MudPuppy wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Two questions:
(1) Why does President Obama win on the socially liberal front? Has he done something in his first administration that leads you to believe he is socially liberal?
(2) Have you considered voting for Jill Stein or Gary Johnson? If not, why not?
1) Are you suggesting that Mitt Romney is more of a social liberal than the president??? I view Obama as supportive of social programs like healthcare/Medicare, Social Security, and education (student loans) while Mitt Romney prefers to cut spending on these programs in order to accomodate lower taxes.
Here's Federal Spending on Education under Obama:
Note two things: (a) the red is estimated, i.e. has yet to happen or not sure what did happen until later and (b) the values are nominal, so given rising inflation since 2008 from expansionary monetary policy, the rise in nominal values is likely a reflection of inflation (i.e. rising prices). In real terms, there's likely to be no increase in spending on education, or spending was slightly increased--in some cases, clearly spending on education was significantly reduced.
The concern that Romney will cut spending on education seems misplaced when Obama has been doing the same thing.
Now, this is fine because Obama subsidized some student loans?
Tuition rates have been increasing. In this
US GAO report, one of the causes is loosening restrictions on student loans (e.g. subsidizing interest rates). So, in turn, under the Obama administration, tuition rates have inadvertently been increased from the forcibly lowered interest rates on student loans.
(Guess who benefits from these subsidized loans?)
Nelnet
Great Lakes Educational Loan Services, Inc.
Sallie Mae
FedLoan Servicing (PHEAA)
Direct Loan Servicing Center (ACS)
MOHELA
ESA/Edfinancial
CornerStone
Aspire Resources Inc
Granite State - GSMR
OSLA Servicing
EdManage
https://studentloans.gov/myDirectLoan/a ... ion.action(OpenSecrets.org)
Over two million spent over the past 6 years.
And spent about a million in political contributions through their PAC in the past 6 years.
Sallie Mae has much spent more in both lobbying and political contributions.
Etc., I'm not going through each of them, but hopefully, we're starting to understanding how interest groups and politicians operate.
Conclusion: There's no good reason to support Obama on education--unless of course supporting crony capitalism is totes cool. Ask player, she thinks it's worth it because she's as "greedy" or self-serving as (all) corporations.
Healthcare:
Corporate boondoggle. But we'll see how it pans out. Democratic fanatics will scream in ecstasy if costs decrease, but they'll forget to assess for quality and to examine unintended consequences, e.g. increased costs in other areas (if an employer must pay more for employees' healthcare/social security; therefore, the employer will simply reduce employee wages).
Conclusion: Obama is yet another crony capitalist, seeking to gain votes from well-intended yet rationally ignorant voter markets.
Medicare:
According to the last CBO reports I've read, the estimated costs for Medicare and Medicaid will double in the next 30 years--relative to GDP. These programs must be cut, and it would be irresponsible to not do so. Will Obama do what is best for the country in the long-run at the personal cost of losing short-term gains by delaying the problem? Of course not. He's a self-serving politician. He won't make the necessary cuts; he'll punt it down for the next president.
Conclusion: This is no good reason to vote for him.
Social Security:
The same applies from the above, but the concern is not as drastic. Any politician will eventually raise retirement ages and whatever for Social Security. Of course, I don't see what's so great about supporting such a Ponzi Scheme. Most of the future recipients (aged <30 now) will very likely receive a loss from SS, but hey, social security is great for retaining votes from the elderly.
MudPuppy wrote: I also view the president as more supportive of women's right to choose and more tolerant toward non-traditional marriage. It's clear that social program reforms are needed and tough decisions must be made about which specific benefits we can afford to keep, etc. but I have little trust that Romney will attempt meaningful reform and will instead just raid the coffer.
Oh, like Obama raided the coffers? Got'cha.
And talk about systemic reform under Obama! Did you see his change in aggressive US foreign policy? How about domestic surveillance? What about NDAA 2011 and his administration's attempt to appeal to the courts ruling against NDAA 2011?
Oh, what about that time when he denied due process to a US citizen and instead bombed him to death? What about this vague war on terrorism, continuing two occupations, killing thousands of civilians, and destabilizing foreign countries? We're talking about Obama here, not Bush.
The Great Humanitarian, indeed! Winner of the Nobel LoL Peace Prize, for sure! These are all social issues, and there's been no reform here. The best that Obama did was transfer wealth from people earning over $250,000 to people making less--and to his donors as well. That's good for some, but not for most. Oh yeah, lip service to gay marriage totally offsets everything...
MudPuppy wrote:2) While the little I know about them intrigues me, I honestly haven't put in the time to research their platforms in depth because we are unfortunately stuck in a two-party system for the time being and they are both unelectable. I truly hope that changes one day. I did vote for the guy with the ears back in the day in hopes we could get some independent/third pary action going in this country but right now it's a two horse race and I can't afford to place my bet on a nag (no offense, Jill).
Then you'll reap the consequences of your decisions. Thank you, sir, for contributing to crony capitalism. The lives of innocent civilians in foreign countries which you'll hardly care about will stain your vote for either major party. Anyone who votes for either party and talks the talk about social reform and concern about other peoples' lives is full of it.
