Why I'm voting for Obama

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: loki8481
McCain thinks that Iraq will descend into even more chaos than it's in right now, and that it could become what Afghanistan was pre-9/11.

McCain said that Al Qaida would take over in Iraq. :disgust:

eh. I almost think AQ has become a catch-all term, at least when people use it in speeches trying to appeal to voters who don't know and don't care about the difference. kinda like people using the term hacker as a catch-all for computer crimes.
 

daniel1113

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2003
6,448
0
0
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: loki8481
McCain thinks that Iraq will descend into even more chaos than it's in right now, and that it could become what Afghanistan was pre-9/11.

McCain said that Al Qaida would take over in Iraq. :disgust:

eh. I almost think AQ has become a catch-all term, at least when people use it in speeches trying to appeal to voters who don't know and don't care about the difference. kinda like people using the term hacker as a catch-all for computer crimes.

Unfortunately, look where the mixing of Iraq, AQ, and terrorism has gotten us today :(
 

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
Originally posted by: daniel1113
snip

What you aren't getting is that if you vote for McCain you WILL get escalation of the war. Obama? It's not guaranteed, he's not the "warrior" that Juan McAmnesty is. It's such a waste of time to sit and argue that Obama is going to have a more diplomatic approach to things than McCain. If you wish to believe there's no difference then that's how it is, for you.
But remember, Obama did not vote or endorse this war.. so voting for Obama is indeed not "voting for unconstitutional military action". You can't quite say that till he's in office. McCain? We have plenty of evidence he's out of his damn mind.

My principles are the same as yours. I am simply admitting that our right to life is paramount. You are more concerned with your economy, free markets and small government in a time when people are losing what's really important, their lives. All the chatter about principles is great, but its strangely reminiscent of Mike Huckabee. Sure you're a libertarian?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=u9sA5FQfE1E
Honor? How about sending our men and women home with their LIVES.

Originally posted by: loki8481
I guess it all depends on what you think is going to happen after we withdraw.

McCain thinks that Iraq will descend into even more chaos than it's in right now, and that it could become what Afghanistan was pre-9/11.

Obama seems to hope that everything will be hunky-dory as soon as there are no more US flags flying in Iraq, but even he said he's send forces back if that doesn't happen.

but all your talk about McCain wanting to escalate the war or go to war with Iran is totally bullshit.

Really? Considering that McCain is a continuation of the Bush doctrine?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg
http://youtube.com/watch?v=VFknKVjuyNk
http://www.breitbart.com/artic...jrccoo1&show_article=1

And what happens after we withdraw is that no more Americans will be in danger in the mideast. We won't be occupying countries that aren't ours. That's all that will happen.
We should've never been there to begin with, and shouldn't continue the occupation either.

You treat others as you'd like to be treated. Instead, Bush and his allies (most of you who are opposing Obama sound like Bush sympathizers) are being complete hypocrites.

If China invades California to liberate us, maybe they shouldn't ever withdraw either.. just to keep... stability. ;) What a bunch of nice do-gooders!!!!
 

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
Originally posted by: loki8481
Obama seems to hope that everything will be hunky-dory as soon as there are no more US flags flying in Iraq, but even he said he's send forces back if that doesn't happen.

This has to be addressed. This is such spin that it can't stand for people to read.

The fact we have troops there and flags flying in the mideast is exactly WHY they attacked us and will continue to attack us until we stop playing favorites in the mideast and occupying their countries.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sraDwkAwqH4

It's not "hope" its REALITY that as soon as American flags are out of Iraq that we will be safe. Maybe not immediately but once they find out we've come to our senses permanently then yes, we will be safe.

McCain is wrong here. Obama is correct, and it isn't "hope" at all.. it's called being educated.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
correct in what regard?

there's certainly an argument to be made for our support for Israel causing animosity towards us in the ME, but neither McCain or Obama is going to be changing anything as far as US-Israeli relations go.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

it was a joke, not an advocation of going to war with Iran. the US will nevernevernevernever attack Iran without Iran making the first move against the US or one of our allies. it's just not going to happen, especially with our army already bogged down in 2 wars.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=VFknKVjuyNk

did you listen to the last 15 seconds of that?
 

daniel1113

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2003
6,448
0
0
Originally posted by: Obsoleet
What you aren't getting is that if you vote for McCain you WILL get escalation of the war. Obama? It's not guaranteed, he's not the "warrior" that Juan McAmnesty is. It's such a waste of time to sit and argue that Obama is going to have a more diplomatic approach to things than McCain. If you wish to believe there's no difference then that's how it is, for you.
But remember, Obama did not vote or endorse this war.. so voting for Obama is indeed not "voting for unconstitutional military action". You can't quite say that till he's in office. McCain? We have plenty of evidence he's out of his damn mind.

Um, the right to life is paramount to individual liberty, which is the cornerstone to libertarianism. I also mentioned it multiple times.

For some reason, I think you have the impression that I am voting for McCain, even though I think I've been pretty clear in that both candidates are unworthy of my vote. Hence why I'm voting for the ONLY person that didn't vote for the war, warned of its consequences, and has stood firm with libertarian principles since day one.

My principles are the same as yours. I am simply admitting that our right to life is paramount. You are more concerned with your economy, free markets and small government in a time when people are losing what's really important, their lives. All the chatter about principles is great, but its strangely reminiscent of Mike Huckabee. Sure you're a libertarian?

You may say you're a libertarian and spout off the core components to the libertarian platform, but at the end of the day, you only get to vote once. Claiming to support one thing and voting for another that is blatantly contradictory is a joke. Why won't you stand up for the principles you claim to possess rather than the popularity of a candidate?
 

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
Originally posted by: loki8481
correct in what regard?

there's certainly an argument to be made for our support for Israel causing animosity towards us in the ME, but neither McCain or Obama is going to be changing anything as far as US-Israeli relations go.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

it was a joke, not an advocation of going to war with Iran. the US will nevernevernevernever attack Iran without Iran making the first move against the US or one of our allies. it's just not going to happen, especially with our army already bogged down in 2 wars.

Sure, as long as its not another false flag like the Gulf of Tonkin or the Lusitania.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=VFknKVjuyNk

did you listen to the last 15 seconds of that?

I did. And the presence is what causes the people in the mideast to hate us. That's what's wrong with staying there.

Originally posted by: daniel1113
For some reason, I think you have the impression that I am voting for McCain, even though I think I've been pretty clear in that both candidates are unworthy of my vote. Hence why I'm voting for the ONLY person that didn't vote for the war, warned of its consequences, and has stood firm with libertarian principles since day one.

Obama didn't vote for the war. Spoke out against it, warned of the consequences and this is the #1 issue right now. I don't see why he's any less worthy for the job in that regard. Regardless he's head and shoulders above McCain on the issue so that's that.


My principles are the same as yours. I am simply admitting that our right to life is paramount. You are more concerned with your economy, free markets and small government in a time when people are losing what's really important, their lives. All the chatter about principles is great, but its strangely reminiscent of Mike Huckabee. Sure you're a libertarian?

You may say you're a libertarian and spout off the core components to the libertarian platform, but at the end of the day, you only get to vote once. Claiming to support one thing and voting for another that is blatantly contradictory is a joke. Why won't you stand up for the principles you claim to possess rather than the popularity of a candidate?

That's your misconception. That everyone who supports Obama is jumping on some bandwagon. Untrue. I have done far more for another candidate who had little shot of winning (Ron Paul) than I bet you did. I've done far more than speak to libertarian ideals, I've put in the blood and sweat. You, have done the talking but I have no idea of your background in regards to your dedication to the libertarian cause or Ron Paul Revolution. I'm no bandwagon fanboy. I'm being pragmatic about a very serious situation.

This election is 2004 all over again. You have a choice, sentencing more Americans to their death in the mideast by continuing the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive warfare thru McCain.. or voting in Obama and an attempt at a different approach to world relations than continued and escalating war through entangling alliances.
Preemptive war has failed us anyway, there are more terrorists now than ever, and we never got Bin Laden. So I have no idea why anyone would even come near endorsing that dogma.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
Obama didn't vote for the war. Spoke out against it, warned of the consequences and this is the #1 issue right now.

"Theres not much difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush?s position at this stage" -Barack Obama
"What would I have done? I don?t know." -Barack Obama

Obama was against the war when it was politically advantageous, he was for the war when it was politically advantageous, and four years later, he's back to being against the war now that the client has changed and it's politically advantageous to do so.

I guess as long as opinion polls stay the same as they are now, we're safe on counting on a troop pull-out.

I'm a liberal. I'm voting for Obama because he's the most likely to do what's important to me. I'm not discouraging you from doing the same, but do it with your eyes open.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: loki8481
McCain thinks that Iraq will descend into even more chaos than it's in right now, and that it could become what Afghanistan was pre-9/11.

McCain said that Al Qaida would take over in Iraq. :disgust:

eh. I almost think AQ has become a catch-all term, at least when people use it in speeches trying to appeal to voters who don't know and don't care about the difference. kinda like people using the term hacker as a catch-all for computer crimes.

So what you are saying is that McCain realizes that the people who would be voting for him are, mostly, ignorant of what's going on.

Gotcha.
 

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
Originally posted by: loki8481
Obama didn't vote for the war. Spoke out against it, warned of the consequences and this is the #1 issue right now.

"Theres not much difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush?s position at this stage" -Barack Obama
"What would I have done? I don?t know." -Barack Obama

Obama was against the war when it was politically advantageous, he was for the war when it was politically advantageous, and four years later, he's back to being against the war now that the client has changed and it's politically advantageous to do so.

I guess as long as opinion polls stay the same as they are now, we're safe on counting on a troop pull-out.

Untrue.
The difference is as stark as can be.

Right at the top of their issues pages-

Plan for Ending the War in Iraq
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

Strategy for Victory in Iraq
http://www.johnmccain.com/Info...-8e34-4c7ea83f11d8.htm

Do I have to explain what a plan for ending the war in Iraq means?
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
So what you are saying is that McCain realizes that the people who would be voting for him are, mostly, ignorant of what's going on.

ask john kerry how nuance plays in red states :p
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
huffington post, msnbc, and a guy who ran for the democratic nomination... not exactly the cadre of people I'd go to for straight talk :p

doesn't really matter as far as I'm concerned, though... unless Obama picks Sam Nunn for his VP or there's some other game-changing event in the next 4 months, Barry's got my vote.
 

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
You wouldn't listen to 4 star General Wesley Clark in a time of war and needless American deaths? I'm sorry.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
Originally posted by: Obsoleet
You wouldn't listen to 4 star General Wesley Clark in a time of war and needless American deaths? I'm sorry.

for an objective opinion about a political issue? no, I wouldn't trust Wesley Clark to give non-partisan advice.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
8
0
Originally posted by: Obsoleet
Untrue.
The difference is as stark as can be.

Right at the top of their issues pages-

Plan for Ending the War in Iraq
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

Strategy for Victory in Iraq
http://www.johnmccain.com/Info...-8e34-4c7ea83f11d8.htm

Do I have to explain what a plan for ending the war in Iraq means?
Obama also had a plan to use public campaign financing and he threw that out the window.

He also had a plan to talk to Iran unconditionally within the first year of taking office and he threw that out the window as well.

I am pretty sure his view on Iraq will change real fast once he is in office. We have invested too much time, money and lives to pull out at this point. Especially when you look at the amazing progress we have made in the last year.
 

daniel1113

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2003
6,448
0
0
Originally posted by: Obsoleet
Obama didn't vote for the war. Spoke out against it, warned of the consequences and this is the #1 issue right now. I don't see why he's any less worthy for the job in that regard. Regardless he's head and shoulders above McCain on the issue so that's that.

Of course he didn't vote for the war. He was elected in 2004. But he's voted for every war funding bill that's come up since he became a senator.

And I won't disagree that Obama is slightly better than McCain when it comes to foreign policy. But shit is still shit no matter what you compare it to.

Vote for whoever you want. I just think that people like you are one of the main reasons politics in this country is so bad. You've identified a candidate that supposedly shares your beliefs, but you don't have the backbone to stand up and actually support the guy to the end. I hope there are others out there that are unwilling to waiver from their core beliefs by choosing a candidate from the piss-poor selection we are given every year. If they continue to receive votes, they will continue to hold positions of power in this country. It'd that simple. And you can't blame anyone except yourself.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread. I've made my point. Do what you want.
 

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
What are you talking about? I'm with Ron Paul till the end and taking over the Republican party with likeminded libertarians.

I'm not supporting Bob Barr "till the end" because I never supported him. I like him, but I'm not a Libertarian.. I'm a libertarian.
Are you trying to turn away a likeminded individual from ever supporting your candidate? I gave up on party politics a while back and will never blindly support a Party ever again. I support all libertarian minded people from all parties. I've given money to Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul. As far as "socialism" and "free market" ect, the fact is that right now people are dying for nothing and I've said it enough times that until all the troops come home I won't rest.

Even if you think I'm "selling out" or not remaining loyal to your party or principles, I'm trying to do the right thing and stop senseless murder of Iraqis and Americans for nothing. That's a pretty high principle in my book.

Isn't that the greatest attrocity going on right now? Not the threat of UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE. Which in itself is a pretty benign thing to be so fearful of. Heaven forbid Barack Obama try to bring healthcare to uninsured children in our country instead of expanding the war :(
Yes I'm against that stuff, but come on.. lets lay every issue out and see whats really important right now.
 

SleepWalkerX

Platinum Member
Jun 29, 2004
2,649
0
0
Originally posted by: Obsoleet
This election I've decided I'm going to cast my ballot to Barack Obama. One of my reasons is because as a fiscally conservative libertarian, Obama is the most conservative of both major party candidates. Proof: http://www.breitbart.com/artic...19UJF80&show_article=1 ; http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25133125/ As well, he tends to only support the welfare state, rather than McCain's insistence on maintaining the welfare and warfare state.

LOL! Obama a conservative?

From your first link:

Democrat Barack Obama told voters Saturday he would push an aggressive economic agenda as president: cutting taxes for the middle class, raising taxes on the wealthy, pouring money into "green energy" and requiring employers to set up retirement saving plans for their workers.

Only one of those things sound libertarian to me. If you say fiscally conservative then he's 1 for 4 so far. And from your second link, just because he promises to relieve more weight off the middle class as opposed to McCain doesn't mean he's as fiscally conservative as a libertarian. True libertarians want tax cuts ALL across the board, for the lower class and the upper class as well as the middle class.

Originally posted by: Obsoleet
I would like to vote for Bob Barr, as I respect him as he's a prominent former Republican and a good one at that.. but I have a cousin in Iraq (combat MOS) and was nearly shot in the face last month by an AK47. We can't afford to play politics with our families lives and McCain is determined to ensure my cousin is dead if he's elected. He's stated that he wants a 100 year occupation, and an invasion of Iran. Of which we do not have the troop counts to successfully pull off without using nuclear weaponry. Obviously, releasing that genie from the bottle is not one I support over taking over 3rd world middle eastern nations that pose no threat to anyone besides themselves.

I'm almost getting there (as far as respecting Bob Barr, that is). He's voted with so many neoconservative agendas in the past that's its nausiating. He's pulled a 180 on almost everything he previously stood for to stand for true libertarian values. I guess everyone has the ability to change their mind. I'll see what he can do before I cast my vote for him in the Fall.

Originally posted by: Obsoleet
I will return to voting to 3rd party once we are out of the mideast and we've returned to a policy of noninterventionism. If Obama fails us as the Democratic congress in '06 did to stop the war, I will return to voting for the Libertarian party.

Don't kid yourself. You're not a true libertarian. Obama's already sold out on our fourth amendment rights. Remember, the Libertarian Party is about individualism and parties like Obama's and McCain's are about collectivism and socialism.

If Obama's rhetoric makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside and gets you to agree with him on corporate bail-outs, homeowner bailouts, giving up your second and fourth amendment rights, raising taxes for everyone but the middle class, national health care, throwing more money at government welfare, social security, and medicare/medicaid, NAFTA, raising money to spend on the "green future", and basically keeping all these big government programs..

.. then you're probably not a libertarian.
 

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
I wonder how old some of you are to tell me what I am and am not.. the very fact I say I'm a libertarian is proof enough that I want to identify with that group, and I've certainly done more for libertarian minded candidates from all parties than almost any of you here. So while I'm far more openminded than you are, I'm also more dedicated when it comes to actually putting words to action.

I may "flip flop" (in your mind only), BUT at least my opinion actually counts because I do a lot more than sit behind a computer and talk about how much of a libertarian I am. Which almost certainly the "dedicated loyal libertarians" here are most likely on the couch talking about their principles.

That being said as to who is actually more a libertarian, the loudmouth or the person who has taken action for the cause.. let me ask, who is more of a libertarian minded candidate of the two candidates who stand a shot at defeating one another? McCain or Obama?

Answer that and I'll let you know if you've gotten my point yet.
 

juiio

Golden Member
Feb 28, 2000
1,433
4
81
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: ebaycj
So what I think the OP is saying is that he is a small-L libertarian who is choosing to be pragmatic this election cycle and voting for the lesser of the two evils that actually stand a chance at getting elected, instead of throwing his vote away on an unelectable big-L Libertarian candidate.

Why is voting for a 3rd party candidate so often considered "throwing the vote away?"


Personally, I often consider a vote for either of the major parties a vote that is thrown away.

I'm not going to throw my vote away just because so many others do.

Not following the herd does not make one lost.

:confused:

Because, 99% of the time it is?

If you think that voting third party is throwing a vote away, then surely you must think that voting D or R in a race that was decided by more than one vote was throwing your vote away also?

Just because your candidate doesn't win or wins/loses by a large margin doesn't mean your vote is a throw-away vote.
 

SleepWalkerX

Platinum Member
Jun 29, 2004
2,649
0
0
Originally posted by: Obsoleet
That being said as to who is actually more a libertarian, the loudmouth or the person who has taken action for the cause..

It depends where they stand on certain issues. If the loudmouth supports abolishing the IRS and the person who has taken action supports national health care, then the loudmouth is the libertarian.

Originally posted by: Obsoleet
let me ask, who is more of a libertarian minded candidate of the two candidates who stand a shot at defeating one another? McCain or Obama?

Answer that and I'll let you know if you've gotten my point yet.

Whatever helps you sleep at night while you vote for a big government bureaucrat.
 

Obsoleet

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2007
2,181
1
0
Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX
Originally posted by: Obsoleet
That being said as to who is actually more a libertarian, the loudmouth or the person who has taken action for the cause..

It depends where they stand on certain issues. If the loudmouth supports abolishing the IRS and the person who has taken action supports national health care, then the loudmouth is the libertarian.

Wrong on all counts. You've done nothing but talk. Hence you supported absolutely nothing.
Good job, you're a bad American by not participating in democracy.

Originally posted by: Obsoleet
let me ask, who is more of a libertarian minded candidate of the two candidates who stand a shot at defeating one another? McCain or Obama?

Answer that and I'll let you know if you've gotten my point yet.

Whatever helps you sleep at night while you vote for a big government bureaucrat.

A big gov't bureaucrat like one who would avoid answering a direct question? Kettle calling pot..
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,507
7,561
136
Originally posted by: Obsoleet
Simply put, from the two major parties, I do have 1 choice that will substantially increase the chances that my cousin's life will be spared. Rather than have someone I care about so much die in vain. Obama will keep us safe and be better for our economy as well being the conservative in the race.

And I should vote for McCain because he is the lesser of two evil choices from my view. Yet that is what I did with my first vote in 2004, when I cast it for Bush. Look where that got us.

You cannot vote for Republican or Democrat and do your duty to protect your family. One or the other they will hurt you in different ways through the same source. They will empower our government to take from us. Be it your cousin's life or your constitutional rights both major parties are sworn to increase the size of government and serve their own interests before our interests. Look at how they were unified in giving Telco?s immunity.

If you ever wanted to change that you would vote for what you truly believed in, not for the lesser of two poisoned pills. That poison will take that which you hold dear no matter which one you choose.