Obama Vs Romney

K-9

The Irish tallymen usually call their election correct, more than US TV Networks, BBC and all their fancy devices calling theirs.

I think it will be tight but the Obama Presidential reaction to the storm maybe the deciding factor.

RADIUS

Randy Anders wrote: »

2 parties that try and act like they have polar ideas and policies to each other when in actual fact they are pretty much the same. Elusion of choice really

So no, I wont be staying up to watch it!

How are they the same?

Here are some examples of their difference's:

Romney wants to tell China how to run it's economy and sees Russia as the USA's number one enemy . He also wants to invest in a massive navy and start mining coal in the USA like there is literally no tomorrow.

Obama doesn't. He has managed to coax Putin out of the cold war mentality and at least some of the way into 21st century thinking with the nuke deal and knows how to talk brass tax with China without rocking the superpowers boat. He is interested in future energy. Most importantly he knows how to tow the line between idealism and reality. He has done wonders in restoring USA's international image. Anyone who can clean up Bush's catastrophic mess deserves another run.

The two are poles apart. Romney is an opportunistic tycoon stuck in the 80's and Obama is a pragmatic realist with a strong moral compass.


For all their rhetoric, I think It's Obama who is the safe bet who will make sensible decisions and pursue careful reform. If Romney gets elected he's gonna make dramatic bullheaded changes that will see USA at odds with the rest of the world again.

dttq

Couldn't be bothered staying up. I know for a fact I'll be waking up (happily) the morning after the election in the knowledge that Obama is on his 2nd term.

rossie1977

closing_bell wrote: »

no president has ever won with unemployment so high

not true, fdr won re-election with unemployment at 16.6%

reagan won re-election at 7.2%, will be interesting to see figures on day of election given they should come out on monday or tuesday (currently 7.8%)

rossie1977

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Sandy has done the Romney camp no favours and the endorsement Obama got from New Jersey's Republican Governor Chris Christie's was also a blow. But it is important to remember that the states affected by Sandy are Obama states. If turnout is affected by this, then it could really benefit Romney in an already very close race.

sandy means next to nothing really, new york, pa, nj etc will all be blue either way, bookies have been in no doubts about this election for the last 3 months, you could get obama at 1/7 before the debates, he is 1/4 with nearly everyone atm.

Spread

K-9 wrote: »

The Irish tallymen usually call their election correct, more than US TV Networks, BBC and all their fancy devices calling theirs.

I think it will be tight but the Obama Presidential reaction to the storm maybe the deciding factor.

Not according to Vegas. You can get Romney at 2/1. Obama is about 1/3.
Get you dosh on the Irishman

mikemac1

Gary Johnson ftw

Excellent candidate and the big two parties both deserve a kicking

the groutch

K-9 wrote: »

I think it will be tight but the Obama Presidential reaction to the storm maybe the deciding factor.

I was thinking that too, with Sandy being so close to the election, the last thing in alot of people's minds will be how Obama dealt with the aftermath or not, and all the debate/policies may well go out the window.

An Coilean

Paully D wrote: »

Will it not help Romney, given that the areas affected by Sandy were largely Democratic strongholds and the last thing on their minds will be to get out and vote?

Dosen't matter, they are democrat strong holds, even if less people go out to ote, the majority will still be democrat so Obama still takes those states.
Remember given Americas f*cked up eletrocal system, it dosen't matter how many people actually vote for you as long as you get a majority in enough states.

yermandan

Romney = Mick McCarthy with Just for Men

pickarooney

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Sandy has done the Romney camp no favours and the endorsement Obama got from New Jersey's Republican Governor Chris Christie's was also a blow. But it is important to remember that the states affected by Sandy are Obama states. If turnout is affected by this, then it could really benefit Romney in an already very close race.

How does that work? Did Sandy specifically hit Democratic parts of New York and New Jersey?

crazy cabbage

I hope to god that romney doesn't get in. He is such an idot.

If he doesn't get in he is pritty much going to jail becouse he has comitted 2 federal crimes. He cant be proscuted however while he is running for president (some law or another).

He has flat out insulted russia. i dont know much about politics but i know that you dont insult another world power and call them your worst enemy when they have nukes f**King idot

he has flat out told countless lies. for example lieing to ohio that one of its main industrys was thinking of moving to china. This was the exact oposite of the truth that the company in question came out and said that they were increasing and expanding its workforce in ohio. Needless to say romney is still claiming to be right and has set up an add campain around it.

You should look up romney debates romney. It is a video that someone made that takes clipings of loads of his speaches over the course of his campain and shows that every point that he has made he has said the exact opposite somewhere else (pritty much). would post the video but no youtube axcess at the min

Franticfrank

He has flat out insulted russia. i dont know much about politics but i know that you dont insult another world power and call them your worst enemy when they have nukes f**King idot

World leaders do this all the time. Whatever about nukes, you should go to jail when you invade another country when you accuse them of having chemical weapon stockpiles and they really don't.

GalwayGuy2

If he doesn't get in he is pritty much going to jail becouse he has comitted 2 federal crimes. He cant be proscuted however while he is running for president (some law or another).

Really? That's interesting if it's true:O

I've actually changed my mind and I will be watching it:P

crazy cabbage

Franticfrank wrote: »

World leaders do this all the time. Whatever about nukes, you should go to jail when you invade another country when you accuse them of having chemical weapon stockpiles and they really don't.

yes but not in such a blunt way. That would be like enda saying that england is our number one enemy. you just dont do that. say that you dont agree with there ideas or goverment but not that they are your number one enemy. That sh1t can start wars.

pickarooney

mikemac1 wrote: »

Gary Johnson ftw

Excellent candidate and the big two parties both deserve a kicking

What's the Libertarian stance on healthcare and education? Or anything else for that matter. 140 characters or less.

Father Damo

Lenin Skynard wrote: »

Definitely will be glued to it. Great entertainment these are. I'm hoping Obama takes it.

Is there anyone outside of the US with a brain who is hoping for Romney? The fact such an idiot is backed by anyone, let alone potentially just over half a population, it beggars belief. He is easily far worse than Bush. For all his faults I honestly reckon, generally speaking, Bush did what he thought was right, however error prone and disastrous it might have turned out. Romney is plain evil with a monarchist like contempt for the common working man, and yet he is bizarrely managing to persuade a great deal of the white working class to assist him solidfying the power and wealth of the super wealthy. And we thought we had it bad with people voting here along civil war lines, compared to this sh1te we are not all that bad.

As for all the Obama criticism, most of his broken promises have only been broken because the house republicans have usually refused to play ball with any reforms he does try and put in. Aside from all that, do these people forget that he consistently and repeatedtly stated when running, and when he won, that the country would not change over night, would potentially get worse before it got better etc etc etc. He didnt prticularly lie about anything and they are gradually moving in the right direction. The US should be ashamed of itself if they elect the other dickhead.

El Guapo!

When exactly is it on? I might stay up to watch it if I don't have work the following day.

GalwayGuy2

For all his faults I honestly reckon, generally speaking, Bush did what he thought was right, however error prone and disastrous it might have turned out. Romney is plain evil with a monarchist like contempt for the common working man, and yet he is bizarrely managing to persuade a great deal of the white working class to assist him solidfying the power and wealth of the super wealthy. And we thought we had it bad with people voting along civil war lines, compared to this sh1te we are not all that bad.here

Kind of random, but I think he came across kind of like Sinn Feinn in a few of the debates. Not anything he was actually saying, but in the lack of detail, rabble rousing and saying anything to get into power vibe.

Matt_Trakker

I really don't like American politics but I'd much prefer if Obama won.

This Romney guys is a pure clown. I mean they couldn't let someone of his intelligence run the place, could they?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxMD02zU9SE

Like he actually believes that Jebus will return and split a mountain and then for 1000 year he'll run the world from Jerusalem & Missouri
#cuckoobananas

..hmmm vid didn't post, here's the link...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5t6t113syr0&feature=youtu.be

I know it's long so tl;dr
Mormons hate, really really hate, like Hitler-esque hate black people.


...can you add the 2nd vid mods? It ain't workin for me

Drakares

People should take more of an interest in this, IMO. Whether or not we'll be voting, we're going to be heavily affected by whoever wins. What America does, as a super power pretty much has a knock on affect to us and much of the rest of the world.

Romney is bad news. I really hope Obama wins.

Hail 2 Da Chimp

CHANGE!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WXhO_-e3bM

Funglegunk

Obama has an 80.9% chance of winning according to Nate Silver's blog fivethirtyeight. He has a pretty good recording of predicting US election results, including congressional, gubernatorial (love that word) and senate elections. So Romney has a 19% chance of winning as of today, which is still a decent chance (iirc he gave McCain a 2.5% chance of winning in 2008) and may change before the end of the week.

Matt_Trakker

Drakares wrote: »

we're going to be heavily affected by whoever wins.

I hear that a lot, but is it really true?
Like honestly, I'm trying to think of something that's happened since Obama came to power that has had an effect on my personal life. I honestly can't think of anything.
And don't just say 'the economy' that was a shítstorm b4 Obama.
Same goes for Afghanistan & Iraq.
OK he killed Osama, big whoop, but I'm not entirely comfortable with Obama's murderous leaning and complete lack of respect for court systems & justice. Wouldn't it be better to bring war criminals to trial and then hang them?

I really don't think that America has the same influence any more.

Drakares wrote: »

Romney is bad news. I really hope Obama wins.

But yea, he's a nutjob who wears magic underpants

ballsymchugh

jack presley wrote: »

I don't stay up to watch our own election results so I'm not going to watch some other country's.

election results in ireland are announced from about 9pm on the count day, and they don't stay late in the count centres. what sort of metabolism have you that can't stay awake for those?

i stayed up 4 years ago and watched the acceptance speech. got about an hour's sleep. goosebumpy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsiYwmNz8uk

renofan

Its a bit of a joke tbh. To me it kind of sums up the aul US of A for me. You only get somewhere there if you have money. Just look at the money that was spent, it would help a few countries out of recession.

BraziliaNZ

Has anyone seen this little sweetheart yet? Bronco Bamma, haha

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuLuOH0FMBM

squod

Think it's fairly close. One of them needs to Oirish it up a bit, as much as the other fella is jewishing his campaign.

Romnowitz vs O'Bama really isn't it?

Dravokivich

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

Has anyone seen this little sweetheart yet? Bronco Bamma, haha

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuLuOH0FMBM

Was reading about it earlier. Don't get how there's so much coverage for it. It's just a kid saying something, she'd be too young to even realise what any of this presidential campaign is about. Then adults chiming in saying they are tired of it as well. Well fúck me, why don't they disband democracy already?

BraziliaNZ

Dravokivich wrote: »

Was reading about it earlier. Don't get how there's so much coverage for it. It's just a kid saying something, she'd be too young to even realise what any of this presidential campaign is about. Then adults chiming in saying they are tired of it as well. Well fúck me, why don't they disband democracy already?

Because she's adoreable. Same reasons we watch pandas sneezing etc.

martingriff

BobbyPropane wrote: »

American Politics. Who looks the best. Who is for abortion, who is against abortion. Which one won the debate I'll vote for him. He's black I'll vote for him. He's black I wont vote for him. Romney is a republican who will most likely ruin America in the long run with his pro capitalism funding from oil and car companies. Obama is a socialist who will cause anarchy and not help with economic recovery.

You only get two choices in the land of freedom.

There are more than 2. 2 realistic choices yes but there are more than 2 on the ticket

Edit: To answer the OP yes I will stay up anyone know a good website to watch to see all results including senate and the house also

Chuck Stone

The day a Libertarian gets near the White House is the day he's either sold out or he gets a bullet in the face.

MJ23

I wouldn't vote for Mick Romney, he has a bit of snakey head on him.

Drakares

Matt_Trakker wrote: »

I hear that a lot, but is it really true?
Like honestly, I'm trying to think of something that's happened since Obama came to power that has had an effect on my personal life. I honestly can't think of anything.
And don't just say 'the economy' that was a shítstorm b4 Obama.
Same goes for Afghanistan & Iraq.
OK he killed Osama, big whoop, but I'm not entirely comfortable with Obama's murderous leaning and complete lack of respect for court systems & justice. Wouldn't it be better to bring war criminals to trial and then hang them?

I really don't think that America has the same influence any more.

Iran / Israel and Syria - if not handled properly could lead to WW3 (removes tinfoil hat).

America is decades ahead of every other country when it comes to military technologies, having some clown at the helm of this doesn't bode well for everyone, no matter how many policies are in place (Look at Afghanistan/Iraq)

The world is a big global field economically, with agriculture, oil, transport etc. So if the USA did have a massive slump with their economy, there would be a massive knock-on affect in import/export prices, jobs etc.

And the list goes on.

rossie1977

romney changes his mind more than he changes his underwear

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0m_xXvQlvg

bnt

I think The Economist has nailed it: they have endorsed one of the candidates ... barely:

We very much hope that whichever of these men wins office will prove our pessimism wrong. Once in the White House, maybe the Romney of the mind will become reality, cracking bipartisan deals to reshape American government, with his vice-president keeping the headbangers in the Republican Party in line. A re-elected President Obama might learn from his mistakes, clean up the White House, listen to the odd businessman and secure a legacy happier than the one he would leave after a single term. Both men have it in them to be their better selves; but the sad fact is that neither candidate has campaigned as if that is his plan.

As a result, this election offers American voters an unedifying choice. Many of The Economist’s readers, especially those who run businesses in America, may well conclude that nothing could be worse than another four years of Mr Obama. We beg to differ. For all his businesslike intentions, Mr Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says. That is not a convincing pitch for a chief executive. And for all his shortcomings, Mr Obama has dragged America’s economy back from the brink of disaster, and has made a decent fist of foreign policy. So this newspaper would stick with the devil it knows, and re-elect him.

MadYaker

Obama is probably the safest bet. I think Romney has shown himself to be totally unfit for office (the 49% video etc etc) and his running mate and all the other wackos on the right are a serious liability. American politics is in a sorry state. This has been the nastiest election ever. Its been all about why you shouldn't vote for the other guy rather than the candidates focusing on their own strengths. I think a lot of Americans are pretty unsatisfied with their options.

Herb Powell

If Obama "didn't get anything done" in his first term, it was because of congress, opposing him at every step, seemingly for the sake of it.

The system is fuccking stupid.

General Zod

MadYaker wrote: »

American politics is in a sorry state. This has been the nastiest election ever.

Not even close. There hasn't even been a "swiftboat veterans for truth" type canard and even that election wasn't the worst.

pickarooney

pickarooney wrote: »

How does that work? Did Sandy specifically hit Democratic parts of New York and New Jersey?

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Unless Obama took a dump on someone's face who was lying with limbs missing after the storm he's not got to worry about NJ/NY.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

The day a Libertarian gets near the White House is the day he's either sold out or he gets a bullet in the face.

I was wondering with Ron Paul's campaign if it was an odd kind of attempt at assisted suicide. :pac:

Herb Powell wrote: »

If Obama "didn't get anything done" in his first term, it was because of congress, opposing him at every step, seemingly for the sake of it.

The system is fuccking stupid.

Obama was just **** politically and how people like Hilary Clinton didn't tell him so is amazing. When the debt ceiling thing was happening one of the Comedy Central shows had a clip of about 10 months earlier when the Democrats had capitulated to something else. Obama was dressing it up as a compromise and some journalist who looked like he was on work experience from high school asked if Obama was worried that since he'd given the Republicans what they wanted that they'd refuse to co-operate on the debt ceiling. Did none of the staff think the same thing? Whatever about obstructionism by the Republicans, there's ways around it that the Democrats never seem to manage and they seem to love capitulating and calling it compromise.

Hazys

Dravokivich wrote: »

Was reading about it earlier. Don't get how there's so much coverage for it. It's just a kid saying something, she'd be too young to even realise what any of this presidential campaign is about. Then adults chiming in saying they are tired of it as well. Well fúck me, why don't they disband democracy already?

America is such a vast place with completely different cultures and beliefs...basically half sane, tolerant, intelligent people...half religious, gun swinging nut-jobs

Dear Red States…

We’ve decided we’re leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we’re taking the other Blue States with us.

In case you aren’t aware, that includes Hawaii, Oregon,Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and all the Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country of New California.

To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get Elliot Spitzer. You get Ken Lay.

We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get Harvard. You get Ole’ Miss. We get 85 percent of America’s venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue, you get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition’s, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a
bunch of single moms.

Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we’re going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they’re apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don’t care if you don’t show pictures of their children’s caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq, and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we’re not willing to spend our resources in Bush’s Quagmire.

With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country’s fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation’s fresh fruit, 95 percent of America’s quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools, plus Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT.

With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia.

We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

Additionally, 38 percent of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent believe life is sacred unless we’re discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44 percent say that evolution is only a theory, 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61 percent of you crazy b*****ds believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

By the way, we’re taking the good pot, too. You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico.

Peace out,
Blue States

http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/sfo/80714812.html

stannis

BobbyPropane wrote: »

American Politics. Who looks the best. Who is for abortion, who is against abortion. Which one won the debate I'll vote for him. He's black I'll vote for him. He's black I wont vote for him. Romney is a republican who will most likely ruin America in the long run with his pro capitalism funding from oil and car companies. Obama is a socialist who will cause anarchy and not help with economic recovery.

You only get two choices in the land of freedom.

Better than no real choice at all, which is what you have in Europe, where parties so often have to compromise and sit in the political centre in order to form coalitions. I like the idea of having two clearly defined ideologies and parties presented to me so that I can choose the lesser of two evils (USA), rather than a squabbling carnival of many small evils (Ireland and Italy spring to mind).

Apolloyon

Lex Luthor all the way. A self made billionaire who still cares about the people. Those liberals in the Daily Planet don't know what they're talking about! This is the problem with a free press. So, Lex was impeached in his last term. But who hasn't broken a few federal laws on the way? I mean he gets the job done, doesn't he? Those off the book deals with the tyrant Darkseid of Apokolips were misconstrued, we needed Apokoliptian weapons to keep America safe.

And as for Superman...if that is even his real name. What's an illegal alien doing poking his nose into American affairs anyway? Go back to Krypton. Destroyed you say? A likely story.

So if you believe in Truth, Justice and the American Way. Vote Lex Luthor in 2012. You know it makes sense.

Rothko

Hopefully, Obama wins. I think it would be a disaster if Romney were to be elected

Principal Skinner

Suas11 wrote: »

Hopefully, Obama wins. I think it would be a disaster if Romney were to be elected

Why? If it wasn't for the fact that he's black Obama wouldn't be up for re-election the democrats would have Hilary in there instead

Wacker The Attacker

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

i will. i hope obama wins

Why? He's full of sh1t.

Like his opponent. Two dullards who have no business running for the worlds most powerful political office.

Wacker The Attacker

Suas11 wrote: »

Hopefully, Obama wins. I think it would be a disaster if Romney were to be elected

Obama hasnt exactly been a runaway success.

The fact that the republicans have a reasonable shot at regaining the presidency after 8 years of George W should tell you everything you need to know about the last 4 years

Rothko

Wacker The Attacker wrote: »

Obama hasnt exactly been a runaway success.

The fact that the republicans have a reasonable shot at regaining the presidency after 8 years of George W should tell you everything you need to know about the last 4 years

Oh, I'd agree with you. It's just that I think he's the lesser of two evils.

Wacker The Attacker

Suas11 wrote: »

Oh, I'd agree with you. It's just that I think he's the lesser of two evils.

But he's been a failure as president. Why should a failed president be re-elected?

There's appears to be very little dfference in both candidates anyhow

pickarooney

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Unless Obama took a dump on someone's face who was lying with limbs missing after the storm he's not got to worry about NJ/NY.

You said (or rather Corvus Maximus said):

If turnout is affected by this [the weather], then it could really benefit Romney in an already very close race.

How would a lowered turnout in Obamacentric states benefit Romney in any way, assuming that those who do still turn up vote along the same lines? Does the number of people who vote in an individual state affect the overall outcome?