HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » If there is no difference...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:51 PM

If there is no difference between Obama and Romney...

45 replies, 3939 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 45 replies Author Time Post
Reply If there is no difference between Obama and Romney... (Original post)
WilliamPitt Jun 2012 OP
CaliforniaPeggy Jun 2012 #1
The Magistrate Jun 2012 #2
kentuck Jun 2012 #3
Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2012 #27
11 Bravo Jun 2012 #4
Puzzledtraveller Jun 2012 #5
CJCRANE Jun 2012 #8
Puzzledtraveller Jun 2012 #11
CJCRANE Jun 2012 #13
freedom fighter jh Jun 2012 #31
jtuck004 Jun 2012 #17
AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #16
robinlynne Jun 2012 #43
sinkingfeeling Jun 2012 #6
freshwest Jun 2012 #7
stupidicus Jun 2012 #9
Jamaal510 Jun 2012 #10
coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #12
AnnieK401 Jun 2012 #23
stupidicus Jun 2012 #36
AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #20
quaker bill Jun 2012 #25
AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #29
woo me with science Jun 2012 #32
stupidicus Jun 2012 #37
Life Long Dem Jun 2012 #34
stupidicus Jun 2012 #40
Flint Stone Jun 2012 #14
AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2012 #18
HopeHoops Jun 2012 #15
jtuck004 Jun 2012 #19
agent46 Jun 2012 #21
Flint Stone Jun 2012 #22
freedom fighter jh Jun 2012 #28
scuciti Jun 2012 #24
ecstatic Jun 2012 #33
coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #39
limpyhobbler Jun 2012 #26
ecstatic Jun 2012 #30
little elvis Jun 2012 #35
emulatorloo Jun 2012 #38
Gregorian Jun 2012 #41
TheKentuckian Jun 2012 #42
Bonobo Jun 2012 #44
alittlelark Jun 2012 #45

Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:53 PM

1. Good question........Why indeed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 02:54 PM

2. Good Question, Mr. Pitt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:00 PM

3. Oh, there is a difference...

Maybe not the difference some would like, but still a difference.

The Koch Bros see their contributions as an investment, not as "spending".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #3)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:42 PM

27. Yes they want something in return

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:02 PM

4. Damned good question!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:02 PM

5. I wonder though, if its Koch for Mitt and if

politics is a just a leveraging game between corporations and industries with the presidents as chess pieces then who's profiting from President Obama? Just asking rhetorically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:46 PM

8. So you think nobody should profit?

Democrats generally think that a "rising tide lifts all boats".

The working and middle classes should share in the prosperity they created and not let it be sucked out of the economy by the 1%.

So the more people who profit the better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CJCRANE (Reply #8)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:18 PM

11. I don't recall giving my opinion, suprised you came away with one.

The question was rhetorical. Question, not a statement of opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #11)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:23 PM

13. In a capitalist country there will always be people who profit

from various policies. Profit and prosperity in itself is not a bad thing. It just is. So to imply that some or many people will profit from Obama's policies is not saying anything shocking.

It seems like an attempt to draw attention away from the fact that only the 1% will profit from Romney's policies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #11)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:56 PM

31. A rhetorical question often *is* a statement of opinion. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CJCRANE (Reply #8)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:41 PM

17. Sure seems that for the past few years a very few boats have lifted at the expense of

a lot of small craft. Don't want to elect the Titanic, of course, but it would be nice if our Tugs would at least pull more off of the rocks.

Nice thought though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:39 PM

16. Good question. As you've pointed out, it is a rhetorical one.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:33 PM

43. well, the banking industry, pharmaceutical industry.....health insurance industry...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 03:44 PM

7. Because the Koch Brothers want a 'real progressive leader' in the White House.

As soon as Obama is voted out, a new paradigm will be in place, supporting human rights, social and environmental justice, health care and jobs. We need a strong leader to deliver all of these things for the USA.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:13 PM

9. who has said there is "no difference"

is what I'd like to know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stupidicus (Reply #9)


Response to Jamaal510 (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:22 PM

12. Shit, I'm way out of the mainstream but even I can

 

see what a sociopath Romney is and how fundamentally decent (even if I think he's somewhat misguided) Obama is.

Anyone saying there's no difference between Romney and Obama needs to pull their head out of their ass, for fuck's sake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #12)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:06 PM

23. Well said!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jamaal510 (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:33 PM

36. I doubt that

that's (and the content of this top post in my deconstruction of it) just an expression of your pov that BHO/the dems can't be improved upon, or that there's no rational or justifiable cause for an interest in a third party. That must be why the OWS doesn't endorse either, those outta the mainstream kooks.

It reads to me like a roundabout way for "purists" to keep their heads buried in the sand over the similarities between the two major parties, and only the dems are beyond reproach over those similarities.

It sure is nice to know that it's either 100% support for the BHO/dems or not at all in this kinda political calculus.

It's an exaggeration, and quite a dishonest one at that, and likely something that erodes support as much as the things criticized do.

It's also almost like acknowledging the similarities and still supporting BHO/the dems are mutually exclusive things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stupidicus (Reply #9)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:50 PM

20. Good question. It may be that some are merely raising the issue as a strawman

 

so that none of us can raise any concerns about the further extension of tax-cuts for the super-rich, the endless wars in the Middle-East, and the pending wage-lowering, let's-send-more-jobs-to-foreign-countries "free-trade" agreement.

President Obama could distinguish himself from Rmoney by clearly opposing another extension of tax-cuts for the super-rich, by taking steps to end optional wars in the Middle-East, and by stopping his Administration from negotiating for another "free-trade" agreement.

He's going to win re-election, but it would help if he would take certain positions to more clearly distinguish himself from Rmoney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #20)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:26 PM

25. Iraq doesn't count?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quaker bill (Reply #25)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:54 PM

29. Count for what?

 

Are you operating under the belief that U.S. tax dollars are not being used to finance U.S. supplied mercenaries in Iraq?

If wars depend upon the existence of the wearing of military uniforms on both sides, then Iraq counts as being peaceful. If that reasoning is applied to the Taliban, can't we say that they are not at war in Afghanistan?

If wars depend upon the MSM reporting and characterizing them as "wars," then aren't all covert wars something other than wars?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #20)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:56 PM

32. Thank you. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #20)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:39 PM

37. exactly

that was my deconstruction of it as well.

I saw it as a jab diected at those who'd dare be concerned about the ways they are similar. The only way I've seen that charge even approximated have largely been confined to the "war on terror", not domestic/economic issues. While some charge that even there BHO is repub-lite -- closer to Raygun than FDR -- there's no one of note I'm aware that aren't aware of the many diffs/distinctions between the two guys on domestic/econ issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stupidicus (Reply #9)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:00 PM

34. That was my first thought

 

Who the hell ever said there's no difference. There's no difference in Bush and Romney. Heard that one over a hundred times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Life Long Dem (Reply #34)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:57 PM

40. one shared by several/many no doubt

Romney could well turn out to be Bush on steroids.

I read it as a slam on those who think there are some similarities between him and BHO, which is exaggerated (the criticisms over this and that) into things like that. It's almost like an individuals eroded support for BHO these days is either counted as more support for Romney, or a treason of sorts.

I don't get it. While I've been a WC Fields kinda guy most of my voting life Hell, I never vote for anybody, I always vote against. W. C. Fields I've always seen myself as the exception rather than the rule, based on experience.

I can see that kinda attitude coming from authoritarian, bed/pants-wetting rightwingnut cult members, but expected more "tolerance" outta "liberals", since that's supposed to define them much as the aforementioned does most of their opposition.

I guess that "similarity" alone makes them "just alike/identical" too...lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:36 PM

14. Because he wasn't born into American Aristocracy (and the obvious)

It doesn't matter that he has governed to the right of an Eisenhower Republican.

It doesn't matter he's given them everything they've asked for; socialism for the rich, poverty for the rest of us.

They really, really think that they are genetically and intellectually superior to the rest of us, and the position of the Presidency is for one of their own. These are truly the most arrogant people on the planet.

If you can gut it, listen to Rush, Hannity, or any right wing mouthpiece. They make it painfully apparent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flint Stone (Reply #14)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:42 PM

18. You're right on all issues except that he hasn't quite given them everything that they've asked for.

 

The pending "free-trade" agreement, which Rmoney already says that he supports, has not been finalized.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:36 PM

15. Well, a couple. Rmoney doesn't have a soul and he's not black.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 04:44 PM

19. They aren't. They are paying to defeat Obama. A loser's game. Who they elect is mostly


immaterial to them, I expect. As long as whoever the "chosen one" is can be twisted in whatever way they want to blow...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:03 PM

21. The right wing dream

of permanent GOP rule is still alive. A Romney presidency would no doubt continue the stacking of the courts and population of the federal bureaucracy with right wing loyalists from theocratic diploma mills in the Bush/Cheney tradition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:05 PM

22. In these Peoples Dominions

$400,000,000.00 represents what, a whole 4% of their wealth maybe???

When they start spending significant portions of their vast array of wealth on a presidential race, you'll know we have a real "man of the people" running.

Right now, it's all just kabuki theater so you don't think the deck is stacked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flint Stone (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:54 PM

28. Agree. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:15 PM

24. The question

For me as a voter, the question is - does Obama represent me? I'm against facism, the police state and war. Against corporate profiteering at the expense of the poor and middle class.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scuciti (Reply #24)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:56 PM

33. uh huh nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scuciti (Reply #24)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:44 PM

39. That is the wrong question to ask yourself. The right question, imo, is this:

 

which candidate will best advance the interests of the working class (or do the least damage to those interests).

If I am right that this is the 'real' question, then unquestionably Obama has to be the choice.

I mean is anyone seriously maintaining that Romney will better protect the interests of workers?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:39 PM

26. I doubt any human on this earth thinks there is no difference between romney and obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 05:55 PM

30. Great comeback for trolls posing as democrats/liberals nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:44 PM

38. I've heard it is just a "head fake"

Or I bet I will hear that soon on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:03 PM

41. I just had this conversation. I really needed this.

Mister Smarty engineering buddy who knows fucking everything because he reads the Wall Street Journal, and has a photographic memory said that "They're all the same".

I sort of nodded my head, but said that there were things Obama wouldn't do that Mitt will do. Not good enough.

This says it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:23 PM

42. Of course there are differences between Obama and Romney

Hell, there are obvious differences between say Jim DeMint and Poppy Bush. There are are differences between McShame and Romney. There are differences between Olympia Snowe and Ben Nelson. There are differences between Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Who is this argument with? Mostly non-voters, the disengaged, and the tuned out. AKA...not hanging around partisan message boards to receive the barrage of pushback on this.
It seems mostly a ploy to evade conversation about bothersome similarities by flipping it around on a minimal population, almost to the point of chasing shadows.

The tactic is quite familiar. Their is a nagging feeling of a well worn playbook at work in general. Not a carbon copy, more inspiration and assimilation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Tue Jun 19, 2012, 11:44 PM

44. No one thinks the are exactly the same.

A highway is not the same as a local road either.

But if they run parallel, fast or slow, they will arrive in the same place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Wed Jun 20, 2012, 12:25 AM

45. KnR

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread