1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Who'll be the better president?

Discussion in 'TPU Frontpage Polls' started by W1zzard, Oct 1, 2008.

?

Who'll be the better president?

Poll closed Oct 6, 2008.
  1. Barack Obama

    1,290 vote(s)
    57.9%
  2. John McCain

    333 vote(s)
    14.9%
  3. But I want George W. Bush

    177 vote(s)
    7.9%
  4. Don't care

    429 vote(s)
    19.2%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. WarEagleAU

    WarEagleAU Bird of Prey

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    10,812 (3.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    547
    Location:
    Gurley, AL
    Apparently on that little test, Im 80% libertarian. Haha.

    Concerning the Obama test, some of the responses didnt fit the questions. For instance, I wasnt sure what some of the questions meant or wanted. I didnt feel the responses they had were right, and they didnt have a i dont know, or na...However, I disagree with 85% of what he stands for.


    I see alot of blind following going on. I see alot more show me sources. Shit, the media is always biased, you really cannot rely on them as sources. Bottom line, Obama changed some things so he could run. McCain is old, senile, and at times lost, but when it comes to National Security and such, he has a nice handle. Quite frankly, I found myself liking Obamas plan seeing as the government uses it and it works for them. However, Im worried about who all is going to pay for OBamas plans.
     
    das müffin mann says thanks.
  2. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,829 (1.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Tradition I think is probably the best answer to that question. After all, the country was founded on distaste for taxes. :laugh: And after the cold war, some people for some reason seem to still be deathly afraid of anything that in some way resembles some principle of socialism (as seen by many of BigJohn's and others posts), which of course taxation can represent to some degree. Change is always met w/ resistance, especially from those who have the most to lose w/ things the way they are. As the rich tend to have more, they of course have more to lose, and will most frequently be resistant to change. And of course, nobody wants to pay if they can avoid it. :laugh: The degree of importance some put on taxation though and losing money when they have plenty I find a little disturbing personally.
     
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2008
  3. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    $700,000+!?! How many people could I hire with that much money? 7 to 14!? WTF would I want to hire 7-14 more government workers in an already bloated government and not fund my own business?

    Read my text: If Obama raises any taxes, this deep recession will fall into a depression. It happened with Hoover, it could easily happen with Obama. Right now, no one has any money to spend and the money they do have, they are sitting on it. Until people are convinced to spend money again, the economy will continue to decline.
     
    WarEagleAU says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  4. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    I have yet to see any truly center or right media establishments. "Press" by definition is liberal.


    McCain has lots of common sense. Take Iraq for instance--generals ask for more troops, common sense tells him to give it to them. The economy is in dire shape so McCain uses common sense to say raising taxes are a bad idea.

    McCain has a lot of charisma. The definition of charisma explains that one well enough:
    Everyone, Democrat, Republican, and Independant, admire McCain's endless public service to the country. They also look for him for leadership in passing difficult bills. Not many people in Congress have made a career out of uniting the sides.

    McCain has an relentless conviction towards what he believes. See anti-torture...


    History tells me McCain. He has dealt with so much in his 72 years. There is not much he hasn't seen and he has the experience to deal with it appropriately.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  5. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,829 (1.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Bush also said in the 2000 debates he would not raise taxes, and brought up repeatedly his bi-partisan history. He also has a relentless conviction to do what he believes, no matter what others tell him. He is, after all, "on a mission from God." I don't see how that's really a good quality for a leader. Morals are one thing, but an unwillingness to listen to the people you preside over is quite another, and a hard-headed black and white good and evil view of the world is not at all what we, or anybody, needs. Bush, I know, is not running for president. But you can see how McCain can bring doubts on his ability to fix what he has done, if not continue the same faulty leadership.

    And as for charisma and common sense, sure he has them, most politicians do. What he really lacks, and lacks badly, is likability. He also seems rather immature for a 72 year old.
     
    WarEagleAU and das müffin mann say thanks.
  6. das müffin mann

    das müffin mann New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Messages:
    3,759 (1.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    335
    Location:
    Appleton, WI
    i like that last paragraph, nicely said
    :toast:
     
    WarEagleAU says thanks.
  7. Tatty_One

    Tatty_One Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    17,516 (5.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,290
    Location:
    Worcestershire, UK
    If he is that good, why has it taken him 72 years to get the nomination, damn he only had GWB to contest 8 years ago.......my daughters pet hamster could string a paragraph together better than GWB.......if McCain is considerably better than GWB then there is hope, if not, as I said earlier, you deserve better IMO.
     
  8. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Bill Clinton had one of the most boring 8-years in Presidential history. I mean, when an affair is all that media can find on them, the administration was not taking a pro-active enough stance. All the "bad news" thusly landed on Bush's lap. Clinton had plenty of opportunity to capture Osama but didn't. Clinton signed into law the bill that started the ball rolling towards the current economic crisis in 1999. Clinton also crippled our armed forces making the wars we do need to fight more difficult and drawn out.

    Politics is a lot like cancer. You might have it and not know that you do. Similarly, all Presidencies have serious issues to address. The best Presidencies were the ones that found and effectively dealt with them. The worst Presidencies are the ones that pandered all the issues off to the next president in hopes of saving political face. Remember, we won't know if Bush's administration was comparatively bad for a good 50 years at least. He is unpopular but so is not doing drugs in school.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  9. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,829 (1.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    That's not at all true, immediate effects of a presidency are easy to see. The economy can be trickier as it is a culmination of many, many factors, but other things are easier to point out. Hindsight is easier to see, but much of the situation we are in is directly b/c of the current administration. You can't just say we won't know anything about what they did for a half century. If that were the case, the what the hell would be the point of even attempting to decide who is a better candidate? You'd need to be clairvoyant to be able to have any say.

    On the Bill Clinton note, a boring presidency is a great sign things are going well. Not necessarily b/c of the president mind you, but not a bad thing by an means.
     
  10. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    I am finding very little evidence that Bush raised taxes throughout his terms.

    Bush was a governor only five years. McCain has been in Congress over 25 years. McCain has earned the title of Maverick, Bush had not.

    McCain keeps religion to himself.

    McCain does listen to other people but he will make his own decision (just like anyone else); however, he always stands with his choices and takes the blame if he was wrong. See Letterman Show on Thursday, October 16, 2008.

    I can't comment on likability because he is, after all, my favorite politician.

    I fail to see how he is "immature."
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  11. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,829 (1.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    I don't think he did raise taxes much, he did raise them though.

    Yes McCain has more experience, not necessarily a good thing, although yes, one would hope it would be.

    McCain, like any other politician in his position, will admit fault only when he deems it politically favorable for him to do so. Standing firmly with your positions as always right in such a grand arena only displays arrogance.

    Watch the debates again. At times he appears to act as my 8th grade brother does in an argument, getting huffy, making jabs, and being condescending for no reason. Bush had/has many of the same mannerisms, in the 2000 debates he was juvenile. McCain may have experience, but his social skills seem surprisingly low for a politician (an old one at that).
     
  12. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    The first time he ran for President was in 2000. Bush basically killed McCain's campaign with negative ads coming to a head with this:
    He was ruined after that. I don't like Bush...not one bit.

    McCain is considerably better than Bush. That should be plainly obvious reading the history between them. Remember, the attacks Bush launched at McCain had McCain considering changing his party to Democrat. Apparently, the wounds that Bush created healed somewhat around 2003-2004 so McCain stayed Republican.

    A picture is worth a thousand words:
    http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/10/19/us/19mccain_CA1.ready.html
     
    WarEagleAU and phanbuey say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  13. phanbuey

    phanbuey

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,225 (1.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    991
    Location:
    Miami
    that's awful... good read tho. Either way, we have nowhere to go but up. McCain or Obama, just thank jesus its not Bush... Bush had no foresight... he was like an innocent puppy that got knocked around by problems that were on their way, but that he didn't "forsee"... i.e.

    Its probably why he sat around reading my pet goat instead of launching an immediate, pre-meditated contingency plan during 9/11. Or why he was so surprised when he realized how F$^ up FEMA was AFTER the fact. It just never occured to him to check up. I just think any leader has to have a general idea of the range of possibilities in the future, by employing thinktanks and heeding early warnings - and then planning for the possible and likely scenarios. That's his/her job. McCain (alhtough maybe not Palin) and Obama both have this quality. And theyre both pretty centrist by most metrics.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2008
    FordGT90Concept says thanks.
  14. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Name five things that are going down in history as important from the Clinton administration. If you can't rattle them off without digging, it was a failed administration. The US Presidency is the most powerful elected seat in the world. As such, "boring" means something is brewing and they aren't addressing it.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  15. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,829 (1.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Except if the problem is fixed w/o the public even knowing there was a problem, then it isn't as big of a deal. A tragedy is a much better news story than a success. For instance what if congress did get the whole Freddie Mac Fannie Mae debacle under control? Would we have heard much about it? I would wager only those who follow such bills extremely closely. Although I do understand what you mean and agree w/ it somewhat, I think sometimes silence is a good thing.
     
    phanbuey says thanks.
  16. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    It wasn't politically favorable to admit wrong doing in the Keating Five investigation but he did. It isn't politically favorable of him to bring up his failed first marriage and say it was wrong to have left, but he did. It was wrong of him to cancel the Letterman interview in favor of a Curic interview, but he did and apologized to Letterman on the air. He is one of the most honest politicians in history--perhaps rivaling "Honest Abe" himself.


    That's just McCain. He's been expressive like that since, well, ever. It makes him a bad liar. ;)

    And actually, I didn't see anything too bad out of any of those running. There were no Al Gore moments or Bob Dole moments. McCain came out and said why he wasn't happy with Obama in the last debate over the Lewis comments. He never attacks people personally because he knows what it is like first hand; he also doesn't like when people attack him personally. Attack the issues, not the individual. McCain has done that consistently.
     
    WarEagleAU says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  17. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    I very much agree. Bush completely lacked foresight. Everything that happened pushed him straight into the pool. He never took the time to brace for impact.

    I think that has to be Bush's greatest weakness.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  18. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,829 (1.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Honest politician is an oxy-moron. It actually was politically favorable for him to do so, b/c it was common knowledge, and obviously wrong, and when such a thing is the case, the only thing one can do to try to save face is admit it (well, some can weasel their way out of it, so I should say the easiest way). It provides the illusion of accountability.

    McCain did indeed personally attack Obama, a few times making comments that went beyond simply arguing the issues, but attacking his character all together. It was unnecessary and showed lack of composure and grace, imo two of the most important qualities in a president.
     
  19. thoughtdisorder

    thoughtdisorder New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,818 (0.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    269
    Location:
    Just South of Mars
    A young country.
    A country founded on hypocrisy.
    Anyone remember the Boston tea party and what that was about? (hint: taxes)
    Freedom of Religion? (Ever seen a dollar bill?) "In God we trust".

    Nowhere in the Constitution (and I've read it at least 3 times) does it mention the Republican Party or the Democratic Party. Yet the two parties determine through their process who we get to vote for in the primaries. Control.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm as American as they come. I have been in the service of my nation since I was 18. I'm now 42, and I'm still in the service of our nation. My point to the younger passionate folks is this; read up on the history of elections over the last 30 years.

    You will find that the candidates of today are trying to sell the same "hot buttons" that they've been trying to sell for years.

    For instance:

    1) Roe -vs- Wade
    2) Taxes
    3) Social Security
    4) Healthcare
    5) Deficit

    YAWN......

    Same old sh*t, different election. Folks, don't take my word for it, do some research. Same old tired issues. Bottom line, 2 parties are in CONTROL of the country, and regardless of who gets elected, less than half of the sh*t they say they'll do will get passed in Congress because of partisan Bullsh*t and stalemates in Congress. Who suffers? We do.

    IMO, our only hope, cut up your voter ID cards that have an "R" or "D" on them, register as an Independent. By doing this, adequate representation will have to be afforded in Washington, and maybe, just maybe we can rid ourselves of all the cronies in the pockets of big business. (At least for awhile).

    We NEED a STRONG Independent who people can get behind and support. Won't happen this election, too late, but maybe there's hope in the future?

    Right now, go to your window, throw it open and yell as loudly as you can, "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore"!;)

    Rant over. Thx.:D
     
    farlex85 says thanks.
  20. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    See, no answer.

    GWB:
    1. No Child Left Behind Act
    2. Patriot Act
    3. 9/11
    4. Recommitment of NASA to go to the Moon
    5. Sub-Prime Mortgage crisis


    And for reference...
    FDR:
    1. New Deal
    2. Mahattan Project
    3. World War II
    4. Polio
    5. Three term presidency


    That's why I said we have to wait 50 years or more. We don't know all the underpinnings of a Presidency until documents become declassified. We also don't know the success of a lot of things such as various appointments until the individuals retire.

    Even if Bush did quietly address Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, that's not to say it wouldn't have resurfaced 20 years later and come back, directly, to what Bush did. The current situation, like deficit spending, goes back as far as Reagan. Medicaid and Medicare go back to the 1960's. Social Security goes back to the 1930's. We all know how much trouble those things will pose in the near future.

    Every presidency has a lasting impact on the history of the nation. That's why it is difficult to judge success or failure in "the heat of the moment." Time will be the judge of that. Remember, history repeats.


    Quote McCain attacking Obama as an individual and not on an issue.


    Both parties formed around the 1900's and they were created from ideals left over from the parties that preceeded them (Whig Party, Federalist Party, Democratic-Republican Party, etc.). You can see the whole lot here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...he_United_States#Historical_political_parties

    I don't remember which of the founding fathers is was (maybe Jefferson) that did not want a system of political parties in the USA. Unfortunately, like minded people can't be stopped from getting together and forming a party. I don't particularly like the idea of parties but such is the human way...


    I don't like Ron Paul but it is worth noting he did have quite a bit of steam behind him. We'll see what happens after this election. If the nation's political scene implodes, things will change. I really don't see that happening though.

    It looked like it could have happened seeing how pissed Republicans were getting towards the Democratic ideals but, McCain really calmed those waters recently.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2008
    WarEagleAU and thoughtdisorder say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  21. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,829 (1.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    I never said I have an answer to your question, and I'm not sure what your point w/ that or on the rest is. Yes you just named things, how does that negate what I said? And yes I said there are indeed effects that can't be seen until later, but that is not necessarily always the case. Why did FDR get re-elected 2 times? The effects are long lasting, but at the time you'd be confronted w/ laughter if you told someone we won't know what he did until half a century later, as you previously implied. Many of the effects of his policies were immediate, some famously so.

    I don't have a quote, I'd have to watch them again to retrieve one. A couple of times McCain sarcastically referred to Obama's "eloquence" I believe. He was needlessly nasty, it only hurt his own image.
     
    thoughtdisorder says thanks.
  22. thoughtdisorder

    thoughtdisorder New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,818 (0.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    269
    Location:
    Just South of Mars
    @ Ford: "I don't like Ron Paul but it is worth noting he did have quite a bit of steam behind him. We'll see what happens after this election. If the nation's political scene implodes, things will change. I really don't see that happening though.

    It looked like it could have happened seeing how pissed Republicans were getting towards the Democratic ideals but, McCain really calmed those waters recently."
    I fear for our nation that if we don't fix this stagnant state of affairs, we will lose our Super Power status. Insurance companies, Utility companies, and oil runs our politicians and that's unhealthy. I'm not happy with either choice, but I will vote for who I vote for, because I like him better than the other option. Period. Sad times. I applaud the passion I've seen displayed in this thread, it's good to know folks are paying attention. That's a start!:rockout:

    We're ALL Americans, be spirited, but please, everyone remember to be civil to each other. That's the beauty of America is freedom of speech of one's opinions.:) (that's not directed at anyone in particular...)
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2008
  23. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    15,119 (6.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,731
    Location:
    IA, USA
    The Clinton administration is the least note-worthy in history. All the major impending disasters were ignored and landed on GWB's watch.

    Remember the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993? That was on Clinton's watch. The same people masterminded what would happen on 9/11. What did Clinton do to prevent 9/11? Absolutely nothing. Clinton could have issued the order to assassinate or capture bin Laden at any number of times--we knew where he slept--but did not. The blood of over 3000 American's is on Clinton's hand more so than anything else. And we can't forget about the hideous handling of the Clinton administration in regards to Somolia.

    Not many people liked FDR back when he was elected (enough to get him elected, obviously). We can only say he was a great President 20+ years after the fact.

    FDR can be blamed for Social Security's imminent implosion in the next few decades. It was designed on the assumption that the growth rate of the USA will remain constant or accelerate which did not happen. Obviously, it did help a lot of people back in the day but things like that are hard to forecast. Most likely, the blame of not fixing Social Security will land on whichever President is in office when it collapses. That's the way the blame game works.


    Here's the quotes of McCain using "eloquence:"
    McCain used "eloquence" on the attack very well. It is very true of Obama and McCain rightfully pointed out the things people would otherwise miss (I know I did).
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  24. farlex85

    farlex85 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    4,829 (1.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    638
    Well I'm gonna have to disagree on the last for sure. I thought Obama was clear (even if it wasn't what many wanted to hear as it wasn't decisive), and McCain can point things out w/o being sarcastic, it's just not at all necessary.

    And as for the previous, actually, you could trace it back to Regan (at least I think it was Regan, correct me if I'm wrong) who actually aided Bin Laden to help fight the Soviets. Clinton was not the first to have a chance to stop that train.

    And again, I don't disagree that some effects of a presidency can't be seen until later, especially when it comes to economic factors. But that doesn't mean we can't get a pretty good idea of how things went now.
     
  25. SK-1

    SK-1

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Messages:
    3,315 (0.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    425
    Location:
    In a Galaxy Far Far...you know the rest.
    My point(and what I should have said) is that no school creates a genius. If the measurement of intelligence is scaled by who graduated at a higher position, then Bush WAS the BETTER choice for president than John Kerry.:eek:
    With the " No child left behind" programs in our school systems, more potential geniuses are smothered by the system than nurtured.
     
    FordGT90Concept says thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page