OccupyEducated.org

Register or log in - lost password?

Login with Facebook

OccupyEducated Forums » Discussion » 2012 Presidential Elections

Obama..the only viable candidate for 2012

(25 posts) (8 voices)
  • Started 1 year ago by politicalsentry
  • Latest reply from OccupyPosters

Tags:

  • 2012
  • after action review
  • coach factory outlet
  • coach outlet
  • coach outlet online
  • coach outlet stores online
  • education
  • fake watches for men
  • flower girl petal dress
  • halloween outlet
  • history
  • obama
  • rolex fake watches
  • Ron Paul
  • strategy
  • vanguard
  • Voting for Obama

123Next »
  1. politicalsentry
    Member

    If we do not reelect president Obama we will be stuck with a deregulator.

    Put simply: deregulation causes collapse because it allows for dirty business and those who know how, exploit those who do not.

    It was the elimination of Glass-Steagall (a government regulation) that allowed bankers to undercut previously established safety precautions and take high risk investments like those sub-prime mortgages that they were eagerly giving out to everyone and their mother at no money down (bc it drove up property values) packaging them with safe investments like government bonds (Triple A rated bonds from Frannie Mae), selling the whole thing as a safe investment in what is known as a "collateralized debt obligation" to other banks, pension funds, etc., When, inevitably, people began defaulting on their mortgages, the banks stopped giving out loans, which caused inflation. So now while money was decreasing in value the debt stayed at the same level meaning you owed more money to pay off debts. This in turn, caused businesses, especially medium size businesses (many of which relied on loans from the bank every year) to fail. Soon the banks were failing because they owned so many of these sub-prime mortgages and in the end that created this recession. (ok so I borrowed this from my Ron Paul post but its relevant.)
    The Glass Steagall Act made this kind of dealing illegal. Regulation is generally a good thing. The government is an easy boogeyman but the day we lose faith in it, is the day we give ourselves to the corporations.

    This recession resulting from a regulatory failure is not new news. The Savings and Loans Crisis in the 80's is another very similar example of this trend.

    The bailout was necessary because without it we would have had another Great Depression.

    Now I'm not a huge fan of Obama's because with that bailout I would have liked to see 3 things: 1) federal absolving of student loan debts, a 2 year freeze on bank foreclosures of houses owned for more than 5 years, and of course prosecutions for the bankers and investors who knowingly poisoned the market.
    Also, I wish Obama would use George W. Bush's leadership style of "you don't like my policy? too bad." I wish he were more progressive...HOWEVER Obama is the ONLY choice of candidate. Nobody else will do. Anyone who favors deregulation is a fool.

    Regulation is responsible for a minimum wage, desegregation, clean air, clean water, health and safety standards, workplace safety, workman's comp, the ability to organize labor, child labor laws, public education standards (which, as Republicans attack the Department of Education, have been slipping), eliminating sexism in the workplace (to a degree), and of course my favorite: ENDING SLAVERY.

    I know Obama isnt the ideal candidate, but as he has said "let's not let perfection be the enemy of pragmatism."

    Posted 1 year ago #
  2. Däv
    Member

    you say that as though Obama is not, himself, a deregulator:

    http://www.thenation.com/blog/157884/obamas-deregulation-dance-wall-street

    http://www.thenation.com/article/157865/obama-pulls-clinton-deregulation

    I don't see ANY viable candidates for 2012.

    I'm writing in "The 99%." for president.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  3. Paul Phelps
    Member

    What a joke!!! Let's buck the two party system. I've believed for a long time that part of the reason for this mess that we're in is the mentality of "lesser evilism." We have to vote democrat because the republicans are so bad; therefore all the democrats have to do is be slightly better than the republicans and we'll elect them again and again.

    This mentality is flawed and has to stop. In reality most of the democrats, including Obama, are just about as sold out as anyone else.

    There are NO VIABLE CANDIDATES. Obama just signed the NDAA into law, he has done nothing for peace, clean energy, or to defend Occupy. What a joke.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  4. politicalsentry
    Member

    If you don't vote Obama, you put the Republicans in power. No change happens overnight. Until we can have alternative voting, we have to vote Democrat. No president is strictly a regulator or deregulator. Obama is the best option.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  5. Paul Phelps
    Member

    I know what you're saying, but I couldn't disagree more. As long as we "have to vote democrat" the democrats have our implicit permission to continue sucking. Of course change will not happen overnight, but at least we can get change if they start losing elections due to their lies and corruption.

    On another note, Obama has pissed me off on almost every issue I voted to put him in power for.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  6. Paul Phelps
    Member

    I mean, look at it this way...and yes, it's extreme hyperbole, but let's say that Gingrich is Hitler and Obama is Mussolini. Are you going to continue to vote in the lesser of the facists every year because they are a bit better? Or rather, are you going to recognize the fact that the difference is a matter of degree and not of kind and buck the whole system?

    I would argue that plodding along obediently on a somewhat better path is the wrong method. A vote for Obama is business as usual. Occupy should not be business as usual.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  7. politicalsentry
    Member

    @Paul Phelps

    If Occupy does not throw its support behind Obama AT ELECTION TIME, it will divide the left and put the greater evil in: a deregulation Republican. Our country CANNOT afford that kind of leadership. Occupy must pull the Democratic Party to the left. Obama is also a far cry from a fascist. He's a compromiser. That's the problem. I still trust him more than ANY of the insane Republicans...and they are all insane.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  8. politicalsentry
    Member

    There is no bucking the whole system. Our government isn't broken beyond repair and talk like that is what alienated people from the hippie movement in the 60's. The end goal of Occupy should not be to get rid of the government as we know it, it should be progressive reform. If Occupy wants to succeed it must run candidates through the party that should be progressive (the Democrats) and bring about reforms that way. Voting is the only way to change this country. One reason Nixon was able to come to power (aside from the fact that the hippies alienated middle America with their anarchist and communist messages) was that independents stopped voting. The rise of independents has put conservatives in power. If you don't vote: someone will. That someone happens to be a right wing fundamentalist. The youth make up a large enough portion of the population to win EVERY election if only they voted. The problem is that the people who do vote are mobilized conservatives. You have to get behind the party that best represents your interests and VOTE IN ITS PRIMARIES, CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS, etc if you want change. Occupy should produce progressive candidates and elect them into office. The Tea Party has been successful because it has put candidates in office. The right wing is VERY organized and party unity is high. This is the secret to their success. The left needs some party unity.

    Go to the polls and vote Democrat or give what's left of the country to the 1%. It's up to you.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  9. Paul Phelps
    Member

    Deal with the devil, my friend, deal with the devil. Are you going to keep compromising as long as the Republicans put forth awful candidates, because, let me tell you, that's never going to stop.

    How can I, or the movement itself, vote for someone who escalates our insane wars and takes economic advice from the same corrupt cronies who crashed our economy? When did he stick up for us and our free speech? When, for f#$%'s sake, did he stand strong on anything we care about?

    I think you misinterpret my "buck the system" comment. I meant buck the two-party system. And as long as you're trapped in it, nothing will change.

    Again, there is a certain logic to what you say, but look at the logic of what I'm saying. The same argument comes up every election in relation to a true progressive candidate. I voted for Obama knowing it was a risk. It's scary to put a Republican in, but we have to do something besides the status quo. From where I'm sitting, Obama doesn't look much different from Bush anyways.

    Posted 1 year ago #
  10. politicalsentry
    Member

    Every single Republican wants to eliminate the EPA after scientists released a memo recently that said "if things don't change in 5 years we can't fix this planet." They want to do away with the Department of Education which provides student loans for underprivileged kids to go to schools. They want to eliminate the Social Security and welfare. People's lives depend on these programs. Think what you will about Obama, but if you don't vote for him, you're gambling with people's lives. I hope I speak for more than just myself when I say cannot do that and I cannot stand by a movement that does that.

    Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

123Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.

OccupyEducated Forums is proudly powered by bbPress.