Vote today... Mitt Romney or Barack Obama
- Thread starter Peter Breuninger
- Start date
- Status
Guys, wake up smell the coffee. The markets are driven by loose monetary policy, not fundamentals. If Romney makes good in his promise to fire Bernanke and replace him with someone more conservative the markets will tank. I find it incredibly ironic the president in office during the largest rebound in the Dow jones and corporate profitability in modern history is labeled as "anti business". Even wonder why Obama never mentions these achievements? It would alienate his base. Why does Romney not mention it (he does mention gas and by implication oil price rebound of course...)? It would dispel the anti business Obama myth.
How do you spell "S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T
Do you honestly believe that, Steve? Maybe coming from Canada that word is not as offensive as it is to many in the States, and I don't meant to infer that Canada embraces "socialism" in its entire form. However, some of the ideology has garnered favour as you are well aware.
I'll just call him a left-leaning Liberal.
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
If we are allowed to enter this fray, I'd say both are schzophrenic, politically: O has been blasted by the hard left for failing to close Gitmo, using drones to kill bad guys, including American citizens, failing to push the health care mandate harder against big pharma and insurance companies, including single payor system, failing to indict or charge one Wall St. bankster, and being in bed with them in the bail-out. At the same time he has been viewed by independents and the right as an 'wealth readjuster' in favor of the poor, too soft on terrorism, corrupt, despite promises of transparency and someone who has been extremely partisan despite promises to be conciliatory.
R has been viewed by the hard right as less than a hardcore conservative, waffling on issues like gun control, and he had to make the right noises (literally and figuratively) to get through the R primary. The left views him through a lense of anti-abortion, anti-gun control, favoring the rich and dismantling the social welfare system, not in the pocket of the banksters, but one himself.
Both are probably somewhere closer to the middle than they are let on, but have to appeal to their constituencies, which range from the middle out to the extremes. In saying this, I personally don't agree with some of the views of either candidate, just trying to put where they are in the spectrum into better focus.
R has been viewed by the hard right as less than a hardcore conservative, waffling on issues like gun control, and he had to make the right noises (literally and figuratively) to get through the R primary. The left views him through a lense of anti-abortion, anti-gun control, favoring the rich and dismantling the social welfare system, not in the pocket of the banksters, but one himself.
Both are probably somewhere closer to the middle than they are let on, but have to appeal to their constituencies, which range from the middle out to the extremes. In saying this, I personally don't agree with some of the views of either candidate, just trying to put where they are in the spectrum into better focus.
Sorry Steve. Didn't mean to imply that YOU thought is was offensive!
Anyway, I'm outta here. Off to Tony's for some R2R bliss! Hopefully my picture-taking skills won't fail me.
I sat through the presentation of one of the high powered analysts that talked about the two candidates and impact on the economy and stock market. One line summary: both of the candidates were painted as being delusional as far as what it takes to get us back to fiscal health. The future was bleak no matter which took office. The two are fighting over 1% impact issues when it comes to such policies. In that regard, I did not walk away with either being much worse than the other.
There is however one positive: certainty. The elections and Europe situation are two things that keep people concerned. With elections out of the way, we will at least have that behind us.
There is however one positive: certainty. The elections and Europe situation are two things that keep people concerned. With elections out of the way, we will at least have that behind us.
Steve, like John pointed out....in the US, SOCIALIST is considered a four letter word...used to be COMMUNIST, but those days have passed.....maybe.
Amirm: I'm not so sure. I think this election has the potential to be tied up with litigation over votes, storm impacts, and even after that dust settles, no matter who gets the Oval Office, a large chunk of the population will be unhappy. I think the sniping and infighting will only get worse during the next 4 years, and there is little likelihood of bipartisan efforts in Congress, no matter who gets elected.
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
I tend to agree Bill
How can we forget Florida, Bush and Gore and all those hanging chads
+1. Who wants to bet that we will be fighting over hanging chads all over again. Supreme Court here we come..again
Last edited:
Do you honestly believe that, Steve? Maybe coming from Canada that word is not as offensive as it is to many in the States, and I don't meant to infer that Canada embraces "socialism" in its entire form. However, some of the ideology has garnered favour as you are well aware.
I'll just call him a left-leaning Liberal.
In the Netherlands we would call him a right of center national security hawk, with a few sound instincts such as the idea of financial services regulation and universal healthcare. This Obama is a socialist is a joke. The central idea of socialisms is nationalization of resources, having the government plan and run production, and workers are on the government payroll. What is the largest socialist (i.e. government run) industry in the USA? Right, the military. Who advocates expansion of the military? Right, Romney. We have to conclude the real socialist in the house is Mitt. The least socialist country in Europe (the uk) is the only place the entire healthcare industry is nationalized.... The term socialism is thrown around rather loosely.
I am simply sharing what my financial advisers are saying. I pay them to know this stuff
. And their point all along has been that people are waiting to see who gets elected. That waiting alone is causing jitters that would go away once a president is elected. Without it there are a lot of "what if" is going on.
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
+1. It will take a real crisis for this country to wake up. I think failure to raise the debt ceiling during the next round of negotiations triggering a government shutdown, us default on it debt and an unprecented financial crisis will do the trick.
Has nothing to do with socialism. Every modern society redistributes wealth. We can debate how much is optimal and desirable but it has nothing to do with socialism.
That's a pretty good description, IMO. But remember, with Mitt, it's not his policies that would come to the fore, it's the usual suspects behind him. Can we say the likes of Karl Rove, et al.
I think there's actually a slightly better chance the GOP will compromise with a second term president who can't run against them again. If Romney gets in and faces at least one opposition house, he'll have to deal with a bunch of Dems who believe the GOP Congress so stonewalled their guy that they wouldn't even take to a vote ideas they enthusiastically supported under GOP leadership. They'll be pissed. They will not be helpfull.
Steve, help me understand what, about obama's presidency looks socialist to you.
Tim
steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
You know Tim, I am almost sorry I said that as I suspected it would evoke that knee jerk response but to go beyond that now gets into personal views and I believe we are still treading on thin ice here.
And this comes from a guy who was born and raised in Canada before coming to the USA in 1978
And this comes from a guy who was born and raised in Canada before coming to the USA in 1978
I am simply sharing what my financial advisers are saying. I pay them to know this stuff
Amirm, no matter who wins, we will have divided government, and ideological inmates running the asylum. Only one party with supermajority and the presidency would break the deadlock and reduce uncertainty. The first issue is what to do about the fiscal cliff - no likely outcome will provide certainly about that.
- Status
