Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

If it comes down to Obama vs. Romney...

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

In that case, obviously vote Obama. Reason being so that when things get worse we at least have an explicit interventionist in office rather than someone upon whom capitalism can be assigned to and blamed on because he has an R next to his name and uses Reaganesque slogans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case, obviously vote Obama. Reason being so that when things get worse we at least have an explicit interventionist in office rather than someone upon whom capitalism can be assigned to and blamed on because he has an R next to his name and uses Reaganesque slogans.

I agree with that logic. On the other hand, another Obama term may be America's coup de grace.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're trying to spin this like Texas Governor Rick Perry is going to be challenging Romney for Republic Candidate. Am I the only one who thinks these two guys look like some corrupt mayor in a Batman comic? They're straight out of Gotham City.

I agree that voting for the candidate who openly denounces capitalism over the guy who runs on it dishonestly is better for the cause of capitalism in the long run. But it's chilling that that is a decision we need to make.

-WC

Edited by WilliamColton
Link to post
Share on other sites
They're trying to spin this like Texas Governor Rick Perry is going to be challenging Romney for Republic Candidate. Am I the only one who thinks these two guys look like some corrupt mayor in a Batman comic? They're straight out of Gotham City.
If we assume the the profile of the U.S. voter is similar to the profile of the Gotham City voter, they might still be right ;)
Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't vote for either of them. I'll leave that slot on my ballot blank, just like I did in 2008. (Not that it will matter on a practical level -- I live in California, and if the Republican candidate is doing well enough here that my vote could impact things then he/she's going to win nationally in a landslide with or without me.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with that logic. On the other hand, another Obama term may be America's coup de grace.

I agree with that logic, too. And I agree that it may be the straw that breaks the camel's back. (to mix metaphors) I think it would be a good thing to have it all come crashing down. People don't seem to get that communism doesn't work, socialism doesn't work, socialism-lite doesn't work, a mixed economy doesn't work, and crony capitalism doesn't work. They need to be slapped in the face with consequences of their choices. The faster it falls apart, the quicker we can get to rebuilding it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that they _will_ blame capitalism even though we have not had that system during our lifetimes. So some sort of "third way" (not socialist, not pseudo-capitalist, but, well, actually socialist with different trappings) will end up on top.

The objection, if I understand it correctly, is that the American people will blame capitalism anyway, and so instead of realizing the failure of interventionism to cure the problem it created, they will go one step further than Obama and even deeper into socialism. I don't find this likely. Most Americans see Obama as more relatively left of center. Since they are inundated with pragmatism and the idea that "extremes are bad," they are more likely to react against his position and desire to swing the pendulum back toward a more relatively market-oriented direction. Of course, the leftist base and hard core will react in the way you indicated (because this is what they believe already), but the American people are unlikely to go "Obama didn't go far enough, we need micro planning!"

So the idea of having an explicit anti-capitalist instead of a conservative sloganizer is to help people see more clearly what they don't already believe. This doesn't work on people who already think capitalism is the fault of everything, so if capitalism will take the blame anyway (which of course you are right it will with some people) then this strategy won't work on these people, but the point is that it is not aimed at them in the first place. In their case, it won't matter who is elected or what they are saying. It's aimed at the pragmatic and centrist-type people that react against what they see based on who is in office and what he represents, i.e. the people who will be affected based on what the President is saying. So in that case, better to have Obama in for a while longer as opposed to the evil Romney.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with that logic. On the other hand, another Obama term may be America's coup de grace.

Agreed. If Obama gets another SCOTUS appointment, it's checkmate. As others here have stated previously, having Obama in the White House puts socialists on the defense since they are deprived of capitalist straw men to attack (Gingrich, Romney, etc.). However, they won't have to defend him if he is able to silence his opponents, which he will be able to do if he gets control of the Supreme Court.

Most Americans see Obama as more relatively left of center. Since they are inundated with pragmatism and the idea that "extremes are bad," they are more likely to react against his position and desire to swing the pendulum back toward a more relatively market-oriented direction.

I think any centrist backlash against Obama would be temporary, since the center shifts, and it almost always shifts to the Left. Take FDR, for example. FDR presided over most of the Great Depression, and many centrists did blame him for America's economic woes. But fast forward to today, and almost everyone including centrists believe that FDR saved us from the Depression. It's not just Obama's current reign that we have to worry about, but also his idealogical influence over future generations, which will continue to grow the longer he stays in office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone ought to say it: I vote Libertarian. I was particularly proud to vote for Harry Browne, having met him. Go ahead, say I’m perverting liberty.

Choosing between Bush, Gore, and Browne was seriously a no brainer. I do, however, plan to re-register as a Republican in order to vote for Gary Johnson in the primary, if he gets that far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. If Obama gets another SCOTUS appointment, it's checkmate. As others here have stated previously, having Obama in the White House puts socialists on the defense since they are deprived of capitalist straw men to attack (Gingrich, Romney, etc.). However, they won't have to defend him if he is able to silence his opponents, which he will be able to do if he gets control of the Supreme Court.

I think any centrist backlash against Obama would be temporary, since the center shifts, and it almost always shifts to the Left. Take FDR, for example. FDR presided over most of the Great Depression, and many centrists did blame him for America's economic woes. But fast forward to today, and almost everyone including centrists believe that FDR saved us from the Depression. It's not just Obama's current reign that we have to worry about, but also his idealogical influence over future generations, which will continue to grow the longer he stays in office.

You raise some good points there. I didn't think about the whole Supreme court issue. I guess it would be kind of bad to upset the balance in the favor of one way or another. I don't know if there's any other reason why his influence would grow, though, and if whatever influence he has in being a two-term president will be worse than Romney.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of leaving the ballot box blank, you could do what I saw in one news story: vote "Revolution".

Between those two, there's not really a better option. A vote for Obama will be interpreted as an endorsement of anti-capitalism, and a vote for Romney will encourage the Republicans to keep nominating such candidates.

Edited by Vox Rationis
Link to post
Share on other sites

You raise some good points there. I didn't think about the whole Supreme court issue. I guess it would be kind of bad to upset the balance in the favor of one way or another. I don't know if there's any other reason why his influence would grow, though, and if whatever influence he has in being a two-term president will be worse than Romney.

My concern with respect to Obama's influence, or his legacy I should say, is how the history textbooks will portray him. I remember the textbooks in high school basically treating FDR like a god. Undoubtedly, historians will try to do the same with Obama regardless of what the electoral outcome is. However, if he loses the election, they won't be able to gloss over his critics like they do with FDR. They'll try to smear his critics of course, but nevertheless, they'll be forced to acknowledge them and hopefully some smart kids in the future will be able to see past the propaganda as a result.

The uncritical historical portrayal of FDR is partially the reason why we have so many left of center Republican candidates like Romney in the first place: They were taught to worship FDR in school, and thus end up channeling him whenever there is a crisis (No doubt Bush was channeling FDR when he decided to pass TARP).

Am I the only one who thinks these two guys look like some corrupt mayor in a Batman comic? They're straight out of Gotham City.

Romney always reminded me of Warren Beatty from Bulworth. Every time I hear him speak, I expect him to start rapping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can America really survive another four years of Obama?

I think it can survive 4 more years of the America hater, but it won't be pretty. If given the choice, I'll vote for Romney. I'd rather walk toward the cliff than take a running leap off of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone ought to say it: I vote Libertarian. I was particularly proud to vote for Harry Browne, having met him. Go ahead, say I’m perverting liberty.

Choosing between Bush, Gore, and Browne was seriously a no brainer. I do, however, plan to re-register as a Republican in order to vote for Gary Johnson in the primary, if he gets that far.

You're a pervert for liberty. Wait, was that what you said someone was gonna say? Who knows.

I wonder, of all the big-talkers that say they're moving, how many actually do it. I'm gonna say 0, because moving to another country is way harder than yelling on the internet about how the new president stinks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder, of all the big-talkers that say they're moving, how many actually do it. I'm gonna say 0, because moving to another country is way harder than yelling on the internet about how the new president stinks.

It's not zero; I moved out of the US in late 2006 when I saw the political writing on the wall -- and I know another expat who lives near me who left the US explicitly because of Bush 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't think it matters who gets elected president this time around, while I can wish for at best Ron Paul to win, he wont, and the downward spiral will continue until there is a revolution, not necessarily soon, but eventually. I think the best thing to do at this point is to buy a house, even if it is a crappy one, in a rural area, fortify it, build a fallout shelter in the basement, and stockpile food, water, fuel, and weapons for when it all goes to shit :nuke:

oh thought it be a laugh to mention obomneycare :lol:

Edited by rdrdrdrd
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...