• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

So my Dad's an idiot.

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,542
260
126
So who doesn't think that if this thread was titled my dad's an idiot cause he's voting for obama that it would have been locked already.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
71,081
20,730
136
Originally posted by: lupi
So who doesn't think that if this thread was titled my dad's an idiot cause he's voting for obama that it would have been locked already.
I don't. Of course that would mean that the person's dad would have had to have been supporting someone in the Republican primary who recently lost and then decided to switch to Obama... but there are no such people like that.

Why do you continue trolling like this? Are you this filled with blind hatred, or is this some sort of candid camera thing? You can't honestly think up things this dumb.
 

tw1164

Diamond Member
Dec 8, 1999
3,995
0
76
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: judasmachine
Originally posted by: Queasy
I'll take someone like your Dad over someone who votes for or against Obama based on his skin pigmentation.
you do have a point in that a lot of people are voting Obama based on his being black. i find this as bigoted as those voting Hillary because she's a woman, and McCain because he's a old white man.
There's also people voting McCain/Clinton simply because Obama is black. There was a quote in another thread where a WV resident stated just that.
I thought it was because he's Muslim.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,806
1,123
126
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: Thump553
now its a virtual love fest.
No. No, it isn't. See the reaction to McCain's Global Warming speech.
The reaction I saw on Fox "News" was basically this-well a few days ago he was reaching out to the right side of his natural base, now he's reaching out to his left side. I don't think they believed McCain really meant it and I certainly didn't here any of the outraged sputting like I'm going to vote for Hillary that was so common a month or two back.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
Well, you don't see me in here talking about you, because I don't care about you personally. You are the one who is calling me out in these threads.
Hillary and politics belong in this forum, your lame personal attacks don't.
No, all you do is spew miss truths and half truths about Obama and your act is well beyond tired. Only your fellow rabid Obama haters aren't laughing at your posts.

 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
1. North Sea oil? How about invading Norway, i men, after all, that's where it's at.

2. I don't think you are using the term "straw man" correctly, which surprises me since its rare that you are logically incorrect, this kinda worries me, have you given up logic for ideals?

3. I have never heard, nor have you, that Obama is going to cut spending, what i have heard is that he is willing to do what Brownie boy does here in England, and increase spending.

I don't think that Obama will do shit, in fact i think he will fold to the congress on every matter, especially when it comes to spending.

These are my reasons for McCain being my "candidate", but as i said, i can't vote in your elections, probably a good thing too, my friend. ;)

Now i know that you are almost as cynical as me, but there are other who are not, like Moonbeam, he actually believes that Obama stands for the "change" he claims to stand for, us regular non mirror staring people get that Obama just says that to win.

If i were you, but i am not, i'd vote for an independent, just to show how i disagree, if everyone who disagrees did that, then independent no1 would be president.
1. You guys got some large off-shore reserves as well. Last I heard, Scotland was trying to make a claim to them.

2. A straw man is any argument, different for the actual argument, made for the purposes of being easily defeated and so give the impression that the actual argument was likewise defeated. And like I said, in order for me to have my hopes dashed with Obama, I'd have to have high expectations to begin with.

3. No one, and I mean no one, can increase spending more and faster than a Republican President. Bush has doubled spending in his 8 years.

And sorry, man, the US is pulling out of the WOT. We simply can't afford it anymore.
Ehhh, the US started pulling out of the WOT back in '03, this isn't news, thank god for France and Canada, with their help we'll get it done.

You're a good guy Vic, but a good guy presented with bad choices can't do much but to pick his poison, it sucks and it's the same bullshit over in the UK, Brown.

We definently need a new Thatcher, a whig type liberal, and so do you.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,110
3,155
126
I'm sure there are people voting Obama because he is Black. There are also some voting Clinton because she's a Woman. It's not based on Racism or Sexism though, but on a sense of "Arriving". Whichever one wins becomes a Historic marker for the US and them both belonging to groups which fought long and hard for Equal treatment, it only stands to reason that those groups want to achieve the final hurdle to full equality.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: Thump553
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: Thump553
now its a virtual love fest.
No. No, it isn't. See the reaction to McCain's Global Warming speech.
The reaction I saw on Fox "News" was basically this-well a few days ago he was reaching out to the right side of his natural base, now he's reaching out to his left side. I don't think they believed McCain really meant it and I certainly didn't here any of the outraged sputting like I'm going to vote for Hillary that was so common a month or two back.
No but the Global Warming speech and his visit to a La Raza conference where he talked about 'comprehensive' immigration reform doesn't help. It leaves alot of Republicans and Conservatives ticked off at McCain and the Republican party which hurts fundraising and get out the vote efforts.
 

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
771
32
91
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: senseamp
Well, you don't see me in here talking about you, because I don't care about you personally. You are the one who is calling me out in these threads.
Hillary and politics belong in this forum, your lame personal attacks don't.
No, all you do is spew miss truths and half truths about Obama and your act is well beyond tired. Only your fellow rabid Obama haters aren't laughing at your posts.
If you take away the mis-truths and half truths, there isn't much left to say about Obama. Noone knows enough about him to say what the real truths are. Talk is cheap, long term scrutiny will reveal the truth.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: senseamp
Well, you don't see me in here talking about you, because I don't care about you personally. You are the one who is calling me out in these threads.
Hillary and politics belong in this forum, your lame personal attacks don't.
No, all you do is spew miss truths and half truths about Obama and your act is well beyond tired. Only your fellow rabid Obama haters aren't laughing at your posts.
If you take away the mis-truths and half truths, there isn't much left to say about Obama. Noone knows enough about him to say what the real truths are. Talk is cheap, long term scrutiny will reveal the truth.
So says one of the rabid Obama haters.

 

mxyzptlk

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,897
0
0
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: senseamp
Well, you don't see me in here talking about you, because I don't care about you personally. You are the one who is calling me out in these threads.
Hillary and politics belong in this forum, your lame personal attacks don't.
No, all you do is spew miss truths and half truths about Obama and your act is well beyond tired. Only your fellow rabid Obama haters aren't laughing at your posts.
If you take away the mis-truths and half truths, there isn't much left to say about Obama. Noone knows enough about him to say what the real truths are. Talk is cheap, long term scrutiny will reveal the truth.
So says one of the rabid Obama haters.
You forgot to give him this:
:cookie:
 

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
771
32
91
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: Robor
Originally posted by: senseamp
Well, you don't see me in here talking about you, because I don't care about you personally. You are the one who is calling me out in these threads.
Hillary and politics belong in this forum, your lame personal attacks don't.
No, all you do is spew miss truths and half truths about Obama and your act is well beyond tired. Only your fellow rabid Obama haters aren't laughing at your posts.
If you take away the mis-truths and half truths, there isn't much left to say about Obama. Noone knows enough about him to say what the real truths are. Talk is cheap, long term scrutiny will reveal the truth.
So says one of the rabid Obama haters.
I am one, but we are many. :laugh:

Seriously though, I have no reason to hate Obama. I have been vocal against him but it has nothing to do with hate. You and I simply disagree on what is best for the country at this time. Obama may well turn out to be a great leader but I can't blindly follow him without a proven record of who he is and what he stands for.

 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: RY62
I am one, but we are many. :laugh:

Seriously though, I have no reason to hate Obama. I have been vocal against him but it has nothing to do with hate. You and I simply disagree on what is best for the country at this time. Obama may well turn out to be a great leader but I can't blindly follow him without a proven record of who he is and what he stands for.
If you were for Hillary and are now for McCain then I don't think you have a clue what is best for this country at this time.

 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,826
83
91
is it possible to just not like Obama as a person for reasons that have nothing to do with race?
 
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
I wish Wesley was running, i can still not get why you didn't elect the man, one of the best men i have ever known and by far the most experienced in pressing issues such as Iran-Syria Iraq and Afghanistan.

I know for a fact that he wouldn't have entered Iraq and i also know that he would have walked with me and asked me what i need in Afghanistan even though i am not American, he did that in Kosovo when i was a mere Sargent and you know what, we got bombers flying in the next day and airsupport choppers roaming for three months, not one man was lost, not ONE.

Compare that to Iraq or even Afghanistan, stupid is as stupid does i guess.

McCain would also know how to fix this, Obama? I'd be surprised if he knows how to wipe his own arse.

I know it's harsh, but i have absolutely NO faith in Obama, i think he'll wreak havoc in both Iraq and Afghanistan because he doesn't know shit about either situation but is eager to keepp his promises.

If he actually does what he has promised, you'll see the numbers skyrocked in a few months, from ~ 4100 to way above 6k.

Remember this, because it's not the first time i've been perfectly right about a situation and the response.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
56,275
4,690
126
Judas, tell your dad he's not alone. I didn't like either of the candidates we Democrats were allowed to vote for this election. It seems like every time, we get worse and worse candidates. It's almost like the Democrats are just throwing people out there so they can cash in on the campaign money, not to really try to win...or give us GOOD candidates that we'd LIKE to see in office.

I'm still not sure how I'll vote in November.
I've NEVER voted for a Republican in my 30+ years of voting, and don't see me starting now, but neither of the two Democratic candidates appeal to me either.

A vote for Nader is like pissing on an electric fence...you KNOW it's gonna hurt you.:D

In the end, I'll probably still vote for the Democrat, even though I don't really want to.

(the lesser of two evils is still evil)
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,570
126
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI...ml?eref=rss_topstories

That didn't take too long. Us typical white folks just aren't responding well when we don't vote for Obama.

"Some want to know why it isn't racist when 70 percent of African-Americans vote for Obama but it is when 70 percent of whites vote against him.

The answer has to do with history. Over the decades, black Americans have had plenty of opportunities to vote for white people for president. And they have done so. But this is the first time that white Americans have a chance to vote for an African-American with a shot at the presidency. And what are they doing?

Many are responding quite well."
 

MagicConch

Golden Member
Apr 7, 2005
1,239
1
0
Originally posted by: Aimster
my parents are voting republican because democrats are going to push up the capital gain tax.
This is a central issue for most people i know given the rapid increases in cost of living. If Obama could indirectly increase the performance of the avg portfolio enough to offset the higher taxes and then some I would vote for him, but of course he won't be able to do that.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: MagicConch
Originally posted by: Aimster
my parents are voting republican because democrats are going to push up the capital gain tax.
This is a central issue for most people i know given the rapid increases in cost of living. If Obama could indirectly increase the performance of the avg portfolio enough to offset the higher taxes and then some I would vote for him, but of course he won't be able to do that.
That and how is he going to explain the contraction of investments and new businesses along with reduced tax revenue from the capital gains tax. But, he's not concerned with that apparently...he's just into his definition of fairness.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: loki8481
is it possible to just not like Obama as a person for reasons that have nothing to do with race?
Sure but given how close they are on policy for a Hillary supporter to vote McCain it brings up the question. Of course, some don't even bother to hid it.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,584
345
126
Originally posted by: Aimster
my parents are voting republican because democrats are going to push up the capital gain tax.
Your parents are going to vote against the interests of the United States, not only for other party issues, but for the capital gains tax in particular.

I doubt your parents are billionares, and it's very likely they have no idea about the issues of concentrated wealth in this nation and the harms it causes.

They sound like poster children for the problem in democracy when people vote for not only short-sighted but mis-guided policies and are easily 'bought off' to ignore other issues.

As someone who pays capital gains taxes, I want the capital gains tax raised, because I think that the burden has shifted dramatically off the very wealthy, and I like our nation to have a lot of people do nicely, not to have a feudalistic system where we have a few very wealthy and a lot of serfs as in most nations. I'd like us to be closer to Europe than to Haiti and China in the distribution of wealth, and the capital gians tax is a good way to help that. FDR did that, and the nation saw the middle class greatly increased and enriched.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,584
345
126
Originally posted by: LTC8K6
He may turn out to be correct. We are already hearing it about WV.

If Obama doesn't play the race card, I'll be amazed.

We hear little about the majority of blacks voting for Obama, though.

If the majority of whites vote for Hillary or McCain, it is, or will be, attributed to racism.
When a black is voting for Obama with his race as a factor (his politics also have to be in agreement with them, they wouldn't vote for Clarence Thomas), as most are, it means that they're very excited to see one of the group which as a history of being discriminated against for hundreds of years be able to end the streak of 43 white presidents by having someone else get to be in charge for 4 or 8 years. It's racial, not racist.

When a white is voting against Obama because he's black, it's typically racist.

You can see the difference in the fact that the racist voters refusing to vote for Obama might say they are not willing to vote for a black, but Obama supporters don't say they won't vote for a white. Rather it's that they have never had a chance to vote for a black president before. There's some subtle line between 'preferring your own race', and being completely insensitive to other races having any equal chance for power.

While a member of an underrepresented minority and a member of an overrepresented majority voting for their own race looks like the same thing on the surface, it's not.

Of course all races are able to abuse the power of majority, to mistreat minority groups. Ask many white South Africans today how they feel. Ask many whites who are subject to the authority of Native Americans. But that's no excuse for equating the desire for some equal share by minorities with the corruption of being happy to vote for unfair dominance by the majority.

We don't see a lot of politics around the eye color of the president, because there isn't a history of discrimination, there's not bigotry around it. If there were, we'd see the same issues as we do with race. If we could say every president had one color of eyes and that for the history of our country other candidates were unelectable because the nation 'wasn't ready' for their eye color and such, the situation would resemble race, with candidates of the other eye color wanting to see one of theirs elected, etc.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,584
345
126
Originally posted by: MagicConch
Originally posted by: Aimster
my parents are voting republican because democrats are going to push up the capital gain tax.
This is a central issue for most people i know given the rapid increases in cost of living. If Obama could indirectly increase the performance of the avg portfolio enough to offset the higher taxes and then some I would vote for him, but of course he won't be able to do that.
If they had a clue about the distribution of income in this country, they'd realize that they're far better off, as is the nation, as the extremely wealthy will pay far more of a fair share.

That allows reducing our debt, which helps them; a third of our 'discretionary' spending budget goes to interest on the debt (interest doesn't seem discretionary, but that's another topic).
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,991
0
0
Originally posted by: Craig234
When a black is voting for Obama with his race as a factor (his politics also have to be in agreement with them, they wouldn't vote for Clarence Thomas), as most are, it means that they're very excited to see one of the group which as a history of being discriminated against for hundreds of years be able to end the streak of 43 white presidents by having someone else get to be in charge for 4 or 8 years. It's racial, not racist.

When a white is voting against Obama because he's black, it's typically racist.

You can see the difference in the fact that the racist voters refusing to vote for Obama might say they are not willing to vote for a black, but Obama supporters don't say they won't vote for a white. Rather it's that they have never had a chance to vote for a black president before. There's some subtle line between 'preferring your own race', and being completely insensitive to other races having any equal chance for power.

While a member of an underrepresented minority and a member of an overrepresented majority voting for their own race looks like the same thing on the surface, it's not.

Of course all races are able to abuse the power of majority, to mistreat minority groups. Ask many white South Africans today how they feel. Ask many whites who are subject to the authority of Native Americans. But that's no excuse for equating the desire for some equal share by minorities with the corruption of being happy to vote for unfair dominance by the majority.

We don't see a lot of politics around the eye color of the president, because there isn't a history of discrimination, there's not bigotry around it. If there were, we'd see the same issues as we do with race. If we could say every president had one color of eyes and that for the history of our country other candidates were unelectable because the nation 'wasn't ready' for their eye color and such, the situation would resemble race, with candidates of the other eye color wanting to see one of theirs elected, etc.
Excellent post, Craig. Unfortunately it will likely fall on deaf ears.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,584
345
126
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: MagicConch
Originally posted by: Aimster
my parents are voting republican because democrats are going to push up the capital gain tax.
This is a central issue for most people i know given the rapid increases in cost of living. If Obama could indirectly increase the performance of the avg portfolio enough to offset the higher taxes and then some I would vote for him, but of course he won't be able to do that.
That and how is he going to explain the contraction of investments and new businesses along with reduced tax revenue from the capital gains tax. But, he's not concerned with that apparently...he's just into his definition of fairness.
You mean the same kind of 'contraction of investments' that happened when Clinton raised the taxes on the top 2% in 1993? You mean the terrible economy of the 1960's when capital gains and income taxes were far higher, yet we were able to spend up to 4% of the budget on a moon landing, reduce the poverty rate by a third with the great society, fight an extremely expensive war in Vietnam, and yet balance the budget in 1969 at the peak of those policies?

You're not concerned with fairness, you're not concerned with the labor of people being incented, by your own choice of policy. You perpetuate the myth that the wealthy respond to an increase in the capital gains tax by getting out of the stock market and other investments and putting their money in a shoebox. They don't. They put it where they can make money, in investments, as history shows, not your false ideology. The wealthy are doing so extremely well that our society is threatened by the concentration of wealth.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY