Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Former Obama voters

So I have at least 3 American friends who are not impressed with Obama's performance over the past 4 years and they do not want to vote for him (they do not like Romney either, which I dont blame them because I cant stand the man and find his ideas are not enough to help the US stop from falling over the cliff)... but they say things like 'this is not what I voted for' or 'I am disappointed with how Obama turned out'. They talk as though they had no idea this would happen. I get annoyed with it, because before Obama even became candidate, back when he was battling edwards and clinton, I learned things about Obama that were less than exciting. It seems to me that Obama did everything that people on the right warned about. So what's the big surprise? Back when my friends were voting for Obama, I told them of things I had learned and checked out for myself, and they would not listen. Now - they just say 'Im not happy with him. I had so much hope but he didnt do anything he said he was going to do'.

Yes, he did! His words might have been wrong - like saying he would cut unemployment, and increase people's take home pay - but the policies he explained BEFORE he was elected showed that what he was touting was impossible to repair that way. His POLICIES were not going to work and that was obvious from the start - from the campaign trail - but people only chose to hear his words and not THINK about what he was saying. Over and over in history, these things failed. Over and over. So why did they think that Obama would magically be able to fix it using the same failed tactics? Or they were so focused on Bad GWBush, they couldnt see past the end of their nose. I just find it annoying and aggravating that they will not say 'I was wrong to believe his policies would work'. Instead they just blame Obama for not becoming what they expected.

I'm sorry but they only have themselves to blame!!! One of these friends is from Alberta where most people vote 'right', and yet down in the states she let her son be in an Obama promotional video and told everyone how excited she was to have her son involved. He was about 7 at the time. Oh boy - and now she is disappointed with Obama. Her in particular I sent information to, but she ignored it or refused to believe it. Now she doesnt want to vote for anyone including Obama and probably wont vote at all. But will NOT admit that she was wrong and should have paid more attention back then. That is something we predicted. If I can stand it, I will have to go back through my old posts from pre-election and find where I guessed that people would turn on Obama and pretend they knew nothing about what the man would do to the US if elected.


  1. People have two choices. More Obama and 4 more years of an economy in the toilet, record spending, and wasting billions of dollars on Obama's green picks, or the possibility of a different direction with Romney. It always irks me to hear of people who don't like the status quo but won't do a thing to change it - instead they'll not vote at all, which of course is the same as voting for the status quo.
    I hear this kind of argument all the time.. "I don't like him" or "I can't stand him"... that doesn't matter. Do you like the direction your country is headed right now, and do you think the opposition could actually make it worse?... those are the only two questions that are important.
    You don't have to like Romney to vote republican, you have to want a change from what you've been living with, and the direction you've been heading in for the last four years. Sitting at home and doing nothing just ensures four more years of what you weren't happy with in the first place. People deserve what they get if they're too lazy or picky to vote for change.

  2. I would wrestle with that if I was American and getting ready to vote. My reasoning is that part of the problems in both our countries is bigger and bigger govt growing out of control like a monster. Romney is a big government man too.

    In the debate on Tuesday, Romney talked about how he would not let illegal immigrants get driver's licenses, for example. How does he plan to do that? Driver's licensing is solely a STATE issue, not federal. Does that mean he plans to get involved in telling the states what to do over that? Does that mean he would be opening up a new crew of federal govt workers to oversee this? Secretaries, people to head it up, people to oversee them, new letterheads and govt titles? Pensions, wages, and benefits for them paid by American tax payers? How is that going to save real money? That is the sort of thing that would make me not want to vote for Romney.

    I think he is on the right track for finding ways for businesses to be able to grow with LESS govt involvement, and that in turn should make the tax revenue grow bigger than it is right now - BUT you have to stop and think there too - WHY do they need such a massive revenue from taxes?

    BECAUSE THEY SPEND TOO MUCH. They all do - democrats and republicans alike. If they keep funding new programs or keep the ones they currently fund without major changes, the US is never going to come close to getting out of debt. Some people refer to Romney as 'Obama Lite' and I can see why. If you really listen to his speeches and debates, he talks of new govt programs but does not say things like 'I would close such-and-such group and put those people in place in a new group called such-and-such', he just talks of all these new groups and plans. That means MORE GOVT SPENDING.

    So, if Obama is driving the US over the cliff at 100kmp, and Romney is going to drive over the cliff at 60kph - it's STILL going over the cliff! If you are in that car and it's going over no matter what, do you think it would be better to die at 60kph instead?? Or would you rather throw open the door and jump OUT?

    There is at least one other person who is on the ticket, running as an independent, but he has not been invited to any of these debates? Why not? I have to search the internet to find what his plans and policies are. Is that fair? What if this guy has a bunch of concrete plans to try to STOP the car from falling over the cliff, rather than just slowing it down a bit like Romney? Most people wont know what his plans are because they are told that it's either Romney or Obama and a vote for someone else would be a waste.

    I heard a radio talking about this the other day and I liked it. Mike Church (sirius patriot) basically said that if people are told it will be THEIR FAULT if Obama wins, because they did not vote or voted for the Independent, or wrote in their own choice on the ballot, they could respond with 'No it's not my fault, it's Romney's fault, for not showing that he is going to take the country in the right direction, for not convincing me that he KNOWS what to do to stop this excessive spending at the Federal level'.

    I whole heartedly agree with that. It's not a person's fault if they vote independent or cant bring themselves to vote at all because the two main choices are not appealing, it's the Candidates' fault and the fault of their policies and plans. End of story.

  3. Now to go the other way, I believe that Romney really feels he can change things. I believe him when he says that. I believe that he is a nice person, not the rich snooty that people have been making him out to be. I believe that he knows how to run a business, and how to be part of a team.

    I like him more than I like Obama, I was always wary of Obama when he tried to act like he knew what people wanted to here. He did not seem sincere and laughed at his own jokes too often. But I do not feel that liking one more than the other automatically means that I would know that Romney should get my vote. It's very difficult. I do not think that Romney has enough of the right ideas for how to turn things around fast and hard. That is the only way, I feel, that the US has any hope of getting through this. Fast and HARD changes. Changes people are not going to like. To me it's like a household realizing they are heavy in debt and getting the Debt Lady from tv to show up and put their money in jars and tell them how much they have leftover and only to live on what they bring in, NOT on credit. If that's how households have to get out of debt, how is it that both these candidates are talking about revenue for the future, and new spending programs???? There is NO FREAKING MONEY. They are in debt an astonishing amount of money. A shocking, sickening amount of money. How are they going to get out of it?

    As Mike Church also put one morning, when they finally pay the 16 TRILLLLLLION dollars back, they only break even, only in the black. Better than in the red, but it's almost impossible to think of how they can possibly ever get to the point where they bring in enough to cover what they are putting out. Households cant run like that. They may lose their home and vehicles. They have much less chances to fix their problems than the federal govts have allowed themselves. It's, quite frankly, terrifying.

    Another thing I would note about this Romney Obama time is that if Romney wins, that does not necessarily signal the demise of Obama. He only served 4 years, so he could sit back and watch the debt clock continue to rise, and come back for the next election. If Romney really messes up or something bad happens under his watch (terrorist plots, etc), Obama could slide right back in again. The elections lately have been so close, near a 50-50 split, I dont know that the Dems would kick Obama to the curb so easily. He could still be their poster boy while they sit and watch the same things happen under Romney. It could go back and forth between both parties for the next 20 years and the US will just continue to crumble. How does that help anyone? What does that solve?

    It will take tough ideas, that is the only way I can see to salvage what's going on.

    And here is another thought - how many times have either Obama or Romney spoken about the Constitution in their debates and speeches? A light mention here and there when it suits them. But that's about it. Neither one of them has talked about how the Federal govt is going beyond what it was supposed to do, and that has contributed largely to the debt and problems. Neither one of them. They swear to uphold the constitution and then ignore it. THAT is a major problem that both of them are the stars of. So while I dont think Romney is a horrible man, I do think he feels the Feds have the right to do what they have been doing and that is just plain wrong. That thinking has led to the increased spending of tax payers dollars over the decades and it's not going to turn anything around.



These are my views and opinions. If you don't agree or think I am sadly misguided, that is your view. Feel free to share your thoughts but I also reserve my right to moderate content (IE foul language, excessive flaming, etc).