I am genuinely confused how people in our age group/financial position tend to vote so heavily on social issues (which appear to end up being non-issues with respect to the federal government, at least for the last 20 years), and tend to ignore what will crush us and our children: the mounting national debt. Democrat or Republican, we need someone to run this country who is a pure-bred CEO-type economist. Only a businessmen-- and by no means, an idealist-- will cure this negligent over-spending. If the U.S. dollar is removed as the reserve currency of the world bank, we are all very screwed. No one seems to comprehend that. Obama does not appear to be that concerned, and I cannot understand why. $17 trillion, a reduced S&P credit rating, and a rich Chinese government foaming at the bit (i.e., could cut off the lending tomorrow!), means we are asking for very serious trouble. Solving this problem should be the President's #1 priority, and Obama does not appear to be that interested. His attitude seems to be much like the majority of America's: ignore the fundamental problem and address the "popular" ones.
As for social issues... Gay marriage is almost entirely a state-level matter. DOMA is the only influence the federal government has ever had on gay marriage, and it's hardly a killer, and even if it were, it's likely to be overturned as unconstitutional (see: Wikipedia: Same-sex marriage in the United States). Immigration is a very valid issue, but on a federal list of priorities, any reasonable person has to put it well below an impending economic disaster given the ballooning national debt. Because at that point, emigration will be the problem, not immigration. Also, immigration mostly affects a handful of states, so it's more concerning on the state level rather than federal (see: Wikipedia: Illegal immigration to the United States). Throw in the other garden variety social issues-- abortion, flag burning, marijuana legality, online gambling, racism (Obama is black, I remind you), etc.-- they are all non-issues, or at best state-level ones. The federal government needs to address three things immediately: (1) ridiculous national debt; (2) troops in the middle east and other foreign hot spots; and (3) internal economics generally, including unemployment. You could argue healthcare as well, but that could be grouped into #3. The social issues (of which I am very liberal on-- I am a libertarian when you boil it down) are not and should not be a priority for our federal government over the next decade. The states themselves can handle those in the meantime, if not forever.
A reality check: currently 40 cents of every federal tax dollar we pay goes to paying interest on our debt. 40 F&#@KING CENTS! If the interest rates go up 3 points, that number skyrockets past 70 cents. We are f*cked if we don't address this now. But every mathematically-challenged, economics-is-boring, idealist marauder out there doesn't seem to care. Seriously?! What we are doing is equivalent to Nick Hedges borrowing enough money such that $10 million of Leads360's $25 million in revenue* gets paid right back to the lenders, and Nick just saying, "Ah, we'll deal with that later." Go ahead and raise taxes everywhere, but we cannot afford as a country to spend that money. Everything must be cut across the board: military, welfare, education, healthcare, every g.d. thing. Not until this debt gets back under control, can we begin to talk about Omar Little's wedding.
We all know the religious right is idiotic, and it has crushed the Republican party. Mr. Horsey (the author of this article: L.A. Times: Obama's victory is a harsh lesson for Republicans) is the Master of the Obvious. No f#cking sh%t Horsey... Rush Limbaugh and Pat Buchanan f&cked us a long time ago. The most important thing Horsey recognizes: "...That does not mean a conservative cannot become president. A pragmatic fiscal conservative with an enlightened view of immigration and a tolerant attitude on social issues could do quite well."
What he should have said though is that "a pragmatic fiscal conservative with an enlightened view on social issues... [is the only thing that can save this country from a catastrophic economic disaster]." A g.d. libertarian is what he means. But it's probably too late. (See L.A. Times: Fitch Ratings warns of U.S. credit downgrade from fiscal cliff.)
