Would you support an Obama administration?

[joebudda]

I usually refuse to get into discussions about socialism in general and whether it works of not. As to the US, it isn't working. But here is a problem that deals with all socialism that I can't get past nor can I get anyone to address. It's a simple math equasion. X dollars are necessary to meet the basic living expences of a family. So, X=poverty But the socialist government wants everyone to meet or exceed that number so they collect money to give to those who don't make X. But wait, we need people to collect that money and we need to pay them Y, poverty plus living wage. But that isn't enough, we also need people to pass out that money so we need to pay another person Y. In addition to that, we have paperwork that needs filled out in quadruplicate and that costs Z. So now, the amount it takes to feed a family is X but with the government involved it now costs X+Y+Y+Z to = the X amount the family is getting to eat. How does this math make sense? Wouldn't it make more sense to allow the people close to them, the people who have a heart of compassion and love to cover the cost at X+donation=X rather than to put it in the hands of the government and live with X+Y+Y+Z=X? I just can't seem to understand the logic of this equasion. Help me out please.

I wouldn't know where to look for it now, but I remember reading some statistics, maybe a year ago, that compared "overhead" costs between government and charities.

It was something like charities have a 10% - 20% overhead, and government was something over 75%. It was really obscene.

So 80 or 90 cents of every dollar was able to help someone with charities whereas only 25 cents or less of every dollar for government.

 

[razzelflabben]

I wouldn't know where to look for it now, but I remember reading some statistics, maybe a year ago, that compared "overhead" costs between government and charities.

It was something like charities have a 10% - 20% overhead, and government was something over 75%. It was really obscene.

So 80 or 90 cents of every dollar was able to help someone with charities whereas only 25 cents or less of every dollar for government.

to even put more perspective on the equasion, you have to realize that Y=X+A. A being a living wage, not survival wage.

so the equasion really is X+(X+A)+(X+A)+Z which helps us understand the % you presented for us.

If you find the numbers, please share them, thanks

 

[aimejl]

I will give him the respect that the president of the United States deserves (IF he wins) but I don't support his views at all.

 

[jamesrwright3]

I would respect him, but I would fight against him if he tried to enact poor policies.

 

[adent]

I find the republican position absurd. Vote for a party that believes in small government, then when they get elected, they screw it up! not like you shouldn't have seen it coming...

the biggest absurdity was voting in Bush II. The guy screwed up just about every endeavor he tried, yet because he acted like the average joe (not withstanding that the Bushes are one of the most elite families in the States...), republicans and some independent were drawn to him. Little wonder he screwed up the USA in just about every way possible: militarily, environmentally, economically.

If you want to see governments working, just head up to Scandinavia. The cleanliness of the cities, few homeless people, safe streets, reliable public transport, pleasant, content people, yet they manage to have a higher GDP per person than the USA.

 

[justacook]

As an ex military man I will respect the office of the commander and chief. As a citizen of the United States I will respect the office of my elected government officials. As a Christian I will respect those in authority over me.
I will continue to perform my job(s) every day and go home to my wife and son and live off what I and my wife earn. And, I will be greatfull and happy to be free to vote for who I think would be better for the job.

I am not highly educated or rich or in any position of authority. I am justacook and a husband and father who will be the best example I can for my son.

 

[razzelflabben]

I find the republican position absurd. Vote for a party that believes in small government, then when they get elected, they screw it up! not like you shouldn't have seen it coming...

the biggest absurdity was voting in Bush II. The guy screwed up just about every endeavor he tried, yet because he acted like the average joe (not withstanding that the Bushes are one of the most elite families in the States...), republicans and some independent were drawn to him. Little wonder he screwed up the USA in just about every way possible: militarily, environmentally, economically.

If you want to see governments working, just head up to Scandinavia. The cleanliness of the cities, few homeless people, safe streets, reliable public transport, pleasant, content people, yet they manage to have a higher GDP per person than the USA.

What I don't understand is why you put the state of our contry on the shoulders of one man much less on the shoulders of the man currently in office. Most policies require at least 4 to 8 years to be felt by the general public. (there are a few exceptions) so most of what we see today, is the result of the previous administration. What the results of Bush the II are will be judged under the next administration (in general). I really get testy about people giving credit or blame to the wrong people. I honestly believe Bush did some things that hurt this country, but he also did some things that helped this country, how about we stop playing the blame someone else for the sins of another and start looking at what he did and how it will be affecting us once it filters down into our lives?

 

[Kroger99]

What do you mean by fight hard?

What does anyone, politically, mean when they say that they will fight hard against something that they oppose?

Also what do you think about George W. Bush (and McCain, and our whole government for that matter) pushing socialist ideals on the American people?

Socialism is socialism. It has no party boundaries. I oppose it!

Is it that you only care when/if a democrat does it?

no... you?

 

[JoshuaW]

most of what we see today, is the result of the previous administration.

Right, so that means the growth of the Clinton years was caused by George HW Bush, and the current economic and international disaster was caused by Clinton, and any good caused by the next administration will be the legacy of George Bush. How convenient for you.

 

[razzelflabben]

Right, so that means the growth of the Clinton years was caused by George HW Bush, and the current economic and international disaster was caused by Clinton, and any good caused by the next administration will be the legacy of George Bush. How convenient for you.

I spoke of both good and bad in all administrations and yet you pigeon hole what I said into only what supports one group???? Personally, I am neither dem or rep. For me personally, both are tooooooooo socialist, but that doesn't mean that they have no good to offer this country. It means that we need to look at each administration fairly, attributing to each what is his to own, as we should do with our own lives as well.

Sounds to me that you like the policies of the rep. but insist on attributing those policies to the dem. and hope that all will be well. Unfortunately, I can't agree with either the dem. or rep. and therefore, I fear I can't agree with you either. That being said, I believe they both have good and bad to offer, my only comment is that we need to attribute to each what is theirs to own.

 

[JoshuaW]

Sounds to me that you like the policies of the rep. but insist on attributing those policies to the dem. and hope that all will be well. Unfortunately, I can't agree with either the dem. or rep. and therefore, I fear I can't agree with you either. That being said, I believe they both have good and bad to offer, my only comment is that we need to attribute to each what is theirs to own.

I like an administration who tries their best to improve the lives of American citizens. We haven't had that for 8 years, and frankly, it seems only Democratic administrations actually make the effort. Republicans always seem to have an ulterior motive....a personal war, enriching friends, destroying the framework of government just because they can.

 

[razzelflabben]

I like an administration who tries their best to improve the lives of American citizens. We haven't had that for 8 years, and frankly, it seems only Democratic administrations actually make the effort. Republicans always seem to have an ulterior motive....a personal war, enriching friends, destroying the framework of government just because they can.

what was the ulterior motive of the stimulus package or the buy out we are just now getting into the economy? What is the ulterior motive behind oil drilling which is helping to bring down oil prices. Like I said, both groups bring good and bad, the problem and trick is to attribute to each what is there's.

BTW, if you want to get reactionary, what of gas prices, the lower prices are coming at the end of four years of rep. who is to blame for that, tonight, we paid under $2.50 a gallon, what ever were the rep. thinking, they should be removed from office immediately for allowing the gas prices to come down during their administration. (sarcasm)

 

[JoshuaW]

what was the ulterior motive of the stimulus package or the buy out we are just now getting into the economy? What is the ulterior motive behind oil drilling which is helping to bring down oil prices. Like I said, both groups bring good and bad, the problem and trick is to attribute to each what is there's.

BTW, if you want to get reactionary, what of gas prices, the lower prices are coming at the end of four years of rep. who is to blame for that, tonight, we paid under $2.50 a gallon, what ever were the rep. thinking, they should be removed from office immediately for allowing the gas prices to come down during their administration. (sarcasm)

YOu seem to have me confused with a Rebublican. Nothing good has been done for the average American since Jan 20, 2001.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

YOu seem to have me confused with a Rebublican. Nothing good has been done for the average American since Jan 20, 2001.

Just so we can be clear, the Democrats in the legislative branch have done nothing good for the average American since 2006?

 

[HollandScotts]

Yes, it is an insight into me. As a 60 year old man who was raised in the South, I know there is a large percentage of unrepentant racists in this country. They will not admit it to pollsters, they speak in code among themselves, but they are out there, and they will be enraged if a black man becomes president.

I'm sorry, but most racists, the unrepentant ones, at least, don't hide it. They flaunt it proudly.

Also, I notice the Republicans have not cast their votes in this poll. Are you afraid to go on the record? Are you undecided how you will react?

More like your poll is bad. There's no answer in I can choose from.

Social security, Medicare, the Civil Rights Act, the American military, the Interstate highway system.....where is that poor track record you speak of?

SS is a ponzy scheme and medicare is a giant black hole for money. The interstate was done well. But the government hasn't been able to secure the border, the War on Drugs is a complete failure and an afront to our rights and freedoms, public schools are lousy in this country and there are plenty of other things the government can't do well.

Name a "solvent bank" in a position to buy larger banks

Wells Fargo, Citigroup, JP Morgan and others.

and who would be fighting drug imports if not the government, you and your friends with Armalites and Budweisers?

Prohibition is the driving reason cartels seek to bring drugs into America, for the sheer profit. Without government interference, the drug problem would hardly be a problem, and man-made drugs would be uncommon since few people would be making them because there would be much money in it.

You want the government limited except in the bedrooms (gay marriage) and telling women what they can't do with their bodies (abortion). Right?

Not me.

 

[JoshuaW]

More like your poll is bad. There's no answer in I can choose from.

My poll attempted to list every possible answer. If "your" answer is not represented, tell me what it is and I will edit the poll to include it.

 

[JoshuaW]

Just so we can be clear, the Democrats in the legislative branch have done nothing good for the average American since 2006?

Since 2006, Congress has managed to help the average American despite a long list of legislation vetoed by George Bush. Here is the record:

1. July 19, 2006: Vetoed H.R. 810, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, a bill to ease restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Override attempt failed in House, 235-193 (286 needed).
2. May 1, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1591, U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007. Override attempt failed in House, 222-203 (284 needed). A later version of the bill that excluded certain aspects of the initial legislation that the President disapproved of... H.R. 2206, was enacted as Pub.L. 110-28 with the President's approval.
3. June 20, 2007: Vetoed S. 5, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007.
4. October 3, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 976, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 ("SCHIP"). Override attempt failed in House, 273-156 (286 votes needed).
5. November 2, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1495, Water Resources Development Act of 2007. Overridden by House, 361-54 (277 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 79-14 (62 needed), and enacted as Pub.L. 110-114 over President's veto.
6. November 13, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3043, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2008. Override attempt failed in House, 277-141 (279 votes needed).
7. December 12, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3963, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007.[18] Override attempt failed in House, 260-152 (275 votes needed).
8. December 28, 2007: Pocket Vetoed H.R. 1585, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008[19]. A later version of the bill that changed a minor provision of which the President disapproved was quickly passed by Congress (H.R. 4986) and was enacted with the President's approval as Pub.L. 110-181 on 28 January 2008.
9. March 8, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2082, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.[20][21] Override attempt failed in House, 225-188.
10. May 21, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2419, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill.[22][23] Overridden by House, 316-108 (283 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 82-13 (64 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-234 over the President's veto. Due to a clerical error, this act was repealed by Pub.L. 110-246.
11. 18 June 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6421, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill, re-passed by Congress to correct a clerical error in HR 2419.[24] Overridden by House, 317-109 (284 votes required). Overridden by Senate, 80-14 (63 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-246 over the President's veto.
12. July 15, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6331, Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act.[25] Overriden by House, 383-41 (283 votes required.) Overriden by Senate, 70-26 (64 votes required). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-275 over the President's veto.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

Since 2006, Congress has managed to help the average American despite a long list of legislation vetoed by George Bush. Here is the record:

1. July 19, 2006: Vetoed H.R. 810, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, a bill to ease restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Override attempt failed in House, 235-193 (286 needed).
2. May 1, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1591, U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007. Override attempt failed in House, 222-203 (284 needed). A later version of the bill that excluded certain aspects of the initial legislation that the President disapproved of... H.R. 2206, was enacted as Pub.L. 110-28 with the President's approval.
3. June 20, 2007: Vetoed S. 5, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007.
4. October 3, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 976, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 ("SCHIP"). Override attempt failed in House, 273-156 (286 votes needed).
5. November 2, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1495, Water Resources Development Act of 2007. Overridden by House, 361-54 (277 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 79-14 (62 needed), and enacted as Pub.L. 110-114 over President's veto.
6. November 13, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3043, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2008. Override attempt failed in House, 277-141 (279 votes needed).
7. December 12, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3963, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007.[18] Override attempt failed in House, 260-152 (275 votes needed).
8. December 28, 2007: Pocket Vetoed H.R. 1585, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008[19]. A later version of the bill that changed a minor provision of which the President disapproved was quickly passed by Congress (H.R. 4986) and was enacted with the President's approval as Pub.L. 110-181 on 28 January 2008.
9. March 8, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2082, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.[20][21] Override attempt failed in House, 225-188.
10. May 21, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2419, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill.[22][23] Overridden by House, 316-108 (283 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 82-13 (64 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-234 over the President's veto. Due to a clerical error, this act was repealed by Pub.L. 110-246.
11. 18 June 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6421, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill, re-passed by Congress to correct a clerical error in HR 2419.[24] Overridden by House, 317-109 (284 votes required). Overridden by Senate, 80-14 (63 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-246 over the President's veto.
12. July 15, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6331, Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act.[25] Overriden by House, 383-41 (283 votes required.) Overriden by Senate, 70-26 (64 votes required). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-275 over the President's veto.

But I thought nothing good had been done for the average citizen since 2001.

 

[razzelflabben]

My poll attempted to list every possible answer. If "your" answer is not represented, tell me what it is and I will edit the poll to include it.

and yet, when I said in a post that my choice was not represented, and at least one other poster said that theirs wasn't represented, there was no offer to change the choices to fit our feelings. At least two of us formally annouced that our choice was not provided and it didn't matter. So why now, why is there a sudden change of heart about adjusting the poll?

 

[WalksWithChrist]

I'm just now seeing this and I must say...

This poll sucks.