Originally Posted by aklim (Post 2968835)

In that instance. I'd have voted Stalin over McCain. But for most cases, I usually vote the one who Promises to do the least

Originally Posted by spdrun (Post 2968837)

To the OP: can't you just change your handle to ObamaSuxs and give it a rest? Don't like him. Vote against him and give money/volunteer work/etc to the opposition's campaign!

Originally Posted by Dudesky (Post 2968885)

Lets look into detail here.
Mitt has all kinds of plans to hopefully move the country ahead the next four years.

Obama's next four years are focused on Romney's offshore accounts, ties to Bain (who is his and DNC's biggest bundlers). and bearing with him in his journey to ??

AM I alone in not hearing any plan for the next four years other than 'move forward'......to what? :eek:

Originally Posted by aklim (Post 2968894)

All of which still has to go thru Congress for it's perversion anyways, lest we forget. I'd say Congress is going to be more important.

Originally Posted by Air&Road (Post 2969093)

Yes, about all that B.O. can offer is that he can SAY that the next four years won't be as bad as his last four years. Of course, since he has bolo'd on so many of his campaign promises, how can we believe THAT?

Originally Posted by Air&Road (Post 2969094)

Congress almost always IS more important. Luckily the congress is split keeping at least some of B.O.'s cock in bull ideas from making it into law. That makes congress more important and effective.

Originally Posted by MTI (Post 2969095)

Which of candidate Romney's positions does anyone believe are "carved in stone" given his track record to date? ;)

Originally Posted by Botnst (Post 2968987)

I agree they are over-rated. But the mass opinion doesn't give a damn what you or I as individuals think. Reagan is now statuary in the state pantheon and George, like Truman, is more fondly remembered than he was respected. I would suggest that the majority of the so-called 'great' presidents are much like those three I've named -- lionized because of superficial treatment in history.

Perhaps a case could be made for obscurity, in which a nation at peace and without domestic crisis provides us with presidents nobody remembers.

Originally Posted by aklim (Post 2969098)

Is there any politician whose promises you can believe in? If so, you are a fool. If you get what they promised you, there will be some strings attached. If you don't, you are probably luckier.

Originally Posted by aklim (Post 2969099)

The only thing the President can do is really veto and that means throwing out the baby with the bathwater. In reality, it becomes a hostage situation. Agree to all the pork or you be the azzhole that refused say armor to the troops.

Originally Posted by aklim (Post 2968835)

In that instance. I'd have voted Stalin over McCain. But for most cases, I usually vote the one who Promises to do the least

Originally Posted by spdrun (Post 2968837)

To the OP: can't you just change your handle to ObamaSuxs and give it a rest? Don't like him. Vote against him and give money/volunteer work/etc to the opposition's campaign!

Originally Posted by Air&Road (Post 2969260)

No, I certainly don't believe any of them. The amazing thing to watch is the people that even believe them after they've gone a whole term proving a whole list of broken promises, ready to give them a second term. The epitome of gullibility.