Quote:
Originally Posted by Taltarzac725
We know by now that you do not like voting for incumbents. I have used this tactic sometimes too if I do not like the way local politics are going. I usually only approach voting with that kind of position though when the incumbents had a lot to do with what the current situation is. Not sure how either Romney or President Obama can stop the huge amount of spending going into governmental programs. Romney wants a huge military industrial complex build up to counter the threat he sees from Russia, China, and various other nations. Obama wants to continue with his Obamacare and other social welfare programs which also cost a lot of money. Both Romney and Obama look like they will continue to take us deeper and deeper into debt.
|
Obama has the power of the veto pen. He also could have accepted and endorsed the Simpson-Bowles recommendations and thrown them into the lap of the Congress. I would have given him "credit" for that, although certainly not all the commission recommendations would have found their way into law.
Instead, Obama has neither used the power of his veto pen, the bully pulpit or any attempt at getting the political factions to compromise. Some might argue that he tried, but no one can honestly say that he's had any effect on the Congressional legislative process or agenda at all. Yes, he began his term wih an awful situation left by the Bush administration. But, he has done little if anything to improve it.
Some of the stuff Romney says he wants to do are really scary ideas and there is nothing on his resume that says he is either capable or experienced in accomplishing any of what he promises. He has governed using the art of compromise with a state legislature with ideological values far from his own. Maybe that's a glow of hope.
But like I said, from what I can see, the differences between Obama and Romney are paper thin.