stuff about the president that needs to be repeated, accepted and understood as often as possible...

Quote :

"he's toppled governments, violated the sovereignty of nations of countries we're not even at war with, killed american citizens without trial, personally oversees kill-list meetings, kept open guantanamo bay, prosecuted whisteblowers, and endorsed legislation that suspends your right to habeus corpus. You'd be fucking livid if a republican had done any of these things."

to all those down with the lesser of two evils voting strategy, could you at least finally start criticizing the guy after the election?

10/22/2012 1:22:02 PM

I'm pretty sure he's taken a lot of heat from liberals his entire Presidency on all of the above mentioned items. He campaigned as a Progressive turned out to be Bush 2.0 (minus blowing Israel or evangelicals). You're not the first person to notice.

10/22/2012 1:32:06 PM

obviously i'm not the first person to notice this, i'm quoting someone else's remarks.

he's doing some historically fucked up stuff. things that aren't merely "liberal" issues. i believe it's important that they're discussed as much as possible.

10/22/2012 1:39:50 PM

Of course you do. But in the context of this thread, what are you trying to say? Would Mitt Romney not have made all these same decisions? I think it's pretty clear that a Romney presidency would have had even more military escalations, more toppled governments, more violations of sovereignty, more assassinations, gitmo still open, more whistleblowers prosecuted and less personal rights.

Throw on top of that bullshit more religion, cutting of social programs, more money to the rich, shittier policies towards homosexuals and women. I'm not saying I'm going to vote for Obama, but I'm sure as shit not going to vote for Romney and Ayn Rand.

10/22/2012 1:45:53 PM

Quote :

"to all those down with the lesser of two evils voting strategy, could you at least finally start criticizing the guy after the election?"

I can only speak for myself, but I'm more excited to re-elect Obama than I was to vote for him in 2008. He's made monumental achievements in economic, social, and foreign policy, and absolutely deserves another 4 years to finish his work and make sure his policies don't get gutted. The criticisms you listed against him are not only intellectually lazy, but show a complete lack of perspective and understanding of the facts.

10/22/2012 1:47:41 PM

the brainwash is strong with this one.

10/22/2012 1:56:46 PM

It's a shame that there aren't more third party candidates on the North Carolina ballot. I previously was undecided between Barack Obama and Gary Johnson; however, I'm now undecided between Gary Johnson and just skipping over that portion of my ballot.

10/22/2012 2:00:38 PM

Quote :

"Of course you do. But in the context of this thread, what are you trying to say? Would Mitt Romney not have made all these same decisions?"

i'm trying to say that Obama is doing things that are awful, that's all. what Romney would have done is a matter of speculation, what Obama has done is a matter of historical record. that said, i'm definitely no Romney supporter, but your attempt to associate me with that crew as an immediate response to my criticism of Obama is troubling.

Quote :

"The criticisms you listed against him are not only intellectually lazy, but show a complete lack of perspective and understanding of the facts."

if that is so, please give me some information that will expand my perspective and correct my understanding.

10/22/2012 2:13:28 PM

Almost all of the liberal criticism against Obama comes back to one central issue: drones, or rather his use of them. Here are two articles, both from the same author, giving opposing views on the issue.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/08/29/all_the_pentagons_lawyers

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/09/05/whats_not_wrong_with_drones

The bottom line is that there are legitimate criticisms you can make against Obama's drone war and his foreign policy in general. They just aren't the same as the ones you hear the most.

10/22/2012 2:30:10 PM

This one too,

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/09/12/take_two_drones_and_call_me_in_the_morning

10/22/2012 3:08:41 PM

Quote :

"The bottom line is that there are legitimate criticisms you can make against Obama's drone war and his foreign policy in general. "

It started out as Bush's drone program, and my understanding is he strongly advised Obama to keep it (along with whatever our offense cyber warfare group is called).

10/22/2012 3:42:52 PM

Quote :

"The bottom line is that there are legitimate criticisms you can make against Obama's drone war and his foreign policy in general. They just aren't the same as the ones you hear the most."

The criticisms over drone warfare are many, and most of the complaints are legitimate. From the complete lack of transparency, extrajudicial killings of American citizens without trial, mission creep, the fusing of war power acts and the rule of law, the dissemination of civil liberties and suspension of habeus corpus, giving the CIA there own fucking air force while being accountable to nobody, coded language and rebranding of the term "militant" to intentionally mislead the public, "signature" vs. "personality strikes," the blowback of creating new enemies faster than you can kill them, to the inevitable use of drones for domestic surveillance and punishment.

Everything from the moral bankruptcy, continuation of imperial adventurism, totalitarian rule, mission creep, to the legal grey areas have been brought up by liberal critics of this program. And every time, defenders of this program and policy simply offer up the Fresh Prince excuse of, "liberals just don't understand."

10/22/2012 4:41:48 PM

Specifics? Facts? Evidence? Anything other than an embarrassingly long list of platitudes and buzz words with no connection to reality? Here's whats actually happening,

1. Terrorist attacks in Pakistan have gone down as drone strikes have gone up. The attacks have been demoralizing to terrorist groups, as confirmed by notes found in OBL's safe house. What blowback?
2. The number of civilians killed by drone strikes have gone down significantly starting in 2010, compared to the period of 2004-2009, based on interviews with actual people on the ground, not government reports. What moral bankruptcy? As long as you concede that lethal force is sometimes necessary, drones appear to be the most moral way to go about it.
3. A congressional oversight committee has been reviewing drone strikes for more than 2 years. What lack of accountability?
4. Both Pakistan and Yemen have asked us for more drone strikes, not less. What imperial adventurism?
5. After going up in 2010 and 2011, the number of total strikes are down significantly in 2012. What mission creep?

I understand where you're coming from, I really do. The problem is your ranting has absolutely no basis in reality.

[Edited on October 22, 2012 at 5:28 PM. Reason : :]

10/22/2012 5:17:32 PM

^
With regard to your fourth point, I think that you meant to say that those governments have asked for those strikes; I doubt that the people of those countries have.


However, regarding the election itself, Daniel Ellsberg makes this argument to not vote third party:

http://rootsaction.org/news-a-views/534-progressives-in-swing-states-vote-for-obama

[Edited on October 22, 2012 at 5:28 PM. Reason : ]

10/22/2012 5:28:00 PM

There is also criticism of Obama on NDAA and renewal of the Patriot Act.

10/22/2012 5:34:54 PM

^^Even that's not entirely clear. While Pakistanis as a whole are strongly opposed to US intervention of any kind, people living in the FATA (where most of the strikes occur) have a much more favorable view of them. They still don't necessarily like them, but they like them better than full scale incursions by the Pakistani army.

[Edited on October 22, 2012 at 5:35 PM. Reason : :]

10/22/2012 5:35:07 PM

Quote :

"However, regarding the election itself, Daniel Ellsberg makes this argument to not vote third party:"

This just speaks to the perverse reality of a two party system. That people are forced to bend to the will of elected officials rather than the other way around really defines how much the people are kept out of the discussion of national policy.


I'll address your ^ earlier points later. I'm not letting you off the hook.

10/22/2012 5:37:18 PM

People in non-swing states or in states where the electorate overwhelmingly favors one guy should vote 3rd party.

I'll probably vote 3rd party just because it doesn't look like Obama is going to win NC, and he doesn't "need" it anyway.

Romney's probably going to win, so a Romney supporter could safely vote 3rd party and still have their guy come out on top.

[Edited on October 22, 2012 at 6:19 PM. Reason : ]

10/22/2012 6:19:12 PM

Quote :

"This just speaks to the perverse reality of a two party system. That people are forced to bend to the will of elected officials rather than the other way around really defines how much the people are kept out of the discussion of national policy."

That's because a third of the country is fanatically motivated to institute a theocracy and the Republican Party is batshit crazy enough to let them into their platform.

10/22/2012 7:24:13 PM

^^ NC is still a swing state so don't throw your vote away yet.

I on the other hand am in Texas so I will be voting third party.

10/22/2012 7:36:32 PM

People who vote third party are like those who go to the indie film just to stick it to the man.

10/22/2012 11:30:28 PM

nobody does that

10/22/2012 11:52:27 PM

10/23/2012 1:05:44 AM

Is it just me, or does romneyapeaar to be a good opponent?

10/23/2012 1:31:53 AM

I cant believe that romney says "why should companies invest ib america"

10/23/2012 1:34:37 AM

So Romneys five point plan? It's so general. The only substantive difference I can see is complete energy independence. Everything else is what any legitimate candidate would do and say.

I'm not one of those that think that Obama is a savior. Far from it but I'm legitimately trying to see what Romney's plan entails and all I see from his whole campaign is... nothing.

And I'm very worried he will win since the only thing that seems to matter in the polls is the first debate still.

[Edited on October 23, 2012 at 8:05 AM. Reason : X]

10/23/2012 8:05:15 AM

5-5-5

10/23/2012 8:50:33 AM

Quote :

"I'm not one of those that think that Obama is a savior."

I've seen the crazy people on TV who think this, but how many of them are there IRL? How many of them are on this board (well, besides Supplanter)

10/23/2012 9:32:47 AM

10/23/2012 9:42:28 AM

C'mon, you know by "the sea" he meant the Mediterranean and that they have secret tunnels under Turkey and Iraq.

10/23/2012 10:00:12 AM

Rasmussen moving towards Gallup. Romney +4 now.

Definitely think Obama is in some trouble but Ohio is still the way for both.

10/23/2012 10:00:56 AM

Oh my. How is this happening?

10/23/2012 5:47:10 PM

Not much in the way of state polls released today, and just some statistical noise in the national daily trackers. The Obama campaign came out and said that contrary to popular belief, they aren't pulling out of NC or FL, and see themselves as tied or ahead in every battleground state. Outside of NC, I think that's basically true. 332-206 is still very possible for Obama.

10/23/2012 6:33:41 PM

You're dreaming. I hope you're right, but Romney is in a good spot. He successfully changed his entire campaign focus that first debate and is riding the wave in.

His approval is inexplicably high for a guy who has really said nothing and every poll is saying he is "presidential" whatever that means.

Yes, it will still come down to Ohio though.

10/23/2012 7:25:35 PM

good thing Tag Romney has all those voting machines under his name!

or whatever the claim is, i haven't really been following it.

[Edited on October 23, 2012 at 7:29 PM. Reason : ]

10/23/2012 7:26:44 PM

Quote :

"is approval is inexplicably high for a guy who has really said nothing and every poll is saying he is "presidential" whatever that means."

He is running on the whole "I am a genius at running a business which means that I will also be a genius and running the country" strategy. Which could and should work well with those without critical thinking skills.

10/23/2012 7:54:46 PM

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/24/ryan-appears-in-ad-for-his-other-campaign/

Quote :

"Ryan appears in ad–for his other campaign (CNN) – Rep. Paul Ryan is once again donning a pair of safety goggles in a new television ad released Wednesday for his House re-election campaign. Similar to his first television ad, Ryan is seen standing in a factory talking to voters about the economy."

Good to keep a fall back job on the back burner I guess.

10/24/2012 10:21:43 AM

Quote :

"You're dreaming. I hope you're right, but Romney is in a good spot. He successfully changed his entire campaign focus that first debate and is riding the wave in."

Why? At this point it's still the likeliest outcome at ~15%. There is a better chance of Obama sweeping every swing state except NC than there is for Romney to win the election at all. People are giving way too much attention to national polls. The state polls are telling the same story they've always told: Obama isn't going to lose.

10/24/2012 11:04:49 AM

To my point,

http://www.politico.com/playbook/

Quote :

"MORNING MINDMELD: As an antidote to the (perhaps) irrational Republican exuberance that seems to have seized D.C., we pause for the following public-service announcement. To be President, you have to win states, not debates. And Mitt Romney has a problem. Despite a great debate and what The Wall Street Journal’s Neil King Jr. on Sunday called a polling “surge,” Romney has not put away a single one of the must-have states. President Obama remains the favorite because he only needs to win a couple of the toss-ups. Mitt needs to win most of them. A cold shower for the GOP: Most polling shows Romney trailing in Ohio, Wisconsin, Nevada, New Hampshire and Iowa – by MORE than Obama trails in North Carolina. Glenn Thrush and Jonathan Martin reminded of us of the 2008 primary analogy: Whatever else Hillary Clinton had, Barack Obama had the math. And math, not momentum, gets you the big house, the bulletproof car, the cool plane. We now resume our regularly scheduled Playbook."

Look, we all went through the election in 2004. I remember going to the polls thinking "god, I hope that one outlier Ohio poll is actually right and Kerry has a chance". The writing was on the wall though, just like it is here. That election was never as close as it may have appeared at times, and neither is this one.

[Edited on October 24, 2012 at 11:44 AM. Reason : :]

10/24/2012 11:41:37 AM

10/24/2012 12:19:23 PM

Quote :

"Essentially a large portion of American people are asking me to serve as their spokesperson."

ha

10/24/2012 12:45:20 PM

http://thepage.time.com/2012/10/24/the-latest-view-from-one-prudential-plaza-why-the-obama-campaign-is-still-so-confident-about-beating-romney/

Quote :

"Chicago remains sufficiently funded and emboldened by its own polling to compete for the final two weeks in all nine of the battlegrounds: Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia in the South; New Hampshire in the North; Iowa, Ohio, and Wisconsin in the Midwest; and Nevada and Colorado in the West. As they have in the past, Obama campaign officials say they expect to win a high percentage of those states and conceivably could sweep all nine. When pressed, the Obama officials with whom I met said that five of the nine stand out: Nevada, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, and New Hampshire. In that quintet, Democrats believe the combination of their current leads in polling, early voting (where applicable), and ground game makes their chances of winning even greater there than in the other four. And given the Electoral College math, unless Romney picks off one or more of those five states, Obama would win a minimum of 281 electoral votes and re-election."

10/24/2012 2:16:42 PM

Mitt is going to Nevada today. According to Real Clear Politics listing of polls, Romney hasn't had the lead in a single poll in Nevada this year, not even among conservative pollsters. Time well spent?

10/24/2012 4:04:06 PM

lol no, Nevada is gone, but it's not like Mitt has many choices of where to campaign. The three swing states that look the most favorable to him right now are NC, FL, and VA, but Obama could lose all 3 of those and still win easily. As I've been saying all along, the electoral math looks very bleak for Romney. His most plausible path to victory is OH + one of NV/IA/CO/NH, while holding on to NC/VA/FL. The problem is there hasn't been a poll showing him up in Ohio since ..... ever, and all four of the other states are currently leaning Obama. Combined with VA and FL being anything but a sure thing for him and I really don't see how anyone can look at this race and call it a "dead heat".

[Edited on October 24, 2012 at 4:35 PM. Reason : WI, silly me lol]

10/24/2012 4:30:04 PM

a huge LOL at this election forecast from a Romney honk on my FB:
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/custom-presidential-election-map?ref=nf#nkammnmannjkkenjn

she has Romney winning 332-206

10/24/2012 5:31:40 PM

What, you don't think Romney has Massachusetts in the bag?

10/24/2012 5:36:04 PM

former Press Secretary and current adviser to Obama, Robert Gibbs, blames the death by drone attack of 16 year old (American citizen) Abdulrahman al-Awlaki on irresponsible parenting

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/10/how-team-obama-justifies-the-killing-of-a-16-year-old-american/264028/

10/24/2012 6:28:51 PM

^You know what I find funny? The fact that the liberals and libertarians on this board have all come to the same conclusion about the disaster of US foreign policy.

And yet the Democratic loyalists on this board have since adopted the right-wing "bomb 'em till they love us" philosophy and have begun cheerleading for a government that has amped up extrajudicial killings, seized more unchecked power, dismantled the idea of due process, and operates in complete secrecy and without accountability....all just because their guy is in office.

Sad.

10/24/2012 7:04:25 PM

Kind of like all the outrage over the patriot act but nothing over the NDAA....

10/24/2012 8:32:19 PM

^10 That's awesome. Obama will never do it though, unfortunately.

10/24/2012 9:04:43 PM