Skip to comments.MARC FABER: If I Had To Vote For Obama Or Romney, I'd Shoot Myself
Posted on 08/08/2012 10:42:37 AM PDT by blam
MARC FABER: If I Had To Vote For Obama Or Romney, I'd Shoot Myself
Aug. 8, 2012, 11:43 AM
Marc Faber, the famous investor and strategist, says that neither candidate in the upcoming U.S. Presidential election is worth voting for, at least if the goal is fixing the economy.
In fact, says Faber, the Thailand-based author of the Gloom, Boom & Doom Report, if you put a gun to his head and told him to pick a candidate to vote for, he'd say, "shoot."
Why is Faber so negative on the two candidates?
Because he thinks neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney will have the balls to do what it takes to get the economy back on track, which, in his opinion, is significantly cut government spending AND modestly raise taxes. Rather, he thinks, both candidates will just focus on remaining popular.
Given that America will almost certainly choose one of these two candidates to be its next President, what is Faber's outlook for the U.S. economy?
Continued crappy growth.
Faber's outlook for the rest of the world, meanwhile, is even less encouraging. Europe is already in a recession, he says, and Asia's growth has peaked and is starting to decline.
Interestingly, Faber is not running away from stocks as a result of this dour view. Rather, he is starting to buy some stocks in Europe, because the valuations have gotten so slammed that he now finds the risk/reward profile attractive. And, with almost every government on earth trying to print its way out from under its huge debt load, Faber still remains a big fan of gold.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
So? Write in someone more worthy.
I could not disagree more with this assessment. How can one compare a community organizer with someone who ran Bain Capitol? Mitt is going to start by getting our energy policy back on track with the Keystone pipeline being the first move. I don’t think Marc is dealing with a full deck.
Some guy ran off to Thailand rather than staying here to help fix things and I’m supposed to listen to his opinions? Maybe on Thai cuisine, but not on politics or the economy.
I'm voting for the one who isn't a Communist.
...and re-elect Dear Leader Obama for four more glorious years so that the USSA can be completed.
Faber is absolutely right. Romney is a disaster. The only “cure” is a collapse of the economy. Americans need to be bitch-slapped back to reality. But, if Romney wins, the collapse will probably occur on his watch and the left will lie and lie and lie until 40% of Americans believe that it was the fault of “unrestrained” capitalism, and another 30%-40% will be afraid of contradicting the “mainstream” opinion.
The only possible good scenario is for the implosion to happen before the election. Romney then might have the testicles to do what needs to be done....nah, I’m just dreaming.
We are screwed.
The worst case scenario is that he'll harm my beloved country far less than will Osama Obama.
Your call, vote for your own destruction, or vote against it.
I loved his work with Grand Funk Railroad.
The economy is going to collapse.
If Romney is in office when America’s chickens come home to roost, the ‘rats will run against him, republicans, free enterprise and decency for a minimum of two generations.
If obama is in office, the republicans will forgive and forget before his term is up.
A pox on both their houses.
” I’m voting for the one who isn’t a Communist. “
and wants to destroy our economy, our morals, and ethics.
Seems like an easy call to me.
Faber is just being Faber here.
Utter crap. Look, either Obamugabe or Mitt is going to be inaugurated in January. That is reality.
I know that causes a lot of consternation among some, but it is what it is.
And I believe the evidence, if only from the private sector and management perspectives, shows Romney is much better.
MARC FABER has voted - with his feet - he’s chosen NOT to live in the United States. If he lived here he’d know there’s more riding on this election than just stocks...
Obama needs to be voted out of office to avoid World War III...
Also, it ain’t hard to call a monetary collapse, when all we do is spend money we don’t have : )
Romney will be a disaster. He will do almost all of the same things Obama will do, but with the full support and blessing of the Republican establishment. Better the bad things happen under a D President than an R President, as far as I’m concerned.
Both will drive us to disaster, Obama at 75 mph and Romney at 65 mph. What a choice!
I'm inclined to vote against both of them.
In my dearest fantasy, some day someone I can vote for will be on the ballot.
As long as we vote against the much, much worse candidate, the other party will have zero incentive to put anyone worthy on the ticket.
If you are happy voting for the one who smells of sulfur just to keep the one who reeks of sulphur out, more power to you.
Some day you'll be able to hold your head high and proudly proclaim "I voted for slow destruction!"
sadly this is the way I will need to vote. Not a lot of cheering here but will hold my nose and check my vote for Romney. Not doing so WILL mean the end. Obama will destroy us. PERIOD!
It’s all fine and well to strut, “I’m not voting for either” WHEN you are in a state that is a foregone conclusion in the Electoral College. I live in California, a mortal lock for Obama (hell, this state would elect Biden), so I do not mind fellow Californians saying they’re gonna vote for Gary Johnson or whatever.
Same goes for Texas or a solidly red state.
But IMHO, if you live in a state that is “in play,” it’s better to hold your nose and vote for Romney BECAUSE he’s the only guy that can get Obama out.
If I thought we could survive 8 years of Obama, including three or more liberal Justices, I might think differently. But I don’t think we can.
your dearest fantasy will be FAR CLOSER realized with Romney in the WH. IF you fail to vote for the lesser of the two evils, (yes one WILL be in the WH whether you vote or not)
....... with Obama in the WH again, you will no doubt ever have a chance at voting freely again. Look at history to realize this fact!
Neither candidate has been formally nominated yet.
If the parties believe that we all are happy as clams with both of them, that's what we'll get.
If either party believes their putative candidate can't win, they still have the option of a brokered convention.
Judging from FR, the republicans must believe they can put up any old bad to mediocre candidate and win.
That's what they'll give us.
Fabar is Swiss, right?
Faber is Swiss, right?
I’m voting to rid this country of a Marxist imposter who’ll destroy the Republic in four more years. I took an oath in 1977 and was never relieved from my responsibilities, as far as I’m aware. You feel “pure” by voting for some third party nobody or writing-in a name, but those of us voting for the major party candidate are adults who know there are only two choices. You’ll feel principaled and I’ll know I tried to save the country. Okay?
Any relation to Emil Faber?
What you said! Of course, living here in the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of Illinois, a place that would elect Lucifer if he had a D after his name, it is somewhat tempting to vote my conscience.
The titer continues. Both parties seek to find just how bad a candidate can be and we will still vote “for” them.
Neither party has the slightest incentive to give us a candidate who isn’t a full up centralized power (in their hands) party apparatchik.
They know we’ll cheerfully vote for the guy that will wait to enslave our children until they are in their 30’s over the guy who wants to enslave them when they are teenagers.
I’m not voting for a slave-master for today, tomorrow or the day after.
I don't know? I was merely pointing out that he doesn't vote, and he didn't run away from problems in the US.
I personally favor Friedman, Sowell, and Williams on these economic questions. But I also think the US has to rediscover our moral compass to avert disaster, (and I mean our Judeo-Christian values, not some new age gibberish). So there's not much chance of my views being realized barring a miraculous revival of Christianity. Which is what I daily pray for, against all hope.
Assuming there is an election in 2016, which party will put up a worthy candidate?
The republicans will scramble to convince us that Romney was wonderful.
The democrats will triple down on stupid and nominate a flat out Stalinist. And why not? Either way their goals get accomplished.
OTOH, if obama continues his reign, there is a slim change that republicans will try a candidate who isn't only slightly better that him, and give America a contrasting choice, rather than a me-too lite.
I see your point, but I gotta tell you if Illinois somehow becomes a battleground state, it’s all over for the Kenyan.
Me too. I thought Marc Faber was a musician.
Me too, and I'm an agnostic.
In 2005, Governor Romney forced Catholic hospitals to provide abortions and day after pills in spite of their moral objection. Would he do the same as President? I cannot say. Can you?
It’s OK though, Mitt will do it more slowly...
I will be casting my vote for Romney, too, polly.
NO President has ever been so dangerous to my beloved country as Obama and his administration.
Votes downticket are also SO important.
I am passionate about getting Obama OUT.. and as many good conservatives as we can in Congress and the Senate.
Let me know when you come back to reality.
I suppose after Romney wins in November, you’ll say “Well, the electors haven’t voted yet. We have until December to convince them to vote for someone else!”
Boy, are you guys in for a jolt. LOL! This Peace and Safety business at any price will prove to bring you neither.
Romney will be on wheels with a Republican Congress backing him up. The fabled Romney intellect, business skills and acumen, and deplorable anti-Christian liberty taking he slammed down on willing Massachusetts will be slammed down across the entire nation with the blessing of that same willing Establishment Republican congress.
Methinks, with caveats, that Obama could be frozen in place by that same Republican DC cabal in the House and Senate who would be the majority rulers. With Romney, they too will be on wheels to get to socialistic hell, with only the House squealing all the way, too scared to shut the purse on any of it.
I don’t know who Marc Faber is, and I wouldn’t care if he did kill himself. But he won’t.
On Feb. 8, White House press secretary Jay Carney said that it was odd for Romney to speak out against the federal mandate, arguing that it is virtually identical to the one that was in place when he was governor of Massachusetts.
Romney responded later that day, saying, Mr. Carney needs to check his history.
He said that the provision was put in Massachusetts before I was governor and that while in office, he tried to have it removed.
I worked very hard to get the legislature to remove all of the mandated coverages including contraception, he said.
Romney has also been criticized for a law that passed when he was in office that required Catholic hospitals to provide emergency contraception, which causes early abortions, to rape victims.
However he has responded that he vetoed this bill when it came to his desk. The legislature overrode his veto, and so the bill became law, but he had not approved it, he said.
Romney argued that as governor, he steadfastly tried to honor and respect religious conscience.
I worked closely with the Archdiocese of Boston, met with Cardinal OMalley from time to time, and did our very best to respect the religious feelings and beliefs of the people in my state, he said.
While his opponents are skeptical and say he should have done more to fight the measures, Glendon believes that Romney has shown backbone on every critical issue at every juncture when it counted.
Before the primaries they made the case.Right now I am making the case before the convention that Romney is not a worthy candidate to be president.
They said it wasn't the right time because he wasn't actually his party's candidate.
Before the main election they made the case.
They said it wasn't the right time because he wasn't actually the president elect.
Before the electoral college vote they made the case.
They said it wasn't the right time because he hadn't actually been elected until the electoral college said so.
Before the congress accepted the electoral college vote they made the case.
They said it wasn't the right time because he hadn't actually been approved until the congress accepted the electoral college vote.
Before was sworn in they made the case.
They said it wasn't the right time because he hadn't actually violated the constitution until he became president.
Now that he is in the White House, they say it's too late, you should have said something sooner!
Peace and Safety?
That sounds vaguely familiar...
He was born in Switzerland but lives in Thailand...
I also am passionate in getting Obama OUT and voting conservative down the ticket!
If Obama gets re-elected, because there are those who refuse to vote for the lesser evil, I fear we will see the end very quickly to what we know right now as freedom.
He will be unshackled and freed to finish up the destruction in a very short time. Those choosing not to vote in protest, will find it too late to turn back the clocks.
Our Constitution will be formally destroyed.
A few months back I declared I would NOT vote for Romney , period.
After looking at the whole situation, I decided that I would hold my nose, vote for him, and then we will need to start day one after inauguration at holding him to the fire, hopefully with a newly elected Senate and Congress!
It’s a bit like going out with the guy who will only drug you and rape you, in preference to the guy that will pull a knife on you and rape you.
Economic collapse is exactly what 0 & his commie pals want. Read this. (I won’t tell you to read 0bama’s books because uncontrollable heaves are *very* dangerous)
aside to Lancey Howard & Internet Walnut- I think that might be Mark Farner.
Today is a *really* hate Mittens day (the Romneycare thing), but I’ll still vote for him if it’s between him & 0.
That is not what the Catholic groups were saying in 2005 until he became the presumptive nominee.
The initial injury to Catholic religious freedom came not from the Obama administration but from the Romney administration, said C.J. Doyle, executive director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts. President Obamas plan certainly constitutes an assault on the constitutional rights of Catholics, but Im not sure Governor Romney is in a position to assert that, given his own very mixed record on this.
Romney had publicly claimed the bill did not apply to private religious hospitals
On December 7, 2005, Romneys Department of Public Health said that Catholic and other privately-run hospitals could opt out of giving the morning-after pill to rape victims because of religious or moral objections
On December 8, 2005 Romney reversed the legal opinion of his own State Department of Public Health, instructing all Catholic hospitals and others to provide the chemical Plan B morning after pill to rape victims. He was quoted as saying, I think, in my personal view, its the right thing for hospitals to provide information and access to emergency contraception to anyone who is a victim of rape.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.