Obama vs Romney, who are you voting for and why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rafael502
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There’s lots of evidence that reducing taxes does not result in the kind of economic growth and job creation that Romney (like Bush I and Bush II) has promised and that serves to increase the deficit.
Actually, there isn’t. I realize people like to cite the CBO study that seems to say it. But if you actually bore into it, it acknowledges that there is a correlation, but dismisses it, judging it not to be statistically significant. It also acknowledges that the prior actual high earner tax rates paid were not much different from now during the periods when the nominal tax rates on high incomes were extremely high. Yes, they were much higher than now, but almost nobody actually paid at those rates. And to get at actual rates when the highest marginal rate was 90% (40% then in reality vs 35% now), they had to resort to looking at the top .01%. That’s one one-hundredth of one percent; John Kerry territory.

And one has to realize that while the combination of the Bush cuts and the two wars did result in a sharp increase in the deficit early on, the deficit shrank during most Bush years, despite two wars, and, in 2007 was about 1/10 what the annual deficit is now with only one.

Why the difference? Far fewer people are working now than then. Working people pay taxes. Unemployed people don’t.
 
As old as I am, I find it hard to think that so many of our fellow citizens are so gullible, nay, dumb. I like to think better of people than that.🙂
I’d like to as well, but only some of the blame can be placed on the newer generation.

I have to say that I was surprised when I looked back on the results of the 1980 election and saw that nearly 42% of Americans voted for the status quo, some of whom lived through the economic boom of the late19th/early 20th Century and saw the dismal days of Wilsonian foreign policy followed by the Roaring 20s, the Depression, the high standards of living and culture of the 50s and the post-JFK malaise.
 
Where is the outrage for 33% of all abortions being performed against 13% of the population? That is.
*But you see, it’s “okay” if it “helps the poor”.

I may at heart be pro-life, but it’s a fair trade off because:

Besides, it’s one less mouth to feed, and I need those gay rights so I can look and feel good in front of others, a subsidy for my NFL or college football stadium, federal funding for my school so I shine at PTA meetings and a Pell Grant because I’m entitled. Those are the reasons I can support a pro-choice, pro-gay rights, anti-religious freedom and golly, my family has voted for the same party for generations! *

/sarc

Those are undoubtedly the excuses, but I promise you’ll hear only about the first one and maybe the second to some extent on here.
 
l plan to vote for Romney. Ask the Pope or Cardinal Dolan if you need to know why.
 
I tried posting this and it didn’t “seem” to get through so I’ll try to do this again. I found this helpful in my voting decision:

Voting Principles for Catholics
  1. “There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called ‘intrinsically evil’ actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned,” (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, USCCB, #22).
Principle: You cannot support something that is intrinsically evil.
  1. “A vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy,” (Catholic Times, September 23, 2012, Bishop Thomas Paprocki, Diocese of Springfield).
“It is important to be clear that the political choices faced by citizens not only have an impact on general peace and prosperity but also may affect the individual’s salvation,” (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, USCCB, #38).

Principle: By voting for someone who supports and advocates an intrinsic evil, you are participating in that intrinsic evil, and could possibly be committing a mortal sin that jeopardizes your eternal salvation.
  1. “Some issues involve ‘intrinsic evils’; that is, they can never under any circumstance or condition be morally justified. Preeminent among these intrinsic evils are legalized abortion, the promotion of same sex unions and ‘marriages’, repression of religious liberty, as well as public policies permitting euthanasia, racial discrimination or destructive human embryonic stem cell research,” (Clarification of Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, Bishops of Dallas/Ft. Worth ).
Principle: Abortion, same–sex “marriage,” and the repression of religious liberty – which are three of the pre–eminent issues in this current election cycle – are indeed all intrinsically evil.

Principle: Therefore, by voting for someone who advocates and supports abortion, same–sex “marriage,” and/or the repression of religious liberty, you are participating in an intrinsic evil and could be jeopardizing your salvation.
  1. “The fact that only the negative commandments oblige always and under all circumstances does not mean, that in the moral life, prohibitions are more important than the obligation to do good indicated by the positive commandment,” (Veritatis Splendor, Pope John Paul II, #52).
“The right to life impl ies and is linked to other human rights—to the basic goods that every human person needs to live and thrive. All the life issues are connected, for erosion of respect for the life of any individual or group in society necessarily diminishes respect for all life. The moral imperative to respond to the needs of our neighbors—basic needs such as food, shelter, health care, education, and meaningful work—is universally binding on our consciences and may be legitimately fulfilled by a variety of means,” (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, USCCB, #25).

Principle: Both opposing evil and doing good – feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, etc. – are essential obligations.

Principle: Issues that pertain to basic needs such as food, shelter, health care, education, and meaningful work are all linked to the right to life.
  1. “Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good… It is impossible to further the common good without acknowledging and defending the right to life, upon which all the other inalienable rights of individuals are founded and from which they develop…” (The Gospel of Life, Pope John Paul II, #72; #101)
“The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed,” (Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, USCCB, #28).

“Therefore, we cannot make more clear the seriousness of the overriding issue of abortion – while not the ‘only issue’ – it is the defini ng moral issue, not only today, but of the last 35 years. Since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, more than 48 million innocent lives have been lost. Each year in our nation more than one million lives are lost through legalized abortion,” (Clarification of Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, Bishops of Dallas/Ft. Worth ).

Principle: Abortion is the overriding issue, the defining moral issue, of our day because it is from the right to life that all the other rights – the right to food, shelter, health care, religious liberty, etc. – flow and are made meaningful.
  1. “As Catholics we are faced with a number of issues that are of concern and should be addressed, such as immigration reform, healthcare, the economy and its solvency, care and concern for the poor, and the war on terror. As Catholics we must be concerned about these issues and work to see that just solutions are brought about. T here are many possible solutions to these issues and there can be reasonable debate among Catholics on how to best approach and solve them. These are matters of ‘prudential judgment.’ But let us be clear: issues of prudential judgment are not morally equivalent to issues involving intrinsic evils. No matter how right a given candidate is on any of these issues, it does not outweigh a candidate’s unacceptable position in favor of an intrinsic evil such as abortion or the protection of ‘abortion rights,’” (Clarification of Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, Bishops of Dallas/Ft. Worth ).
mlz
 
I will be voting for President Obama. In my view, President Obama’s policy on social justice and the poor just simply resonate. He’s worked in the trenches with the poor and vulnerable while in Chicago which decisively speaks in his favor. You can’t take experience away. He seems to be balanced in the manner he governs. I recently spoke to two religious sisters that I know and they confided in me that President Obama offers the greatest hope for the poor than they have seen in a president in a many years. He’s been a good president in light of what he inherited, not to mention a congress that won’t work with him on anything. Strictly speaking, the economy is slowly starting to improve, and the stock market has nearly doubled compared to when he took over. The President’s foreign policy has been fairly effective too. With that said, I do wish he would move the date up on brining all of our military troops home. It’s fair to say that when he was elected he inherited a nightmare. So for this Catholic, it’s Obama and Biden 2012!
You’re kidding, right? Obama had two full years of a democrat congress and senate and did nothing about issues like immigration reform, the economy he has whined about or any of a myriad of other issues. The democrats won congress and senate in 2006. So, after his election and until 2010 we had ONE party in control. The new house didn’t enter office until January 2011.

The only people and companies who seem to benefit from Obama as president are his cronies, otherwise known as big donors. And then came Obamacare. So now any of us who have qualms about paying for abortions or abortifacient pills, or tubal ligations for children or abortions for children without parental notifications are just supposed to suck it up?

The President’s foreign policy has been fairly effective too.

This is also a joke. We had an ambassador and three other American citizens killed on 9/11/2012 and he tried to blame it on a movie that nobody saw. It was a terrorist attack. Most protesters don’t carry RPGs with them to protest a movie even in Islamic countries. The president of Libya said it was a terrorist attack. Who are you going to believe? Obama and Sec of State Clinton, or your own eyes?

Please, buy a clue.
 
Also to my dear practicing Catholic friends who have expressed support for Obama. You know I am totally with you on voting in this election. But how do you respond when the “non negotiables” are tossed at you by your fellow Catholics?
It’s very simple. Here is this document:

ewtn.com/library/CURIA/cdfworthycom.htm

See the footnote. Cardinal Ratzinger (the current Pope) deliberately leaves open what he means by “proportionate reasons”, obviously because he does not want to constrict voters’ conscience too much. For me such reasons would be
a) that I have no rational reason to seriously believe that voting for Mitt Romney will actually cause a lesser number of abortions to occur in this country because of legislation
combined with b) that I do believe that voting for Obama will actually cause a lesser number of abortions to occur in this country compared to Romney.
Why the latter? For economic reasons.

Apart from that, I am not a one-issue voter, for obvious rational reasons. And hope for an overturn of Roe v. Wade is far too remote and rationally questionable as to be a sufficient reason to allow me to vote in my conscience for a candidate and a party that puts the country further on a path to go down the drain – look at the Bush years, Romney’s policies are essentially Bush 2.0.

I even do not trust the Republicans that they are willing to tackle Roe v. Wade. I consider the Republican Party to be deeply cynical in many ways, and therefore I have reasons to believe that, at least for a large part, their pro-life stance is deeply cynical as well – they need to keep their “socially conservative” base in order to stay in power. If Roe v. Wade were overturned, that base would have one less reason to stay with the party, and they would lose power. No, the Republican Party is best served with the status quo, and I do believe they really would want to keep it that way when push comes to shove – certainly on the national level. Of course, there are honest individual pro-life politicians in the Republican Party, but as a whole I do not think the party would want to risk power by rattling too much on the convenient status quo.
 
So,in a nutshell,you feel better about voting for Obama,who has a record of being pro abortion,anytime under every circumstance,as opposed to Romney,who you are not certain will lessen abortion:confused:Go figure…:eek:
 
So,in a nutshell,you feel better about voting for Obama,who has a record of being pro abortion,anytime under every circumstance,as opposed to Romney,who you are not certain will lessen abortion:confused:Go figure…:eek:
Defunding Planned Parenthood at a minimum would mean less abortion and congress has been close to doing this.
 
You can ask that of just about anyone.

IMO, Mormonism and Scientology to not equal Christianity. So I find it really strange that evangelicals are so quick to “hold their nose”, look the other way and back Romney.

It’s a dealbreaker for me. Although I am an Obama supporter, if I were not - I still could not support Romney because of his religion. America needs a President, not a prophet.
I am not voting for the Mormon church. I am voting to get the most pro-abortion president in my lifetime out of office.

Remember Jack Kennedy? They were saying back then (and I am old enough to remember) that the Pope was going to run the country.

The Mormon church will not run this country if Romney is elected and I think we all really know that.

It’s an excuse and a poor one at that.

And I find it difficult to believe that a Catholic could support Obama. I know many do and it sickens me and we all will have to answer for our vote.

youtube.com/watch?v=D9vQt6IXXaM

Please watch this.
 
I’m not for abortion at all and if I thought Romney could overturn Roe v Wade I would vote for him. But does abortion have to be the only issue? A non-Christian who basically stated that he despises the poor doesn’t seem to be a very good choice for president. But then Obama isn’t perfect either! Whew! Everyone here brings up great points for voting for Romney AND for voting for Obama. Scary times for America.** If I were a begger on the side of the road with a tin cup in my hand I wonder which man would help me?**
But does abortion have to be the only issue?

I used to be you. I truly did not understand how abortion could be such a deciding issue. You know there are other important issues out there.

And then one day I was a Catholic. Whoa, I so understand now. I don’t even recognize me from then to now.

** If I were a begger on the side of the road with a tin cup in my hand I wonder which man would help me?**

From what I have read about Romney, yes, he is the one who would actually, really, help you.

Is he Catholic? Nope. Is he a Christian? He feels that he is. Does he help others? Why yes he does. Even those who are not Mormons.

Read about him. Do not depend on tonight’s news stories which will never cover what Romney has done for others.
 
I’m not for abortion at all and if I thought Romney could overturn Roe v Wade I would vote for him. But does abortion have to be the only issue? A non-Christian who basically stated that he despises the poor doesn’t seem to be a very good choice for president. But then Obama isn’t perfect either! Whew! Everyone here brings up great points for voting for Romney AND for voting for Obama. Scary times for America.** If I were a begger on the side of the road with a tin cup in my hand I wonder which man would help me?**
But does abortion have to be the only issue?

I used to be you. I truly did not understand how abortion could be such a deciding issue. You know there are other important issues out there.

And then one day I was a Catholic. Whoa, I so understand now. I don’t even recognize me from then to now.

** If I were a begger on the side of the road with a tin cup in my hand I wonder which man would help me?**

From what I have read about Romney, yes, he is the one who would actually, really, help you.

Is he Catholic? Nope. Is he a Christian? He feels that he is. Does he help others? Why yes he does. Even those who are not Mormons.

Read about him. Do not depend on tonight’s news stories which will never cover what Romney has done for others.
 
Please advise as to where anyone, much less Romney/Ryan have said they despise the poor? This is not true.

What percentage of people will vote for Obama no matter what, probably close to the 47% Romney referred to? What percentages of people do not pay Federal income taxes, about 47%? This is who Romney was referring to, and many of the people who fit that bill despise him, he does not despise them. This is what he was saying.

Check the charitable contributions of these four men, Romney by far gave more to charity, i.e. the poor, than all the rest together; and didn’t claim most of it on taxes. ** I am embarrassed to see Joe Biden gave less than I di last year; he makes quite a bit more than I do.**

Look at their actions, not their words or the words the liberal media tell you about them.
I am embarrassed to see Joe Biden gave less than I di last year; he makes quite a bit more than I do.

Exactly.
 
** If I were a begger on the side of the road with a tin cup in my hand I wonder which man would help me?**

From what I have read about Romney, yes, he is the one who would actually, really, help you.
Now that seems rather questionable, given his 47 % comment.
 
47% do not pay taxes. Everyone should pay something.
Of course they pay taxes. Payroll taxes, sales tax . . .

And by the way, our seniors and veterans are just leeching on society too, and “don’t take responsibility for their lives”? Sheesh.
 
A good start would be to think about your vote.

Ask:
*
Why am I, Matt, voting for Obama when he is telling my Church what to do, and openly supports abortion and for now, so-called “gay marriage”. *

If it is to impress other people or to feel and look good, those are selfish motives and God can see right through it.
Thanks SuperLuigi. Insert a name whose religion is listed as Catholic and I understand your reasons.
 
Jesus said let the little children come to me! Obama says let abotion be the law of the land. A no brainer>> Romney Ryan .
 
While I understand you are firm in your position, you still appear to be asking for a sincere answer. So here’s mine, even though I’m not sure there is any such thing as a unitary “Catholic voting psyche” in this country.

I don’t really believe this Pew result. Might be right, but I have sincere doubts.

While Obama did get something like 52% or 54% of the “Catholic vote” in 2008, that was skewed by Hispanics. Among white voters, Obama was something like 46%. Pew asks a lot of me to ask me to believe there has been a shift of only 3 or 4%, given that Obama’s track record on abortion and homosexual “marriage” are widely known. Hispanics may have abortions, but their culture isn’t favorable toward it, and Hispanic culture (at least among Mexican-Americans which are most of the Hispanics I know) abhors homosexuality. That’s particularly true among Mexican-American males. Hispanics vary a lot. Mexicans are, by and large, extremely entrepreneurial in instinct and far less inclined to be tax-friendly toward the government than most whites. Someday I believe the majority of them will belong to the right wing of the Republican party, once they get enough money in their wallets. They’re very big on sharing with family, but not much with anyone else, and certainly not with the government. Most Mexican-Americans I know think the government is a gaggle of saps. They’ll take what it offers for now, but disdain it otherwise. While many Hispanics currently have something to gain from government largesse, not all do, and I expect at least some shift among at least Mexican-Americans this time around. We’ll see.

The Catholics who have come to firmly identify Catholicism with an ideological political liberalism they strongly favor will probably stay with Obama and the Democrats. Probably their numbers are no greater than that of Americans generally; perhaps 25-30%.

Catholics have abortions about as much as anyone else, and some of them, particularly parents and boyfriends of the girl involved, have a psychological stake in insisting to themselves that “well it’s too bad it has to be, but it’s not all that big a moral issue”
Some women who have had abortions will change their views, but I do not expect their involved “facilitators” to do so. Too much guilt with that, and this country is not at all inclined to accept guilt for anything.

Many, many, many Catholics vote Democrat because all of their ancestors were Democrats, their ethnic group origins were always Democrat and/or their neighborhood is solidly Democrat. I do expect some shift in this group, though I don’t know how much. For whatever reason, among the third-generation “ethnic” group members I know, the Irish are the most intractable in this regard. I’m mostly Irish and was a Democrat operative myself for years and years, and I think I understand why Irish are the most stubbornly Democratic. You drank it with your mother’s milk, in a way others didn’t. You identified Republicans with the Masons and the nativists and “no Irish need apply” and even the Black and Tans your grandmother told you about. But at a point, I just couldn’t stand indirectly supporting abortion anymore. I didn’t become a Repub. But I vote almost exclusively for them because their opponents are almost always abortion supporters, and I can’t bring myself to support it with them. I’m not sure how many of such people will finally have all they want of it. But some will. Not to make too much of ethnicism because nearly all European “ethnics” are third generation at least. But some were just never part of the 'ethnic struggle" that identified with the Democrat party in the same way the Irish were. We’ll see how it turns out.

And, you were expecting this, of course, there is no “proportionate reason” to support abortion in this election. There is no authoritative person in the Church, e.g., a bishop who says there is, and many, including many bishops, who say there isn’t.
Ridge, thanks for recognizing I was indeed sincerely asking for sincere answers. Is just because no bishop says there is no “proportionate reason”, does that make it law that there is not? What of the Catholics in the dioceses whose bishops have not said that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top