Are you for Obama?

For the greater good, absolutely. I mean it. I wouldn't wish violence upon him, but i'd be immensely pleased for the greater good if he had an aneurysm right this second. I'd say the same about Tony Abbott currently, or in the past George Bush Junior, and of course more exaggeratedly evil characters i won't bother to name in order to avoid hyperbole.

 

Wow, I really do not have words for this.

I think it's best I avoid the bolded part as well.

 

What's the problem?

 

The problem would be that this is a thread on whether you're before or against Obama. Not about proving how passionate you are about it by inventing horrid fates for half the GOP. That's essentially revenge porn, and not relevant or germane to having a proper discussion.


It's OK to dislike either party, really. I make no secret that I disagree with Romney on pretty much his entire program.

But it would help if we could keep civil and focused on facts, rather than running off with wild hyperbole.


(by the way: this is not necessarily aimed just at your post. I'd implore everyone in this discussion to keep it civil)

 

Well I wouldn't say that one current and one former GOP rep constitutes half the GOP

I don't like a lot of what Obama has done. I'm especially against his human rights record, on more than just the gitmo issue. There are two reasons I am really for Obama. One, as I mentioned in my first post, is that the 2 party system is broken and untenable, leaving everyone with the choice between 2 and only 2 candidates. The other is that 1 of those candidates I have come to be terrified of because of his nature which I have already gone through. I've done my best to avoid hyperbole.

 

Romney winning the elections would be disastrous, not only for the USA but for the whole world.

This. The "win in a state and all votes are yours"-system is rotten to the core and not at all representative for the actual votes. Not very democratic, is it?

And this, if I lived in the States. Even though it would have no influence at all because of said system.

 

One of my friends said this in a recent status:

To a point I agree with her. And because political debates just infuriate me...I'm not going to say exactly how I feel about either candidate besides making it known that I do support Obama.

I voted for him the first time and I'll do it again.

 

blah blah blah blah Romney hates big bird, blah blah blah blah Romney says the military are lazy and he doesn't care to get their vote because they dont pay federal income taxes because they are lazy moochers who are not taxed for their combat pay, blah blah blah Romney contradicted his own website and a year and a half of his campaigning frequently in the debate, blah blah blah...

 

is that true?

---------- Post added 6th Oct 2012 at 04:32 AM ----------

Also, i'd like an actual answer to this.

 

If Romney died or was removed before the electoral college met, then the electors who would vote for Romney would all vote for Ryan and whoever Ryan chose to be his VP. If they met after the electoral college assembled, then I believe that his votes would be invalidated. If Romney won, and therefore no valid candidate had 270+ votes, then it would go to the house to decide. I don't remember if the vote is held before or after the new house is inaugurated, the current one would vote for Ryan and I would imagine the new one, even if it was Democrat-dominated, would still vote for Ryan unless it was a situation in which Romney won the electoral but lost the popular, in which case the Democrats might back Obama.

 

When he was spewing his BS about the 47%, he did not realize that most of the 47% are traditional republican groups such as military members, who do not pay federal taxes on their combat pay because they are excluded for their service to the country. he dismissed a good chunk of his voter base as being lazy leechers who want goverment to provide for them.

He was trying to make it seem like people who dont pay federal income taxes are obama supporters when most of them are republicans. He was basically falsely generalizing a section of america to a bunch of rich people, none of which likely has ever served their country in uniform.

Also, this is a man who was pro-vietnam, but refused to actually fight the war he said we had to do... and we all know how vietnam turned out.

 

I would say that Obama is the lesser of two evils...but I can't even call him an evil in good conscience. So he's not perfect, but not many are. He supports all the ideals I believe in *including* marriage for myself and my partner...so even if he can't make everything happen that he'd *like* to happen, at least he'll try. That's *far* more than I can say for Romney.

I don't get the person who says "I'm not for Obama" but "I hope he wins." Huh? This is the real world...the only one we have. Wake up!

 

Polls looking much better for Romney after the debate. A couple have him leading in Florida, Virginia and down or up by one point in Ohio. This race is far from over.

Ohio: Romney 47%, Obama 46% (source: We Ask America)
Ohio: Obama 50%, Romney 49% (source: Rasmussen)
Florida: Romney 49%, Obama 46% (source: We Ask America)
Virginia: Romney 49%, Obama 48% (source: Rasmussen)
Virginia: Romney 48%, Obama 45% (source: We Ask America)

 

Unemployment rates are the lowest they've been since obama got elected this month.

 

Let's put this number into context.

That number isn't including the huge amount of people that have stopped looking for work all together. Also, the number of low-paying jobs/underemployed Americans is sky high.

 

I'm not so much pro-Obama as I am anti-Romney. Though, not like my vote matters in this state.

 

Rasmussen is a Republican hack pollster.

WeAskAmerica is a Republican hack "pollster" AND absolute garbage. WeAskAmerica "polls" should be completely disregarded and ignored.

Obama still holds the clear lead in this race. A bounce from a debate doesn't last forever.

 

welcome to the world of far right pollsters known for trending away from the scientific average of the rest of the polls, and in the end being known for typically being off the mark in the long run.

you gotta look at the broader swath, not simply the ones funded by the extremes of ones party afiliation.

 

These numbers fall into the sampling error. Also, the sources are all have a republican bias.