Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

11/18/2012 new

I heard that exit polls had these results when voters were asked:

Q: Who cares for you?
A: Obama

Q: Who shares your values?
A: Romney

For the most part people vote their pocket books. This is not a 100% rule but often true: upper middle class & rich vote conservative because they tend to let them keep more of their money via lower taxes & deductions. The poor & lower middle class tend to vote liberal because they give them money outright thru various social programs. Economic times are hard right now... more people needing handouts... ergo more people voted for Obama.

Relatively few people will vote their values if that means voting for someone who is not in their best interest. Me personally I'm a one issue voter: anti-abortion. If Obama had suddenly become ardently anti-abortion but remained liberal on the rest of his beliefs then I would have voted for him. I almost make enough to be in the "upper middle class" range and I still would have voted for him. Most people do not vote their values if it will hurt their wallet no matter what those values are: environment, abortion, or whatever.

That's why people voted for socialism. To choose the other cadidate would have meant for more people to get less money in a recession when they need it.

My two cents

LOCKED
11/18/2012 new

(Quote) Michael-556947 said: I like to KNOW ?
(Quote) Michael-556947 said:

I like to KNOW ?

--hide--


And for all their complaining about Obamacare's anti-life policies the bishops did not hand out voter guides that showed people where the candidates stood on life and preached to their people that they needed to vote for life. This is not the same as preaching "Vote for Romney" from the pulpit. This strategy has passed legal review / challenge in courts and could have been used. Compared to what they could have done the bishops did relatively little to educate their people. Catholic Answers (a faithful apologetics organization http://www.catholic.com) printed a Catholic Voter Guide which showed where the candidates stood on the issues of life and others -- the bishops could have mailed one to every household in their diocese and did not.

That's my opinion.

LOCKED
11/18/2012 new

(Quote) Eric-114571 said: I heard that exit polls had these results when voters were asked:Q: Who cares for you?...
(Quote) Eric-114571 said:

I heard that exit polls had these results when voters were asked:

Q: Who cares for you?
A: Obama

Q: Who shares your values?
A: Romney

For the most part people vote their pocket books. This is not a 100% rule but often true: upper middle class & rich vote conservative because they tend to let them keep more of their money via lower taxes & deductions. The poor & lower middle class tend to vote liberal because they give them money outright thru various social programs. Economic times are hard right now... more people needing handouts... ergo more people voted for Obama.

Relatively few people will vote their values if that means voting for someone who is not in their best interest. Me personally I'm a one issue voter: anti-abortion. If Obama had suddenly become ardently anti-abortion but remained liberal on the rest of his beliefs then I would have voted for him. I almost make enough to be in the "upper middle class" range and I still would have voted for him. Most people do not vote their values if it will hurt their wallet no matter what those values are: environment, abortion, or whatever.

That's why people voted for socialism. To choose the other cadidate would have meant for more people to get less money in a recession when they need it.

My

--hide--



Eric,


Just which are Romney's values, versus Obama's values? Do good values only rest with conservatives, neo-cons and ultra-right conservatives?

I want to make sure that I get you right. Obama was elected by a coalition of a majority of white women (rich, middle class and poor, a majority of Latinos (rich, middle class, and poor), majority of African Americans (rich, middle class, and poor), a majority of Asian Americans (rich, middle class, and poor) In your mind of minds, are you suggesting that those people, all of them, 51% of the American voters including me voted for Obama because he gave us handouts? Romney and Ryan called them gifts....Really? I will bet you this, most of us saw our values in Obama, his stand on abortion, notwithstanding! I do not know who is responsible for delivering Obama's handouts and gifts (Post office may be), so if you know who they are tell them that we are still waiting, to please hurry them up!

Lets take Romney, you are aware he flip-flopped on issues, you are aware he told lies, a lot! esp in the final days of Ohio campaigns. You are aware also that he changed his positions so much that toward the end of the campaigns he was sounding just like Obama. In fact in matters of foreign policy, he did not oppose Obama's position. He agreed with him on his foreign policy platform on every point. Most people, on the left or and on the right abhor abortion, but most of us also agree that a woman should be given every right and information and understanding to control her own destiny with regard to her body. Mind you, this has been Romney's position over the years, but, only changed for presidential elections.

Eric, you are also aware of the discussions by conservative republicans about rape, right? You caveat your stand by stating that you are a one issue voter. Fine, I accept that but most of us are many issue voters.

To suggest, therefore, that the majority of us who voted for Obama did so because of handouts, and gifts and not values is simply INASANE!

Most of us do still not understand the values of a rich kid, an interesting faith, and one who is still complaining that those who are not as rich as he is do not love him enough to vote him to the presidency. We simply do not think he is good enough for the job. That's all. You can call them values, but that is simplifying the matter too much!

Final point. If the republicans continue to insult the rest of us as they are doing, whether it is about one or two issues, you will continue to loose. It is not about anyone's wealth, it is patent foolishness and ignorance that we do not understand.




















LOCKED
11/18/2012 new

(Quote) Karis-410918 said: Eric, Just which are Romney's values, versus Obama's values? Do good values only...
(Quote) Karis-410918 said:

Eric,

Just which are Romney's values, versus Obama's values? Do good values only rest with conservatives, neo-cons and ultra-right conservatives?

I want to make sure that I get you right. Obama was elected by a coalition of a majority of white women (rich, middle class and poor, a majority of Latinos (rich, middle class, and poor), majority of African Americans (rich, middle class, and poor), a majority of Asian Americans (rich, middle class, and poor) In your mind of minds, are you suggesting that those people, all of them, 51% of the American voters including me voted for Obama because he gave us handouts? Romney and Ryan called them gifts....Really? I will bet you this, most of us saw our values in Obama, his stand on abortion, notwithstanding! I do not know who is responsible for delivering Obama's handouts and gifts (Post office may be), so if you know who they are tell them that we are still waiting, to please hurry them up!

Lets take Romney, you are aware he flip-flopped on issues, you are aware he told lies, a lot! esp in the final days of Ohio campaigns. You are aware also that he changed his positions so much that toward the end of the campaigns he was sounding just like Obama. In fact in matters of foreign policy, he did not oppose Obama's position. He agreed with him on his foreign policy platform on every point. Most people, on the left or and on the right abhor abortion, but most of us also agree that a woman should be given every right and information and understanding to control her own destiny with regard to her body. Mind you, this has been Romney's position over the years, but, only changed for presidential elections.

Eric, you are also aware of the discussions by conservative republicans about rape, right? You caveat your stand by stating that you are a one issue voter. Fine, I accept that but most of us are many issue voters.

To suggest, therefore, that the majority of us who voted for Obama did so because of handouts, and gifts and not values is simply INASANE!

Most of us do still not understand the values of a rich kid, an interesting faith, and one who is still complaining that those who are not as rich as he is do not love him enough to vote him to the presidency. We simply do not think he is good enough for the job. That's all. You can call them values, but that is simplifying the matter too much!

Final point. If the republicans continue to insult the rest of us as they are doing, whether it is about one or two issues, you will continue to loose. It is not about anyone's wealth, it is patent foolishness and ignorance that we do not understand.

--hide--

I find the criticism of Romney mind-boggling. Not that he's beyond criticism, but the nit-picky critiques of him pale in comparison to the criticisms that can be made about Obama in his first term. Flip-flopping? What about Obama's huge flip-flops? Obama used to be a communist, but in the second debate he says he believes in free markets! For twenty years he listened intently to the sermons of Jeremiah Wright. Then, in 2008, he said he didn't pay attention and threw him under the bus.

And we're wondering whether ROMNEY was good enough for the job? Of course, he is. So many people are, now that Obama, as well as Bush and Clinton (impeached), have set the bar so low. We were electing the man to run the country. If you had a company, and had to decide between Obama and Romney as to who should run it, who would you choose?... Thought so.

LOCKED
11/18/2012 new

Gee Florian, for a while I thought you were one of the reasonable people around here.

Calling Obama a socialist is a scurrilous thing to do. All's fair in politics, so his opponents are free to do that, but the writers who started calling him a socialist knew it was inflated hyperbolic rhetoric. The problem is, too many Rush Limbaugh fans were so dumb they actually took it literally.

Obama has always been a free market guy, as all US president are. In fact, he has disappointed the far left with his conservative policies.

If you were to line the 44 men who were ever president up from most conservative to most liberal (impossible because of different times, but it's just a thought experiment), Obama would be somewhere in the middle. History will judge him this way. He's in the American mainstream, all the way.

As far as who would you hire to be CEO of a large corporation: Romney. That's not the question though. The President is not a corporate CEO. His constraints, powers, constituencies, diplomatic obligations, political maneuvers, etc. are completely different. Being the governor of a state or mayor of a small town is not the same as being a CEO of a corporation either. Back before I was old enough to vote a crazy guy named Ross Perot ran for president (twice) with the promise that he built and ran a corporation called EDS so he was qualified to be president of the US. The voters said no. Romney seems a lot more sane and reasonable than Ross Perot and he may well have been an excellent president, but his business experience is only part of the question.

LOCKED
11/18/2012 new

(Quote) Cathy-620979 said: Gee Florian, for a while I thought you were one of the reasonable people around here.Call...
(Quote) Cathy-620979 said:

Gee Florian, for a while I thought you were one of the reasonable people around here.

Calling Obama a socialist is a scurrilous thing to do. All's fair in politics, so his opponents are free to do that, but the writers who started calling him a socialist knew it was inflated hyperbolic rhetoric. The problem is, too many Rush Limbaugh fans were so dumb they actually took it literally.

Obama has always been a free market guy, as all US president are. In fact, he has disappointed the far left with his conservative policies.

If you were to line the 44 men who were ever president up from most conservative to most liberal (impossible because of different times, but it's just a thought experiment), Obama would be somewhere in the middle. History will judge him this way. He's in the American mainstream, all the way.

As far as who would you hire to be CEO of a large corporation: Romney. That's not the question though. The President is not a corporate CEO. His constraints, powers, constituencies, diplomatic obligations, political maneuvers, etc. are completely different. Being the governor of a state or mayor of a small town is not the same as being a CEO of a corporation either. Back before I was old enough to vote a crazy guy named Ross Perot ran for president (twice) with the promise that he built and ran a corporation called EDS so he was qualified to be president of the US. The voters said no. Romney seems a lot more sane and reasonable than Ross Perot and he may well have been an excellent president, but his business experience is only part of the question.

--hide--



Cathy, reading your contributions gives me more hope and joy, than you could ever imagine. People here take these arguments personally. They do not understand that we looked at these men's lives balance sheet and we liked Obama's better. Or a majority of women, Latinos, blacks and Asians who are certainly the future of this great country decided Obama, at this point in life was better for this nation. It is really that simple. Trivializing our ability to examine our presidential candidates positions, and then voting our choice is a serious matter. Got it?

I hope you all learn something to help you in the next elections!

LOCKED
11/18/2012 new

(Quote) Florian-626971 said: I find the criticism of Romney mind-boggling. Not that he's beyond criticism, but the nit-p...
(Quote) Florian-626971 said:

I find the criticism of Romney mind-boggling. Not that he's beyond criticism, but the nit-picky critiques of him pale in comparison to the criticisms that can be made about Obama in his first term. Flip-flopping? What about Obama's huge flip-flops? Obama used to be a communist, but in the second debate he says he believes in free markets! For twenty years he listened intently to the sermons of Jeremiah Wright. Then, in 2008, he said he didn't pay attention and threw him under the bus.

And we're wondering whether ROMNEY was good enough for the job? Of course, he is. So many people are, now that Obama, as well as Bush and Clinton (impeached), have set the bar so low. We were electing the man to run the country. If you had a company, and had to decide between Obama and Romney as to who should run it, who would you choose?... Thought so.

--hide--

All true. But with the reelection of the least qualified man to sit in the White House in the last 100 years, the bar has been set so low that it has disappeared. The only possible way, while we are still nominally a democracy, for the bar to go any lowwer is if somehow Biden should become President.

Let us all remember this, in 2004, of the four major candidates; McCai/Palin and Obummer/Biden, even the one with the most qualifications was not qualified to be President, Palin.

LOCKED
11/18/2012 new

(Quote) Cathy-620979 said: Gee Florian, for a while I thought you were one of the reasonable people around here.Call...
(Quote) Cathy-620979 said:

Gee Florian, for a while I thought you were one of the reasonable people around here.

Calling Obama a socialist is a scurrilous thing to do. All's fair in politics, so his opponents are free to do that, but the writers who started calling him a socialist knew it was inflated hyperbolic rhetoric. The problem is, too many Rush Limbaugh fans were so dumb they actually took it literally.

Obama has always been a free market guy, as all US president are. In fact, he has disappointed the far left with his conservative policies.

If you were to line the 44 men who were ever president up from most conservative to most liberal (impossible because of different times, but it's just a thought experiment), Obama would be somewhere in the middle. History will judge him this way. He's in the American mainstream, all the way.

As far as who would you hire to be CEO of a large corporation: Romney. That's not the question though. The President is not a corporate CEO. His constraints, powers, constituencies, diplomatic obligations, political maneuvers, etc. are completely different. Being the governor of a state or mayor of a small town is not the same as being a CEO of a corporation either. Back before I was old enough to vote a crazy guy named Ross Perot ran for president (twice) with the promise that he built and ran a corporation called EDS so he was qualified to be president of the US. The voters said no. Romney seems a lot more sane and reasonable than Ross Perot and he may well have been an excellent president, but his business experience is only part of the question.

--hide--

A clear examople of wishful thinking over reality.

LOCKED
11/18/2012 new

Cathy and Karis, I agree with you. I may not like national healthcare but that is one issue, there were other issues that needed to be considered. Mr. Romney appeared to be a good candidate but he didn't have much experience in the Political Arena. As a MA friend said he quit before his term was up, I thought he made a good governor.


If the US is a socialist country it started long before this president. I think it may have started when this country was formed. We are a nation of immigrants who came here to have better lives.

LOCKED
11/18/2012 new

(Quote) Karis-410918 said: Cathy, reading your contributions gives me more hope and joy, than you could ...
(Quote) Karis-410918 said:




Cathy, reading your contributions gives me more hope and joy, than you could ever imagine. People here take these arguments personally. They do not understand that we looked at these men's lives balance sheet and we liked Obama's better. Or a majority of women, Latinos, blacks and Asians who are certainly the future of this great country decided Obama, at this point in life was better for this nation. It is really that simple. Trivializing our ability to examine our presidential candidates positions, and then voting our choice is a serious matter. Got it?

I hope you all learn something to help you in the next elections!

--hide--


Of course they do! Secular progressives thrive on taking as many down the drain with them as they can.


And yes, secular progressivism is not only ruining our Church, but the moral fabric of every society it has ever infiltrated. You bet we - those of us who choose to remain obedient and faithful to our Holy Church - take that very personally. It's just now that we've decided that we've had enough of you people who work in earnest to destroy us from within, and we're putting an end to it.


President Blameless started a war when he chose to come after our religious liberties. It's a war that he, and progressives like you, will not win. The lines have been drawn in cement this time, and we're going to fight to the end... your end.


theheart

LOCKED
Posts 141 - 150 of 200