As a matter of principle I always try to give all the 3rd party candidates a serious look so I can't say for sure where my vote will go... but baring that, it's pretty much impossible for me to agree with a Republican candidate so it's most likely I'll be voting for Obama again.
Obama in for 2012? Where do you stand?
- Thread starter Danoz
- Start date
I voted for him, but I wish he was doing a lot better than he currently is (The whole Job thing and Health Care are his biggest failings so far in my opinion). I'm not keen on any of the conservative possibilities so far so I might vote for him again, maybe on the basis of things don't happen overnight.
I voted for him. Will not be voting for him again.
I pretty much agree with this.
His whole thing was health care and more health care, but then he never had a plan, let Congress figure it out, and then just watered it down more and more to please Republicans that a blind and deaf dumb cat could see would never agree with anything.
Then what else did he do? Get a Russian peace treaty? Nice, but not that big of a deal. 1,000 nukes, 3,000 nukes, what's the difference?
The he fucked up the oil spill, fucked up Egypt, Libya, Syria, Barain (I'm not sure if I spelled that right). So pretty much all I have seen him do in the years in office is try not too piss to many people off so he can stay in the nice house for free for another 4 years.
However I live in Massachusetts, so nothing I say matters.
Stupid Constitution.
Really, how exactly did he do these things?
My thoughts as well....
Egypt we didn't really back the people at all, then we bomb Libya because they have a civil war. Bahrain was invaded and no one seems to care because we have a base there and like the devil we know. Syria is actually a threat to us and Israel, but we ignore that too. Then there is Yeman, same thing
He gives a speech to the nation talking about why we started bombing a country in a civil war "Stand up for American values and free elections" or some bullshit like that, yet he didn't seem to back Egyptian rebels, and we are ignore Yeman, and Syria and Bahrain which are actually important to our national defense.
He gives a speech to the nation talking about why we started bombing a country in a civil war "Stand up for American values and free elections" or some bullshit like that, yet he didn't seem to back Egyptian rebels, and we are ignore Yeman, and Syria and Bahrain which are actually important to our national defense.
Egypt happened within a, what? 48 - 72 hour period? It was generally a peaceful coup. The government did not attack the people and whatever violence that did happen in Egypt was due to the people themselves. Why would America need to go into Egypt and bomb it out of the sky if the Egyptian government was managing the situation and their current leader was stepping down?
You can not compare Libya to Egypt. Gadaalfi is killing any opposition that gets in his way. He will not step down. People are dying... That is why America and several other allied units stepped in.
As for Isreal? Our relationship with that country is pretty much why the Arab world hates us, imo. Getting our feet anymore in their problems is just going to make the situation worst. I suggest we keep out of their little fight with Palestine. They're definitely no angels in that scuffle.
Bahrain was unfortunate but it was Clinton who demanded restraint, not President Obama. Bahrain is also sticky territory. What if we did go into Bahrain? Would that escalate already growing tensions in the middle east?
Is it always our responsibility to solve every country's political problem with guns ablaze?
You can not compare Libya to Egypt. Gadaalfi is killing any opposition that gets in his way. He will not step down. People are dying... That is why America and several other allied units stepped in.
As for Isreal? Our relationship with that country is pretty much why the Arab world hates us, imo. Getting our feet anymore in their problems is just going to make the situation worst. I suggest we keep out of their little fight with Palestine. They're definitely no angels in that scuffle.
Bahrain was unfortunate but it was Clinton who demanded restraint, not President Obama. Bahrain is also sticky territory. What if we did go into Bahrain? Would that escalate already growing tensions in the middle east?
Is it always our responsibility to solve every country's political problem with guns ablaze?
This rationale might be the only way he gets my vote.
Not American, but if I were, I'd vote for him in 2012. He's made a few missteps, I'll admit, but for the most part, I think he's doing a pretty damn good job in a rather difficult time.
Besides, I certainly couldn't ever see myself voting for the Republican candidate.
Besides, I certainly couldn't ever see myself voting for the Republican candidate.
I don't understand what you're saying, you're all over the place. It is true that the USA's dealing in this region historically, practically and still now is quite hypocritical insofar as which regimes are considered friendly and which not, but you're also not being consistent at all. Do you want more military action or less? Do you seriously want the USA to start new wars in Syria and Saudi Arabia and start a full war in Libya?
- Egypt: imo Obama/Clinton went out on a limb pretty far here with Mubarak having been such a reliable ally for so long and anyway the revolution was/is a true mass movement, there's not much the USA could do either way to influence the events except if it had decided to go all-out against the movement and allow Mubarak to defend his position by any means necessary. It was a very tricky situation, and I think Obama played it nearly perfectly. Also, regardless of what he'd have done, he would've been attacked fiercly.
- Libya: much more precarious position for the rebels due to relative lack of civil society, mass support and a much more complicated geography. What did you want Obama to do, engage in yet another full-scale ground war? That would've gone over well in the American public, eh?
- Bahrain/Yemen: yeah, that just sucks. I doubt anyone in the Obama administration is very happy with supporting these regimes, and I do believe they are trying to get them to solve the differences with their "rebels" peacefully, but sometimes realpolitik is just a bitch. With little chance of an alternative, more democratic (and US-friendly) society developing, what's the US supposed to do? Just give up their most important naval base in the Middle East? Send in the Marines and take over Bahrain completely?
- and Syria: complaining here I absolutely don't understand. Doing anything remotely military there would be insanely dangerous for the stability of the whole region.
All in all, I'm very content with how Obama handled this. The USA can't help everywhere, but they helped where they could, at least in Egypt and Libya, and they probably prevented even more bloodshed in Bahrain too.
Wow... Are you an American because this would explain a lot.
The change of power, after the days of protests, took roughly 48 - 72 hours. Of course there was a gradually rising increase in protesting after the events of Tunisia. I watched it unfold on Al Jazeera.
You're still trying to compare Libya to Egypt. Same in terms of a revolution but completely different in how the government reacted.
Wow, hello generalization. Nice to know that you blew over everything else to point that out.
Well, presumably his opponent will be a Republican, so I'll be voting for him again. Unless he does something really egregious, in which case I'll write somebody in.
As far to the right of him as humanly possible, which is exactly where I'll be on Election Day.