Quantcast

Is the 'Anyone But Obama' Tactic Smart or Silly?

SodaHead News 2012/05/09 19:00:00
You!
Add Photos & Videos
If you think Mitt Romney is President Obama's only hurdle in the upcoming election, you're wrong. It's Mitt Romney, and... pretty much anyone with $2,500. In Tuesday's West Virginia Democratic primary, inmate Keith Judd trailed by just 18%. That's right, inmate. As in, behind bars. One West Virginia voter explained, "I voted against Obama ... I don't like him. He didn't carry the state before and I'm not going to let him carry it again." So, he voted for Judd. Or, as he put it, "That guy out of Texas."

A little more about Judd. According to Politico, Judd has run for president in every election since 1996, and actually finished third in the 2008 Idaho Democratic primary with 1.7 percent of the vote. He's a former Hollywood musician who claims to be a "Rastafarian-Christian," and lists Richard Nixon as his favorite president because "he got us out of Vietnam, and began world peace with China and the Soviets." Sounds pretty solid. But we've got to ask: Is the "anyone but Obama" tactic a good idea?

keith judd


Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Old Salt 2012/05/09 20:48:45
    Smart
    Old Salt
    +57
    Did not like the limited answers! It is rather REMARKABLE that the Democrats would even ALLOW a convict to be posted against the President... that is in itself disrespectful yet plain stupid!

    The fact that DEMOCRATS were the ONLY ones allowed to vote in this election and greater than 4 out of 10 choose a CONVICT over obama perhaps tells the rest of us just how much OBAMA is disliked.... even by his own party?

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • jay 2012/05/10 19:32:02
    Smart
    jay
    +6
    It was smart until Romney wound up the front runner...now it doesn't matter since Romney is clearly a candidate who has a better resume than Obama.
  • Katherine the Renaissance W... 2012/05/10 19:10:55
  • chgo 2012/05/10 19:09:44 (edited)
    Silly
    chgo
    +8
    the "Anyone But Obama" is quote possibly the dumbest quote of the year.

    The whole "anyone but Obama" argument just says that you're uniformed and unwilling to listen to even your own side of the aisle's candidates and make an good decision based on their platforms. If you're just going to cover your ears and scream "la la la", you might as well not even vote.
  • jay chgo 2012/05/10 19:33:56
    jay
    +3
    It really wasn't quite like that and you know it. The ABO was really about any republican would be better than Obama. Now it is the OMG movement....Obama must go.
  • chgo jay 2012/05/10 19:45:59 (edited)
    chgo
    +3
    thanks for proving my point. Typical republican sheeps have always been taught not to look at things objectively or to use their brains; instead, they've been taught to "go with the party line" and to cheer for "their team" just like they're at a football game.
  • Roger chgo 2012/05/10 21:27:24
    Roger
    +3
    Really have you never watched cnn? Can you not figure out that it is total communist b.s. and is targeted to democrats? What about the fact that most democrats are democrats mainly just because the media promotes it? Is that what you call thinking?
  • chgo Roger 2012/05/10 22:11:58
    chgo
    +3
    What is "total communist b.s."?

    CNN and other media outlets cater to Wall Street and Washington, not the American people. Media conglomerates are corporate bias, which tends to lean right than they do left.

    Most democrats are not democrats mainly just because the media promotes it. Most Americans don't fall for the lies and fear-mongering of the Right. we, the people, value the collective, not just the 1 percent. The right have for years won elections with their money, but it didn't work in 2001. Americans maybe dumb, but they're not that dumb. The majority of Americans lean left in fact.Bush for example stole the election in 2001. He's an idiot and Americans knew it, that's why Gore won the popular vote.

    Record-High 40% of Americans Identify as Independents in '11
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/15...
  • Caleb chgo 2012/05/11 01:55:43 (edited)
    Caleb
    +3
    Let me guess.. If not CNN, you must listen to MSNBC, or is it your sophisticated lefties? For an Independent, you don't sound like one. Sadly, you will stand for nothing, because you have fallen for the typical Communist swill that the Occupiers are promoting. Do you notice that the Occupiers leave their protest areas trashed, burn, rape, and steal while they occupy? That is a Communist tactic from 1912 when it started in Russia. You are ignorant of world history. You exhibit the traits of the Communists and at the same time you deny it. That is another example their method of operation. "The collective" is another Communist term. What you say, tells us that you don't have a clue. "It is still the Economy, and we are not stupid." Socialism doesn't work either, it is almost as old as Democracy and every method to try to make it work has failed and none has ever accomplished the level that America has attained. You respect the irresponsible. Show me differently. (That is a challenge.)
  • chgo Caleb 2012/05/11 02:20:24 (edited)
    chgo
    +3
    Private Jobs Increase More With Democrats in White House, since 1961 non-government payrolls in the U.S. swelled by almost 42 million jobs under Democrats, compared with 24 million for Republican presidents

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news...

    American CEOs earn 343 times more than typical workers. If you want to in a democracy, we can't have extreme income gaps. We can't have both.

    " Socialism doesn't work either"

    Who's promoting socialism?

    the countries that you stupidly think are socialists (e.g. France, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, etc.) are economic powerhouses compared to the U.S. right now.
  • Roger chgo 2012/05/31 19:02:55
    Roger
    While I do not favor Bush he was not a idiot. Also have you ever heard Gore talk all he does is lie. Gore won the popular vote becuase most people don't use there own brains. Plus if cnn and other media news networks were to the right why would they support Obama. Then why would fox news be a joke they are to the right but most people say they are idiots??? If you look at the only america I know you will see most people are slightly to the right,that is why the ussr was our enemy.
  • chgo Roger 2012/05/31 19:09:42
    chgo
    Fox News like to dress the news up as entertainment, and they can get away with whatever they like. It doesn't matter if they info is true or not. people watch train wrecks and car crashes too. that doesn't make it a good thing. the only thing good about Fox is Shepard Smith.

    So like I said, at least 50 percent of Americans are idiots. they watch fox and voted for Bush twice, so why wouldn't they be?
  • Roger chgo 2012/06/07 15:50:19
    Roger
    Okay so you are saying Al Gore would've been better. Buying enlarging goverment taking away rights and pushing the global warming scam? Wait isn't Obama doing the first two? And is it or is it not failing? By the way if Fox is nothing but lies then do you by chance watch cnn? or mabye msnbc? even cnbc?
  • Caleb chgo 2012/05/11 01:28:57
    Caleb
    +2
    Who is uninformed? Who is objective? If only you had a clue, Obama has spent more money than all Presidents in U.S. History and has nothing but Solyndra and 15% unemployment to show for it. (I forgot ACORN). The missing 7% quit looking for non-existent jobs and dropped out. They are still unemployed! Obama has already sold you and I (all Americans) out, with our tax money. You will not learn this from the Putin loving media that we now have. Obama sent a message to Putin that he would do what Putin wanted when he got his second term. Did you miss that? Google IT!
  • chgo Caleb 2012/05/11 01:49:42
    chgo
    +3
    "Obama has spent more money than all Presidents in U.S. History"

    I do not believe you pay very close attention to what is going on in America and quite likely you get your "news" from Fox. Haven't you read headlines say "1,000 days since the Senate pased a budget"? Obama hasn't signed a single fiscal-year budget until April 2011. what are you talking about? All the money we're spending is due to Bush budgets. get it right.

    Obama has steered the nation towards recovery without any help what-so-ever from the Republican side and in fact major opposition from them..He signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act into Law immediately upon taking office. He has not spent more than two thirds of his time on vacation like his predecessor. Obama has put forth jobs bill after jobs bill to be only blocked time after time by the repubs who want a sluggish economy. Why do so many misinformed people like you blame Obama? the repubs have blocked all of Obama's jobs bills the past 2 years). Most economists and the CBO have said in 2008, a year after Obam took office, the economy will will take years to get back to normal.

    The funding to Solyndra was a bipartisan effort authorized in 2005 under a GOP administration. get it right.

    The 1% who largely funds and controls both halves of our ruling duopoly, lov...










    "Obama has spent more money than all Presidents in U.S. History"

    I do not believe you pay very close attention to what is going on in America and quite likely you get your "news" from Fox. Haven't you read headlines say "1,000 days since the Senate pased a budget"? Obama hasn't signed a single fiscal-year budget until April 2011. what are you talking about? All the money we're spending is due to Bush budgets. get it right.

    Obama has steered the nation towards recovery without any help what-so-ever from the Republican side and in fact major opposition from them..He signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act into Law immediately upon taking office. He has not spent more than two thirds of his time on vacation like his predecessor. Obama has put forth jobs bill after jobs bill to be only blocked time after time by the repubs who want a sluggish economy. Why do so many misinformed people like you blame Obama? the repubs have blocked all of Obama's jobs bills the past 2 years). Most economists and the CBO have said in 2008, a year after Obam took office, the economy will will take years to get back to normal.

    The funding to Solyndra was a bipartisan effort authorized in 2005 under a GOP administration. get it right.

    The 1% who largely funds and controls both halves of our ruling duopoly, loves it that way -- the "system" is working just as it should.


    "(I forgot ACORN)."

    You forget your head too. it's probably somewhere stuck up your ass.
    It’s that Obama Derangement Syndrome you've got that is the problem. facts don't mean a thing to right-wingers. It's all hyper-speculation and nonsense and no facts. they really should make a pill for that to treat..

    " Obama sent a message to Putin that he would do what Putin wanted when he got his second term. Did you miss that? Google IT!"


    No, I didn't get the message. lt's because I'm not one of those crazy conspiracy theory believing nuts, unlike someone.
    (more)
  • Uranos7 chgo 2012/05/11 02:38:24
    Uranos7
    +1
    Your the one that needs to get a clue.
    He did pass one budget so that statement goes out the window.
    He has passed bills and plans wich increased spending, also he extended the Bush tax cuts so he took over the blame for the deficit they caused.
    In addition to that he has used E.O.'s to increase spending as well has set up new positions and committee's in government increasing red tape and creating spending on thier own.
    ALL WHITHOUT A PLAN TO PAY FOR ANY OF THEM.

    Solydra:
    The FBI is investigating what happened with Solyndra, a solar panel company that got a $535 million government-backed loan with the help of the Obama White House over the objections of federal budget analysts.

    Obama and Vice President Joe Biden got a nice photo op. They got to make speeches about being "green." But then Solyndra went bankrupt. Americans lost jobs. Taxpayers got stuck with the bill. And members of Congress are now in high dudgeon and making speeches.

    Federal investigators want to know what role political fundraising played in the guarantee of the questionable loan. Washington bureaucrats warned the deal was lousy. And White House spokesmen flail desperately, like weakened victims in a cheesy vampire movie.
    http://articles.chicagotribun...

    Even his friends in Chicago see it for what it was, why can't...






    Your the one that needs to get a clue.
    He did pass one budget so that statement goes out the window.
    He has passed bills and plans wich increased spending, also he extended the Bush tax cuts so he took over the blame for the deficit they caused.
    In addition to that he has used E.O.'s to increase spending as well has set up new positions and committee's in government increasing red tape and creating spending on thier own.
    ALL WHITHOUT A PLAN TO PAY FOR ANY OF THEM.

    Solydra:
    The FBI is investigating what happened with Solyndra, a solar panel company that got a $535 million government-backed loan with the help of the Obama White House over the objections of federal budget analysts.

    Obama and Vice President Joe Biden got a nice photo op. They got to make speeches about being "green." But then Solyndra went bankrupt. Americans lost jobs. Taxpayers got stuck with the bill. And members of Congress are now in high dudgeon and making speeches.

    Federal investigators want to know what role political fundraising played in the guarantee of the questionable loan. Washington bureaucrats warned the deal was lousy. And White House spokesmen flail desperately, like weakened victims in a cheesy vampire movie.
    http://articles.chicagotribun...

    Even his friends in Chicago see it for what it was, why can't you. LOL

    ' I'll be more flexible after the election.'
    Like you would not have hung Bush by his toe nails for a slip like that?

    Why were they trying to hide his association with ACORN, and what else is Obama lying to us about? Perhaps the biggest question now is how and why they got the Social Policy article stricken from most of the world wide web in the first.place. What are they trying to hide?
    http://www.wnd.com/2009/05/98... Obama acorn
    Barack Obama during a 2004 meeting of an ACORN affiliate
    (more)
  • chgo Uranos7 2012/05/11 03:01:04
    chgo
    +3
    Pay attention, genius.

    He has not "passed" bills and plans (U.S. presidents don't pass any bills or plans) for the past 3 years. He signed continuing resolutions (look it up) that were passed by both chambers of Congress.


    Solyndra probe of its actions finds no wrongdoing
    A newly released independent report essentially clears the name of failed solar company Solyndra, the recipient of a $535 million federally backed loan whose abrupt bankruptcy led to a criminal investigation and a congressional inquiry into whether it misled the government about its financial health.
    http://www.denverpost.com/bus...


    McCain makes exaggerated claims of 'voter fraud.' Obama soft-pedals his connections.
    Neither ACORN nor its employees have been found guilty of, or even charged with, casting fraudulent votes. What a McCain-Palin Web ad calls "voter fraud" is actually voter registration fraud. Several ACORN canvassers have been found guilty of faking registration forms and others are being investigated. But the evidence that has surfaced so far shows they faked forms to get paid for work they didn’t do, not to stuff ballot boxes.
    Obama’s path has intersected with ACORN on several occasions – more often than he allowed in the final debate.

    http://www.factcheck.org/tag/...

    that's downright pathetic....
    Pay attention, genius.

    He has not "passed" bills and plans (U.S. presidents don't pass any bills or plans) for the past 3 years. He signed continuing resolutions (look it up) that were passed by both chambers of Congress.


    Solyndra probe of its actions finds no wrongdoing
    A newly released independent report essentially clears the name of failed solar company Solyndra, the recipient of a $535 million federally backed loan whose abrupt bankruptcy led to a criminal investigation and a congressional inquiry into whether it misled the government about its financial health.
    http://www.denverpost.com/bus...


    McCain makes exaggerated claims of 'voter fraud.' Obama soft-pedals his connections.
    Neither ACORN nor its employees have been found guilty of, or even charged with, casting fraudulent votes. What a McCain-Palin Web ad calls "voter fraud" is actually voter registration fraud. Several ACORN canvassers have been found guilty of faking registration forms and others are being investigated. But the evidence that has surfaced so far shows they faked forms to get paid for work they didn’t do, not to stuff ballot boxes.
    Obama’s path has intersected with ACORN on several occasions – more often than he allowed in the final debate.

    http://www.factcheck.org/tag/...

    that's downright pathetic. you make this too easy. give up already, weirdo.
    (more)
  • Uranos7 chgo 2012/05/11 04:12:34
    Uranos7
    +1
    First even being connected to a scandalous orginiztion will affect his chances he covered his tracks to avoid impeachment but it will not change public opinion .
    Second I never even said what they were charged with because it does not matter he had connections with them and they were involved in wrong doing that is enough to hurt his reputation and cost him votes.
    Third :
    "He has not "passed" bills and plans (U.S. presidents don't pass any bills or plans) for the past 3 years. He signed continuing resolutions (look it up) that were passed by both chambers of Congress"

    Then he has not done a thing while in office and should be removed for negligence which works just as well for me.
  • chgo Uranos7 2012/05/11 05:02:41
    chgo
    The organization has not "covered its tracks". You don't have proof they did either.

    Solyndra has not hurt his reputation nor has it cost him votes. Your fairytale beliefs makes look stupid.

    "Then he has not done a thing while in office and should be removed for negligence works just as well for me."

    the job of passing a budget resolution is not the president’s, ignoramus. That responsibility falls to Congress, and even then the president doesn’t sign it. The president has no role in passing a budget. The president can cajole Congress about passing a budget and advocate for positions and funding levels, but in the end, Congress approves the budget resolution for their own purposes. All he can do propose is propose his own presidential budgets every fiscal year, which he does per law. In fact, there were two times Congress voted on the president’s budget requests, both times they were voted down. Last time: Obama has no duty to help pass a budget.
  • Uranos7 chgo 2012/05/11 07:41:03
    Uranos7
    January 20, 2009
    President Obama sworn into office

    President tells the American people in his Inaugural Address: “Those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.”

    He took the responsibility.

    February 17, 2009
    President Signs into Law the Spending Stimulus
    The stimulus adds $821 billion in new spending according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
    The White House promises this infusion of spending and borrowing would keep unemployment rate below 8%. As millions of Americans are painfully aware, that promise was broken.

    Unemployment continues to shoot up reaching a high of 10.2 in October of 2009 (8 months later) it stays above 9% for 2 years straight.

    March 11, 2009
    President Signs FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act

    The massive spending bill includes 8,696 earmarks at a cost of $11 billion.


    The spending bill adds $19 billion in new spending above the baseline – an 8.6% spending increase.

    April 29, 2009
    Congressional Democrats Pass FY2010 Budget

    The Congressional Democrats’ budget calls for a $2 trillion debt increase in 2010, and another 8.9% increase in non-defense discretionary spending.
    The...



















    January 20, 2009
    President Obama sworn into office

    President tells the American people in his Inaugural Address: “Those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.”

    He took the responsibility.

    February 17, 2009
    President Signs into Law the Spending Stimulus
    The stimulus adds $821 billion in new spending according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
    The White House promises this infusion of spending and borrowing would keep unemployment rate below 8%. As millions of Americans are painfully aware, that promise was broken.

    Unemployment continues to shoot up reaching a high of 10.2 in October of 2009 (8 months later) it stays above 9% for 2 years straight.

    March 11, 2009
    President Signs FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act

    The massive spending bill includes 8,696 earmarks at a cost of $11 billion.


    The spending bill adds $19 billion in new spending above the baseline – an 8.6% spending increase.

    April 29, 2009
    Congressional Democrats Pass FY2010 Budget

    The Congressional Democrats’ budget calls for a $2 trillion debt increase in 2010, and another 8.9% increase in non-defense discretionary spending.
    The reconciliation process is abused to later pave the way for health care overhaul to be jammed into law.
    Of note: this is the last time Congressional Democrats will bother budgeting.

    February 2, 2010
    President Issues FY2011 Budget

    The President’s budget more than doubles the debt; pushes the FY2011 deficit to a new record of $1.6 trillion; drives spending to a new record of $3.8 trillion in fiscal year 2011; and raises taxes by more than $2 trillion through 2020, under the administration’s own estimates.

    April 15, 2010
    Congressional Democrats Decide Not to Do a Budget for FY2011

    The 1974 Budget Act requires Congress to pass a budget each year by April 15.
    In an unprecedented budget failure, House Democrats not only failed to pass a budget – they opted to not even propose a budget.

    February 14, 2011
    President Issues FY2012 Budget

    The President’s budget yet again calls for the doubling of the debt in five years, and tripling the debt in ten years.
    The President’s budget spends $47 trillion over the next decade, imposes over $1 trillion in new tax hikes, and fails to address the drivers of the debt.

    With him throwing crap like that out that only increases spending and debt each year it is no wonder he cannot get any of them passed.
    (more)
  • chgo Uranos7 2012/05/11 17:07:16
    chgo
    The fed gov't hasn't spend $823 billion. how are tax breaks spending? 40% of it wasn't actual spending but tax credits of up to $400 for individuals with an adjusted gross income of less than $70,000 or $800 for joint returns for taxpayers with an adjusted gross income of less than $140,00, had $499 billion in spending, and is fully paid for. $275 billion, not 832 billion, was spent on job-creation efforts using federal contracts, grants and loans.

    $800 billion economic stimulus package was approved by Congress in February, 2009. The package was designed to quickly jumpstart economic growth, and save and create over 3 million jobs. The package allocated funds as follows:

    $288 billion in tax cuts.
    $224 billion in extended unemployment benefits, education and health care.
    $275 billion for job creation using federal contracts, grants and loans.

    How about you start getting your news from actual news outlets next time. you sound grossly misinformed on things that are
    general knowledge.

    the Stimulus Act Was a Success. By most economic indicators, the Economic Stimulus Package was a success. In March 2009, before it was launched, Q1 GDP was -6.4% (it has since been revised to -4.9%)and the Dow had slid to 6,500. By Q4 2009, GDP was 5% and the Dow had risen to 10,428. Not al...


















    The fed gov't hasn't spend $823 billion. how are tax breaks spending? 40% of it wasn't actual spending but tax credits of up to $400 for individuals with an adjusted gross income of less than $70,000 or $800 for joint returns for taxpayers with an adjusted gross income of less than $140,00, had $499 billion in spending, and is fully paid for. $275 billion, not 832 billion, was spent on job-creation efforts using federal contracts, grants and loans.

    $800 billion economic stimulus package was approved by Congress in February, 2009. The package was designed to quickly jumpstart economic growth, and save and create over 3 million jobs. The package allocated funds as follows:

    $288 billion in tax cuts.
    $224 billion in extended unemployment benefits, education and health care.
    $275 billion for job creation using federal contracts, grants and loans.

    How about you start getting your news from actual news outlets next time. you sound grossly misinformed on things that are
    general knowledge.

    the Stimulus Act Was a Success. By most economic indicators, the Economic Stimulus Package was a success. In March 2009, before it was launched, Q1 GDP was -6.4% (it has since been revised to -4.9%)and the Dow had slid to 6,500. By Q4 2009, GDP was 5% and the Dow had risen to 10,428. Not all of that success can be attributed to the Stimulus Package, since expansive monetary policy and strong emerging markets also helped boost the economy. However, those were all in place in March 2009. No doubt, the economic stimulus package inspired the confidence needed turn the economy around.

    Jobs created:
    doubt economic stimulus package inspired confidence turn economy jobs created
    America lost an averaged 720,000-750,000 jobs a month before the stimulus bill went into effect and only 35,000 a month in the last three months.

    The bill was signed Feb. 17, 2009, and officially went into effect that day.

    March: 131175 THOUSANDS jobs April 131357 THOUSANDS jobs May 131442 THOUSANDS jobs June 131626 THOUSANDS jobs
    http://data.bls.gov/timeserie...

    I'd be curious to know if you have an alternative theory as to why there was such a dramatic reversal in terms of private sector jobs lost/created.

    The stimulus prevented unemployment from reaching 11%. Those are CBO numbers that most economists agree with.

    For the umpteenth time, simpleton, the president's FY Budget proposals have to approved by Congress. are you slow? they haven't. He's signed continuing resolutions, which continued previous budget solutions signed into law (Bush's budgets).


    List of continuing resolutions for the U.S. federal budget
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    (more)
  • Uranos7 chgo 2012/05/11 17:38:26 (edited)
    Uranos7
    Mine came directly from the House budgetary commitee.
    not a demo rag which only showed a small slice of the unemployment problem that happened to improve.

    I already showed he did pass one budget and if HE APPROVES OR FAILS TO CHANGE those previous spending amounts HE TAKES THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEM.
  • Pamela ... Uranos7 2012/05/11 10:57:30
    Pamela Perkins
    +1
    Good one!
  • Uranos7 chgo 2012/05/11 02:13:12
    Uranos7
    I have not ever voted the party line of republican I worked on the Hillary campaign I think Obama is the worst president in my lifetime.
    BTW: Those people were democrats too.
  • chgo Uranos7 2012/05/11 02:14:32
    chgo
    +3
    Who cares? Stay home November 6, OK?
  • Uranos7 chgo 2012/05/11 07:05:26
    Uranos7
    no I wll be helping to oust the idiot in chief so the country can get back on track.
  • Pamela ... chgo 2012/05/11 10:54:25
    Pamela Perkins
    And you don't think the Democrats vote party lines. Well guess again.
  • jay chgo 2012/05/11 16:07:15
    jay
    It is not "going with the party line" when it is so obvious that no one can be nearly as bad as Obama and his administration. What is really perplexing is that people like you don't get it. Believe me I listened to all their platforms and they were all better than Obama. The ABO idea wasn't about not making the choice for the best republican...it was an annoucement to the world that Obama was the worst president since Jimmy Carter. I am a Romney supporter and never doubted that he would get the nomination.

    So your point still goes unproven.
  • ManicPanda chgo 2012/05/10 23:37:02
    ManicPanda
    +3
    Respect!!!
  • \V/ 2012/05/10 19:00:20
    Smart
    \V/
    +3
    Vote your values not your fears

  • Dave 2012/05/10 19:00:11
    Smart
    Dave
    +3
    Let's say PRETTY MUCH ANYBODY but Obama, OK ?
  • Margaret Jacobson 2012/05/10 18:50:26
    Silly
    Margaret Jacobson
    +3
    Find SOMEONE QUALIFIED PLEASE !!
  • Bigbrowneyes 2012/05/10 18:43:34
    Silly
    Bigbrowneyes
    +3
    Of course it is silly. Do people honestly not have the imagination to realize how worse of a president we can have, whether or not you support Obama?
  • Nero 2012/05/10 18:27:45
    Smart
    Nero
    +3
    This is one way to make your displeasure known. Obama has been wagin war against coal with his 'green' policies. In case no one has noticed, WV has a large coal industry, so shutting down coal-fired powe plants hurts our people. Politicians should not only look at the numbers ty won by, but should also keep in mind the number of people who voed against them.
  • ManicPanda Nero 2012/05/10 23:48:37
    ManicPanda
    +3
    Umm sorry to tell you but it is the 21st century, these "'green' policies" are the first step to the future. Coal is fairly toxic and not very efficient as a fuel source. Plus it is a finite resource which means in maybe 100 years at most their gone... better to start redoing infer structure now rather than have an energy and economic meltdown at the same time when the fossil fuels run out,

    Silly troglodyte move out of your cave, we have wonders for you to see now!
  • Caleb ManicPanda 2012/05/11 02:29:45
    Caleb
    Nothing "Green" is financially viable. It must be viable before it can replace what we now have. The present energy is what enabled America to grow as fast as it did. Our elderly and the young cannot provide for themselves until it is viable. You act as if we can't develop both cleaner fossil energy and better green energy at the same time. If we don't, we all fail. Viable energy fuels jobs, without viable energy, we all fail. "Crucify Oil now, destroys your ability to replace it." Just how hard is that to understand. It is totally illogical to think differently. (Unless you want to destroy America and everyone in it.)
  • ManicPanda Caleb 2012/05/11 06:06:55
    ManicPanda
    +1
    Yes that is true "green" isn't always financially viable. That is the the reason we need to start now while there is some leeway. Fossil fuel technology is pretty much maxed out in terms of efficiency. Fossil fuels just aren't that effective as an energy source in a global economy. Countries fight wars over them constantly and that will just get worse as supplies dwindle. They have to be physically moved from one place to another(sometimes across the world) and makes the US vulnerable to energy disruption from outside forces. Oh and green isn't nuclear just because it glows green, same problem, uranium is rare and toxic. Maybe lithium but it's still too new a tech.

    Green energy is generally much more efficient than fossil fuels.They have point source production which reduces overall energy consumption and loss of energy from extensive power lines. Sure just wind turbines isn't the solution, there is enough wind energy to power the world but not enough rare earth minerals to build them all, like neodymium which convert kinetic energy to electrical. In the right places wind energy is great and mixed with solar and geothermal(hydro generators have the same problem as wind generators). Then there are things like using algae to produce biogasoline. Even using plastic to oil conver...

    Yes that is true "green" isn't always financially viable. That is the the reason we need to start now while there is some leeway. Fossil fuel technology is pretty much maxed out in terms of efficiency. Fossil fuels just aren't that effective as an energy source in a global economy. Countries fight wars over them constantly and that will just get worse as supplies dwindle. They have to be physically moved from one place to another(sometimes across the world) and makes the US vulnerable to energy disruption from outside forces. Oh and green isn't nuclear just because it glows green, same problem, uranium is rare and toxic. Maybe lithium but it's still too new a tech.

    Green energy is generally much more efficient than fossil fuels.They have point source production which reduces overall energy consumption and loss of energy from extensive power lines. Sure just wind turbines isn't the solution, there is enough wind energy to power the world but not enough rare earth minerals to build them all, like neodymium which convert kinetic energy to electrical. In the right places wind energy is great and mixed with solar and geothermal(hydro generators have the same problem as wind generators). Then there are things like using algae to produce biogasoline. Even using plastic to oil converters to both clean things up and fuel you car at the same time. Hydrogen fuel cell are carbon free if the charging stations are powered using solar energy, electrolysis baby! Let alone adapting heavy traffic pedestrian/vehicle ares to piezoelectric generators. New techs like using Graphene, nanotubes and Buckyballs in combination to produce solar cells thinner than a human hair and transparent. This Tech is at least a decade away but with out proper funding it could be decades away.

    Like an addict you think you can just wait until your stash is gone then just go cold turkey.. If you wait until the fossil fuels are almost gone then just, balm, switch everything over. That is asking for an industrial and economic collapse. We need time to not only rebuild the horribly ailing energy infrastructure but to switch over industry and capital to the new energy types. These changes are inevitable, it is best to start as soon as possible because the longer we wait the more it will hurt us in the long run. Realistically we are all biding our time until clean fusion power. which can replace the large scale generators. Although a more distributed point source power grid is more stable and efficient. and the so called "green" tech is jsut what we need!
    (more)
  • Waldorf 2012/05/10 18:13:57
    Smart
    Waldorf
    +3
    Romney will do well enough as President. I am more concerned about fixing a dysfunctional Congress and stopping Obama from nominating Supreme Court Justices, possibly three of them.
  • Caleb Waldorf 2012/05/11 02:52:29
    Caleb
    Replace the Establishment in the House and totally replace the Communist Senate will give us a chance to survive as a prosperous nation. We need to eliminate their MULTI-MILLION Dollar retirement funds FIRST!! I totally agree with you on the SC. If Obama wins, we all will be freedomless slaves and serf's to the government in the first year of his next term. We the People must regain our FREEDOMS that we have lost First Thing. For the Coastal Sophisticates, you have been entertained right out of your LIBERTY! and ours too! Do you really think you have full control of your destiny? !NOT!! If you do, you are clueless.
  • Sheila 2012/05/10 18:09:17
    Smart
    Sheila
    +1
    I saw this yesterday and laughed my hiney off. I will miss it as my pants will no longer fit.
  • txtumlin Sheila 2012/05/10 19:58:11
    txtumlin
    +1
    Niiice Sheila. :D

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/05/25 23:46:32

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals