Who should we replace him with though? I want him out as well, he has not been doing the job he promised to do. It's as shame there's not a good viable third party available.
And anyone considering wasting a vote on any of the candidates. Obama isn't the only one who is guilty of these kinds of things. I, personally, don't think a politician in the last 50-70 has come anywhere near actually representing the interests of the people who elected him. They all get their money from the same places and it doesn't matter if they are Republican, Democrat or Libertarian. They all say what they think people want them to say and once they get elected they throw it all away.
Anyone would be an improvement over BO. Everything he has done so far has made us worse off.....and he's trying to get another borrow, spend, borrow, spend, borrow, spend scheme passed again! It obviously didn't work the first time around so why would he expect it to work now?
Sorry, but I can't agree with that. Rick Perry would most definitely be worse than Obama. Almost everyone of the crop of Republican candidates with their anti-scientific attitudes and desire to institute their anti-human rights policies are definitely on my "DO NOT VOTE FOR" list.
Yeah, but you are operating here on fallacies or personal bias, not facts. The facts regarding BO's tenure are obvious, one need only to consult any economic indicator.
I do agree with you that Rick Perry is not a good solution to the problem that is Obama. I do think that it's unfortunate that you're condemning an entire group of people based on party-line talking points. The entire field of candidates that the Republicans have at hand are stinkers. Horrible. But Obama doesn't deserve a second term--if the Democrats ran another candidate against him, I'd probably vote Democrat.
Out of all the policies Obama has put in place how many of them were Republican idea in the first place? Obama panders to the right far more than he should.
If you look at the policies Obama has proposed in the last three years, I guarantee you that you can find Republicans that also either proposed the same policies or backed those exact policies in the past.
Incorrect. I am operating on the facts. I have actually looked at what the Republican candidates have to say on the issues and they are firmly anti-science, anti-evolution, anti-environment, anti-gay rights and without fail want to institute some form of religious mandate for decisions. Of course, you can read for your self: http://www.issues2000.org/default.htm
How exactly would you classify the stated goals to limit other people's rights? The stated goals of denying homosexuals the right to marry and the right to adopt children, discrimination against certain religions, the removal of environmental protections against companies polluting the earth/air/water which humans require to live, etc.
The fact that you mention Obama is not a contradiction of the facts. One of the reasons that so many Democrats are upset with Obama is his willingness to give in to the conservative right instead of standing up for his convictions. However, Obama does agree with the scientific evidence supporting both evolution and global warming. He has supported, although apparently somewhat ambivalently, the repeal of DADT and DOMA. He is willing to say that trying to discriminate against people based on sexuality is wrong. The same can be said of his attitude towards religion, abortion and similar issues. It shows that he is willing to set aside his personal opinions in light of evidence. The same CANNOT be said for the conservative opposition. I, for one, would love to see a truly qualified person to vote for instead of Obama, but that isn't going to happen and I refuse to support the people who are in open opposition to the many things I believe in. If he gets reelected then we at least have someone who might be willing to listen. The same cannot be said of the Republican opposition.
There you go again. Even though BO has stood fast in a policy that, in your opinion, disqualifies every Republican candidate you are still willing to give him the benefit of a doubt. You think he "might be willing to listen" now? Why? The guy has very few core beliefs but the anti-gay thing seems to be one he's awfully sure of.
Of course, I am. I know that he supported gay marriage, but then changes position on it to get more votes. Despite this fact he has done some good work on getting things changed from his refusal to support DOMA and his support for repealing DADT. Show me where he has said that gay people are a danger to civilization and should be opposed and I will give it a look. Like these people: http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/08/26/305565/rick-perry-signs-anti-gay-marriage-pledge/
More hyperbole..."danger to civilization"? BO & a few of the Republicans are on the same side of the gay marriage issue.
