What is your opinion on our current president?
- Thread starter JUL
- Start date
Abu Taj al Deen
Paragon
If Bush wasn't impeached, no way Obama will be.
D
Deleted member 1609
I believe that Obama only came out in support for LGBT rights because he wanted the votes of otherwise disappointed liberals. Civil rights in other areas have eroded under Obama (e.g. NDAA).Hotspot said:
Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are extremely close except on a few isolated issues.
P.S. I'm moving this to the Debate Corner.
NBK*Twitch
Seasoned Veteran
Snobothehobo said:
Agreed.
Also if your not going to vote for someone due to one thing... You shouldn't vote at all... No one will have all of your views..
As for our current president... I am not really a fan...
D
Deleted member 1609
I don't think it's fair to say that avoiding voting for someone because of one issue is unreasonable. LGBT rights is a very important issue to many people, so I think it's very reasonable to avoid voting for someone who is against LGBT rights.
agentmanningctu
My Posts = Jack Bauer's Kills
Especially LGBT. It might seem like one issue, but a candidate's opinion on this matter shows a lot about who they are. For many people, you can figure out everything you need to know just by knowing their stance on LGBT rights.Snobothehobo said:
agentmanningctu
My Posts = Jack Bauer's Kills
Gytix said:
'Murica!
But seriously, to be fair, those candidates get a lot of support. You'd be surprised how many US citizens don't want to allow gays any rights.
agentmanningctu said:
I don't see what the big deal is, gays should have equal rights; simple as that. Arguing that, just reinforces the fact that you're an ass.
Obama should remain president, otherwise NATO will end up having to invade America in a few years to overthrow their evil dictator.
My view on this president is the same as my view on the next:
We are under the illusion of a democracy in that we are not choosing our leaders; but choosing the options our leaders make available. It's almost as if we are voting for the lesser of two evils.
There are two major political parties and the politician with the most money has the greater chance for nomination. This can be explained in their campaign strategy. Their strategy is cut-throat using portions of their advertisement budget not to promote themselves, but dig deep in the opposing candidate's history and expose their dark past. Other elements of the campaign that determine our nation's vote are nation-wide speeches, billboards, radio and television spots, news articles, and global interviews. (Do you think all this is free?)
Ralph Nader has been running even before Clinton's campaign. Is he a worthy candidate? Of course! But why is he only getting 9% of our vote? Because his campaign will not support him financially as they will support certain Republican and Democratic candidates.
But the sad truth of the matter is: None of this really matters.
All of these campaigns and presidential candidates are utilized by the U.S. Government, under the power and direction of an invisible group controlling our government, in order to ensure its people believe that there is rock-solid structure and social order in the election.
The truth is: the invisible group purchases the right to all say over its governmental officials, political figures, military, and social dictation.
Why once a candidate gets into office, his promises are soon a thing of the past? Doesn't it make sense that his campaign ordered him to make those promises? Why can't they be kept when in office? Because he soon is manipulated by political documents, fallacious protocol, and I would not be surprised if by something even worse.
We are moving closer and closer to a universal government as each country crumbles before its debt. Once our debtors ask for their money... or else; there will be no other choice to submit, or fight.
My opinion. Most disagree. Peace.
We are under the illusion of a democracy in that we are not choosing our leaders; but choosing the options our leaders make available. It's almost as if we are voting for the lesser of two evils.
There are two major political parties and the politician with the most money has the greater chance for nomination. This can be explained in their campaign strategy. Their strategy is cut-throat using portions of their advertisement budget not to promote themselves, but dig deep in the opposing candidate's history and expose their dark past. Other elements of the campaign that determine our nation's vote are nation-wide speeches, billboards, radio and television spots, news articles, and global interviews. (Do you think all this is free?)
Ralph Nader has been running even before Clinton's campaign. Is he a worthy candidate? Of course! But why is he only getting 9% of our vote? Because his campaign will not support him financially as they will support certain Republican and Democratic candidates.
But the sad truth of the matter is: None of this really matters.
All of these campaigns and presidential candidates are utilized by the U.S. Government, under the power and direction of an invisible group controlling our government, in order to ensure its people believe that there is rock-solid structure and social order in the election.
The truth is: the invisible group purchases the right to all say over its governmental officials, political figures, military, and social dictation.
Why once a candidate gets into office, his promises are soon a thing of the past? Doesn't it make sense that his campaign ordered him to make those promises? Why can't they be kept when in office? Because he soon is manipulated by political documents, fallacious protocol, and I would not be surprised if by something even worse.
We are moving closer and closer to a universal government as each country crumbles before its debt. Once our debtors ask for their money... or else; there will be no other choice to submit, or fight.
My opinion. Most disagree. Peace.
I don't think i can trust Romney, he gets a lot of funds by his big corporate friends and doesn't seem to want to improve the middle class.
Obama doing quite fine he has created a lot of jobs here on u.s soil & he passed a law allowing illegal immigrants their residency I wouldn't be surprised if he gets another term
Just my opinion
Obama doing quite fine he has created a lot of jobs here on u.s soil & he passed a law allowing illegal immigrants their residency I wouldn't be surprised if he gets another term
Just my opinion
Watch Me Sink
Madly Diligent
Neither does Barack Obama. In 2008 he was opposed to gay marriage, now that he needs votes he supports them. Don't get me wrong, in the past 4 years my views have changed too, but he couldn't have picked a more convenient time to like gay people.Hotspot said:
Snobothehobo said:
You haven't looked into any third party candidates or Ron Paul then.Gytix said:
LOLGytix said:
I heard he's big on corporation rights too. All hail the CEO's!Gimgak said:
Watch Me Sink said:
I do agree with what you said. But, back in the 90's, he did think gays should get married... So I think he didn't say anything so he could get elected.
He has also helped the LGBT community a whole lot. He repealed DADT for instance.
Watch Me Sink
Madly Diligent
Congress repealed DADT, Obama just signed it. Though there wasn't enough support to override a veto, some careful lobbying would have brought it to the 2/3 needed. Either way it was a matter of time before DADT got repealed, I couldn't see it lasting much longer.Hotspot said:
D
Deleted member 1609
I'm still waiting for the "liberal media" to give Stewart Alexander and other genuinely liberal candidates some actual coverage. Everyone over at FOX seems to believe that every other station is socialist, but how can they be socialist if they don't even have socialists on their stations? 😛
Affiliates
