By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Republican or Democrat?

mrstickball on 05 August 2011
Player1x3 said:
mrstickball said:
Player1x3 said:

 

What about Richard Nixon?


Nixon is half-and-half to me.

On one end, he got us out of Nam (eventually), and had we not of had the anti-war protestors, would have won the war due to Linebacker and Linebacker II. He also prevented WW3 during the Sino-Soviet Crisis by coming to China's defense by arguing that if the Soviets attacked the Chinese, we would relatiate with nuclear weapons. You also had other mixed bag foreign policy decisions such as supporting Pinochet against Alliende in Chile.

Economically, he did stupid things like institute price controls, the EPA, and also killed NASA. Then of course you have Watergate.

So overall, I'd put him in the lower tier of presidents. Not quite Carter, LBJ or FDR in the overall scheme of things, but not far away from them, either.

Watergate?


You know, I kept telling my self 'don't forget to mention watergate', but I went and did that. I apologize for that. Watergate was a disgrace. But in regards to presidential rankings, I try to look at the long-term in terms of what offices they created and sustained in order to rank presidents. Watergate was horrible, but not a long-term issue for every American. Comparatively, you look at other laws issued by other presidents that are far more egregious. But again, his establishment of the EPA is a huge mark on his presidency which makes me rank him in the probably the 5th or 6th worst president of the century.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Around the Network
Ssenkahdavic on 05 August 2011

I love all of these "If I were an American"

Politically, Id be described as a Libertarian Republican, though I am 100% for the death penalty and pro choice (most are against both). Socially, I am more centralist (I cannot stand the far right or the far left on social grounds)



 

  

The Only True Next Gen Game - Hero-U

Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.
Robert A. Heinlein

dsage01 on 06 August 2011
badgenome said:
bannedagain said:
badgenome said:

I don't really see how the first three were particularly detrimental to the economy in the short term, unless you believe that debt and deficits are what caused the recession. The sub-prime crisis seems a far likelier culpri

WARS ARE EXPENSIVE. YOU HAVE TO RAISE TAXES WHEN YOU GO TO WAR.  When you put money back into jobs it makes sense.

Okay? But what does that have to do with this specific recession? It seems like you're spouting slogans and blaming the recession on things you dislike, which may or may not be bad things but aren't generally thought to have had anything to do with why the economy crashed. The general consensus is that years of easy credit gave us too much debt at all levels of the economy, especially in the housing sector, and it eventually blew up in our faces. If you have an alternate theory, I'm interested to hear it, but please - no more GOERGE BUSH MAED A WAR AND IT WAS SAD AND BAD JOBS NOT BOMBS!!!! stuff.


Okay the main reason ression happend in 2008 was that the Republican's left U.S.A in charge of the banks. And when China made 2 trillion dollars off of profits in exports they decided to invest it the U.S. banks they gave loans to them and with that money the people bought products and invested in houses and Cars which China was buying back and paying intrest for there own stuff as well. So when they found that out they got really pissed and took there money back and U.S economeny went down like crazy .. read the updated OP for the full information. Wars and other stupid decions made by Republican's (no tax on big corpartions) were quite a big problem as well.



bannedagain on 06 August 2011
dsage01 said:
badgenome said:
bannedagain said:
badgenome said:

I don't really see how the first three were particularly detrimental to the economy in the short term, unless you believe that debt and deficits are what caused the recession. The sub-prime crisis seems a far likelier culpri

WARS ARE EXPENSIVE. YOU HAVE TO RAISE TAXES WHEN YOU GO TO WAR.  When you put money back into jobs it makes sense.

Okay? But what does that have to do with this specific recession? It seems like you're spouting slogans and blaming the recession on things you dislike, which may or may not be bad things but aren't generally thought to have had anything to do with why the economy crashed. The general consensus is that years of easy credit gave us too much debt at all levels of the economy, especially in the housing sector, and it eventually blew up in our faces. If you have an alternate theory, I'm interested to hear it, but please - no more GOERGE BUSH MAED A WAR AND IT WAS SAD AND BAD JOBS NOT BOMBS!!!! stuff.


Okay the main reason ression happend in 2008 was that the Republican's left U.S.A in charge of the banks. And when China made 2 trillion dollars off of profits in exports they decided to invest it the U.S. banks they gave loans to them and with that money the people bought products and invested in houses and Cars which China was buying back and paying intrest for there own stuff as well. So when they found that out they got really pissed and took there money back and U.S economeny went down like crazy .. read the updated OP for the full information. Wars and other stupid decions made by Republican's (no tax on big corpartions) were quite a big problem as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP0ygzR3L5w&feature=player_embedded#at=405

watch and learn



Joelcool7 on 06 August 2011

Man the OP is so whack. I'm not even American and I'm offended. I mean calling the US the most corrupt country in the world alone shows alot of bias and really makes the OP laughable. Now do I disagree or agree with every/anything he says I dunno I stopped reading.

So I will answer the question. I am neither Democrat nor Republican. To be honest I would have voted Republican during the Clinton Era, democrat during the Bush era and I'm actually a supporter of Obama. However I have many Conservative and Liberal views that clash with one another and as such keep me from being clearly democrat or republican.

In the end Canada has five major political parties. Liberal, NDP , Conservative, Green and Bloc. I of course am Conservative up here but that doesn't mean I'm Republican. Fact is if I were American I'd probably be supporting a different party almost every election. It would depend on each President's decisions and policies rather then their political party.

So if I were to align myself with an American party I would say I'm a Democratic Republican!



-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer

 

Around the Network
Player1x3 on 06 August 2011
mrstickball said:
Player1x3 said:
mrstickball said:
Player1x3 said:

 

What about Richard Nixon?


Nixon is half-and-half to me.

On one end, he got us out of Nam (eventually), and had we not of had the anti-war protestors, would have won the war due to Linebacker and Linebacker II. He also prevented WW3 during the Sino-Soviet Crisis by coming to China's defense by arguing that if the Soviets attacked the Chinese, we would relatiate with nuclear weapons. You also had other mixed bag foreign policy decisions such as supporting Pinochet against Alliende in Chile.

Economically, he did stupid things like institute price controls, the EPA, and also killed NASA. Then of course you have Watergate.

So overall, I'd put him in the lower tier of presidents. Not quite Carter, LBJ or FDR in the overall scheme of things, but not far away from them, either.

Watergate?


You know, I kept telling my self 'don't forget to mention watergate', but I went and did that. I apologize for that. Watergate was a disgrace. But in regards to presidential rankings, I try to look at the long-term in terms of what offices they created and sustained in order to rank presidents. Watergate was horrible, but not a long-term issue for every American. Comparatively, you look at other laws issued by other presidents that are far more egregious. But again, his establishment of the EPA is a huge mark on his presidency which makes me rank him in the probably the 5th or 6th worst president of the century.

You didnt forget to mention Watergate actually, I was only wondering what's Watergate? Some sort of incident?



Player1x3 on 06 August 2011

To answer the question I would be socially Republican and economically democrat



Kantor on 06 August 2011
mrstickball said:
Kantor said:

Gary Johnson is a less crazy (but unfortunately less popular) version of Ron Paul. My personal favourite is Rudy Giuliani, but he hasn't announced that he will run, and it's not even being widely speculated. The nomination will go to either Romney (whom I still like MUCH more than most of the Republican field) or those nutcases Cain, Palin and Bachmann.

Ron Paul is an extremist. He has the right idea, but he takes it so far as to make it ludicrous. He opposed raising the debt ceiling when there were two days left before the Treasury ran out of money (yes, the final deal was terrible, but only because all of the Democrats were screaming "Don't touch Medicare!" and the Republicans screamed back "No tax increases!).

This whole debt debacle cemented my belief that both parties are led by childish individuals who put their own bank accounts and positions of office above the interests of the American people.

That said, I will give the slight edge to the Democrats at the moment, only because Obama is very slightly better than Boehner and his lot (and because the Tea Party are the most dangerous force in the country).

You are forgetting someone.

Rick Perry is the likely nominee now. He's within 2% of Romney and hasn't even declared. He has too much going for him to lose to Romney, and isn't quite as nutty as Bachmann.

Otherwise, I agree with you.

Ballot support isn't really the most important figure, because these are early days and quite a few of the contenders will likely drop out. Recognition and approval are really the most important.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx

As you can see, Rick Perry has very low recognition (54%). Indeed, I'd never heard of him until about a week ago. He does have incredibly high positive intensity (24) but half the country hasn't heard of him.

Sarah Palin is, unfortunately, in the strongest position at the moment (96/16) with Romney (84/15) and Giuliani (89/19) not too far behind. One of those people would make an outstanding President, one a pretty good President, and one... to be honest, I'd rather vote for Kodos.



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

dsage01 on 06 August 2011
bannedagain said:
dsage01 said:
badgenome said:
bannedagain said:
badgenome said:

I don't really see how the first three were particularly detrimental to the economy in the short term, unless you believe that debt and deficits are what caused the recession. The sub-prime crisis seems a far likelier culpri

WARS ARE EXPENSIVE. YOU HAVE TO RAISE TAXES WHEN YOU GO TO WAR.  When you put money back into jobs it makes sense.

Okay? But what does that have to do with this specific recession? It seems like you're spouting slogans and blaming the recession on things you dislike, which may or may not be bad things but aren't generally thought to have had anything to do with why the economy crashed. The general consensus is that years of easy credit gave us too much debt at all levels of the economy, especially in the housing sector, and it eventually blew up in our faces. If you have an alternate theory, I'm interested to hear it, but please - no more GOERGE BUSH MAED A WAR AND IT WAS SAD AND BAD JOBS NOT BOMBS!!!! stuff.


Okay the main reason ression happend in 2008 was that the Republican's left U.S.A in charge of the banks. And when China made 2 trillion dollars off of profits in exports they decided to invest it the U.S. banks they gave loans to them and with that money the people bought products and invested in houses and Cars which China was buying back and paying intrest for there own stuff as well. So when they found that out they got really pissed and took there money back and U.S economeny went down like crazy .. read the updated OP for the full information. Wars and other stupid decions made by Republican's (no tax on big corpartions) were quite a big problem as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP0ygzR3L5w&feature=player_embedded#at=405

watch and learn

I wish the Republican's actaully listend to the democrats at that point of time. Anyways the reason I listed was THE MAIN REASON why U.S.A had a huge crash in the econemy



Viper1 on 07 August 2011
Kantor said:

Gary Johnson is a less crazy (but unfortunately less popular) version of Ron Paul. My personal favourite is Rudy Giuliani, but he hasn't announced that he will run, and it's not even being widely speculated. The nomination will go to either Romney (whom I still like MUCH more than most of the Republican field) or those nutcases Cain, Palin and Bachmann.

Ron Paul is an extremist. He has the right idea, but he takes it so far as to make it ludicrous. He opposed raising the debt ceiling when there were two days left before the Treasury ran out of money (yes, the final deal was terrible, but only because all of the Democrats were screaming "Don't touch Medicare!" and the Republicans screamed back "No tax increases!).

Guiliani has an atrocious foreign policy.  He'd have us invade all of the Middle East if you let him.

As for the debt ceiling?  The Treasury ran out of money months ago.  We were already spending $250 billion over the debt limit.  It was already broke.   That $250 billion was borrowed despite it being ove the limit.  And ALL the debt ceiling increase does in allow the Treasury to print more Treasury Bonds to sel to the Fed and China to pay for proposed budget increases.  It doesn't go to pay anything already being paid for.  Not so extreme anymore, is it?



The rEVOLution is not being televised