Hacker News Reader

Comment by drivebyacct2 | Hacker News Reader

>It's that they're the same _where it matters_.

Quite frankly, that's bullshit. Romney/Ryan advocate a rollback of my rights and continued (or furthered) discrimination against me. That's only one small social issue that they differ on and they differ on policies that involve much more substantive issues.

Maybe you're privileged or fortunate enough to not be affected by tax rates, women's rights legislation, gay rights issues, and more, but many of us aren't. Those issues matter and that's why some support Romney and some support Obama.

View on HN

It's really frustrating to see how often they're described as the same thing. Whenever there's just one (or a couple of) issues that diverge from someone's personal opinion, they completely disregard all of the differences. I can accept that there's a lot of grey area in politics. That doesn't completely shroud the very distinct differences there would be between a Romney and Obama administration.

What rights did you gain under the Obama administration that you would lose under a Romney administration? How would Romney discriminate against you in a way that Obama would not?

DADT? Soon to include DOMA? Federal benefits for domestic partners. That's only on gay rights.

How clueless are people about social issues exactly?

I wouldn't consider those really substantive compared to drawback of the military-industrial complex, radical increase in nasa/science funding, full free national health-care (including dentistry), overhaul of the education system (along the lines advocated by khan academy), ending the drug war, ending corporate welfare (and maybe even corporate personhood), and probably other major ones I can't think of right now.

Those issues affect me every, single day in a tangible primary fashion. The other problems, yes, are frustrating. Romney and Obama differ on how the feel towards funding that military industrial complex, and in a telling way given what you're discussing and the nature of the industrial complex.

As for national health-care, education, science, etc, they very noticeably and very starkly differ as well.

... I feel like you just supported what I was saying. My second post was simply an example of how they differ in meaningful ways.

This is not an either/or discussion. I see what you mean, that there is a very tangible difference between the current two candidates. On the other hand, two is a very limited choice. A lot of first world countries have multi-party systems and have some form of social democracy. Perhaps if it weren't for the first-past-the-post electoral system, the US might be a social democracy as well.

>On the other hand, two is a very limited choice.

Oh I certainly agree.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com