POTUS - your non favored candidate is elected. How damaging to the country?

[Koxinga]

Some comments in this thread made me wonder how each of you might feel about the prospect of your non-favored presidential candidate being elected and what it means for the country. Possibly irreparable damage to the republic, damaging but it all can be reversed four years later, or not really all that damaging.

Wish this could be posted in "Elections," but I don't think it allows for polling. Which is a bit ironic, don't you think?

[IceQube]

Originally Posted by Koxinga

Wish this could be posted in "Elections," but I don't think it allows for polling. Which is a bit ironic, don't you think?

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=656678

[Shagnasty]

It isn't all that damaging. There is a reason we have three branches of government with a segregation of powers. We don't elect a dictator in chief. A given presidential election has some degree of importance but a lot of it is indirect like nominations to the Supreme Court. The candidates we get these days are all center to center-right so it isn't like there is a huge choice there. Romney and Obama aren't all that different in their viewpoints even by American standards let alone the spectrum that the rest of the world has.

[Koxinga]

Originally Posted by IceQube

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=656678

See, I was being meta ironic.

*cough* Would a kind mod . . .

[Lanzy]

Bush brought us to the brink of ruin, Romney will push us into the abyss of destruction.

[Mosier]

I don't like Romney, but he won't cause irreparable damage to the country if he's elected. Other than Bush jr, it's been a very long time since someone actually fucked the country up in a long-term way. Like, Buchanan long. A decent case can be made for Johnson fucking the country up royally with the whole mess in Vietnam, but other than those 2 exceptions (Bush jr, and Johnson) we've had more than a hundred years of decent leadership in the White House.

ETA: Yes, I'm including Nixon in the "didn't fuck the country up" category.

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by Lanzy

Bush brought us to the brink of ruin, Romney will push us into the abyss of destruction.

To put some meat on this bone, the GOP Congress (they'll take the Senate if Romney wins) would push us into the abyss, and Romney would sign whatever they passed.

Watch Medicare get turned into a voucher program, and Medicaid turned into state block grants, gutting both programs (forget about Obamacare), and watch Social Security get cut way back for those under 55.

No, that can't necessarily be fixed four years later. The odds are pretty heavily against it, really.

No, it won't be filibusterable. They'll stretch reconciliation to fit. The 'liberal' Washington Post will say: politics ain't beanbag, no big deal.

This is a very radical GOP Congress. They'll call the tune, and Romney will dance to it. Speculation about whether Mitt's a closet moderate is totally irrelevant.

ETA: Hell, I'd even include Bush in the "didn't fuck the country up" category. Maybe if he'd succeeded in privatizing Social Security...

[Oakminster]

Originally Posted by Lanzy

Bush brought us to the brink of ruin, Romney will push us into the abyss of destruction.

Neither candidate will cause irreparable harm to the country. I prefer Romney, but if Obama gets re-elected, so be it. There will be another election in 2016, and the Dems aren't likely to three-peat.

[Little Nemo]

The thing that would most concern me about a Romney presidency would be the Supreme Court.

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

The thing that would most concern me about a Romney presidency would be the Supreme Court.

Well if John Roberts is any indication it might not be so bad for liberals.

[Merneith]

It's taking longer than four years to repair the damage from the last Republican administration - thanks, in no small part, to the ongoing Republican shitheadedness. Now Romney's got Tea Party darling and bad-at-math shithead Paul Ryan for a running mate - we might as well just as well kiss our status as a first world nation goodbye if they win.

[Stratocaster]

Originally Posted by Oakminster

Neither candidate will cause irreparable harm to the country. I prefer Romney, but if Obama gets re-elected, so be it. There will be another election in 2016, and the Dems aren't likely to three-peat.

Exactly. This board can be a bit dramatic. As I always say to my son, "The Republic will endure." Irreparable damage from either of these guys? As if.

[RTFirefly]

Originally Posted by Merneith

Now Romney's got Tea Party darling and bad-at-math shithead Paul Ryan for a running mate - we might as well just as well kiss our status as a first world nation goodbye if they win.

Yipes! Apparently that's what everybody expects to happen this morning.

Lately, I thought for sure he was going to go with bland (Portman or Pawlenty), but I guess after the wingnut furor over his spokesperson's endorsement of Romneycare a week ago, he had to prove his right-wing bona fides yet again.

The Ryan budget, which the House has passed a few times already IIRC, is as wicked as it seems.

This is why the ideology of Romney himself is not significant. He is a pawn, a figurehead. He is an empty suit that will sign whatever the wingnuts in Congress send him.

[Merneith]

Originally Posted by Stratocaster

Exactly. This board can be a bit dramatic. As I always say to my son, "The Republic will endure." Irreparable damage from either of these guys? As if.

Having heard that same line about George Bush, I'm not inclined to give Romney the benefit of the doubt here.



ETA: Incidentally, I reported this thread for a forum change, since the OP wanted it in the Elections room.

[pseudotriton ruber ruber]

Originally Posted by RTFirefly

He is a pawn, a figurehead. He is an empty suit that will sign whatever the wingnuts in Congress send him.

Romney only pawn in game of life?

Slate is reporting that the AP says Romney will announce Ryan as his pick at 9 AM today. Their link to AP doesn't work though.

[Iggy]

This reminds me of George Carlin's riff on pollution, the gist of which is we aren't going to destroy the planet... destroy ourselves, maybe. But the planet? Who do we think we are that we can destroy a planet that has long endured?

Certainly the republic has not been around for geologic time scales but it endures. It will endure regardless of who is elected in November. Congress and the President may pass legislation that screw up our economy and cause all sorts of social disruption, but they aren't going to destroy the country. If the pendulum swings too far with the winner this fall, it will be corrected by the voters in 2016.

[Stratocaster]

Originally Posted by Merneith

Having heard that same line about George Bush, I'm not inclined to give Romney the benefit of the doubt here.

Right, because Bush damaged the country irreparably. He alone among presidents had such a power, and unfortunately he used it for evil, like the Bond villain that he was and is. And now the country will never be the same, it is beyond repair. You're right, I forgot about him.

This board is funny sometimes.

[Boyo Jim]

Romney is the least destructive Republican candidate, by far, among the posse of clowns that ran in the primaries.

[Loach]

The fucking Civil War wasn't irreparable. Neither of these candidates will destroy the country.

In other news, the sky is not falling.

[Acid Lamp]

We need an option for "MIGHT cause irreparable damage" Rather than will or won't. I"m not terribly worried about Romney himself, but the idea of him in office with the current psychotic and disfunctional house terrifies me. Nothing he's shown me gives me any indication that he's willing to stand up to his own party firmly and resolutely to do what's right, rather than that what is politically convenient. Since social issues are of a greater concern to me than economics, I have little faith that Romney would work tirelessly to protect and extend civil rights when placed against his congress.

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

Interesting more Obama-supporters percentage-wise are saying the country is doomed if Romney wins that vice versa.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi

Interesting more Obama-supporters percentage-wise are saying the country is doomed if Romney wins that vice versa.

There are more Obama supporters here than Romney supporters.

[Boyo Jim]

I was not among those who said Romney would be very harmful to the country, but I believe he is much more likely to be harmful than Obama. Most of what he accomplishes will be bad -- I just don't think he'll accomplish much, and that will be a good thing considering the alternative.

[elfkin477]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

There are more Obama supporters here than Romney supporters.

So? He did mention precentages not a raw number. More than 50% of Obama supporters who voted think the sky will fall if Romey is elected vs about a third of Romey supporters feeling the same about Obama.

[Procrustus]

Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi

Interesting more Obama-supporters percentage-wise are saying the country is doomed if Romney wins that vice versa.

Hard to say Obama would really hurt the country. We have had him for four years, and even if you don't always agree with him, you'd have to admit he isn't screwing things up. The extent Romney would hurt us is still an unknown.

[Hari Seldon]

I hate to be so negative, but if Romney governs like he is campaigning, he can certainly extend the economic misery another 4 years and that really can do irreparable damage. The only way to balance the budget without cutting the military and without raising taxes would be essentially end all government welfare programs including SS and medicare. And even that might not be enough because tax receipts will nosedive. Of course, with congress and the courts fighting him doggedly, Obama might also fail abjectly. Well, my children and grandchildren are dual citizens so they can always move up here to the frozen north.

[antonio107]

Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi

Interesting more Obama-supporters percentage-wise are saying the country is doomed if Romney wins that vice versa.

It's a weird trope for left leaning people, I've noticed. I don't really have any strong opinions about politics, but I go to school with a lot of people that do. Stephen Harper, the Canadian PM, is--like a great deal of Canadian conservatives, IMO--pretty moderate by conservative standard, American GOP'ers. Yet from the conversations and Facebook posts you read, you'd think we were being ruled by General Franco.

From a mile high glance, as a non-American, Romney seems as bland as pablum, and governed liberal Massachusetts, of all places. He's a fantastically wealthy guy running against a sufficiently wealthy guy, and he did an OK job running the winter Olympics. Even that right-wing demagogue Jimmy Carter said that Romney was an OK guy for POTUS.

I think it's a race between a moderate conservative and a moderate liberal who broke a huge race barrier. But, the American electoral cycle being such good theatre as it is, it plays out in people's minds as a re-enactment of 300, with their guy being Leonidas and the other party's guy being eight-foot-tall-metro Xerxes.

[For You]

Originally Posted by elfkin477

So? He did mention precentages not a raw number. More than 50% of Obama supporters who voted think the sky will fall if Romey is elected vs about a third of Romey supporters feeling the same about Obama.

"I don't like Romney …" is rather not equivalent to "I am an Obama supporter". Effectively, yes, but some/many people really detest Willard (that was one scary bio-pic) while also being very disenchanted with Barack (me, in part, because his name has come to obscure the word I used to describe Jethro Tull's music).

[IceQube]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

There are more Obama supporters here than Romney supporters.

The reason is that there are more moderates here. Some lean one way or the other, but we definitely have a dearth of people who genuinely believe that Obama is a Muslim/Socialist/Communist/Fascist/Racist/Warmist/Antichrist.

Hence, the belief that Obama will ruin the country is relatively low on the SDMB.

[Shagnasty]

Originally Posted by IceQube

The reason is that there are more moderates here. Some lean one way or the other, but we definitely have a dearth of people who genuinely believe that Obama is a Muslim/Socialist/Communist/Fascist/Racist/Warmist/Antichrist.

Hence, the belief that Obama will ruin the country is relatively low on the SDMB.

I don't hate Obama for who he is but still think he underqualified for his position to this day. 90% of what I expect all government to do is just based on economic strategy both long-term and short-term and I believe Romney would do a better job at it. I don't care about all the fluff issues every else gets excited over because the media tells them to. I just want to make sure the nation is financially stable over the next many generations. That is the absolute most important thing even for social issues.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by elfkin477

So? He did mention precentages not a raw number. More than 50% of Obama supporters who voted think the sky will fall if Romey is elected vs about a third of Romey supporters feeling the same about Obama.

Maybe I misunderstood him. I thought he was saying that of the people in this thread who were attacking the opposition something like 90% were Obama supporters attacking Romney vs 10% Romney supporters attacking Obama.

[PandaBear77]

I must say I am just SHOCKED at the poll results! SHOCKED, I say!

[dexter]

Originally Posted by antonio107

It's a weird trope for left leaning people, I've noticed. I don't really have any strong opinions about politics, but I go to school with a lot of people that do. Stephen Harper, the Canadian PM, is--like a great deal of Canadian conservatives, IMO--pretty moderate by conservative standard, American GOP'ers. Yet from the conversations and Facebook posts you read, you'd think we were being ruled by General Franco.

From a mile high glance, as a non-American, Romney seems as bland as pablum, and governed liberal Massachusetts, of all places. He's a fantastically wealthy guy running against a sufficiently wealthy guy, and he did an OK job running the winter Olympics. Even that right-wing demagogue Jimmy Carter said that Romney was an OK guy for POTUS.

I think it's a race between a moderate conservative and a moderate liberal who broke a huge race barrier. But, the American electoral cycle being such good theatre as it is, it plays out in people's minds as a re-enactment of 300, with their guy being Leonidas and the other party's guy being eight-foot-tall-metro Xerxes.

"party pooper"
Indignation ain't worth spit if you can't have some righteous to go with it.

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

Maybe I misunderstood him. I thought he was saying that of the people in this thread who were attacking the opposition something like 90% were Obama supporters attacking Romney vs 10% Romney supporters attacking Obama.

I meant what elfkin477 was saying although the trend seems to be gone now.

[John DiFool]

Originally Posted by Iggy

This reminds me of George Carlin's riff on pollution, the gist of which is we aren't going to destroy the planet... destroy ourselves, maybe. But the planet? Who do we think we are that we can destroy a planet that has long endured?

We may not be able to destroy the planet, but we may be able to destroy its ability to sustain us and our civilization. AGW is much more dire threat than the Civil War was, and another 4 years of the GOP in charge means another 4 years of once again doing nothing while our planet continues to sizzle. While I am not confident that the Dems will do much either, to be honest, there still is a chance they can and will (assuming of course Congress swings their way too and the filibuster is defanged sufficiently).

[Elendil's Heir]

I voted, "I DON'T favor Romney; if elected he'll damage the country but it can be reversed 4 years later." American democracy is pretty robust - we can take a crappy President now and then. We survived Buchanan, Grant, Harding, Nixon and GWB; we can survive Romney, if it should come to that.

[Sal Ammoniac]

Originally Posted by antonio107

I think it's a race between a moderate conservative and a moderate liberal who broke a huge race barrier. But, the American electoral cycle being such good theatre as it is, it plays out in people's minds as a re-enactment of 300, with their guy being Leonidas and the other party's guy being eight-foot-tall-metro Xerxes.

Bingo. We act as if presidential elections are cataclysmic events, which is unfortunate, because it keeps us fixated on the issue of the week, and not on long-term trends. If we elect Romney, the existing gulf between rich and poor will just get wider -- not enough to tip us suddenly into banana republic-dom, but the trend is not a good one for the Republic. And if Obama is reelected, the gulf will get wider, but at a slower rate, perhaps.

You need to keep a sense of perspective, and keep your expectations low, whichever side you're on.

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi

Interesting more Obama-supporters percentage-wise are saying the country is doomed if Romney wins that vice versa.

The Republicans are more extreme and active than the Democrats. The parties are not mirror images of each other; the Democrats are mostly spineless, passive moderate right wingers; the Republicans are dominated by rabid right wing extremists.

The Democrats aren't likely to destroy the country regardless of their beliefs; they aren't likely to do much of anything. They are too weak, too spineless to serve as much more than a speedbump against the Republicans; and not even much of one.

[BigT]

I guess I'm an optimist--it could be fixed. Now, whether it will be is a big problem, as my favored party is also the one with the least amount of drive.

[Snupzilla]

Voted "I DON'T favor Romney, but if he's elected, I won't be happy but we'll all get through it." I've got no love for Romney, in fact I don't like the guy at all, but he is not quite as bad as the terrible ideas he pretends to believe strongly in. Ultimately I think he's an opportunist and a pragmatist so he will govern from the position of least resistance rather than to the extreme right.

Once he is in office the rest of the GOP will probably quiet down as Romney now holds the president trump card and the extreme wings like the tea party will find that the rich people money that keeps them afloat dry up. Romney will have the rich folks' backs, so there is no need to spend money on phony populism that might undermine him. Without worrying about his right flank Romney can ease up on social issues and avoid big fights there than might hurt him. Neither he nor the class who fund him care enough about these issues to waste political and real capital on when they control the Whitehouse. Ever notice that Republicans only seem to care about the budget when they don't control the executive branch? Yeah, there is a reason for that.

On foreign issues, I think he will be bland and avoid unnecessary confrontation. I don't think he has some grand vision of the world that he will try to make reality like Bush, so I'm not too worried. He can't seem to come up with any real believable opposition to Obama's foreign policy which makes me think he doesn't really have any. Its all style (if you can call what he does style, which is a stretch) and no substance whatsoever. My only fear is that he will think he needs to back Israel so much that it emboldens them enough to attack Iran, which would be a disaster. Other than we will be fine, although I don't expect anything great.

All that said, I'm really pulling for Obama to win. I think he is a better President than Romney can be.

[BigDadWolf]

If Romney is elected I fear an "austerity" recession as government spending is drastically reduced in an attempt to balance the budget while cutting taxes. This will take years to recover from ensuring the 2010s will be a "lost decade" which really sucks as it this is a crucial time for my wife and I to prepare for retirement and the time during which my two children will be entering the workforce.