Why I am supporting Obama

[Tim]

I'm voting for Obama for the following reasons:

• Capturing bin Laden
• Pulling us out of Iraq
• Timetable set for departure from Afghanistan
• Ending DODT
• Sponsorship of successful legislation geared toward minimizing decision-making capabilities of profit-driven health insurance companies.
• Increase in domestic oil production while working to minimize risks of offshore drilling.
• From a personal perspective, I've seen tremendous growth in own economic situation during his presidency.
• Lastly, I find him to be a decent, moral, intelligent man of the people.

Could those things continue under Romney? Perhaps. But I'd be happy if the trajectory we're on continued, so I see no reason to vote out the current president.

[Jacob]

What is that reason? We just finished our taxes, and ended up paying about 20% on less than $100k, which is significantly more than than Mitt pays on his investment income. Why is it that public school teachers should pay a higher tax rate than Mitt Romney?

The reason is that Mitt doesn't really pay only 15% in income taxes. Mitt owns shares of corporations. Those corporations pay tax at a 35% rate. That comes from income that the owners of the shares would have been entitled to. Then, if the shareholders deem appropriate, they can pay themselves that income that they just just paid taxes on at 35%. When they do so, they pay additional taxes at the rate of 15% of whatever post-tax money they receive.

Sure, it makes no sense, but not in the way that you say. It makes no sense because there is no good reason to tax dividends at 15% when they've already been taxed at 35%. It's not fair to Mitt.

Also, if your effective tax rate is 20% you are doing something wrong. But I'm sure it's not. Your effective federal income tax rate is lower than that.

[Donuthole]

So...since there is no difference economically in my mind, I will move on to what I consider the second most important issue; social policies.

Translation: "I feel social policies are the most important issue in this election."

FTR, there's nothing wrong with feeling that way, but I think most people who have that opinion feel obligated to give lip service to the economy. On the bright side, you're not alone; Rick Santorum also feels the social policies are of prime concern this election cycle.

[byu71]

I'm voting for Obama for the following reasons:

• Capturing bin Laden
• Pulling us out of Iraq
• Timetable set for departure from Afghanistan
• Ending DODT
• Sponsorship of successful legislation geared toward minimizing decision-making capabilities of profit-driven health insurance companies.
• Increase in domestic oil production while working to minimize risks of offshore drilling.
• From a personal perspective, I've seen tremendous growth in own economic situation during his presidency.
• Lastly, I find him to be a decent, moral, intelligent man of the people.

Could those things continue under Romney? Perhaps. But I'd be happy if the trajectory we're on continued, so I see no reason to vote out the current president.

If those are your priorities, I can see how you would vote for him. On the increase in domestic oil production Boone Pickens was aksed about that. He said Obama had nothing to do with it. He also said the republicans had nothing to do with it. He said it was due to the industry and their advances in technology.

By the way, I am not questionning your priorities. We don't all have to think alike and have the same priorities.

[Goatnapper'96]

Let me say that I firmly believe the economy is, and should be, the driving force behind deciding whom to support in the presidential election...and it is for me as well. Nothing else even comes close in my mind as to which issue to prioritize when choosing a candidate.

With that said, even though they adamanty claim different, I honestly cannot see where the Republicans have done a better job of dealing with economic issues than the Democrats. So...since there is no difference economically in my mind, I will move on to what I consider the second most important issue; social policies. The Democrats are much more in line with my beliefs in that regard so I'm going with Obama.

I really think that President Obama is inept when it comes to economic policies. This is why he sticks to his fairness arguments - he can argue them better because it is really what he believes. I don't think he believes the economic arguments he tries to put forward, but politics demand he at least try. I have concluded that he is an intense ideologue whose compelling intent is to redistribute as much wealth as he can because he genuinely believes that is the right thing to do. I happen to disagree with him and I cannot see under any scenario where he will work with Republicans to fix our growing deficits. In his world if the wealth of the US is not redistributed there isn't really any reason to fix the deficit issues because the country is not being fair and he sees no reason for that type of system to continue indefinitely.

This is also nothing new as he was clear in his 2008 campaign that to him his definition of fairness was a more compelling issue than whether or not it was a good economic decision. If you care first about economic growth and opportunity you should vote against Obama because he has clearly stated that he believes we should subordinate economic interests to his version of what is fair.

Besides that his wife has small knockers, but that likely doesn't bother you as much as me!

[Jacob]

I'm voting for Obama for the following reasons:

• Capturing bin Laden
• Pulling us out of Iraq
• Timetable set for departure from Afghanistan
• Ending DODT
• Sponsorship of successful legislation geared toward minimizing decision-making capabilities of profit-driven health insurance companies.
• Increase in domestic oil production while working to minimize risks of offshore drilling.
• From a personal perspective, I've seen tremendous growth in own economic situation during his presidency.
• Lastly, I find him to be a decent, moral, intelligent man of the people.

Could those things continue under Romney? Perhaps. But I'd be happy if the trajectory we're on continued, so I see no reason to vote out the current president.

This is an interesting justification. Lets assume for a moment that Bush had been elected to a 3rd term. What would have happened with respect to your bullet points?

• Capturing bin Laden (Likely)
• Pulling us out of Iraq (Likely, though perhaps not as low as the troop levels Obama has)
• Timetable set for departure from Afghanistan (Bush probably would have done it sooner. We know for certain that Obama tripled the number of troops in Afghanistan, so this really should count against him)
• Ending DODT (would not have happened)
• Sponsorship of successful legislation geared toward minimizing decision-making capabilities of profit-driven health insurance companies. (whatever that means, Let's assume Bush wouldn't have done it)
• Increase in domestic oil production while working to minimize risks of offshore drilling. (production would have increased more under Bush, and I seriously doubt there would have been much difference in "minimizing the risk" after the BP disaster.)
• From a personal perspective, I've seen tremendous growth in own economic situation during his presidency. (this is likely independent of Obama, so Bush would have done just as good)
• Lastly, I find him to be a decent, moral, intelligent man of the people. (Bush is certainly decent and moral, though his intelligence is more questionable that Obama's)

I doubt Tim would be voting for Bush if he were running right now. But based on his priorities, the justification for Bush is about as good as Obama. I say this as someone who would not support Bush and disagree with many of his policies.

If we look at the list again, this time replacing Romney, there is reason to believe that Romney would have been superior to Obama in almost every regard (except DODT). Including being more decent, moral, and intelligent.

[byu71]

If we look at the list again, this time replacing Romney, there is reason to believe that Romney would have been superior to Obama in almost every regard (except DODT). Including being more decent, moral, and intelligent.

I am not in favor of bad arguments, even if the argument is supporting the guy I support. Why would you say this?

[Katy Lied]

What is that reason? We just finished our taxes, and ended up paying about 20% on less than $100k, which is significantly more than than Mitt pays on his investment income. Why is it that public school teachers should pay a higher tax rate than Mitt Romney?

Depends upon what fair is. If you think it is fair that everyone pay the same percentage tax rate, then businesses like the luxury yacht industry will not sell as many yachts, and carpenters and shipbuilders and slip workers will not have jobs. If you think it is fair that everyone should have a job if they want one, then decreasing taxes on rich people should cause them to spend more, thereby putting poorer people to work.

[doctorcoug]

And likewise, if prospective teachers knew that their rate would be 15% vs the rate they would get in other sectors, some highly qualified potential teachers might commit their talent to education rather than some other sector, and THAT might be a net benefit to society. But it wouldn't be fair. Let investors go to 'alternative options.' As with any change, it might hurt for a bit, but eventually smart entrepreneur-types will learn how to thrive under the FAIR system, those unable to adapt will die out as nature intended, and the world will be a better place.

Seriously?

Life isn't fair, never has been and never will be. I'm in favor of the platonic model of making decisions for the better good of the people. Fairness is not for the better good.

[Swimmer]

Translation: "I feel social policies are the most important issue in this election."

FTR, there's nothing wrong with feeling that way, but I think most people who have that opinion feel obligated to give lip service to the economy. On the bright side, you're not alone; Rick Santorum also feels the social policies are of prime concern this election cycle.

I am pretty tolerant of most things, but one thing I will not let pass without correcting is when someone attempts to tell me what I think. You are simply wrong in claiming that I am only giving lip service to the economy. To me the economy is the most important issue in this election, and Republicans are no better at dealing with it than are the Democrats, therefore I will go with my second most important issue - social policies. Thank you for not speaking for me.

[BYUMizzou]

What is that reason? We just finished our taxes, and ended up paying about 20% on less than $100k, which is significantly more than than Mitt pays on his investment income. Why is it that public school teachers should pay a higher tax rate than Mitt Romney?

If you paid an effective 20% tax rate on $100,000 of ordinary income, you're doing it wrong. You said "we" so I assume you're married filing jointly. With only the standard deduction for you and your spouse and no other deductions whatsoever, your tax would be $12,500, for a 12.5% effective tax rate.

[All-American]

Depends upon what fair is. If you think it is fair that everyone pay the same percentage tax rate, then businesses like the luxury yacht industry will not sell as many yachts, and carpenters and shipbuilders and slip workers will not have jobs. If you think it is fair that everyone should have a job if they want one, then decreasing taxes on rich people should cause them to spend more, thereby putting poorer people to work.

Fair is a flat tax. Nobody wants fair.

[Jacob]

I am not in favor of bad arguments, even if the argument is supporting the guy I support. Why would you say this?

I don't understand your question. Why would I say what?
I went down the list and said why Obama wasn't superior even to Bush on most of those bullets. The only one that Tim wanted that Obama did better was on healthcare, and now that Obama claims he copied Romney on healthcare, I fail to see how Romney wouldn't have done that as well, but better.
That Romney is even more decent, moral, and intelligent is obviously, just my opinion, though his intelligence and decency cannot be questioned. The moral part is in the eye of the beholder. I think Romney's priorities/policies show more moral rectitude than Obama's. Though this is largely because I believe Obama is just ignorant of the likely effects of his policies.

[doctorcoug]

Fair is a flat tax. Nobody wants fair.

Flat tax is most definitely not fair to the poor.

[Donuthole]

I am pretty tolerant of most things, but one thing I will not let pass without correcting is when someone attempts to tell me what I think. You are simply wrong in claiming that I am only giving lip service to the economy. To me the economy is the most important issue in this election, and Republicans are no better at dealing with it than are the Democrats, therefore I will go with my second most important issue - social policies. Thank you for not speaking for me.

Sorry, the rationale "both parties will be equally successful or unsuccessful in dealing with the economic issues" practically screams "I don't really care about the economy." No need to lash out at me; I'm just helping you understand what you're saying.