2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[kurai]

Again that would be a poor course for Obama to take, if they wish to talk about Perjury then they have already lost the narrative, by going after the SEC documents, they have already put themselves in a possession where numerous Fact Checking organizations have called them out as being false. At this point any further talk about perjury will only lead back to those false accusations.

It is when A: It has already been found false through your initial attacks on the SEC documents.

B: It makes your candidate look like he is trying to dodge the economy.

C: It makes your candidate look like they are taking radical steps to discredit the opponent, again I note what would happen if McCain had attacked Obama on Birtherism.

No it is a radical accusation, period, end of story. It suggests that the Obama Administration is desperate, that they are willing to throw anything and everything out to stop Romney, including suggest he is a felon, they are scared of him, scared that he may win. That is what the accusation suggests, and mind you just because a opponent is not willing to use the Justice Department to investigate, does not give credence or support to such accusations or help the opponent. Again Bush could very well have instructed the Justice Department to publicly investigate the Birtherism claims in 2008, but that would not have helped him or McCain, it would have looked like they were trying to distract the public while the economy is falling down around them, the same could be said now.

And mind you that by going this route, Obama is seen as a typical politician, a bully partisan willing to engage in South Side Chicago Politics. That takes another hit on Obama's image, and only helps drive independents away.

i think we can agree that we have established that the SEC documents are not the FEC documents, and that the felony claims arising out of the former are misleading. however, as the SEC documents are the evidence serves to that undermine the claims in romney's public disclosure forms, connecting perjury with the SEC is not problematic: it points to the potential perjury in relation to the FEC.

causing an economic collapse (if you wish to portray it as such) is not the sole criteria for eliminating one's chances at the presidency. as has been stated, felonious action is an equally valid method of disqualification. such has been intended since the original authoring of the constitution.

it is only a distraction in the sense that it is not directly about the economy, but this does not mean that it is about an unimportant subject. if romney is willing to perjure himself over simple disclosure forms, he would be unworthy of high office - let The People become informed about it, investigate the circumstances, and judge for themselves through the election.

but of course, the obama campaign will be doing whatever they can to stop their opponent from winning. this is hardly "South Side Chicago Politics" (which is hilarious). the SEC/FEC documents are a good situation for them, as they gain the advantage both through seeking Justice and through undermining their opponent. it is exactly what one ought to expect from an open election process.

[Roy Karrde]

i think we can agree that we have established that the SEC documents are not the FEC documents, and that the felony claims arising out of the former are misleading. however, as the SEC documents are the evidence serves to that undermine the claims in romney's public disclosure forms, connecting perjury with the SEC is not problematic: it points to the potential perjury in relation to the FEC.

So what should the Democrats say. "Hey you know we fucked up on the SEC, Romney didn't commit perjury there, but we double promise with sugar on top that he might possibly, kind of, sort of, committed perjury with a FEC filing".

Yeah... forget about stopping a Romney Administration, the public would distrust and hate the Democratic party so much they would be lucky to even have a chance come 2020.

causing an economic collapse (if you wish to portray it as such) is not the sole criteria for eliminating one's chances at the presidency. as has been stated, felonious action is an equally valid method of disqualification. such has been intended since the original authoring of the constitution.

Sure and if we are going to go full retard here why don't we check to see if Obama is a Kenyan? I mean we may not be sure, so lets look into it, and since we are not sure, we will refer to him as "The Possible Kenyan" until he is proven innocent.

it is only a distraction in the sense that it is not directly about the economy, but this does not mean that it is about an unimportant subject. if romney is willing to perjure himself over simple disclosure forms, he would be unworthy of high office - let The People become informed about it, investigate the circumstances, and judge for themselves through the election.

Jesus F'ing Christ are you politically tone deaf.

Of course it is a distraction and a unimportant subject, people who are unemployed do not give a damn about what "involvement" may or may not mean inside of the legal sphere. People who are living pay check to pay check do not care, people who are worried their company is about to shut down do not care. People who see the economy going into the shitter do not care.

They want to know what the candidate will do to help them, not some utter stupidity on a document. To believe otherwise is pretty pathetic.

And since you are willing to go Full Retard here, lets continue with the Kenyan thing, Obama could have allegiance to another nation, hey he also might be a Muslim, lets investigate that. Because if he could lie about his religion who knows what he will lie about. Lets let ALL the information come out right? Let the public decide? I mean why not lets make a whole idiotic political parade out of it.

but of course, the obama campaign will be doing whatever they can to stop their opponent from winning. this is hardly "South Side Chicago Politics" (which is hilarious). the SEC/FEC documents are a good situation for them, as they gain the advantage both through seeking Justice and through undermining their opponent. it is exactly what one ought to expect from an open election process.

No it is not, you seek to undermine your opponent through the realm of ideas, not through looking for loopholes through the legal process. Again that is South Side Chicago Politics. I would assume you are atleast smart enough to know how Obama won his first election right? Not through the realm of ideas, not a debate as to which person is better, but by using the legal system to disqualify them. Again South Side Chicago Politics.