June 5, 2012 
Sun Papers
RSS Feed
Should Canada's mission against ISIS in Iraq be extended for another year?


Who is better for Canada: Obama or Romney?
Tue, June 5, 2012

President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney made their final urgent pleas to voters on Monday in a closing sprint through vital battleground states that will determine who wins their agonizingly close race for the White House.

Full story: Obama, Romney focus on swing states

Who is better for Canada: Obama or Romney?


This comment is FULLY MODERATED.


This thread is now past tense, please remove.

None of the above should be a choice
Bucadogg, 2012-11-07 14:48:30

hes sure not good for any of my friends in the states what has has he done so far shoot down jobs on piupleine yaa creating jobs ooh oh hes not for jobs
gregg lompik, 2012-11-06 23:52:37

If you even have to ask this question there's something wrong.

I think 0bama is a Liberal and a Communist.

Romney isn't.
Dave, 2012-11-06 20:56:14

Oh...Let's not forget Ann Romney when explaining the hard times she and her husband had been through said "They were not easy years. Neither one of us had a job, because Mitt had enough of an investment from stock that we could sell off a little at a time. The stock came from Mitt’s father ."

Ummm..."Not easy years"??? "The stock came from Mitt's father"???? Can you say WAY out of touch with reality???

Anyone that votes for this guy is past being an idiot.
Little Billy Clinton, 2012-11-06 17:35:01

To Ex-Liberal below,

It’s nice to see that you can parrot figures well enough, but they have no meaning, or at the very least, only as much meaning as stating that union membership since 1954 has dropped from 28.3% to 11.5% in 2003 and income growth for the middle 60% of the population has grown 39% while income growth in the top 1% was up 304%. Now on to the debunking...

I’m not sure where you’re getting an unemployment rate of 8.1% for last month; the US Bureau of Labor Statistics quoted 7.9%, and you conveniently leave out the fact that it was at 9.8% in Dec `10, but that would interfere with your narrative. Now if you’re really upset about the unemployment numbers, remember the government can only create government, or public sector, jobs which, as a conservative, you should be dead against, so the only people left to blame for unemployment are the “job-creators”. Guess they’re not doing their job now, are they?

With regard to consumer confidence, there are so many external factors contributing to this, to attempt to lay all blame on Obama’s shoulders is facetious at best.

Addressing the “job gap”, I’m assuming that being a conservative you’re in favour of small government, so you should be happy that Obama cut 600,000 jobs from the public service (according to the FED); this is despite the temporary increase of 400,000 government jobs added through stimulus spending in 2010 (in case the math escapes you, that’s a cut of 1million jobs in government from the 2010 high). So if the private sector hasn’t picked up the slack, I guess the blame for that lies with the “job-creators” yet again.

If the median household income is lower, maybe it’s for reasons I cited in my first paragraph, maybe it’s because Obama is shrinking government and the private sector isn’t raising wages, maybe it’s because the bottom 20% of the employed population are entirely employed by the private sector which has managed to drive their wages down to 1973 levels (US Census Bureau).

And home ownership? Are you really trying to blame the mortgage and security collapse of `08 on Obama as well? Puh-leeze. Go figure, someone that loses everything when the bubble bursts suddenly can’t afford to buy another house, I don’t know about you, but I had to save for almost 10 years to afford the $15,000 deposit I had to put on mine.

Do some actual research and pull your head out of the sand. I can go on all day about Obama too; his policy failures; his being center-right at best, and only looking like a leftie when compared to the rabid Republicans; or his spineless attempts to compromise on almost every issue.

On a side note, I’m really getting tired of all the news agencies calling this race “too close to call” because the national polls are even. So what? National poles take into consideration the 50,000 or so democratic voters in Texas or Republicans in California. If we throw out all the states that are decidedly red or blue, the remainder is all that matters and in that remainder, Obama is leading.
GeneralShrek, 2012-11-06 17:25:56

I work for an american company that has an office in the US. I was recently in a US office with some american co-workers. The out right hatred of Mr Obama and the things some of these folks were accusing him of was quite stark. There is quite a large split between the two parties it's astounding. You might not agree with his parties philosophies but he is/maybe was your president.
Rw, 2012-11-06 16:35:51

Pragmatic: At least Obama stands up for women...let's just move back 50 years and that is where we would be starting with Romney. And isn't it funny that Romney says he would need 11 years to clear the debt up, but only gave Obama 4. Let's think real hard and remember that the debt was handed down to Obama by the previous administrations to clear up. I think he was just a scapegoat for other's errors. Get real and vote Obama. I agree that by Dec 21st we would probably be invaded by a Romney army in Canada.
anothermotherof3, 2012-11-06 16:01:33

ROmney is a Liar, I've caught him lying plenty more times then Obama. I still havnt seen a plan from romney.. the plan he does tell us sounds like a car salesman pitch. he wants to bring down the deficit by loopholes and deductions? great, theres 1% of the deficit... what about the rest? I bet BP and Haliburton will help out with the rest... not.

When face with a choice, go with the lesser of 2 evils.
Adam L, 2012-11-06 15:18:06

Some pretty silly comments below about Obama being responsible for the economic issues. I guess they completely forget the disaster that Bush left the country in.
Bobbo, 2012-11-06 14:14:32

It escapes me why (during the campaign) more wasn't made of the mess that Obama inherited. Even reading through this there is only the odd reference to it.

Let's look back a bit to what Dubya inherited from Billy and then look at what Dubya did to it.

Clinton - 6 million new jobs, tax cuts to 15 million low income families, and the list goes on and on. Arguably, during the Clinton years the U.S. was at its best economically.

Now for Dubya - Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market, the first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job, Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history....and the list goes on and on.

So Obama needs more time to "fix" things than 4 years...are we seriously THAT surprised??

I truly don't understand why more isn't made of the absolute disaster he inherited from Dubya.

Course, I truly don't understand why ANY person with half a brain would have returned Dubya for a second term...let alone giving him the first crack at it.

Little Billy Clinton, 2012-11-06 14:06:13

<< Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next >>
Comment Links

Comment Links

, Last Updated: 10:54 AM ET





Canoe News | Videos & Photos – National – World – Crime - Weird News

Environment C-Health Galleries