hilary can do it but her odds are about as good as any major GOP candidate at this stage. Swing votors are very fickle in this manner.

 

[Burning Love]

Five million votes is VERY close. Remember, Obama's biggest advantage is that his opponant was extremely unpopular and only beat him by five million votes. No one in either party is getting much love, Hilary can do it but her odds are about as good as any major GOP candidate at this stage. Swing votors are very fickle in this manner.

Romney was a businessman that most Republicans seemed to hail as their savior, someone to make up for the so-called failings of John McCain. I don't know what world you're living in.

Personally, I fucking hate Hillary Clinton and wish Elizabeth Warren would primary her like the Teathings primary their own people. Hillary is just another rich worshipping Wall Street loving Blue Dog.

 

[Mourning Dove]

My political compass results:

Economic Left/Right: -5.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.46

 

[The Dude]

Romney had two major things going against him: He was a flip-flopper, and he is Mormon. There is still a big prejudice against Mormons, especially in Evangelical circles.

When you get right down to brass tacks, however, there really isn't much difference between Romney or Obama. Both of them are big government stooges and empty suits.

 

[Burning Love]

Romney had two major things going against him: He was a flip-flopper, and he is Mormon. There is still a big prejudice against Mormons, especially in Evangelical circles.

When you get right down to brass tacks, however, there really isn't much difference between Romney or Obama. Both of them are big government stooges and empty suits.

Big business is a lot more problematic than big government. If big government worked for the little people, everything would be fine. Instead, big government is the stooge of big business.

 

[Duke Nukem]

Romney had two major things going against him: He was a flip-flopper, and he is Mormon. There is still a big prejudice against Mormons, especially in Evangelical circles.

When you get right down to brass tacks, however, there really isn't much difference between Romney or Obama. Both of them are big government stooges and empty suits.

Big business is a lot more problematic than big government. If big government worked for the little people, everything would be fine. Instead, big government is the stooge of big business.

It seems they basically scratch each others' backs while ignoring real problems. If you have money though you can get away with almost anything, or so it seems.

 

[Burning Love]

Romney had two major things going against him: He was a flip-flopper, and he is Mormon. There is still a big prejudice against Mormons, especially in Evangelical circles.

When you get right down to brass tacks, however, there really isn't much difference between Romney or Obama. Both of them are big government stooges and empty suits.

Big business is a lot more problematic than big government. If big government worked for the little people, everything would be fine. Instead, big government is the stooge of big business.

It seems they basically scratch each others' backs while ignoring real problems. If you have money though you can get away with almost anything, or so it seems.

It wasn't always like that. The New Deal restrained the power of big business for the next 50 years, until Reagan's new political order started tearing it apart piece by piece. New Deal and Great Society policies actually helped ordinary Americans, because the government wasn't owned by corporations. It wasn't any less big, either, it was just more efficient and better funded thanks to high taxes from the New Deal era.

 

[UnwiseKhan]

Part of the problem is just people disagreeing on the role a government ought to have in society. New Deal era politicians thought it existed to help the people and plan longer-term than individuals or corporations do, and to provide for the common good in ways that others/businesses don't. Reagan disagreed, and basically saw it as a vehicle for foreign policy and a hindrance domestically. Personally, I tend to lean towards the former. People aren't inherently good, evil, or even stupid, they're just self-interested and short-sighted. It makes sense for people or businesses to focus on short-term profit and their own needs, but you still need some kind of entity planning for the long run or everything is just going to collapse.

Part of the problem is that even the government is just focusing on the short-term. Most of the officials only care about getting re-elected, and due to the costs of re-election they tend to pass their time by passing laws that benefit their corporate sponsors campaign contributors, but nothing too controversial since that could hurt their chances of re-election. The only time they're willing to actually try to change things is when they know they're not getting re-elected.

tl;dr People are self-interested shitheads and ruin everything.

 

[exball]

Man politics are boring as hell.

 

[The Dude]

Man politics are boring as hell.

Politics are fucking stupid. They turn otherwise intelligent people into jibbering mental defectives.

 

[Smutley]

Five million votes is VERY close. Remember, Obama's biggest advantage is that his opponant was extremely unpopular and only beat him by five million votes. No one in either party is getting much love, Hilary can do it but her odds are about as good as any major GOP candidate at this stage. Swing votors are very fickle in this manner.

		       Popular		Electoral	Percentage
2012
Obama		65,899,660	332		51.1%
Romney		60,932,152	206		47.2%

2008
Obama		69,456,897	365		57.7%
McCain		59,934,814	173		52.9%

2004
Bush			62,040,610	286		50.7%
Kerry			59,028,444	251		48.3%

2000	
Bush			50,455,156	271		47.9%
Gore			50,992,335	266		48.4%

1996
Clinton		47,402,357	379		49.2%
Dole			39,198,755	159		40.7%
Perot			8,085,402		0		8.4%

1992	
Clinton		44,909,326	370		43%
Bush			39,103,882	168		37.4%
Perrot		19,741,657	0		18.9%

1988
Bush			48,886,097	426		53.4%
Dukkakis		41,809,074	111		45.6%

1984
Reagon		54,455,075	525		58.8%
Mondale		37,577,185	13		40.6%

1980
Reagan		43,904,153	489		50.7%
Carter		35,483,883	49		41.0%
Anderson		5,720,060		0		6.6%

The only times the elections have been "close" have been in 2004 and 2000. The 2012 elections, no matter how you look at it, were not close. They weren't the sweeping victories of a crazy-popular president versus a nobody, or the times that the republicans were fucked over by Perot, but they aren't close.

There's no way to spin those numbers. 5million voters isn't close. 126 electoral college votes isn't close. Was the 1992 elections close? Bush was within 5 million votes of Clinton. Was the 1988 election close? Bush was only within 7 million of Dukkakis who was never considered a valid contender.

You can say a lot of things, like, "Dissatisfaction with Obama cost him nearly 5% points." or, "Everyone is still mad at Bush and that's why he won again", or even, "Romney killed his own campaign by being himself". But the one thing you can't say is this was close. The only people that thought Romney was going to win was Romney and the feverish nutjobs that make up the "anything blue in politics or brown in skin is bad" movement.

 

[TL 611]

Man American politics are boring as hell.

FTFY

 

[hellbound]

It wasn't always like that. The New Deal restrained the power of big business for the next 50 years, until Reagan's new political order started tearing it apart piece by piece. New Deal and Great Society policies actually helped ordinary Americans, because the government wasn't owned by corporations. It wasn't any less big, either, it was just more efficient and better funded thanks to high taxes from the New Deal era.

lol

 

[The Dude]

Arguing politics is like playing chess with a pigeon: no matter how good you are at the game the pigeon is always going to knock over the pieces, shit on the game board and then strut around like it won.

 

[Mourning Dove]

I think it's useless to argue politics, especially if one or both sides are very staunch in their beliefs. These people have probably been ingrained in theses beliefs for many years, some since childhood. How is one vehement argument going to suddenly change that person's viewpoint to the opposite one? Plus, arguing politics unnecessarily raises my blood pressure.