Why Some Non-Partisan, Open-Minded People Support Obama

Discussion in 'Politics' started by mikegriffith1, Nov 4, 2012.

  1. mikegriffith1
    Offline

    mikegriffith1 Mike Griffith

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,750
    Thanks Received:
    621
    Trophy Points:
    285
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +1,878
    FYI, I'm an independent who leans to the right on most issues (but I never voted for George Bush). Although I strongly support Romney, and although I think Obama has done a terrible job in key areas, I can understand why some non-partisan, open-minded people who are somewhere in/near the middle of the ideological spectrum could support Obama's reelection.

    I happen to have a number of centrist friends, and even a few conservative friends, who are voting for Obama. Some of them are people who have very conservative moral values and who attend church regularly. A few of them even send their kids to private religious schools. When we have talked about Obama, the reasons listed below largely reflect their reasons for supporting him.

    * I think many Republicans don't understand that most Americans are sick and tired of war. Most people like the fact that we're out of Iraq and that we're winding down in Afghanistan. And many people also like the fact that Obama is obviously very reluctant to get involved in another war.

    * Many non-partisan, more-or-less-centrist voters like certain aspects of Obamacare, even if they understand that Obamacare also has some major flaws.

    * Even some people who are fiscally conservative think we might need to raise the top two tax brackets back to what they were under Clinton in order to get the federal budget under control. They note that the economy did very well when the two top rates were higher under Clinton. (I wonder how many of these people know that just a couple weeks ago Obama announced that he supports ending the Bush tax cuts for middle-income taxpayers as well. I wonder if they realize just how much this would cost them.)

    * Many non-ideological voters support Obama's easing of relations with Cuba. Personally, I think our embargo against Cuba is downright silly and that Cuba would be a democratic nation in short order if we would normalize relations and allow a free flow of trade and people with Cuba. I was glad to see Obama ease some of the currency and travel restrictions with Cuba.

    * Many voters of all stripes appreciate the fact that Obama has cut taxes for the middle class and the poor with his reduction in the payroll tax (i.e., the Social Security tax). Keep in mind that $288 billion of the $787 billion stimulus went for tax cuts, and most of those tax cuts were for the middle class. In other words, over 1/3 of the stimulus consisted of tax cuts (mostly for the middle class, but also for the poor and for businesses).

    * Many centrist types like the fact that Obama kept GM and Chrysler in business. Granted, most of them don't know that part of Obama's auto bailout was an outright handout of $12 billion taxpayer dollars. Nor do most of them know that the bailout only put a temporary band-aid on the structural problems (mainly the unrealistic, unsustainable labor-cost structure) that led those companies to the breaking point in the first place. But, they look and see that GM and Chrysler are making money again, that thousands of auto workers kept their jobs, etc., etc.

    * Many centrist types simply do not care about issues like abortion and gay marriage as political issues. They think these are matters of individual choice and they don't get why anyone should care if two men or two women want to get "married." They don't see the threat that gay marriage poses to the foundation of society, the family, and the threat that gay marriage is proving to be to our freedom of religion. They may not like abortion and would not recommend abortion for their daughters with unplanned/unwanted pregnancies, but they think this matter should be left to individuals, families, and their doctors to decide. (Yes, I know this position shows no regard for the rights of the baby in the womb, but I'm just summarizing how many centrist-like folks feel on this issue.)

    * Many non-partisan, centrist-like voters believe Obama deserves some credit for halting the recession, for stopping the economy's profuse bleeding, and for getting us to the point where we are seeing at least a small amount of economic growth. They opine that weak growth is better than no growth, and many of these voters believe Bush still deserves at least some of the blame for the economy's current state.

    * Many non-partisan, centrist-like folks are as concerned about our huge debt and deficit as anyone else is. But they note that Bush and the Republicans took us from a nominally balanced budget and from paying down the debt to irresponsible deficit spending and an increase of $5.1 trillion in the national debt. So they are not too impressed when they hear many of these same Republicans screaming about the debt and the deficit, and thus they are willing to give Obama another chance in this area. They are hopeful that he will get the federal budget under control in a second term. (Don't ask me how any rational person could think this, given what Obama has done and given what he is proposing, but most of these folks simply do not know just how horribly Obama has handled the budget, and they don't understand that what he's now proposing is even worse than what he's done so far. Also, they have fresh memories of the fact that Bush and the GOP did a rather poor job on the budget.)
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  2. LoneLaugher
    Offline

    LoneLaugher Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    45,629
    Thanks Received:
    6,450
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Inside Mac's Head
    Ratings:
    +18,430
    Thoughtful. Prepare yourself. It is coming your way.
     
  3. BoredDead
    Offline

    BoredDead Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    54
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Washington (state)
    Ratings:
    +3
    This has some of the reasons why I'm voting for Obama, but there is a big miss on the last one.

    I really did a big analysis on the subject, but can't link you to it because it's on another political forum and this forum thinks I'm an evil troll who is going to post pornographic imagery because I'm new. If your interested, go to Politicalforum (dot) com, search "Bored Dead", click my screen name in the 5th row, then go to "view latest started threads" which is on the left of the screen, then go to "my criticism of Romney's budget".

    But basically, Romney wants to only cut spending while Obama wants to cut spending and raise taxes.
     
  4. mikegriffith1
    Offline

    mikegriffith1 Mike Griffith

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,750
    Thanks Received:
    621
    Trophy Points:
    285
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +1,878
    As governor, Romney inherited a sizable deficit and balanced the budget his very first year and every year after that, while at the same time he cut property taxes for seniors, rebated $275 million in capital gains taxes back to taxpayers, increased the state's reserve fund, improved the state's bond rating, and improved the state's job-creation rate from 47th to 28th.

    We don't need to raise taxes, certainly not while the economy is barely limping along. We're already collecting $2.5 trillion in taxes. That's more than we collected per year during the boom years from 2005 to 2006, when unemployment was below 6% and GDP growth was at around 4%. The problem is not revenue--it's spending.

    Romney's plan is far more sensible and saner than Obama's. Mark my words: If Obama gets reelected and is able to carry out his proposals, the economy will slow down even more, the federal budget will remain in the red, and the national debt will keep rising.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  5. Freewill
    Offline

    Freewill Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    27,131
    Thanks Received:
    4,372
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +12,981
    * I think many Republicans don't understand that most Americans are sick and tired of war. Most people like the fact that we're out of Iraq and that we're winding down in Afghanistan. And many people also like the fact that Obama is obviously very reluctant to get involved in another war.

    Apparently you put a lot of thought into this or someone else did so I will respond in a reasonable fashion one point at a time.

    Why the first supposition that Republicans obviously like war? That in and of itself is enough to reject the rest of the argument. But to address that bit of fantasy why are we at war? What has not Obama or the democrats stopped the wars as they could easily have done or do? Is there a war on terror as Obama will admit or not? Did those who wish for Americans to be killed bring it to America or not? Was 9/11 a conservative fantasy? Of course that is how the "truthers" would like us to believe that is why they want to paint 9/11 as an inside job.

    Did or did not Bush receive bi-partisan support for action in both Iraq and Afghanistan? The answer is yes. Did Iraq wind down on the Bush time table, the answer again is yes. Has Afghanistan? No, Obama had his surge four years ago and the death toll is much higher then it was under Bush and can we say we are any nearer to winning? Winning when those we trained are shooting those who trained them?

    Then there is the intervention into the "Arab Spring" in the ME. Does that sound like a person who is against war? Does having a kill list and USING that kill list to kill an American and his 16 year old son sound like a dove to you? Do you remember Bush doing like wish?

    So saying Obama is very reluctant to get involved in war is really just a liberal fantasy. For nothing else he uses a CIA list to kill Americans that beyond anything else disqualifies Obama to remain in power.

    Oh, and the bragging point of having OBL executed. Obama invaded an allied country without permission and killed OBL without one bit of due process, not that he was due any being a foriegn national.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  6. OODA_Loop
    Offline

    OODA_Loop Account Terminated

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2011
    Messages:
    6,953
    Thanks Received:
    468
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +523
    Less taxes and cut spending works for me.
     
  7. BoredDead
    Offline

    BoredDead Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    54
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Washington (state)
    Ratings:
    +3
    I know Obama did a bad job with the debt, but I know I have to look at what he is going to do, not what he did. Same with Romney.

    Your didn't go to my analysis like I wanted you to, so I'll just copy and paste the important part.
    So basically you're ignoring that cutting spending also harms the economy by costing jobs. And that tax increases on the wealthy are also a good deficit cutting tool like cutting spending.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  8. Freewill
    Offline

    Freewill Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    27,131
    Thanks Received:
    4,372
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +12,981
    * Many non-partisan, more-or-less-centrist voters like certain aspects of Obamacare, even if they understand that Obamacare also has some major flaws.

    I agree that if some reform was needed there are aspects of Obamacare that are worth keeping. But that said it isn't going to change the other parts if Obama is in office. So I am not sure why this would be a plus for Obama. Obamacare is the largest tax ever imposed on the American people, we did the math when I first came to this board and it is in fact the largest. A large tax can not have a good effect on America. Yes certainly those who Obama has structurally unemployed will benefit by getting something for nothing. But those of us that work will pay MUCH more for LESS service it can be no other way. Obamatax has to be a loser for Obama except maybe for the 47 percent which are not exactly open minded.
     
  9. mikegriffith1
    Offline

    mikegriffith1 Mike Griffith

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,750
    Thanks Received:
    621
    Trophy Points:
    285
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +1,878
    "Or someone else did"? No, I wrote the post, all by myself.

    Anyway, so much of your reply is partisan fiction or distortion.

    Yes, Bush received bipartisan support for the Iraq War, because he, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Tenet, Rice, etc., painted a false picture of WMDs in Iraq, Saddam and Al Qaeda, Saddam and 9/11, etc., etc. Most of that false picture was a pack of lies, and many in the Bush administration knew they were lies when they spread them.

    SOME Republicans clearly seem to like war and to want endless war. If SOME Republicans had their way, we'd be invading/bombing/occupying/fighting half of the Middle East right now.

    I do not think Romney has this mindset at all, which is one reason that I'm supporting him.

    A far better argument about the killing of OBL would be to note that we would not have been tipped off to Bin Laden's courier if Obama had gotten his way on enhanced interrogations from 2005 onward. Also, Obama dallied for weeks over the decision. Even when the matter reached critical mass and a decision had to be made, Obama, much to the shock of his national security team, insisted on taking another 16 hours to mull over the matter. He almost listened to Joe Biden, who, true to form, thought we needed more information and more planning. Luckily, there were folks like Panetta who pushed hard for the go decision.
     
    Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
  10. Freewill
    Offline

    Freewill Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    27,131
    Thanks Received:
    4,372
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +12,981
    * Many non-ideological voters support Obama's easing of relations with Cuba. Personally, I think our embargo against Cuba is downright silly and that Cuba would be a democratic nation in short order if we would normalize relations and allow a free flow of trade and people with Cuba. I was glad to see Obama ease some of the currency and travel restrictions with Cuba.

    This is of no consequence to the American people. Sure if we are worried about Cuba then when Castro is voted out, both of them, then let's normalize relations. To normalize relations with a man who has done what Castro has done is to capitulate to totalitarians. It would be in fact an insult to Cuban Americans. How is the connection made between normalizing relations and that creating a democracy? Does not make sense. Kennedy put in the sanctions for a reason and may have lost his life for doing so.
     

Share This Page