22 answers

Do You Think the Answer Is Still Someone Else Out There?

So this is a different type of Political question...That I hope will not start a war....

Obama has nailed his coffin shut for me. Signing the National Defense Authorization Act was his fail chance to show he really cared about the average Joe.

That being said I have questioned changing my political standings more then a few times because Ron Paul intrigues me(no comments on this please I am only looking into the other options at this point)....but no one really grabs me telling me they could fix this mess.

Here is my questions.....WHO other then the people running would you listen to? I guess right or Left at this point.

There has been quiet chatter that we need to try and get someone from the Left to run against Obama. This intrigues me alot. Although I think he started with best intentions the money became to tempting. So he is now following it more then us.

Who would you like to see run? I want to start pushing for other options all around. I realize Primaries have started but even the reporters keep down playing their importance with such blah contenders that no one is really to excited to vote for.

What do we do when the options suck or really suck?

Anyone else sick to death of the pressure this election is putting on those who are already hurting the most??Talk about weighing in on a bought fight to begin with:)

1 mom found this helpful

What can I do next?

So What Happened?™

No not a fantasy Question. Not at all. In fact it is exactly the opposit of fantasy, because the reality around freaking blows right now. And right now there is no one person I think can stand up to the job we have at hand.

Please feel free to comment on Ron Paul as a Person. Not on the fact I am looking into him. Is what I was getting at with that.

Thank you for letting me see I need to clarify that. I would not want anyone to think I was telling them not to state their opinions on him.

I am not debating my failed loyalty to Obama either. I had been a proud supporter from the time he was nominated(I was pulling for Clinton before that).

The National Defense authorization act as a whole is what scared me. no tthe who signed it. He had the Power to Veto it or parts of it and he choose not to, only issuing a signing statement is not good enough.

It scares me because I am a VERY vocal member to the Occupy movement Locally. I have been speaking in front of city council, Policitical Parties and the Public on the issues at hand Locally and Nationally.

it is very noticeable that those Stepping out and speaking on behalf of the citizens instead of corporations are being harassed.

in the last two weeks I have had Police by my house numerous times. Just cruising by and stopping in front of my house. I also had them approach me at a meeting and take my information.

As someone in support and involvement of the movement and never having had any Police interaction before this, I can only think the two go hand in hand.

Our organization is taking a HUGE developer on over a spot they want to build a giant sky scrapper. So the Corporate has the Police behind them at this point.

NDAA now makes me and everyday people subject to terrorist titles. If that does not concern you as a citizen, I think you should reconsider. It kills the Bill of Rights. Why did they have to switch the wording so drastically ALL of a sudden?

Kari F. You are right I have been listening to much to my ''Occupiers'':) This is why I come back here...to get a not so anti- everything going on now point of view:)

I too look at Ron Paul from a far and say ''Why would we not vote for him??'' but the fact he is so extreme on somethings make him not so shiny.

Featured Answers

I have listened to Steve Forbes speak for a good decade...I would vote for him in a heartbeat!

~Sadly, IMHO: The only reason he would never be elected is because...quite frankly the man is very scary (creepy) looking...so sad!

3 moms found this helpful

My honest opionion, all the running candidates are a bunch of all clowns. It is very hard to fix what a previous president has done wrong to the country. No matter who comes along republican/democratic will have a hard time fixing all the wrong doing of the previous presidents. Not to mention that some have made worst situations than others. Even worst if they only have a chance of a 4year term, this is not enought time to make an improvement to a country.
Chicago just had a change of mayor...the new mayor has come in an made huge changes. Starting with rasing fees, parking fees, city sticker fees,etc- this raises revenue to the city's budget. Good for the city-bad for the residents. Its a never win case.

3 moms found this helpful

More Answers

Personally, I am a registered Republican but I am Hillary Clinton's biggest fan. That woman has more experience, dare I say than our current POTUS, in being in the trenches, working for the average Joe, identifying needs of the poor and down-trodden and by golly, as Secretary of State she now has global vision in knowing how to position the US as a leader in the free world and beyond. I just wish her foreign policies reflects more support for Americans and our military.

I would listen to her. I honestly wish she were running. I was fortunate enough to be in New Orleans when she and Obama were playing the primaries in 2007 and she was AMAZING to listen to. Hillary knows her stuff and her experience shows she knows how to deal w/Americans on any economic, intellectual, demographic level. Obama...well, he just tries to appeal to whoever he is in current company with. You should have heard him in NOLA...all he talked about was rebuilding the community and you would have thought he was going to swing a hammer to help NOLA once he was in office but I seriously can't recall any major move Obama has done since then to help NOLA. To this day I still can't understand how he won that year's Democratic nomination.

Hillary for President in 2016!!!!

8 moms found this helpful

Libby:

I'm sooo glad you are doing research and thinking!! Not just going with what the media tells us....in 2008 we were in the same boat - our options sucked. I would've preferred Clinton over Obama any day. I think she would've done better. I know she's got balls and wish she would run against Obama NOW.

it's hard. The choices are not the best - however, they are better than what we have now (my opinion and others as well).

Do I think there is another option out there? Probably.

Ron Paul scares the living bejesus out of people because his platform is simple - VERY SMALL government and people are held accountable for their actions...for sooo many decades we have NOT really been held accountable for our actions and we are now reaping what we sowed. Sucks doesn't it? Ron Paul is the antithesis of Obama - where Obama is an extreme liberal - Paul is an extreme libertarian. So totally opposite in their convictions and platform.

The reporters will continue to bash and down play ANYONE who poses a threat to Obama...there will be people who disagree with that - but it's true. The media will skewer ANYONE (think Palin, Cain and Joe the Plumber) anyone who threatens Obama's presidency...too bad the media didn't skewer, examine and drag every skeleton Obama had in his closet in 2007 and 2008...it would've been VERY different.

No one will be perfect. The mess we were in was NOT JUST Bush's doing as Obama supporters say. It was DECADES in the making and WE ALL are accountable for it - lack of voting, voting party lines, not researching the candidates, etc.

I'm sure I'll get bashed for this - but it's all documented and facts...

Keep in mind - under Obama we have had NO FEDERAL BUDGET for THREE YEARS!! It's all been continuing resolutions (CRs) lasting anywhere from 24 hours to 9 months. But NO BUDGET. Our deficit has TRIPLED...
Unemployment is still high (and don't let the seasonal hirings of Nov/Dec/Jan mislead you).
Gas is STILL above $3 a gallon (when he took office it was $1.79 here in DC)
He got us into ANOTHER war (Libya) without congressional approval.
He is TRYING to circumvent the system by doing recess appointments - which is WRONG - and EVEN THE DEMOCRATS are telling him it's WRONG!!!

So when you are looking for a candidate - you need to make a list of YOUR priorities and how the candidate will WORK FOR YOU. Look at their voting history if they are currently a member of congress or the house...(if you looked at Obama's record while he was in IL, you would see that he didn't show up most of the time and voted 3 times....) their votes will tell you HOW THEY REALLY are, not what they are TELLING YOU.

As for me? Right now? Anyone BUT Obama. Most are clowns, but in MY opinion, they are and will be better than what we have now.

ETA: Zakaria is ineligible to run for President. he is NOT a natural born citizen. He is a smart man though (even though he works for CNN!!) :) We could open another can of worms about Obama's eligibility as well, couldn't we?

6 moms found this helpful

Jeb Bartlett. Ethical, responsible, compassionate progressive. (unfortunately fictional, but other than that vastly, better than the competition).

Unfortunately the right has moved so far to the right that there is no where for moderate fiscal conservatives who want the government out of their bedrooms to go - it truly horrifies my parents that they will be 'forced' to vote for Obama again - it was the first time my dad voted democratic in his life and the second time for my mom (she voted for JFK). I would prefer a more progressive option - but NOT at the risk of putting one of the other clowns in office. It might be a different world today (maybe a little cooler) if Ralph Nader hadn't run - my vote will not go there.

Ron Paul is NOT a libertarian. Libertarians believe in small government - not your government in MY bedroom, MY doctor's office and MY marriage. Ron Paul is an isolationist who believes he knows how many children I should have. Sorry.

6 moms found this helpful

I don't like ANYONE. However, Ron Paul scares me the most. He is toeing the line of believing in anarchy. Not only that, his record is abysmal. I think he's had 3-4 things passed. NOTHING he wants to accomplish would get passed, and he would just be veto happy.

I don't believe a president will save our country. I think it's much more complicated then that. I'm honestly undecided on what needs to happen.

6 moms found this helpful

The way I see it with the NDAA: Hello! If you don't want to be detained without trial for terrorism, keep your nose clean.

Do you really think a Republican would not have signed the NDAA? Don't forget Bush and Cheney were not champions of civil liberties.

President Obama is not less humanitarian to every day Joes on this issue. If you're looking for more fairness and freedom for the average Joe, looking Right is the wrong direction to look.

Obama is not a wuss or a flaming liberal, he is very tough regarding the military, which is why he signed the NDAA. No, it's not Left enough for some of us, but it's still far preferable to the Right.

ALSO, I do sympathize with the GOP only having kooks this time around to pick from. They should just back Romney, but he's not going to beat President Obama.

Where are the normal intelligent non crazy conservative candidates? I don't know, but not in this race. President Obama is the most moderate choice-in other words, best for general population.

If McCain (WITHOUT crazy Palin) and Hillary were the candidates this time around, that would be a TOUGH race. (And I'd Vote Hillary)

5 moms found this helpful

Here is an article that may help, Libby. It is an old article, but is still pertinent.

http://www.brutallyhonest.org/brutally_honest/2007/08/wha...

"Ron Paul is one of only a few members of Congress who always votes according to his principles, and truly believes in Constitutional limits on the power of government. On spending, on taxes, on freedom from an overbearing government, he’s great. I also agree for the most part with his take on foreign aid, and in always putting America first.

Where I disagree with Ron Paul, in domestic terms, is in his inability to compromise or rally anyone to his side to get anything accomplished. He’s a go-it-alone, all-or-nothing kind of guy. It’s admirable in a sense, but also unhelpful, to vote against every bill because it happens to fund a federal education plan, or because it contains a million dollar grant to Uganda. At a certain point, you have to vote on the best bill you can get; bills are never going to come out of Congress perfect. Because he will never bend, most of his votes are essentially meaningless and counter-productive.

On foreign policy and trade, I disagree totally with Ron Paul. He is an isolationist and is against free trade, while I believe that 9/11 calls for increased involvement (at least diplomatically) and more trade with other nations.

Some of Paul’s inability to bend spills over into defense and security issues, as well. He votes against bills that help Government detect and fight terrorism, arguing that they mean more government invasion of our privacy. A fair concern, to be sure, but ultimately unjustified in my view. For me, it reveals that Ron Paul has the right ideas but the wrong priorities, especially in our current fight against terrorism. I think his policies would make us less safe, more vulnerable, less able to detect and respond to terrorist groups.

I’ve read some of his articles and speeches, and he also seems to be a bit of a conspiracy nut. And so it doesn’t surprise me that the people supporting him most, at least around here, are the John Birchers, the folks who think 9/11 was an “inside job,” people who think everything they disagree with is “unconstitutional,” etc. These are folks I agree with 99%, but who consider me liberal.

No offense, though, if you like him. Because, like I said, he really does have some great qualities.

I do think a lot can be deduced about someone by simply observing who it is that is passionate about what that someone has to say. Ron Paul is backed by too many people I consider to be a bit kookish and he does little, very little, to distance himself from them.

That's a problem."

Now, Libby, here are my thoughts. Ron Paul is a libertarian in the truest sense (not the nut job libertarians in the present party, but the philosophical ones). In a different world I would actually agree with a lot of what he says since he is a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. The problem is the same problem that exists with Communism - neither Libertarian nor Communist ideas really work in the real world. One side eviscerates government and is pretty much every person for themselves, while the other is at the extreme of government intervention and control.

We are fundamentally a Federal Republic (not a democracy if you are keeping score) and the issue of the dominance of states’ rights vs. federal rights was settled by the civil war long ago. Paul suggests eliminating the Federal Reserve for example, as excessive intrusion by the government in private affairs. However, we have to have a monetary policy and it has to be managed. Even though some may argue that the Fed is not as effective as it might be (and in the most recent recession contributed to the magnitude by continuing to loosen money policies longer than they should have), when the crisis hit the Fed was very effective at reducing panic and preventing runs on banks and other financial institutions. Agree or disagree with TARP and TALF, having a lender of last resort prevented the failure of virtually every major financial institution in the US.

Libby, imagine a world with no Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, or other social services, no national educational standards, no foreign aid or foreign based troops and limited military (no ability to project force due to Paul’s isolationist views), therefore neither a carrot nor a stick to influence world events, where each state is regulating commerce on its own so business rules vary state to state, where FEMA does not exist as local disasters like tornados or hurricanes are considered local problems, where emergency rooms can turn away the uninsured, yet there is no mandate to insure, and the insurer has the right of recession (I can only imagine the calls to insurance companies “How much will it cost to take care of him?” “oh about $30,000” Ook thanks, just let him know we are cancelling his policy and wish him luck”). While I applaud Paul’s consistency, sincerity and willingness to clearly stake a position, I do not want to live in a world that reflects his values.

The thing that shocks me is listening to people say they would either vote for Ron Paul or Hillary Clinton. Does this mean they have no clue what Ron Paul believes? Or do they not understand that these two people are absolutely opposite? How does this make sense?

And I have to say I am rolling my eyes over people STILL going on and on about where Obama was born. Oh please!

You mention having someone run against Obama. The Democrats and Hillary Clinton are smart enough to know that if they did that, they would be handing the presidency to the Republicans. I think that if the American people want a president other than Obama, and they want an America they recognize, and not what I've written about here, or a Newt Gringrich CORPORATE run government, they would be smart to vote for Mitt Romney, and get over the fact that he is a Mormon. What a stupid reason to have a problem voting for a president.

D.
Hope this helps!

5 moms found this helpful

I think the mainstream media will continue to downplay all the republican candidates. They want Obama to be re-elected. That being said, I would like to take a little bit from every candidate and that would make my "perfect" candidate. I will vote ABO (anyone but Obama). I believe the republican slate is much better than what we currently have. I have never seen a president so disconnected, and have so much contempt for a large section of the population.

I like Ron Paul's domestic agenda, but his foreign is totally out there and that is why I could never support him.

5 moms found this helpful

I think the transformation from wide eyed idealist, to hardened administrator is fascinating. Something clearly happens in the "behind closed doors" security briefings. Our President is a principled man that lives his values. If he has signed things that contradict his values, I know it was for the greater good. If he backs down on something he holds important, I know it was a necessary compromise. If he has reveresed his position on certain matters, I know it is for our safety. I believe that there are things we are not privy to, that only a President will ever actually know. I have faith in him, like a father, to make decisions and shield me from some of the dirtier details. Do I think someone new will make a differance? No, because they will be subject to the same transformation. The wieght of the world. The greatest responsibility in the world. The fate of millions. That has to make a man realign priorities.

5 moms found this helpful

Required Fields

Our records show that we already have a Mamapedia or Mamasource account created for you under the email address you entered.

Please enter your Mamapedia or Mamasource password to continue signing in.

Required Fields

, you’re almost done...

Since this is the first time you are logging in to Mamapedia with Facebook Connect, please provide the following information so you can participate in the Mamapedia community.

As a member, you’ll receive optional email newsletters and community updates sent to you from Mamapedia, and your email address will never be shared with third parties.

By clicking "Continue to Mamapedia", I agree to the Mamapedia Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.