• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Why should Obama be reelected?

I can't match opposition to same-sex marriage universally to religious extremism. Plenty of clearly not religious extremist politicians either agree with this point of view or don't have the cajones to speak up against it. Being a cowardly accessory doesn't excuse the point of view, but it doesn't mean the person shares the religious extremism either.
 
BenBurch said:
Obama should be re-elected because he is the most qualified person who is up for the position.

Do I wish I had some other applicants for the job? You bet I do! But if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
Click to expand...

I prefer the Jayne Cobb version. "If wishes were horses we would all be eating steak".
 
Tricky said:
Anybody can post as long as it's more-or-less on-topic. Applecorped can request that people give positive reasons, but he can't demand it. I considered it a polite request, so I tried (mostly) to honor it.
Click to expand...

How is saying that Obama should be reelected because he is preferable to the other candidates not a positive reason?

ETA: In practical terms, it's how we conduct presidential elections. Sure you can write in someone else, but no write in candidate has ever had much of a showing in a presidential election.
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
My thoughts exactly. Any candidate whose platform includes subjugating a portion of the citizenry classifies them as being an extremist.
Click to expand...

And there really is no argument against the equal treatment of homosexuals that doesn't have a religious basis. At least, I've yet to hear any.
 
Here's another reason to vote for Obama: To demonstrate that the American public rejects the claims that the President is a pretender/non-citizen/Muslim/atheist/Manchurian Candidate/subversive/traitor.

And the flipside of that is to savor the wailing and gnashing of teeth of the Culture Warriors, the Christian supremacists, and the chauvinist "Real AmericanTMs" on November 7.


I also like the fact that Obama doesn't always wear neckties.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
How is saying that Obama should be reelected because he is preferable to the other candidates not a positive reason?

ETA: In practical terms, it's how we conduct presidential elections. Sure you can write in someone else, but no write in candidate has ever had much of a showing in a presidential election.
Click to expand...
It's a comparative reason, i.e. one is better, one is worse. Clearly, Applcorped's idea was to see what people thought Obama's accomplishments were. It's fine that you find him preferable, as do I, but it really doesn't give any information on why.
 
applecorped said:
Try harder. Surely you can mention something as to why he should be reelected without mentioning the opposition.
Click to expand...
Why? "Lesser of two evils" is a legitimate reason to vote for someone. I'd like there to be a better reason, but when there isn't one it will do.
 
Tricky said:
It's a comparative reason, i.e. one is better, one is worse.
Click to expand...

But that's the decision we make when casting a vote in a presidential election.

Why pretend that we're just listing reasons why Obama is the greatest person in the universe? That's catering to a strawman argument.

He should be re-elected because he's the better candidate. He's the better candidate because of what he is AND what he is not. Electing a president is strictly a relative calculation. I don't think it's reasonable to disallow half of the calculation in determining which is the better candidate.

ETA: I suspect Applecorp isn't interested in reasons why Obama should or should not be re-elected. Instead, he's trying to constrain the rules on answering the question so that he can then say that the only reasons we have to re-elect Obama are x and y. I'm fine with the rules as long as he has to say they're the "only" reasons when you ignore all the other reasons.
 
Last edited:
GreyArea said:
And the flipside of that is to savor the wailing and gnashing of teeth of the Culture Warriors, the Christian supremacists, and the chauvinist "Real AmericanTMs" on November 7.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, last time the wingers were so up in arms was when Klinton was president. Last thing we would ever want to do is to return to the horror of peace and prosperity that stained his regime.

Daredelvis
 
Dessi said:
...LGBT rights... sexual orientation and gender identity. This is huge... openly gay federal judge... transgender woman, at least 150 other LGBT officials... gay rights... gay rights... foreign LGBT asylum seekers... gay rights...LGBT... cisgender allies...
Click to expand...
Because with all that faces this nation and this world, that's what really matters...

Elypsis44 said:
Do you ever get tired of parroting Sean Hannity?
Click to expand...
Stalker, Is that why they banned me from his forum years ago? Literally, you know, I gotta tell ya, I mean, frankly, you know, I gotta tell ya, frankly, literally, it's unbelievable, literally...

Alferd_Packer said:
Do you think we should "Keep America American?"
Click to expand...
Do you think you're clever?

fishbob said:
Neither does he.
Click to expand...
You're welcome and glad I could help you feel better about yourself. Only a week until the days start getting longer...
 
Last edited:
applecorped said:
Good list. It's hard not mention a Republican though, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Yes, since the election is going to be effectively a choice between a Democratic and a Republican candidate. It's hard to say why one is better without referencing the other.

Can you tell me why 5 > 3 is true without mentioning 3?

If you want to include 3rd party candidates, that's fine too. Can you say why 5 is the greatest among 5, 3, 2 and 1 without referencing anything but the 5?

This really is the kind of choice we make in presidential elections. We're not creating the optimal president. We're choosing from among actual existing choices.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
But that's the decision we make when casting a vote in a presidential election.

Why pretend that we're just listing reasons why Obama is the greatest person in the universe? That's catering to a strawman argument.

He should be re-elected because he's the better candidate. He's the better candidate because of what he is AND what he is not. Electing a president is strictly a relative calculation. I don't think it's reasonable to disallow half of the calculation in determining which is the better candidate.

ETA: I suspect Applecorp isn't interested in reasons why Obama should or should not be re-elected. Instead, he's trying to constrain the rules on answering the question so that he can then say that the only reasons we have to re-elect Obama are x and y. I'm fine with the rules as long as he has to say they're the "only" reasons when you ignore all the other reasons.
Click to expand...

Well it is useful to articulate why one would vote for Obama without focusing on his opponents. I object to the idea that one should not mention the opposition or the lack of negative qualities. For example, I see that 'not an extremist' is somehow deemed mentioning the opposition when it really does not.

If the point is to make us meaningfully examine ones support for Obama without it becoming 'us vs them', and focusing on beneficial qualities, then I'd say that's useful. If the point is to control a discussion to place those supporting Obama on the defensive only because it's become ridiculously easy to support Obama's reelection by pointing out the glaring problems with the rest of the field and there's not a lot of ways to turn that around, I'd say that it's just a rhetorical trick.
 
JudeBrando said:
Do you think you're clever?
Click to expand...

I think he's referencing Mitt Romney's use of that KKK slogan in his campaign. For some people, that's a pretty shocking thing. Apparently you don't know that Romney used a KKK slogan, or if you do, you think it's nothing to be concerned about.

Which concerns me.
 
Tricky said:
If people like you allow a Newt Gingrich to become president, then you are partially to blame. Don't be the kind of person who screws his country because there's no perfect candidate.
Click to expand...

If more people responded like him we might actually get better candidates.
 
Unabogie said:
How dare you call someone racist for merely using KKK slogans! What's next? Romney can't dress up in blackface, even if he's only kidding?

Fascist!
Click to expand...

Maybe it's just a coincidence. «Keep America American» isn't very original to start with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom