REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Will a serious presidential candidate please stand up?

POSTED BY: GEEZER
UPDATED: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 10:47
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2335
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, August 27, 2012 5:52 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


...says the Editorial Board of the Washington Post.

Quote:

AS THE PRESIDENTIAL campaigns officially kick off, with the Republican convention week and the Democrats assembling the week after, many voters are exasperated and tuning out.

The unrelenting ugliness of television ads is one cause, as those of us with the mixed privilege of living in a swing state such as Virginia (or in its media market) know well. But there’s also a sense of disappointment in the candidates — a sense that they are smaller, and their campaigns are smaller, than the issues and challenges facing the country.

In the case of presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney, part of what underlies the unease is an uncertainty about core beliefs. Every politician will change positions over a career; you’d worry if he or she didn’t. But few have covered as much ideological ground as the former Massachusetts governor: on abortion, stem cell research, health-care reform, gun control, immigration, gay rights, climate change and more.

It may seem a small thing, but when a man who’s been hunting twice can blithely say that he’s been a hunter “pretty much all my life,” it makes people wonder what is real. His attacks on primary opponents Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich for revealing even a sliver of pragmatic concern for undocumented immigrants suggested an ethos of winning at any cost and a deficit of principle. The sketchiness of his policy proposals since then only aggravates the concern.

In President Obama’s case, there’s a different sort of disappointment. The country has a pretty good sense of the man by now and generally likes him. But he has not, as many had hoped, fully inhabited the presidency, in the sense of rising above the pettiness and partisanship that he diagnosed so eloquently before assuming office.

Simpson-Bowles is the shorthand for the most commonly cited failing in this sphere, referring to the bipartisan budget deal that Mr. Obama commissioned but then could not bring himself to embrace. That was emblematic of a reluctance to provide leadership, abroad (with Syria, for example) as well as at home.

Is there hope for something bigger, more edifying, more statesmanlike, from the candidates? We’d like to think so.

One reason is that both candidates are men of toughness and intelligence. Mr. Obama has proved as much in office. In the teeth of an economic gale, he helped stabilize the nation’s finances and succeeded in extending health-care coverage to millions of uninsured. His stewardship of foreign affairs, while disappointing in numerous ways we haven’t hesitated to mention, has been sober and thoughtful.

Mr. Romney has a heavier burden of proof, but he comes with an accomplished résumé and an understanding of how to get things done. His selection of Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) as his running mate, much as we take issue with Mr. Ryan’s fiscal priorities and even his arithmetic, bespeaks an openness to debate entitlement reform that the country badly needs.


And the country needs a serious campaign; it is facing life-or-death questions. Is al-Qaeda dead, or nearly so, leaving the United States free to move on to other challenges, such as China’s rise, or does Islamist radicalism still present a breeding ground for existential threats? Can the United States influence whether the Arab Spring evolves toward greater democracy or toward theocratic rule and sectarian conflict? Can Iran’s nuclear ambitions be cooled peacefully, and if not, do they really justify a war? If so, why, and what would the consequences be?


Do the candidates believe that the United States remains the world’s indispensable nation, and what does that mean in Syria or the South China Sea? What would either candidate expect to achieve in Afghanistan?

We are facing existential questions at home, too. Is the kind of economic growth the country enjoyed in the 1960s and 1970s gone for good, or can it be rekindled? Can poverty be ameliorated and prosperity more evenly shared? As the nation’s population ages, can the government right-size itself and the entitlements it has promised, or will political dysfunction produce growing debt and eventual decline? These challenges begin not on Inauguration Day but the moment the polls close, when Congress must confront the looming fiscal cliff.


So far, the campaigns have focused instead on Mr. Obama’s “you didn’t build that,”Mr. Romney’s tax returns and, most recently, Rep. Todd Akin’s “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

We don’t dismiss these as distractions. The differences between the candidates on abortion are important considerations, as is the anti-science or pseudo-science strand of the Republican Party typified by Mr. Akin’s remarks. Mr. Romney’s secrecy on his tax returns and his campaign bundlers says something about his attitude toward the public that the public would be foolish to ignore. The debate over government’s role in the economy is important, too, and potentially useful.

But such a debate isn’t sufficient. Yes, Mr. Obama will, and should, make familiar Democratic arguments for spending more on roads and schools. Mr. Romney will, and should, make familiar Republican arguments for taxing and regulating less. Mr. Obama will tout wind, Mr. Romney will preach oil.


Neither, though, will be able to lead the country on such a narrow partisan basis. The one November outcome we can almost definitively rule out is a mandate election, in which one party overwhelms Congress and the White House in a landslide. Politics will force whoever wins to search for compromises with the other side.

Even more important, the nature of the problems will mandate such a search. Saving Medicare will require a combination of market forces and regulation. Avoiding national bankruptcy will require higher taxes and scaled-back benefits. A rational climate-change policy will end up encouraging both wind and natural gas.

A candidate who can lay the groundwork for those kinds of solutions over the next two months might spur voters to start listening again.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/will-a-serious-candidate-please
-stand-up/2012/08/24/3701660e-ed19-11e1-9ddc-340d5efb1e9c_story.html


And of course all the partisans here will pull out bits that criticize their opponents and ignore the bits that criticize their champions, ignoring that both sides have got problems they're trying to cover with slung mud rather than face.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 27, 2012 6:30 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


interestingly balanced piece from the well known left-wing MSM liberal mouthpiece.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 27, 2012 7:53 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


"And of course all the partisans here will pull out bits that criticize their opponents and ignore the bits that criticize their champions, ignoring that both sides have got problems they're trying to cover with slung mud rather than face. "


And you are as partisan as anyone here, and completely willing to ignore anything that paints your chosen candidates as less-than-desirable.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 27, 2012 8:09 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
And you are as partisan as anyone here, and completely willing to ignore anything that paints your chosen candidates as less-than-desirable.



Name my chosen candidates, Mike.

While you're at it, we still have the question of what you think I agree with a White Republican, or disagree with a Black Democrat, about.

Or will you just slink off once again.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 27, 2012 8:48 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Well Geezer, you DO have a well-known habit of one-sided criticism.

Don't make me pull out the quotes I have, or you'll be sorry.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, August 27, 2012 4:32 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Well Geezer, you DO have a well-known habit of one-sided criticism.

Don't make me pull out the quotes I have, or you'll be sorry.




He's also got a well-known habit of yelling out insults and claiming he's leaving the site, and then failing to follow through on his promises. He refers to it as "slinking off", and he's got a good bit more practice at it than I...



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 28, 2012 3:01 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
He's also got a well-known habit of yelling out insults and claiming he's leaving the site, and then failing to follow through on his promises. He refers to it as "slinking off", and he's got a good bit more practice at it than I...



Name my chosen candidates, Mike.

While you're at it, we still have the question of what you think I agree with a White Republican, or disagree with a Black Democrat, about.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 28, 2012 5:58 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

And of course all the partisans here will pull out bits that criticize their opponents and ignore the bits that criticize their champions, ignoring that both sides have got problems they're trying to cover with slung mud rather than face.
Interesting you say that, as it goes a long way toward reflecting your own biases. Personally, I find nothing wrong with the article and agree with it almost completely...I don't think anyone here is an "Obama champion" or thinks he has done an exceptional job, or has ever said so. In fact, I think those who would choose Obama over Romney/Ryan have been pretty clear that there are any number of things they disagree with Obama on, while it's those like Raptor who have absolutely refused to find ANY negative in Romney/Ryan, and consistently laud them to the skies.

I do disagree with the author that whoever wins will have to compromise, given it is the right's stated intent not to compromise, and their actions have reflected that. I don't believe they will compromise even if (gawd forbid) Romey were elected. They've said as much. Ryan has started right out with "Ryan: No Compromise On Sequester If Romney Wins" ( http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/08/paul-ryan-mitt-romney-defen
se-sequestration.php
That's just my opinion, however.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, August 28, 2012 1:17 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
He's also got a well-known habit of yelling out insults and claiming he's leaving the site, and then failing to follow through on his promises. He refers to it as "slinking off", and he's got a good bit more practice at it than I...



Name my chosen candidates, Mike.

While you're at it, we still have the question of what you think I agree with a White Republican, or disagree with a Black Democrat, about.




Well, I could go back and dig up all that info, but then you'd only whine and complain about me "going down to the grey file cabinets again".

Let's suffice to say that I've yet to hear you criticize any candidate who gets labeled "conservative", and I've yet to hear you disagree with any white Republican, or agree with any black Democrat. (Voter ID laws come to mind...)

Maybe you can go to your files and prove me wrong, but I doubt it.



"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, August 29, 2012 4:23 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


I think it's the fact that a 'liberal' outlet is critical of Obama, that Geezer expects to rankle.

Geezer, how about YOU say what YOU think President Obama has done badly.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 30, 2012 3:00 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Well, I could go back and dig up all that info, but then you'd only whine and complain about me "going down to the grey file cabinets again".



Nah. Go ahead.

Quote:

Let's suffice to say that I've yet to hear you criticize any candidate who gets labeled "conservative"...


Said several times I wouldn't (couldn't in good conscience) vote for either party's candidate. Seems a pretty direct criticizm to me.

Quote:

...and I've yet to hear you disagree with any white Republican, or agree with any black Democrat. (Voter ID laws come to mind...)


Well I do support same-sex marriage, which puts me in disagreement with both the White Republican (if that's code for Romney) and the Black Democrat (if that's code for Obama).

Voter ID? It the gift that keeps on giving for both parties. If the Repubs didn't push it to fire up their base, the Dems couldn't use it to fire up theirs. I can't see the actual requirement for ID as having near as much effect on turnout as the propaganda surrounding it will have.

I'll just wait for your list of other stuff.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 30, 2012 3:44 AM

CATPIRATE


Atten Hut,

Well Geeze I have to tell ya. 4 more years of the O or 8 years of Romney. Which can you stomach. I don't want to vote. I just can't see the point. They put us into this global recession. No one has gone to jail over it. They are still continuing the practices on Wall Street that caused it. The US citizens sell off everything in America we can pay off 9 trillion out of the 16 trillion we owe. Our country is in serious trouble. We need leaders with vision on the future. We can elect but not select.

At ease.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 30, 2012 5:58 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Saying you wouldn't vote for either candidate in no way means you are nonpartisan. Consistently defending the right and dissing the left shows your true leanings. One does not equate to the other, simple as that.

I won't even get INTO voter ID, given your mind is locked where that one is concerned. The facts are there and easy to find; obviously it's easy for YOU, so it must be easy for everyone I guess. Why exactly do you think the Republicans have worked so hard and fought any effort against it WHEN VOTER FRAUD IS VIRTUALLY NONEXISTANT, then? (That's a rhetorical question; there IS no reason for it, as has been made obvious, and if we're not lucky, it will steal the election for Romney despite his lack of support among African Americans, Latinos, students, women, etc., etc.)


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 30, 2012 6:17 AM

STORYMARK


Yeah. Mitt not being far ENOUGH to the right doesn't make one a centrist.


Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 30, 2012 6:22 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:

Well I do support same-sex marriage, which puts me in disagreement with both the White Republican (if that's code for Romney) and the Black Democrat (if that's code for Obama).



Apparently, this post was written last year, and save for some reason. Or Geezer lives in cave.


Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 30, 2012 6:29 AM

CATPIRATE


Bill Maher said there is no one to represent the left. The Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin. Yeh I am right I never said I was nonpartisan. Adventure Capitalist Jim Rogers says neither candidate have a clue to the crisis we are in. Boon Pickens said that last time around about the energy dependence with the last bunch that ran. The empty suits are not going to fix anything but make it worse.

It's better to light a candle than shout in the dark.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 30, 2012 12:52 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Why exactly do you think the Republicans have worked so hard and fought any effort against it WHEN VOTER FRAUD IS VIRTUALLY NONEXISTANT, then?



All you have to do is actually read what I type, rather than make your usual biased assumptions.

The Republicans are supporting voter ID laws because it ENERGIZES THEIR BASE!!!!

The Democrats are just as happy to let the Republicans propose voter ID laws because it ENERGIZES THEIR BASE!!!!

The amount of voter fraud is negligible, but the Republican base believes it's a big issue because there are partisan articles and editorials that "prove" it is.

The number of voters who'll be disenfranchized by voter ID laws is negligible, but the Democratic base believes it's a big issue because there are partisan articles and editorials that "prove" it is.

You will of course quote more partisan articles and say "BUT THIS PROVES IT". I will remain unconvinced.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, August 31, 2012 7:23 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Cat, my remark was aimed at Geezer, not at you. I'm as sick to death of voting for the "least worst" candidate as anyone.

I find it sad that, given not only is voter suppression a well-known, historical tactic of the right, but that a couple of Republicans have ADMITTED that the voter-ID thing will give Romney their state, Geezer seems to need to believe it's only to energize their base. I don't think their base gives a shit about voter-suppression, and it definitely wouldn't make them like Romney more (which a lot of them obviously do NOT). His self-deception would be amusing, given everything that clearly shows the intent, if it weren't so self-delusionally sad.

Why bother posting facts and figures for him? His mind is as closed as Raptor's, and he's just as unable to see reality. Facts and figures are a waste of time on people like them.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 1, 2012 2:47 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
...but that a couple of Republicans have ADMITTED that the voter-ID thing will give Romney their state, Geezer seems to need to believe it's only to energize their base.



Well. Yes.

If they energize their base by acting to stop all those illegal aliens from voting (I know, I know - but that's what their base believes), they think they'll get more Republicans out to vote, and they'll win their state.

As to the Republican base believing in voter fraud: http://www.illegalaliens.us/votefraud.htm
And that's just the first that came up googling (well, Bing, actually) "illegal aliens voting". There are pages & pages.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 1, 2012 5:58 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Stupid Republican voters aside, they didn't pass the LAWS that are the problem. While there are plenty of stupid legislators, I'm pretty sure most of them don't believe this "illegal alien voter fraud" bullshit. Their reasons are obvious by their statements alone. Your argument falls apart given the laws passed wouldn't stop forged papers anyway, and they know that...as well as knowing perfectly well that the facts show "voter fraud" is virtually nonexistant.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:48 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:
Stupid Republican voters aside, they didn't pass the LAWS that are the problem.



They don't have to. They just have to show that they're doing ANYTHING about it. Just like the Democratic legislators who are fighting it only have to show Stupid Democratic voters that they're doing SOMETHING.

Quote:

While there are plenty of stupid legislators, I'm pretty sure most of them don't believe this "illegal alien voter fraud" bullshit.


Nor do Democratic legislators believe the "HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF VOTERS WILL LOSE THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE" bullshit.

If you look at the "figures" from either side, you'll notice a whole lot of "could" and "might" and "it's possible" and "may", as they spout the absolute worst case scenario - one that's as likely to happen as hitting Powerball...twice.

Quote:

...as well as knowing perfectly well that the facts show "voter fraud" is virtually nonexistant.



And the Democratic legislators know the number of voters who'll be disenfranchised by photo ID is negligible. So?

It's a campaign issue. You think politicians on either side are going to let actual facts stand in the way? They have legions of folks who are ready at a moment's notice to crank out enough "facts" supporting their side to completely blanket the truth.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 4, 2024 10:47 AM

JAYNEZTOWN


Biden set for Mexican border curbs with eye on Trump

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/biden-set-mexican-border-curbs-060514644.htm
l

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:24 - 594 posts
A.I Artificial Intelligence AI
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:16 - 237 posts
How do you like my garbage truck?
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:49 - 2 posts
Trump on Joe Rogan: Full Podcast
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:05 - 7 posts
Israeli War
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:04 - 62 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:58 - 4657 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:45 - 4425 posts
Spooky Music Weird Horror Songs...Tis ...the Season...... to be---CREEPY !
Thu, October 31, 2024 16:19 - 56 posts
Sentencing Thread
Thu, October 31, 2024 15:11 - 381 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Thu, October 31, 2024 14:25 - 921 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, October 31, 2024 13:46 - 7408 posts
No matter what happens...
Wed, October 30, 2024 23:43 - 21 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL