Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


Sandy's political fallout

 
Sandy's political fallout

It looks like Obama may get a bump from Hurricane Sandy, or more accurately his response to it- maybe. There seems to be a sort of debate as to whether he is getting a bump for his quick and effective response in getting FEMA moving (in contrast to when Bush held FEMA back durring Katrina), others feel it relates to Romneys past statements about the states helping themselves (or as John Stewart put it - the hurricane agenda, which is to demonstrate that bog government can be necessary), though personally I think the fact that Romney held a political rally and simply relabelled it a hurricane rally (without even changing the press passes) and asking people to bring canned food that he wasn't even sure where it would be sent might have an impact as well. What are other people's thoughts?

Well, I personally think that it will give him a nice bump. Especially after the Republican Governor praised Obama's quick help in NJ and thanking him for the aid. This is really good I believe, because usually Rep. and Dem. don't usually praise one another, let alone thank them. I do hope that with this Obama can gain some votes from uncertain voters.

Governor Christie's comments on Fox News, which I saw on a segment on the Daily Show, are quite valuable I think. Paraphrased, he said on air in response to a question about the impact of Sandy on the campaign, "I have 2 million people here who need immediate assistance. I have a job to do. If you think I give a damn right now about Presidential politics, you don't know anything about me."

My hope is that those words will sink in on a deeper level to the Fox viewing public. Our country is still in a deep need for recovery. Obama has proven himself to be someone who is going to do everything he is allowed to do by Congress to make the country a better place*, whilst Romney continues to stage events designed to make him look good but that miss the key component of actually providing any benefit to anything but his PR.

We can argue about whether or not Obama's efforts actually do make the country a better place, and I understand that many people choose not to vote for him because they don't agree with his ideology. But I think it's somewhat more evident that one man is genuinely using the office to do what he thinks is good, and the other man is a hollow caricature of that who makes missteps at every turn because he simply doesn't know how the hell to act like a real leader of the entire country.

(* Granted, inside of the corporatist agenda that both parties share and that ultimately disenfranchise the people of the country.)

To be completely honest with you guys, I really doubt it will actually matter either way. Obama's several points ahead in Ohio, which is what matters. Also, let's not pretend that most of America cares about what politicians actually say or do anymore. You've got senior citizens voting for Romney, despite medicare reform supporter Paul Ryan on the ticket. They are actively supporting someone who will make their lives worse. Why? Because he's not black.

I'm sure it brought a few people from undecided to Obama, but unless it helps him tip a swing state, it doesn't matter. The country's so polarized that the base can NEVER be dissuaded to vote for their candidate. Realistically, though, Obama's going to win. He's ahead in Ohio, you see.

A few racists (seniors or not) are not the majority of the country. It will probably sway a large portion of the few remaining undecided voters, but the real question to me is whether any of the "base" of Romney support might take a hard second look at what it is they are supporting. because to be honest if 40%+ of the nation is really more interested in making sure there is an R after the name of the president instead of a D than they are worried about the lives of millions of Americans and the entire Eastern Seabord, then we are in more serious trouble than can be imagined. When terrorists attacked one building filled with people that was enough for people to come together despite party differnces to support a Republican plan. When the entire north East coast is hit with signifigantly greater impact is it not enough for us to come together under a Democrat? Especially when the opposition is behaving as they are, looking for opportunities to make political hay out of disasters that have such signifigant impact. In Benghazi the blood wasn't dry before Romney took pot shots at the president, the winds had barely died down from Sandy before Fox was asking Cristie about taking romney on a photo op. If you haven't at least questioned your dedication to the Republican cause then i would say you are part of the problem.
I'm not trying to say that voting Republican is inherantly evil or bad, but if you don't at least step back and ask the question...

I'm with Governor Christie. Politics has no place in things like this, and it disgusts me to see people politicizing it.

Bush did not hold FEMA back. The governor of Louisiana held FEMA back. FEMA cannot respond without the state governor's permission.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arkaelis View Post
To be completely honest with you guys, I really doubt it will actually matter either way. Obama's several points ahead in Ohio, which is what matters. Also, let's not pretend that most of America cares about what politicians actually say or do anymore. You've got senior citizens voting for Romney, despite medicare reform supporter Paul Ryan on the ticket. They are actively supporting someone who will make their lives worse. Why? Because he's not black.

I'm sure it brought a few people from undecided to Obama, but unless it helps him tip a swing state, it doesn't matter. The country's so polarized that the base can NEVER be dissuaded to vote for their candidate. Realistically, though, Obama's going to win. He's ahead in Ohio, you see.
Have you met anyone who's said their reason for voting against Obama is his skin color (instead of the myriad reasons they might choose to vote against him, including his espousal of an agenda quite unpopular in this country a few decades ago)? I've met some whose reason for voting for him is his skin color, but I'm not accusing people who vote for him of being racists.

Learn to acknowledge that other people have viewpoints different from your own. Few on the right think of things in terms of race.

The problem is polarization, and it's a nightmare. There are hardcore Republicans and hardcore Democrats. That's nothing new. What is new is how extreme their views and positions are, on both sides. Combine that with a long-term economic meltdown and a war that are being used as political footballs by both sides, factor in high unemployment rates and social changes, and what you have is a political powderkeg with fuses sticking out in various different directions.

All this is bad enough, but there's one more element that just tops it all off. Nobody seems to trust the electronic voting machines. I've seen several Democratic analyses which purport to show that the Republicans are stealing votes using them. And the Tea Party say exactly the same thing about the Democrats stealing votes, with figures which purport to back them up too. So there's the final element: even after the elections are over, the losers will be *convinced* that the winners cheated. Which only increases the bad feelings, and the polarization.

It's a mess. And everybody seems to think of every event as having political significance. Political differences have become the primary method of analyzing events and activities. Which is why I would vote for Governor Christie whether I was a Republican or a Democrat - he is putting the people first, not politics. It's rare in these days, and noteworthy for that fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solaris View Post
Have you met anyone who's said their reason for voting against Obama is his skin color (instead of the myriad reasons they might choose to vote against him, including his espousal of an agenda quite unpopular in this country a few decades ago)? I've met some whose reason for voting for him is his skin color, but I'm not accusing people who vote for him of being racists.
Absolutely, I have. I help out with several senior citizen-related organizations, both veteran and civilian, and I've spoken with quite a number of senior citizens who are, in fact, racists, and honestly think he only serves the "n-word agenda".

Did I say that there weren't racists on both sides? Did I say that all people who won't vote for Obama are racists? Did I say anything along those lines at all? Did I say my example was the only one?

Quote:
Learn to acknowledge that other people have viewpoints different from your own. Few on the right think of things in terms of race.
For that matter, did I say that I support President Obama? Because I don't. He's about ten steps to the right of me.

I have nothing against the right. I don't agree with many of your viewpoints, but on a few, I do. I'm somewhat conservative on gun control, for example. I agree entirely that Benghazi was mishandled greatly, regardless of how Romney chose the wrong way to attack it. No, my problem is not with the right, but with corporatism. Though I will admit that Romney has a gorgeous head of hair.

My primary argument is that while the people taking part in these discussions are politically minded, most people aren't. My best friend is an example: brilliant girl, very successful in her field, doesn't care about politics because she doesn't think anything will change. The sad thing is, I'm beginning to think that she might be right, at least for the next few years.

In short, don't put words in my mouth and then personally attack me. I'm really not a fan.

There should be little or no affect of Sandy on politics, as concerns Romney's reaction to it. It is the President's job, along with the governors, to make sure relief is available. It's Romney's job to stand aside , maybe help if he can, but do his best to not politicize it. Which seems to be what has happened, all for the best; Romney's reaction was appropriate, as was Obama's.

And, wow... if I hear another person castigating a republican for voting for Romney because he's white... (not you specifically, Ark) ...just as bigoted a reaction as one who actually DOES it.

As someone who is not the the US, I seriously need to ask: why are you (if you are) voting for Romney? I watch the news coverage, I watch the debates, and I see absolutely nothing redeeming about the man.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status