The Queer Vote

[Annika L]

Ok, despite the thread's name, I welcome everyone to vote here.

Hopefully there's a choice for everyone.

Below, feel free to post your reasons, hold a debate, stand on a soapbox, divert into quantum mechanics, go off on another tangent, post erotic fiction, post erotic fact, go into a tizzy, or discuss penis size (particularly if it affects your choice of candidate). Just be civil.

[Jobelorocks]

I am eligible to vote and I am voting, but not for Obama or Romney. There are several candidates. Here is a link to a good test to see which candidate you agree with most on key issues http://2012election.procon.org/view....ourceID=004491 . As it turns out I really don't match up too well with anyone, so I will have to think some more before I make my final decision.

It is between Johnson, Stein, and Goode. The problem is that all three believe differently than I do on some core issues. They are the closest matches for me though.

[DuckiesDarling]

I'm eligible to vote and I will be casting my vote for Obama for a variety of reasons that I have laid out over and over in another thread. Btw thanks for the new poll to get rid of that other one.

[Long Duck Dong]

I am not in the us, but I would vote for obama...... the final straw for me, was reading that romney is wanting to pluck big birds funding ...lol...

we have the same thing here, in order to save money, the government cut as many sources of funding as possible, but the government is targeting government spending, starting with wage / salary freezes and caps on departmental spending, and many of the areas where excess government spending was keeping people in jobs where they actually did nothing of any value.... mind you a couple of natural disasters did not help specially with the near recession we ended up in.....

romney going after something that have been a source of learning, entertainment and joy for a few generations of kids and adults ?......is there anything that he holds sacred other than his over seas bank accounts ?

[12voltman59]

I really do wish we had more true options than just the two we are presented with----I do have to say---my vote for Obama is not so much for Obama as it for the Democratic Party and my voting for them is not so much because I think they are so great and are miracle workers--but because at least the crap they do is less vile than the sheer stupidity of the modern version of the Republican Party that does things like engages in Voter Suppression, wants to set women back to a state that is probably more like 1812 than 2012, are homophobic, xenophobic and a whole other set of "cultural war" reasons.

The other thing with the Republican Party---their appeal is largely being only towards a literally dying demographic cohort since their core constituency is a demographic that grows smaller with each passing year---namely older, wealthy white male, protestant Americans, and those who live primarily in the southern states, pockets of mid-west states and sections of inter-mountain western states--but they are becoming less and less--a viable national party.

I really do wish that the Republican Party would not be so far crazy right as they are now and become a bit more moderate and reasonable--but since we are not likely to have a true multiparty system in the US in my lifetime, it really is bad for democracy if the Republicans were to become a minority, fringe party and the Dems would once again become too dominant because that leads to excesses and such going the "other way."

I really do believe that no one side has all the answers to the things that trouble us, that no one side has a lock and key to the gates of "THE TRUTH" and only one side is the defender of all that is RIGHT AND TRUE and that from coming at things from at least two sides----in an honest attempt to fix things--- is the best way that we can come to the best workable consensus deals to GET THINGS DONE!!!

That we have such polarization in our politics now---with both sides seeming to refuse to work with "the enemy"--that is keeping us from getting things done and that is why as I have said in the past, a bit pessimistic about America's future prospects.

Not long ago---I watched yet another replay of the wonderful Ken Burns' documentary series "The Civil War"----the late historian Shelby Foote, whose work on the Civil War served as the basis of what Burns featured in the series said something very profound about the real cause of that great war and he said that it was not really the matter of slavery and related issues per se but it was a "failure of those in power to be able to reach a consensus" on how to deal with the issue.

It is a very scary prospect that those who serve in our stead are so locked into their respective positions on everything that they can do nothing that really poses a very real threat to the future of this country.

[12voltman59]

LDD: It has long been the goal of those on the right to "kill" public broadcasting almost since the moment it began, along with their desire to get rid of any vestiges of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's "New Deal" from the '30s and '40s and Lyndon Bird Johnson's "The Great Society" from the 60s. It has also long been a goal of the cultural warriors of the right to undo the Roe vs Wade decision that gave women the right to have abortions----some of the most extreme are even wanting to overturn cases like Griswold vs. Connecticut that gave people access to contraceptives and probably Mapp vs. Ohio as well, the case that basically opened the door to access "pornography."

Mitt Romney as vowed that in his Dept of Justice---a high and perhaps even top priority---will be to take down as much of the porn industry as possible.

When it comes to Mitt and what he says he will cut funding for---not only does he vow to zero out funding for PBS, but for National Public Radio as well, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and both the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities.

Now--we of course have budget "problems" but the total amount of all of these entities combined that they get from the national treasury---is something like .012 percent of the total federal budget. Eliminating them would be like knocking off a few ticks off a dog totally infested with them---meaning it won't make one blip of difference in the budget and help to solve our budget situations.

In regards to his tax plan and what deductions he plans to do away with---Romney won't disclose what tax deductions he will get rid of---but many economists are suggesting that chief among those deductions he will do away with will be the deduction for making charitable contributions----and if that does take place--then the incentive for people to make such contributions will go away other than a person's simple desire to make such contributions. This would be a double whammy at the same time on cutting arts and public broadcasting funding, hitting it at both the private and public ends. It would also hit other sorts of agencies that have taken on an increasing load of "social services" work thanks to many such agencies going away entirely in the past few decades or at least cut sharply. George Bush basically pushed for transferring much of the social safety net to the "private sector" instead of the public one.

When it comes to the "good" that funding things like the arts brings economically----as I recall the figure----there was a milestone economic study done a decade or so regarding the benefits that such funding brings. That study found that "taxpayer" money coming from those endowments allow either directly or indirectly via state arts agencies, to support the arts in places all over the country and for each single "taxpayer" dollar spent on the arts--generates something like $40 of private economic activity.

Now---in places like Los Angeles, New York, Chicago and even smaller places like Cincinnati where the local symphony owns some of the biggest venues to bring in popular music acts and such----which brings them big bucks each year to fund the symphony, opera and ballet companies---there will be plenty of the "high arts" still available--but in places from from even mid-sized cities in America that put on small festivals and such that honor local talent and such---the odds are that those sorts of things will go away and that would be to my mind--a tragedy of sorts since such things do bring some economic good to such places and it helps to preserve, protect and encourage our cultural and artistic heritage. It also does help to "enrich our lives" and to me--if we don't fund "the high arts" as we have come to do---I don't care if we somehow get more jobs----we will be poorer in other ways.

God knows--if we leave up "culture" to the mass market media companies--our cultural legacy won't be things like jazz, bluegrass, the blues, jazz or old time rock and roll---it will be lowest common denominator crap like "Watching the Kardashians" "The Jersey Shore" or "The Real Wives of _______"

I almost think that to gut the arts and culture is part of an overall plan to really make America the land of "Dumb and Dumberer!"

Actually---I am not voting now---but am going downtown to my local Board of Elections next week to cast my votes thanks to early voting here in Ohio and I am going to vote for Obama and pretty much most of those running as Democrats-I am surely voting to re-elect Sherrod Brown---the little dweb that is running against him for US Senate----Josh Mandel---has like zero qualifications to hold that office---he is under investigation for hiring a bunch of his buddies to fill top end state jobs without qualifications at all--paying them like 50 percent more for those positions than have prior administrations, both Democratic and Republican and he has run a campaign that both liberal and CONSERVATIVE media outlets have said ranks as one of the most dishonest in the history of Senatorial campaigns!!

[Long Duck Dong]

12 volt, the more I read about romney, the more I question what he has the issues with...... but it reminds me of a movie I saw a few years about about how religion had become the new * police * and ownership / possession of art, music, cultural items, were illegal and the items destroyed.....

romney needs to stop trying to turn america into the romney / mormon country of no culture, no life and no rights... and look at how to help continue getting america back to being a country that so many americans are proud to call home......and that means that everybody is looked after, health, job and housing wise, regardless of sexuality, age, culture or religion without turning the USA into a imitation of what the USSR was like....

but its like they say, you do not have to take away a persons right of freedom of speech and expression, you just need to remove the platforms they use.....IE the PBS, NPR and all of the other outfits that share a simple message that we can all live together and enjoy the same things regardless of who we are......

[falcondfw]

I will vote for Romney. He is not my favorite candidate, but my favorite did not win the Republican primary. I have 3 kids (maybe 4). I WILL NOT burden them with our expenses. Obama has already raised the deficit more than 43 other Presidents COMBINED. When does it stop? Bush raised the deficit a lot, but nowhere near Obama. In fact, Obama actually called Bush unpatriotic for raising the debt so much. So if Bush is unpatriotic for raising the debt so much in 8 years, what does that make Obama for raising it so much more in 4 years? Simple logic. And those who would vote for Obama are not looking at the facts or examining things logically. Simple math. For example. If we created fewer jobs this month than last, how does the unemployment rate go down almost 1/2 of a percent?

[DuckiesDarling]

For example. If we created fewer jobs this month than last, how does the unemployment rate go down almost 1/2 of a percent?

Easy, Falcon, the unemployment rate is based on the amount of people who are eligible to claim benefits, many people have exhausted benefits but are no less unemployed.. they just no longer count on the rate as they are not recieving money. I also love the fact that Republicans are closing their eyes to the benefits that they want to take away from everyone or stop people from getting then claim we don't see the facts. I think we see them a lot more clearly than you do.

[darkeyes]

God falcon what kind of maths did they teach u at school.. fewer jobs created doesn't mean none... so not only is ur Maths faulty but so was the English they taughtcha...

Neways have sat thinking bout this.. not American so cant vote... but if I was I would cos its too dangerous not to. It wouldn't exactly be a ringing endorsement of Obama but it would have to go his way cos it's far too dangerous either not to vote, or vote for anyone other than him.. as an individual Im not desperately afraid of Romney as Pres although his poltics are enough to turn my stomache.. I am however rather more afraid of the dickheads who he will owe favours to and end up running the US... the bugger is in thrall to some ver nasty unpleasant peeps who hate our kind (the lgbt).. hate my kind(women).. have contempt for and hate the poor and underprivileged, will return the US to n even more free and unfettereded and selfish form of capitalism and turn the US into an even more unfair and unfree place than it is now, hate health care for all, are xenophobic, racist, Islamophobic, warmongering American supremacists and dangerous as the world is, a Romney Presidency would make it even more dangerous. I could argue ad infinitum why people should vote for Obama, and also why they shouldn't... but about Romney and his masters? I could take forever or I could just say a vote for him is a vote for the greed and selfishness of a very few.

[tenni]

Just a question or two.

So, falcon
Are you stating that the debt (total money owing built up over several presidents' eras) increased during Obama or the deficit?(annual negative tax imbalance)
................
My understanding has been that Bush increased the "debt" by not raising taxes during two invasions. There was a negative government tax income annual during that era due to not raising taxes or cutting expenses to create a balanced budget for eight years. He was the first US president to have a war and not increase taxes. I recall that he actually reduced taxes for the upper income people. I recall statements that the interest owing on the debt seemed to be on a path that in the not too distant future all of the tax collected would be needed just to pay the interest on the accumulated debt.

Now, the debt increase over eight years and interest charged on the debt causes an every increasing burden on the taxpayer. The next president and government needed to deal with this debt. Using terms like "deficit" means an annual negative tax income. The US government spent more that year than it brought in with taxes. That needs to be added on to the debt carried over from the past. That includes the increased debt from the Bush eight year regime. Bush seems to be blamed for the increased debt from his era. The government is more than the president and includes the Senate & Congress bills. The same occurs with Obama.

During the Bush era, the Congress and Senate were the same political party as the US president? During the Obama era, the Congress and Senate ended up not being the same political party as the US president. So, who actually increased the annual deficit? Who holds that responsibility?

I am asking because I do not understand your system as far as statements that falcon made. (not being a smart arse)

[fredtyg]

You should always include more than just two choices thus I won't be voting in your poll. I'll be voting for Gary Johnson. He's the successful past two- term Governor of New Mexico and is both fiscally conservative and socially tolerant.

[fredtyg]

Some of you may want to take the quiz on the isidewith site to see which presidential candidate most shares your views. If you check the state results, you can see where your state really stands in regards candidates vs. issues.

[Annika L]

Ah, well, y'know...8 choices max in a poll on this site...and Gary Johnson won't be winning this election, so with all due respect to your vote, I'm not as interested in what portion of people will be voting for him as I was in the other choices I posted. In hindsight, if I'd have thought of it, I could have made choice #5 include "or would not vote for Obama or Romney". Live and learn.

[Annika L]

Obama has already raised the deficit more than 43 other Presidents COMBINED.

Yeah, it was the national debt Romney said Obama had raised. Do you believe this because Romney said it? He said quite a number of false things.

Politifact gives this accusation a "mostly false" rating: http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey...evious-43-pre/

CBS News says "the Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office." (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...an-under-bush/) Not exactly the same numbers, but that doesn't sound like "more than all 43 previous presidents combined."

[darkeyes]

Yeah, it was the national debt Romney said Obama had raised. Do you believe this because Romney said it? He said quite a number of false things.

Politifact gives this accusation a "mostly false" rating: http://www.politifact.com/new-jersey...evious-43-pre/

CBS News says "the Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office." (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...an-under-bush/) Not exactly the same numbers, but that doesn't sound like "more than all 43 previous presidents combined."

The UK, which currently essentially is implementing the kind of shit economic and social policies Republicans would love, see's imports rocket, exports collapse, industries shrivel and die, unemployment and especially youth and female unemployment rocket, even less job security, a return to full recession, living standards fall sharply, poverty increase, homelessness go through the roof and more beggars on our streets, savings and pensions shrink, fuel poverty go sky high, environmental and conservation concerns disappear, the rich become even richer, the banks out of control, the health service being butchered, public services disappear and the national debt and government borrowing go through the roof... and guess what? The bastards tell us we haven't even scratched the surface yet.. there is far far worse to come... that, boys and girls, is what u have coming ur way if u vote for Romney and the Republicans...

[meteast chick]

I am just as much a hair raising Liberal as much as I am an out and proud lesbian. I voted for Obama and thankfully won 4 years ago and my wife and I will be voting for him again next month. It seems anyone can get on a stage, send out a mass of postal smut, and spew hatred and lies on the television to get the American people to believe anything. Regardless of the politicking, the truth is out there, and the truth is that Romney's original words were the true ones, not the flip flopping he did at the debates. His Mormon ass doesn't like my lesbian one. I'm sure if he could he would undo the civil union I had performed in my state this year and rebill the money my mother received from state aid when I was a child when she was going through a divorce, working 2 jobs, going to school and not receiving a dime in child support from my deadbeat father, and trying to raise 3 children. When she was able to, she actually returned the remainder of food stamps she had and said thank you. How horrible she was to rely on the government when she needed it. If it was up to Romney she'd never had received that so desperately needed help. I can't say that I've never received federal subsidies when I was out of work with 2 infants. How many of us can say we are NOT or never have been in the 47%? As far as the federal budget goes, get the true facts and not the propaganda known as Obama 2016. Get the facts and then it will be clear who the true and right candidate is. I'm all about Team Obama/Biden!!!

[DuckiesDarling]

[The Young Pretender]

It's fascinating to see an almost even split between Romney and Obama. I'd love to see a demographic breakdown, as I'm curious as to whether or not the Romney voters feature a higher quantity of bisexuals in heterosexual marriages.

I woke up this morning to see one of my uncle's facebook posts with a political bent (his posting habits are more of a narcissistic teenager's than a 40+ year old...). However, this one made some fair points. In particular, it restated the common knowledge about Republican disdain for LGBT civil rights. I wonder how LGBT individuals could vote for Republicans who would obstruct marriage, adoption, and the tax benefits derived from the former.

That said, I can't vote for either party. Both are too focused on holding power for 2 more years bickering over the peripheral issues while global political, military, and financial power shifts to the Orient and America careens (seemingly) inexorably to financial doomsday.

[DuckiesDarling]

[void()]

I really do wish we had more true options than just the two we are presented with ---

Why not vote for Jill Stein or Rocky Anderson?

Jill Stein reminds me of a Green Party F.D.R, Rocky Anderson seems to be the Justice party's Romney. AFAIK, Jill Stein is on the ballot in many states, working on getting the last two. Rocky Anderson seems to be on most ballots as well. You could vote Independent and have more choice.

Democracy Now has debate coverage if you need to some familiarity with these candidates.

These two were not allowed into the MSM debate, doesn't mean they aren't viable choices. You think government or MSM is going to help U.S. Citezens be informed? Look at public education and try saying they will with a straight face. Look at no coverage of the Iraq, or Afghanistan wars and try it. You need to look for yourself.

Annika, excuse me for not adding to the poll. I wouldn't vote for either of MSM's candidates. Might vote for an Independent candidate. You didn't list those.

[mariersa]

[Simple math. For example. If we created fewer jobs this month than last, how does the unemployment rate go down almost 1/2 of a percent?[/QUOTE]
Falcon seems as if you don't stand a chance! apparently contributors here have a better formula for figuring it out i'm still confused you start with xxxx add 366 subtract 144 and you end up with xxxy hmmm. anyway lots of 'em either became self employed, were ill, vacation , experienced bad weather hahaha what a formula, no wonder they're confused.

www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

[sodacan3]

I think that if Mitt wins, it is an indictment of the educational system in this country. If one looks at history and the multiple times the Republicans have messed up this country, then how could one vote for them. From the depression to the Wall Street Meltdown, their hand has been steering us towards rocky waters. And who can possibly believe in the Trickle Down Theory. How can people blame Obama for everything? How about the hard right members of the Congress and their role in stalling everything.

I want to be on the public relations and political strategy committee for Obama. They need new slogans: "Keep your Mitts off our Country!" "If the Mitt fits, you can't elect!"

[bityme]

I put myself down for a Romney vote. Overall, I'd be happier with Gary Johnson, but, unfortunately, I don't think he has a chance. So my selection is based on what I think would be best for the country. Given a choice between social issues and the economy, I have to go with getting the economy back on track. While Obama might have a greater following on social issues, I perceive it to be largely due to his having gone overboard on give-away programs (entitlements other than Social Security and Medicare).

In coming to my decision, I had to look at a number of different factors. On the social front, Obama did nothing other than the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and that was passed as a bipartisan measure during his 3rd year. Yes, there is Obamacare, passed during the first two years while he still had Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate. During that period, he could have pushed through the majority of the things he is saying he will do if re-elected. The problem is he no longer has that double majority in Congress. I believe his claimed support of same-sex marriage is just another hollow promise.

Obama claims not to be able do stop raids on Medical Marijuana dispensaries in several states because he has to follow the law, but, by Executive Order, he could remove marijuana from Schedule 1 drugs which would open free prescription use and preclude federal prosecution. I view his taking such action as extremely unlikely. Pharmaceutical companies have spent $241,431,044 on lobbying during this election cycle and Obama has collected $902,985 in campaign contributions from them through September 3rd of this year.

Seeking the hispanic vote, he illegally exempts 800,000 illegal alien students from deportation by refusing to enforce the laws we have and siding with the president of Mexico he sues one of our states that wants immigration laws enforced. He increases the National Forest lands along our border with Mexico, limiting Border Patrol access to illegals crossing the border. He ships arms to the Mexican cartels that are used to kill Border Patrol agents as they attempt to enforce our borders and then prosecutes Border Patrol agents who, when shot at, return fire killing illegals crossing the border.

How about the economy? I don't believe the politician themselves, the biased broadcasters, or the so-called fact-checkers when it comes to their manipulation og accounting data. Every time I check them, I find they have selectively favored one side or the other in presentation of their analysis. Obama wants to blame everything on Bush, but won't admit that Bush started out with an 11-month recession from Clinton's policies. My view is that every president has to deal with the nation's problems during their term of office. The test is whether or not they handled the problems properly. Here is my own analysis:

According to the Treasury Department, as of January 20, 2001, the national debt was $5.728 trillion. By January 20, 2009, the national debt was $10.629 trillion. So, under the Bush administration, over 8 years, the national debt increased by $4.901 trillion.

For Fiscal Year 2012, which ended October 4, 2012, the figure is $16.162 trillion. That means, under Obama presidency, in less than 4 years, the national debt has increased $5.533 trillion.

For the first time in our nation's history, the national debt now exceeds 100% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP). It hit a high of 74.1% under Bush. Put another way, as of December 31, 2011 it had reached 183% of the average per capita income in the U.S. Bush had a high of 130% and Clinton had a high of 112%.

According to the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (Obama’s administration), the U.S. deficits are calculated as follows::

Bush Deficits
2001-2008 = $2,262,087.00

Obama Deficits
2009-2012 = $5,332,720.00
2013-2016 est. = $2,827,678.00

So we have a president who, in his first term, almost doubles the deficit of two terms of the previous administration. On top of that, he projects that if re-elected the budget deficit will continue to climb to over 3 times that of the previous president. Despite billions spent on bailouts, homes are still being foreclosed on, banks are still failing, and wages are down. The record is pretty clear. Obama is not just "incomplete" as he admits, he's incompetent.

This is the same president that has failed to get Congress to pass a budget at any time during his term in office. Whether he had a Democratic majority in Congress, or not, Congress, on a bipartisan basis, has rejected every proposed budget he has submitted to them. He has openly stated that he can't change Congress from the inside. He still has not learned the art of leadership required to negotiate or obtain a consensus. The chance of him being a successful leader during a second term are not very promising.

Do I think Romney can fulfill all of his campaign promises or projections? Hell, NO! I am, however, convinced that Romney has a much better business sense than either Obama or his cadre of advisers. The only way to fix this economy is to put American business back on a solid path of continuous growth.

Pappy

[DuckiesDarling]

Sorry, Pappy, I fully disagree with your take that Romney as a businessman would be better for the country than Obama. I think if you actually look at Romney's so called tax cut plan you will find many of the things he claims are impossible. Of course the deficit went up under Obama, after all he had to try and get us out of a war without losing more lives in the balance. Besides the last time we had a businessman in office to "fix" the country, it was George Bush... oh yeah the problems started with his snowball and Obama tried for two years to push it uphill then the scare tactics started at the Democratic advantage in both House and Senate was lost and then it became just like Sisyphus.

I don't believe his support for LGBT rights is hollow, after all he also made it plain that partners of LGBT people can not be denied access to them in the hospital despite the lack of a marriage license. Ryan wants to gut Medicare and Social Security, Romney disdains 47% of the American population as worthless. Sorry to those that actually had to get some help in times of need we know damned well we aren't worthless, we just needed a bit of help.

If Romney is elected you'll see an even more widespread gap open between the "rich" and the "poor". Romney's plan would gut the small business which would cripple the middle class job market. Obama's plan would strengthen the middle class job market and in effect get Americans back to work. And, really Johnson?? He wants to get rid of the IRS.. yeah we can all dream about it, but in the end we know that's a fool's dream. Two things in life are certain, Death and Taxes so the IRS or another replacement tax collection agency will always be around.

http://factcheck.org/2012/08/romneys...e-tax-promise/

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious...-declarations/

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/romneys...ergy-whoppers/

http://factcheck.org/2012/02/dueling-debt-deceptions/

[fredtyg]

I put myself down for a Romney vote. Overall, I'd be happier with Gary Johnson, but, unfortunately, I don't think he has a chance.

Something to consider, bityme: The President isn't elected by popular vote. He's elected by the Electoral College. In that regard, your vote in California for Romney (as is my vote for Johnson, in a way) is actually a wasted vote.

Obama is all but certain to win California without even campaigning here. He'll probably win by a fairly large margin. Once he gets 51% of the vote, he wins all the state's electoral votes. Your vote for Romney won't give Romney any electoral votes. That gives you- and others in states considered "safe" for one candidate or the other- the perfect excuse to vote your REAL choice.

The same could actually be said for Obama voters in California. Once he gets 51% of the vote, any votes cast for him beyond those 51% are essentially wasted. He gets the same number of electoral votes whether he gets 51% or 99% of the vote. There are Obama supporters that might really prefer Green Party candidate Jill Stein or even Gary Johnson. This is the perfect opportunity for them to cast a vote for their real choice and not have to worry about the outcome.

I'd suggest, if you're a California Obama supporter that would rather vote for someone else, you could get everyone you know to vote for Stein or Johnson and Obama would still win the state and its electoral votes.

What's to lose? This is the perfect time to vote your real choice and help change our electoral system from a 2 party duopoly to one where at least some attention is paid to other candidates.

[tenni]

"For the first time in our nation's history, the national debt now exceeds 100% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP)."

Pappy
I heard about this at least five years ago as a first step prediction about the US economy. If you have a debt, you must realize that you are paying interest on that debt. Each successive year where you continue to have a deficit and not a surplus, your country is unable to reduce the debt. The interest is compounded annually and this adds to the increasing debt.

The next horror for you is when your interest on your national debt equals the GDP or it may be when the interest on the debt equals or is greater than taxes collected. I don't recall how far off that is but it is not long. The interest on the debt is growing. Tax cuts are not the solution to such an economy or so I've been told. Tax increases and reduced services should be in the wing. What politician is going to state that though? Who is stating that one of the largest expenses, the military needs to be drastically reduced? No one.

[IanBorthwick]

The Republican party doesn't think you should elect Romney. Don't believe me? Watch and learn.....




And he's indecisive and a flip flopper. Whatever gets him, or he THINKS gets him traction, he'll chase to get you to hire him! That's consistent with someone lying to get hired by a new company!



Are you voting for Romney? Really? Or are you voting AGAINST the black guy because of the rhetoric, your bigoted views, your belief that somehow the President creates legislature, that you've been told the fiction that Obama caused the debt and MAGICALLY interest stops accruing from Bush and Reagn and Bush Jrs Supply Side Fairy Tale?




I know talking politics here, especially fact driven and truth oriented politics, puts me in the minority, but it has to be said. Your choices come down to Obama and his attempts to fix what Bush made go horribly wrong, or Romney and his record of lies, obfuscation, cronyism, and his latest...the good old Gish Gallup.

[IanBorthwick]

And let me leave you with THIS gem, to all your Right Wing, Bisexuals....excuse this IF you can!

If you're not STRAIGHT, you're shit outta luck with expecting protection of YOUR rights!

[wanderingrichard]

In WA state we will only be able to vote X or Y. Why? Becuase the Repugnicans and the Democraps have both convoluted and perverted the state electoral system into a 2 party only system.

Personally, being modeerate and mostly independent, I'd vote for the Greens, if i could. Aint gonna happen, wont be on the ballot.

Please, explain to me how we can forcibly and enthusiastically send "Monitors" funded by our Dept. of State ,[btw, never trust these fucks either] into other countries to ensure Free and Fair Elections, when we cant even do it inside our own?