2012 Presidential Election Thread

[Syzygy]

It begins. Mitt Romney just captured the Republican nomination today, officially making it Romney vs. Obama in the election on November 6th.

Discuss, don't flame.

[Cynon]

Officially Romney v. Obama, as opposed to it being de facto Romney v. Obama for quite some time...

[Alta]

>Not voting Based Roseanne
C'mon guys.

[Cardinals5]

If certain candidates didn't advocate the gold standard (a terrible idea) I would be even more solidly in their corner...sadly my particular candidate won't win.

[RealRacer4]

I'm most likely going to try to stay away from the social networking sites as much as possible when it gets closer to Election Day. The way I look at it, no matter who's going to be running for president, they won't be any better than who you voted for last time.

[Cynon]

For being the leader of the United States, the President has comparatively little power. The people you should be going after are representatives and senators.

In my case, neither Dick Durbin or Mark Kirk (both of whom I would probably vote out) are up for election this year. I'm not sure about who my local representative is though.

[Syzygy]

I'm quite fed up with both major parties at this point.

Barack Obama hasn't lived up to his promises from 4 years ago, and has developed a horrible track record that will continue for the next 4 years if we elect him.

Normally, at this point I'd turn to the Republican Party, but they've shot themselves in the foot multiple times by successfully rigging the nomination for Romney and not giving Ron Paul a snowball's chance. When you re-write the rules of the RNC to prevent someone from having a legitimate shot at getting the nomination (and strip 10 of their delegates!), you deserve to lose.

That's why I'm saying NObama and RomNO this coming election, and voting for the person who I believe will be the best leader for our country.

[navycook75]

Enough Said

[RetrogradeRenegade]

I'm not American, but since the subtitle only said I had to be old enough to vote, which I am, I figure I can toss my hat into the ring on that technicality

Anyway, if I was American, I'd probably vote Jill Stein - unless the polling where I lived was fairly close, in which case I'd vote Obama. From what I've heard, the proposed Romney-Ryan budget won't even balance until 2040, and their ultra right-wing platform pretty much goes against everything I believe in, more or less. And don't even get me started on Ron Paul.

[gwoodard41]

I'm not American, but since the subtitle only said I had to be old enough to vote, which I am, I figure I can toss my hat into the ring on that technicality

Anyway, if I was American, I'd probably vote Jill Stein - unless the polling where I lived was fairly close, in which case I'd vote Obama. From what I've heard, the proposed Romney-Ryan budget won't even balance until 2040, and their ultra right-wing platform pretty much goes against everything I believe in, more or less. And don't even get me started on Ron Paul.

I believe it's 2028 or so... but then again, the Democrats in the Senate haven't even passed a budget...

I would most likely vote Johnson/Paul if the ticket was to form. I've known Romney was the nominee since McCain blew the election in '08 (Palin sure didn't help).

[Spannerhead29 (Nelson)]

>Not voting Mike Rutana for 2032.

[Alta]

>Not voting Mike Rutana for 2032.

But what about 2012?

[Spannerhead29 (Nelson)]

>Not voting Mike Rutana for 2032.

But what about 2012?

Can't vote, bcoz Straya.

[flyingturns89]

This will be my first voting (I turn 18 in a few weeks) but I'm still undecided. Right now I'm leaning towards Obama, but I don't really have a solid position on things. Also to comment on what Retrograde said, I'm not sure that Jill Stein can run anymore, cause I believe I heard that she and her VP candidate just got arrested in Philadelphia a couple weeks ago.

[BWard]

I may be from Britain, but I'd say Obama should stay as president because in my opinion, he has run his country pretty well in the last few years, which as well because my younger brother doesn't like Mitt Romney.

[Alta]

Personally my vote's with Obama, I despise Romney and i don't think he will fix our current issues (Most likely make them worse), i don't think Stein has any significant shot and Same with Johnon.

[PRAWBLEMS]

I may be from Britain, but I'd say Obama should stay as president because in my opinion, he has run his country pretty well in the last few years, which as well because my younger brother doesn't like Mitt Romney.

Have you SEEN the national debt, unemployment rates and the fact that liberals haven't passed a balanced budget in 4 years? Research, Barney, research.

[PRAWBLEMS]

Personally my vote's with Obama, I despite Romney and i don't think he will fix are current issues (Most likely make them worse), i don't think Stein has any shot and same with Johnon.

Fixed.

[BWard]

I may be from Britain, but I'd say Obama should stay as president because in my opinion, he has run his country pretty well in the last few years, which as well because my younger brother doesn't like Mitt Romney.

Have you SEEN the national debt, unemployment rates and the fact that liberals haven't passed a balanced budget in 4 years? Research, Barney, research.

i will i will, give me time.

[Cardinals5]

I may be from Britain, but I'd say Obama should stay as president because in my opinion, he has run his country pretty well in the last few years, which as well because my younger brother doesn't like Mitt Romney.

Have you SEEN the national debt, unemployment rates and the fact that liberals haven't passed a balanced budget in 4 years? Research, Barney, research.

Not for nothing, but blaming everything on [insert group here] doesn't make that group liable. I'm reasonably certain there hasn't been a "balanced budget" in quite some time, at least not since the Clinton presidency (and the numbers on that one are shaky at best, since there were far more factors in play [such as a dot-com bubble]).

Saying that Congress (in particular the Democrats, none of whom are traditional liberals, but American liberals who are still right-of-center) hasn't passed a budget in over two years would actually be true. Blaming "liberals" is just being angry at some group someone else tells you to hate.

Also, the national debt and unemployment numbers are more the result of Bush-era policies, not Obama. Granted, Obama's policies have not done as much as one would hope to improve them, but the Bush era is what led us to this far more than Obama did. It's disingenuous to say otherwise.

[Metro 6r4]

I may not be able to vote and you probably think that I don't know anything about politics but if America's politicians are anything like England's then they are all LIARS. One group of people might make a small difference, if at all, but running people against each other is only slowing everyone down. Instead everyone should all help as one, then when we are out of the recession they can go back to fighting for presidency.

[Cardinals5]

They are all liars, it's just about whose lies you like better

[Metro 6r4]

They are all liars, it's just about whose lies you like better

When you said that I could only think of this

[PRAWBLEMS]

I may not be able to vote and you probably think that I don't know anything about politics but if America's politicians are anything like England's then they are all LIARS. One group of people might make a small difference, if at all, but running people against each other is only slowing everyone down. Instead everyone should all help as one, then when we are out of the recession they can go back to fighting for presidency.

That's called Communism. See how that works!

[Metro 6r4]

I may not be able to vote and you probably think that I don't know anything about politics but if America's politicians are anything like England's then they are all LIARS. One group of people might make a small difference, if at all, but running people against each other is only slowing everyone down. Instead everyone should all help as one, then when we are out of the recession they can go back to fighting for presidency.

That's called Communism. See how that works!

I thought I would get that answer from someone.

[RetrogradeRenegade]

I may be from Britain, but I'd say Obama should stay as president because in my opinion, he has run his country pretty well in the last few years, which as well because my younger brother doesn't like Mitt Romney.

Have you SEEN the national debt, unemployment rates and the fact that liberals haven't passed a balanced budget in 4 years? Research, Barney, research.

Have you?

I may not be able to vote and you probably think that I don't know anything about politics but if America's politicians are anything like England's then they are all LIARS. One group of people might make a small difference, if at all, but running people against each other is only slowing everyone down. Instead everyone should all help as one, then when we are out of the recession they can go back to fighting for presidency.

That's called Communism. See how that works!

Then you have a strange definition of communism.

[Blake Camphausen]

I may be from Britain, but I'd say Obama should stay as president because in my opinion, he has run his country pretty well in the last few years, which as well because my younger brother doesn't like Mitt Romney.

Have you SEEN the national debt, unemployment rates and the fact that liberals haven't passed a balanced budget in 4 years? Research, Barney, research.

The national debt was created by Bush, A conservative. (However, Obama hasn't stopped creating debt) High unemployment rates existed for about a year before Obama entered office, and happened because of the economic collapse of 2008, with Bush as president. And the budget hasn't been balanced in quite some time. Both Liberals and Conservatives have a their chance and failed to balance it.


Seeing as I am very Liberal, I am siding with Gary Johnson and the Libertarians, not that he is going to win, but he is the closest to my beliefs, so I support him.

[PRAWBLEMS]

I may be from Britain, but I'd say Obama should stay as president because in my opinion, he has run his country pretty well in the last few years, which as well because my younger brother doesn't like Mitt Romney.

Have you SEEN the national debt, unemployment rates and the fact that liberals haven't passed a balanced budget in 4 years? Research, Barney, research.

The national debt was created by Bush, A conservative. (However, Obama hasn't stopped creating debt) High unemployment rates existed for about a year before Obama entered office, and happened because of the economic collapse of 2008, with Bush as president. And the budget hasn't been balanced in quite some time. Both Liberals and Conservatives have a their chance and failed to balance it.


Seeing as I am very Liberal, I am siding with Gary Johnson and the Libertarians, not that he is going to win, but he is the closest to my beliefs, so I support him.

No, the economic collapse was started with Barney Frank's Freebie and Fannie essploding the housing market. Obama just hasn't even tried to do anything, then cries Congress.

[RetrogradeRenegade]

No, the economic collapse was started with Barney Frank's Freebie and Fannie essploding the housing market. Obama just hasn't even tried to do anything, then cries Congress.

No it didn't, and yes he has. Also, Obama has every reason to 'cry Congress', when the Republicans have stifled pretty much every attempt he's made at fixing things.

[Blake Camphausen]

No, the economic collapse was started with Barney Frank's Freebie and Fannie essploding the housing market. Obama just hasn't even tried to do anything, then cries Congress.

No it didn't, and yes he has. Also, Obama has every reason to 'cry Congress', when the Republicans have stifled pretty much every attempt he's made at fixing things.

This. And on top of that PRAWBLEMS, I never said what caused the collapse, I merely said Bush was president at the time of the collapse. Read my post again.

[PRAWBLEMS]

No, the economic collapse was started with Barney Frank's Freebie and Fannie essploding the housing market. Obama just hasn't even tried to do anything, then cries Congress.

No it didn't, and yes he has. Also, Obama has every reason to 'cry Congress', when the Republicans have stifled pretty much every attempt he's made at fixing things.

This. And on top of that PRAWBLEMS, I never said what caused the collapse, I merely said Bush was president at the time of the collapse. Read my post again.

My name is Collin, and don't blame Bush if he wasn't involved.

[RetrogradeRenegade]

No, the economic collapse was started with Barney Frank's Freebie and Fannie essploding the housing market. Obama just hasn't even tried to do anything, then cries Congress.

No it didn't, and yes he has. Also, Obama has every reason to 'cry Congress', when the Republicans have stifled pretty much every attempt he's made at fixing things.

This. And on top of that PRAWBLEMS, I never said what caused the collapse, I merely said Bush was president at the time of the collapse. Read my post again.

My name is Collin, and don't blame Bush if he wasn't involved.

You're quick to blame Obama, though, and it didn't even happen under his watch. Plus, starting two long and costly wars isn't exactly cheap, y'know - the total cost to the US of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan will total in the region of $4 trillion. Not saying that was the only cause, but it didn't help matters.

[Cardinals5]

No, the economic collapse was started with Barney Frank's Freebie and Fannie essploding the housing market. Obama just hasn't even tried to do anything, then cries Congress.

No it didn't, and yes he has. Also, Obama has every reason to 'cry Congress', when the Republicans have stifled pretty much every attempt he's made at fixing things.

This. And on top of that PRAWBLEMS, I never said what caused the collapse, I merely said Bush was president at the time of the collapse. Read my post again.

My name is Collin, and don't blame Bush if he wasn't involved.

What you're saying can basically be summed up as:

Hey guys, let's just ignore facts and reality and the actual passage of time to blame Obama. Surely no one will notice.

Just because you're being willfully ignorant of the realities of the world (including the fact that George Bush was President of the United States when the economic crisis began AND that many of his policies contributed to the severity of it) does not make it true. To be fair though, it is CONGRESS that holds most of the responsibility for getting things done, so let's see...

2001 - 2003: 107th US Congress (Senate: 50-50 split, House: Republican)

Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (aka "Bush tax cuts") passed.
PATRIOT Act passed.
War on Terror/Operation Enduring Freedom declared (without Congressional approval which is unconstitutional).
No Child Left Behind passed.
Farm Security and Rural Investment Act (farm subsidies) passed.
Help America Vote Act (basically a precursor to the current voter restriction laws of today) passed.
Authorization for war with Iraq passed (with the help of falsified evidence of Iraq's WMD program which did not produce one weapon).
Homeland Security Act passed.

2003 - 2005: 108th US Congress (S: 51 R, 48 D, 1I; House: 52% R)

The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (second round of Bush tax cuts) passed.
Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act passed.
Protect Bioshield Act of 2004 passed.
North Korean Human Rights Act passed.
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act passed.

Keep in mind that at this point we've expanded the federal government (HS Act/IRTP Act), started two separate wars, undertook massive (and very expensive) Medicare reform, bought billions in "vaccines" for biological warfare, sent large sums of money overseas to North Korea (a country described as an "axis of evil"), all the while cutting taxes (the primary source of revenue for any nation) not once, but twice. And we're just barely approaching the beginning of Bush's second term.

2005 - 2007: 109th Congress (S 55 R, 44D, 1 I; H 53% R)

Notable: This is where Barack Obama first becomes involved in the national scene, as he is elected Senator from Illinois and serves his first term as a Senator.

Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 passed.
Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (one of the banking lobby's greatest victories ever because of how blatantly obvious it was in its nature to screw over consumers) passed.
Family Entertainment and Copyright Act passed.
Energy Policy Act of 2005 passed.
Tax Increase Prevention Act passed.
Tax Relief and Health Act passed.
Secure Fence Act passed.


I could go on FROM HERE but I'm choosing not to unless it's necessary. I will note that there were other policies passed under both Bush and Clinton presidencies that made the housing bubble and economic crises of the last half of the 2000s not only possible, but the only logical scenario.

TL, DR: If you cut income and raise expenses, you're gonna have a bad time.

[Blake Camphausen]

No, the economic collapse was started with Barney Frank's Freebie and Fannie essploding the housing market. Obama just hasn't even tried to do anything, then cries Congress.

No it didn't, and yes he has. Also, Obama has every reason to 'cry Congress', when the Republicans have stifled pretty much every attempt he's made at fixing things.

This. And on top of that PRAWBLEMS, I never said what caused the collapse, I merely said Bush was president at the time of the collapse. Read my post again.

My name is Collin, and don't blame Bush if he wasn't involved.

I only know you by your username. And your username doesn't make your actually name obvious like mine (Although some people do that for privacy, and I understand that.) And once again, in my original post, I never BLAMED Bush for the economic collapse. I said the Bush was president at the time of the collapse, not that he had anything to do with it. (Even though he did.)

[pennst24]

I mean seriously, these threads never end well.

[Cynon]

You know, I'm really tempted to make a new category of the forum and make it only viewable to users over 18. Because that's who should be posting in this thread.

PRAWBLEMS, if you define communism as anything you don't like, I invite you to read Wikipedia's general overview of what communism actually is. Then you should go look up a general idea of how Stalin ran Russia. You're making an idiot out of yourself (again) and for your own good you should just shut up.

The only problems with threads like this are when kids who aren't even of voting age yet think they know everything and start blabbering all over the place. In turn, they make themselves look really, really dumb. I know there's a few people mature enough to disagree with each other on the forum without starting a flame war, and those are really the only people I'd like to see posting here.

2005 - 2007: 109th Congress (S 55 R, 44D, 1 I; H 53% R)

Notable: This is where Barack Obama first becomes involved in the national scene, as he is elected Senator from Illinois and serves his first term as a Senator.

Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 passed.
Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (one of the banking lobby's greatest victories ever because of how blatantly obvious it was in its nature to screw over consumers) passed.
Family Entertainment and Copyright Act passed.
Energy Policy Act of 2005 passed.
Tax Increase Prevention Act passed.
Tax Relief and Health Act passed.
Secure Fence Act passed.

Obama didn't really do much in the Senate in order not to make too many enemies come time he would run for President.

I could go on FROM HERE but I'm choosing not to unless it's necessary. I will note that there were other policies passed under both Bush and Clinton presidencies that made the housing bubble and economic crises of the last half of the 2000s not only possible, but the only logical scenario.

TL, DR: If you cut income and raise expenses, you're gonna have a bad time.

Clinton and Bush II largely continued Reagan's disastrous policies when it came to fiscal policies, so it goes a bit further back then you implied. I used to have a couple of books that outlined how Reaganomics are still paramount in today's society. Wish I still had them so I could directly quote them.

[antknee]

For me it's not a matter of Republican versus Democrat or conservative versus liberal. I'm seriously tired of that crap...it only leads to bickering and division of the country. If you want to truly make a difference look at the person's qualifications and accomplishments. The finger pointing is completely asinine.

Clinton was able to essentially balance the budget with a Republican Congress.

Under Bush, even fighting two wars didn't increase our National Debt as much as the current regime. The year he moved into office the National Debt was actually decreased by over 2%. Regardless of where you stand, Bush was dealt a bad hand with the attacks. I know he came off as a bit of a goof but he had the nation's best interest in heart when he stepped into the White House.

Now, Obama's administration had full control over Congress for the first two years of his term. What did he accomplish? He bailed out a bunch of elitist companies that continue to struggle and who only paid back those loans by borrowing elsewhere. In 2010 alone, when the Dems had full control of Congress, the debt increased by over 12%. Is this a track record I'm supposed to support? Also, who has confidence our VP? What happens should Obama be unable to fulfill his duties?

...or I should I be interested in a candidate that has balanced the budget in his state to the point of a surplus and his running mate that is the current budget chairman?

It comes down to priorities. What is important to you? Personally, I'm a little more concerned about struggling to provide for my family than I am about who's allowed to be married to whom. Don't get me wrong, I have a personal stance on this and similar issues but they are not at the top of my priority list.

It seems that we weren't given the change we were promised and in any other realm of American life, if you don't provide results then you are replaced. Why should the presidency be any different?

#endsoapbox

[Cardinals5]

You know, I'm really tempted to make a new category of the forum and make it only viewable to users over 18. Because that's who should be posting in this thread.

PRAWBLEMS, if you define communism as anything you don't like, I invite you to read Wikipedia's general overview of what communism actually is. Then you should go look up a general idea of how Stalin ran Russia. You're making an idiot out of yourself (again) and for your own good you should just shut up.

The only problems with threads like this are when kids who aren't even of voting age yet think they know everything and start blabbering all over the place. In turn, they make themselves look really, really dumb. I know there's a few people mature enough to disagree with each other on the forum without starting a flame war, and those are really the only people I'd like to see posting here.

2005 - 2007: 109th Congress (S 55 R, 44D, 1 I; H 53% R)

Notable: This is where Barack Obama first becomes involved in the national scene, as he is elected Senator from Illinois and serves his first term as a Senator.

Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 passed.
Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (one of the banking lobby's greatest victories ever because of how blatantly obvious it was in its nature to screw over consumers) passed.
Family Entertainment and Copyright Act passed.
Energy Policy Act of 2005 passed.
Tax Increase Prevention Act passed.
Tax Relief and Health Act passed.
Secure Fence Act passed.

Obama didn't really do much in the Senate in order not to make too many enemies come time he would run for President.

I could go on FROM HERE but I'm choosing not to unless it's necessary. I will note that there were other policies passed under both Bush and Clinton presidencies that made the housing bubble and economic crises of the last half of the 2000s not only possible, but the only logical scenario.

TL, DR: If you cut income and raise expenses, you're gonna have a bad time.

Clinton and Bush II largely continued Reagan's disastrous policies when it came to fiscal policies, so it goes a bit further back then you implied. I used to have a couple of books that outlined how Reaganomics are still paramount in today's society. Wish I still had them so I could directly quote them.

I could have (and was tempted to have) gone way further back but I had already written FAR too much for my own taste.

My point in defining where Obama was involved was more to tell PRAWBLEMS exactly where anyone actually started to care about him. Not much other than that.

I also agree with antkee that the labels are just serving as division points. Besides, I believe it was one Christopher Rock who stated that anyone who makes up their mind before they hear an issue is a fool. I personally don't see myself throwing a vote towards Romney any time soon, but that's my own opinion.

Truthfully, the REAL problem is Congress and their lack of being able to do anything. All we hear now is how they need a 60-person bloc in the Senate to get anything done because of the threat of a filibuster. I do think that in order to sway undecided voters, Obama needs to prove that he's actually a leader, which is what he has not shown anyone much of really.

[RetrogradeRenegade]

For me it's not a matter of Republican versus Democrat or conservative versus liberal. I'm seriously tired of that crap...it only leads to bickering and division of the country. If you want to truly make a difference look at the person's qualifications and accomplishments. The finger pointing is completely asinine.

Clinton was able to essentially balance the budget with a Republican Congress.

True, but the Republicans under Obama have gotten in his way at every possible juncture, or near enough. I don't think Clinton had to deal with the level of opposition that Obama has faced.

Under Bush, even fighting two wars didn't increase our National Debt as much as the current regime. The year he moved into office the National Debt was actually decreased by over 2%. Regardless of where you stand, Bush was dealt a bad hand with the attacks. I know he came off as a bit of a goof but he had the nation's best interest in heart when he stepped into the White House.

The national debt decreased because of Clinton's policies, which actually left the US with a surplus. I have no doubt that Bush had only the best intentions, but the fact is it was under his watch that the US was set on the road to economic disaster. As cardinals has pointed out, if you cut income and raise expenses, you're gonna have a bad time. Which is exactly what happened. Plus, Obama added the costs of the wars to the budget; Bush didn't do that.

Now, Obama's administration had full control over Congress for the first two years of his term. What did he accomplish? He bailed out a bunch of elitist companies that continue to struggle and who only paid back those loans by borrowing elsewhere. In 2010 alone, when the Dems had full control of Congress, the debt increased by over 12%. Is this a track record I'm supposed to support? Also, who has confidence our VP? What happens should Obama be unable to fulfill his duties?

Obama's ended the economic crisis, and set the US on the road to recovery. There is more work to be done, and he could've accomplished more had he not attempted to comprimise with the Republicans, but that seems a pretty good track record to me. Also, the Democrats did not actually have full control over Congress for 2 years as you say. They were very close for a long time, but only emerged from the 2008 General Election a vote short of a supermajority. They did finally get one in July 2009, but that only existed on paper as Ted Kennedy was dying of a brain tumour and unable to vote. When he did pass away and his replacement was sworn in at the end of September, then the Democrats actually had a supermajority. For about 4 and a half months until Massachusetts held an election to determine Ted Kennedy's successor, which was won by a Republican.

[PRAWBLEMS]

Okay, time for official facts.

Left = 2008, Right = 2012.

Average unemployment: 7.8% 8.3%
Median Household income: $52,029 $ 51,418
National Debt: $10.2T $15.9T
And sorry for douching earlier, probably my last post in this thread.

[24batista24]

Okay, time for official facts.

Left = 2008, Right = 2012.

Average unemployment: 7.8% 8.3%
Median Household income: $52,029 $ 51,418
National Debt: $10.2T $15.9T
And sorry for douching earlier, probably my last post in this thread.

I dont have an opinion on the election because Im Canadian and I dont care about politics in general. Im just here to say I hope that is your last post on this thread because It clearly states Please comment if you are old enough to vote and because Ive heard on the ts that you are getting quite annoying on here so please stop that. Anyway, Continue on with the bs politic crap. Also the reason I dont care about politics is because in Canada, we have retards running the country. Literally. Our PM almost got chopped into pieces at a factory tour while he was running for PM.

[pepsibottle1]

Enough Said

Yes.

[gwoodard41]

Johnson and Johnson for President

We need Band-Aid and Tylenol to heal our nation!

[Cynon]

Okay, time for official facts.

Left = 2008, Right = 2012.

Average unemployment: 7.8% 8.3%

Here's what unemployment means:

Pre-Reagan, if you worked half time or less, or if you were in the military, you were not counted as "employed." Under Reagan, if you worked half time or more, or were in the military, you were "fully employed." He [Reagan] also changed the law that said if you were out of work for more than two years, you were no longer counted as "unemployed" -- YOU WERE NOT COUNTED AT ALL. Thus, it appeared as if unemployment was not as bad as it really was. And, no president has corrected this lying statistic to this day.

Statistics mean nothing unless you know what they actually mean.

[navycook75]

Enough Said

Also with that said, I personally believe Cave Johnson will fix the economy and unemployment when there's openings for test subjects, and for warfare he'll use combustible lemons to bomb the crap out countries. We will also have Repulsion, Propulsion, and Conversion gel (not to mention a Portal Gun), which will make a new kind of transportation, so you won't have to worry about gas prices.

Tell me why Cave Johnson shouldn't be president.

[pepsibottle1]

Enough Said

Also with that said, I personally believe Cave Johnson will fix the economy and unemployment when there's openings for test subjects, and for warfare he'll use combustible lemons to bomb the crap out countries. We will also have Repulsion, Propulsion, and Conversion gel (not to mention a Portal Gun), which will make a new kind of transportation, so you won't have to worry about gas prices.

Tell me why Cave Johnson shouldn't be president.

Cave has my vote.

[PRAWBLEMS]

Enough Said

Also with that said, I personally believe Cave Johnson will fix the economy and unemployment when there's openings for test subjects, and for warfare he'll use combustible lemons to bomb the crap out countries. We will also have Repulsion, Propulsion, and Conversion gel (not to mention a Portal Gun), which will make a new kind of transportation, so you won't have to worry about gas prices.

Tell me why Cave Johnson shouldn't be president.

Aren't his methods dangerous? No one's tested citrus warfare.

[f1fan12]

I have kept quiet on the election, because I am not ready to make a choice when I feel as if we arn't getting the full story. For one, I will not use media outlets to make my choice on will be the best leader, because all the news media is, is a crapload of bias that they use against a canidate. Now my Dad, watches Fox news and I do too. Not for news, but for the clear humor of how bad their coverage is. Face it, News media in 2012, is no more reliable, then the crap you would hear in the girls locker room. So what I am saying to you is, don't base your opinon on what National News reports, because there is always another side to each issue.

[RealRacer4]

I have kept quiet on the election, because I am not ready to make a choice when I feel as if we arn't getting the full story. For one, I will not use media outlets to make my choice on will be the best leader, because all the news media is, is a crapload of bias that they use against a canidate. Now my Dad, watches Fox news and I do too. Not for news, but for the clear humor of how bad their coverage is. Face it, News media in 2012, is no more reliable, then the crap you would hear in the girls locker room. So what I am saying to you is, don't base your opinon on what National News reports, because there is always another side to each issue.

For real news, watch The Daily Show and The Colbert Report (even though I haven't watched it in a while).

[antknee]

I have kept quiet on the election, because I am not ready to make a choice when I feel as if we arn't getting the full story. For one, I will not use media outlets to make my choice on will be the best leader, because all the news media is, is a crapload of bias that they use against a canidate. Now my Dad, watches Fox news and I do too. Not for news, but for the clear humor of how bad their coverage is. Face it, News media in 2012, is no more reliable, then the crap you would hear in the girls locker room. So what I am saying to you is, don't base your opinon on what National News reports, because there is always another side to each issue.

which is why we must scan all media and make our own decisions. there's a lot of disinformation floating around on both sides and people are all too ready to jump on bandwagons instead of taking the time to research and make educated decisions.

[Sponsored content]