Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Moderator: HAZ - Moderators

Linked Guides none
Linked Areas none
User avatar
paulshikleejr
Posts: 105
Joined: Feb 02 2010 4:37 pm
City, State: Scottsdale, AZ
Contact:

Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by paulshikleejr » Oct 26 2012 6:18 am

Admittedly, I have only the smallest amount of data on this (see hereafter), but I'm thinking that Romney is better for hiking than Obama because:

- Romney was in charge of an Olympics
- Romney never did substances
- Obama did substances (which may be a non sequitur because I'm sure many hikers have inhaled, etc.)
- Obama (from what I've seen) seems to be more into screwing oil and other natural resource-based industries opposed to actually promoting outdoor activities (like hiking)

In my opinion, it doesn't follow that being conservative means you're anti-environment (I'm conservative, but I recycle, drive a Prius, am into hiking and camping, and am very stewardship minded) and it doesn't follow that being liberal means you're pro-environment (you might just be de facto anti-development).

But, I don't have much info about Obama's and Romney's documented actions (as opposed to just lip flapping) with regard to (specifically) hiking/camping/backpacking. Does such documentation exist for either?
Last edited by paulshikleejr on Oct 26 2012 7:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Decisionmaking and action should only be informed by, not subject to, healthy, reasonable concern.
That being said, anything worth doing is worth doing to excess.

User avatar
SpiderLegs
Posts: 746
Joined: Jul 12 2012 7:35 pm
City, State: Tucson, AZ

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by SpiderLegs » Oct 26 2012 6:25 am

Well because of Obama I was unemployed for almost 6 months. That was great for my hiking, had nothing else to do and was able to put up some great routes over the summer. But just got a job and am dependent on the economy picking up so that I can afford to buy new hiking gear plus keep the job I have. So now I'm leaning towards Romney.
See my pics on Instagram @tucsonexplorer

User avatar
AZLumberjack
Posts: 308
Joined: Feb 17 2010 10:28 am
City, State: Apache Junction, AZ.
Contact:

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by AZLumberjack » Oct 26 2012 6:48 am

For the outdoor experience, I guess I would favor Obama:
1. Romney supports coal, one look at the haze over GC will convince ya that coal's not the answer (favor Obama)
2. Renewable/clean energy. Sure we need gas to run our cars, but lets find an alternative (favor Obama).
3. Can't draw a picture in my mind of the Romney's out on the trails (Cadillac accessible trail heads?).
4. Someone who will continue to protect America's national parks. Parks don't generate a profit so I don't think Romney and Ryan would put them very high on the list.
5. Sure would be nice if someone would control the Mexican drug/human trafficking along the boarder. That's a really nice part of the country that we can't safely make use of (favor Romney).

Whoever you support, it's your responsibility to vote.
On every trip into the Superstitions, I find another Gold Mine. Today the mine was filled with Memories. I can not wait for the next trip.

User avatar
beterarcher
Posts: 474
Joined: Jul 23 2012 7:17 pm
City, State: phoenix, az

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by beterarcher » Oct 26 2012 6:59 am

@SpiderLegs I was in the same boat for a year ](*,) , absolutely voting for Romney. Plus, I like dogs and Romney will get his dog to the trail head come pumpkin or high water :whistle:
Understand, when you eat meat, that something did die. You have an obligation to value it - not just the sirloin but also all those wonderful tough little bits.
Anthony Bourdain

User avatar
chumley
Posts: 6892
Joined: Sep 18 2002 8:59 am
City, State: Tempe, AZ

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by chumley » Oct 26 2012 7:43 am

Money doesn't hike. Since both of them are whores and will say or do anything for big money, neither of them is better for hiking.
Highway to hell

User avatar
paulshikleejr
Posts: 105
Joined: Feb 02 2010 4:37 pm
City, State: Scottsdale, AZ
Contact:

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by paulshikleejr » Oct 26 2012 7:53 am

OK, I want to stick to observed actions, but I must say Cadillacs and money do hike--with better gear.

Several of my hiking buddies absolutely have more disposable income than I do. They hike, with much better equipment--lighter, higher tech, safer (e.g., $500 PLB), etc.

When I have more disposable income, I'll still hike/camp and I'll have a PLB (and other stuff as well).
Decisionmaking and action should only be informed by, not subject to, healthy, reasonable concern.
That being said, anything worth doing is worth doing to excess.

User avatar
Sredfield
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sep 08 2002 1:07 pm
City, State: Ahwatukee, AZ

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by Sredfield » Oct 26 2012 7:57 am

Having been on the "inside" of government natural resource agencies for 30+ years, there is no doubt that the environment, and our access to it, and preservation efforts, fare much better under Democratic administrations. Wilderness expansion, National Monuments, roadless areas, Land and Water Conservation Fund, Recreation, etc. are all Democratic supported concepts. These "nice to have" things will likely take a hit under either because budgets have to tighten, but the Dem's consider them much more important than the Rep's. These are things the Rep's do to get re elected, the Dems do them because they believe in them, at least that is my impression.

Vote early, and often!
Shawn
The bear went over the mountain to see what he could see.

User avatar
azbackpackr
Posts: 8122
Joined: Jan 21 2006 6:46 am
City, State: Flag-summer-Needles-winter

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by azbackpackr » Oct 26 2012 8:11 am

What the heck is a PLB? :?

Maybe I'm a PLB (pretty liberal bi....) because I agree with Sredfield about the Dems...but I also like firearms and jobs (not sure Reps can produce more jobs than Dems did, though.)
There is a point of no return unremarked at the time in most lives. Graham Greene The Comedians
A clean house is a sign of a misspent life.

User avatar
CannondaleKid
Posts: 1251
Joined: May 04 2004 8:39 pm
City, State: Mesa, AZ
Contact:

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by CannondaleKid » Oct 26 2012 8:31 am

azbackpackr wrote:What the heck is a PLB? :?
Personal Locator Beacon... you know, one of those things that lets Big Brother know exactly where you are in case you want to be found... or is it when they want to find you?

Either way, I have no interest in one... if I manage to kick the bucket while out hiking somewhere remote, first, I'm doing something I absolutely love and second I'd rather be there than in a cemetery or in an urn on a mantle. I've already told my sons if that happened and they sent people to find me, they better hope I'm not found or they pay for my burial or cremation as my 'estate' won't have enough to pay for it.
CannondaleKid

User avatar
gummo
Posts: 251
Joined: Oct 23 2010 10:07 am
City, State: mesa

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by gummo » Oct 26 2012 8:44 am

mnlumberjack wrote:For the outdoor experience, I guess I would favor Obama:
1. Romney supports coal, one look at the haze over GC will convince ya that coal's not the answer (favor Obama)
2. Renewable/clean energy. Sure we need gas to run our cars, but lets find an alternative (favor Obama).
3. Can't draw a picture in my mind of the Romney's out on the trails (Cadillac accessible trail heads?).
4. Someone who will continue to protect America's national parks. Parks don't generate a profit so I don't think Romney and Ryan would put them very high on the list.
5. Sure would be nice if someone would control the Mexican drug/human trafficking along the boarder. That's a really nice part of the country that we can't safely make use of (favor Romney).

Whoever you support, it's your responsibility to vote.
6. Romney supports hyrdualic fracking. The only reason they are not fracking along the upper Delaware River is because the Obama Administration opposed drilling. (favor Obama).

User avatar
Al_HikesAZ
Posts: 1348
Joined: May 16 2005 1:01 pm
City, State: Scottsdale, AZ
Contact:

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by Al_HikesAZ » Oct 26 2012 9:36 am

At times like this I open my Bible where I can usually find wisdom and inspiring quotes. I found this quote from George Carlin on a handwritten scrap of paper I must have stuck in there long ago.
"You may have noticed that there's one thing I don't complain about: Politicians. Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says, "They suck". But where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. No, they come from American homes, American families, American schools, American churches, American businesses, and they're elected by American voters. This is the best we can do, folks. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out.

....I have solved this political dilemma in a very direct way: I don't vote. On Election Day, I stay home. I firmly believe that if you vote, you have no right to complain. Now, some people like to twist that around. They say, "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain", but where's the logic in that? If you vote, and you elect dishonest, incompetent politicians, and they get into office and screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You voted them in. You caused the problem. You have no right to complain.

I, on the other hand, who did not vote -- who did not even leave the house on Election Day -- am in no way responsible for that these politicians have done and have every right to complain about the mess that you created."
George Carlin
What better place to keep George Carlin quotes than in a Bible ;)

Be the change you want to see in this world. Mahatma Gandhi.
Anybody can make a hike harder. The real skill comes in making the hike easier.
Not if we can help it UNCLE JACK. http://www.sleepingdogtv.com/reel/Uncle-Jack.aspx Not if we can help it.

User avatar
writelots
Posts: 967
Joined: Nov 22 2005 2:20 pm
City, State: Tucson, AZ
Contact:

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by writelots » Oct 26 2012 9:49 am

Al_HikesAZ wrote:...they come from American homes, American families, American schools, American churches, American businesses, and they're elected by American voters. This is the best we can do, folks. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out.
Be the change you want to see in this world. Mahatma Gandhi.
Amen, hallelujah and pass the gunpowder, brother. (I have to admit that I disagree with George about voting, though. :M2C: )

Do it.
-----------------------------------
It troubles me that these days no matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up
- Lilly Tomlin

User avatar
Tortoise_Hiker
Posts: 323
Joined: Apr 02 2005 1:30 pm
City, State: Mesa, AZ

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by Tortoise_Hiker » Oct 26 2012 10:36 am

I always enjoy reading Al_HikesAZ. :D
Tortoise Hiking. Stop and smell the Petrichor.

User avatar
outdoor_lover
Posts: 1664
Joined: Aug 19 2011 7:49 pm
City, State: Scottsdale, AZ

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by outdoor_lover » Oct 26 2012 11:10 am

George Carlin was a genius!!! : app : I really miss him!!! And that's all I will say on this entire subject.....
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming, "Wow What a Ride!"

User avatar
hippiepunkpirate
Posts: 1218
Joined: May 30 2008 7:43 am
City, State: Peoria, AZ
Contact:

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by hippiepunkpirate » Oct 26 2012 3:47 pm

Outdoor Lover wrote:George Carlin was a genius!!! : app : I really miss him!!! And that's all I will say on this entire subject.....
I was writing "RIP George Carlin" in trail registers back in '08 went he passed away
My website: Mountain Tripper
I also write for: Territory Supply

User avatar
Canyonram
Posts: 230
Joined: Jun 01 2006 9:03 pm
City, State: Payson, AZ

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by Canyonram » Oct 30 2012 9:23 pm

This election provides one of the strongest contrasts between the two major political parties ever. When it comes to protecting wilderness, it is not even close as to which candidate/political party will act on behalf of our natural environment: President Obama/Democrats. We've already seen this here in Arizona with the Obama administration moving to protect 1 million acres around Grand Canyon being kept off-limits to further uranium mining. There is an issue on the current State ballot to take control of all Federal Parks, forests, etc within AZ---guess what will happen to those protected areas if handed over to those who will quickly move to 'develop' those natrual areas.

The Sierra Club has summerized the contrast between the two candidates:

"More than any other in recent decades, the 2012 Presidential election has propelled energy issues to those among the forefront of the public debate. During his first four years in office, President Barack Obama has established significant new safeguards protecting clean air, clean water, and public health while focusing heavily on growing the American clean energy economy. Along the way, he has encountered unprecedented resistance from those who oppose these measures, including large oil, coal, and gas companies, their allies in Congress, and his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney.

In response, fossil fuel companies are investing heavily to push their policy priorities into the political narrative, including repealing these public health safeguards, maintaining special oil industry tax benefits, and increasing domestic drilling and mining on public lands. Fossil fuel special interest groups have been among the most active in taking advantage of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in the Citizens United v. FEC case that opened the floodgates to unlimited, undisclosed political spending by these corporations and other special interests. By mid-September, fossil fuel interests had spent more than $150 million on television ads promoting their agenda, attacking clean energy, and supporting Romney, outspending clean energy advocates by more than 350% according to a New York Times analysis.

Among the measures championed by Obama are historic clean air safeguards, including historic protections to limit toxic mercury pollution and dangerous climate-disrupting carbon pollution. Obama also acted to protect more than 1 million acres of land around the Grand Canyon from Uranium mining and enacted the largest investment in American clean energy jobs in history. The President also implemented landmark fuel efficiency standards that represent the most significant step ever taken by any administration to cut our national dependence on oil and slash the pollutants that cause climate disruption.

In contrast to Obama, Romney has embraced the agenda of oil, gas, and coal companies. Romney’s energy plan was admittedly crafted with the assistance of oil and gas executives, and proposes significantly weakening Clean Air and Clean Water Act protections as well as throwing open public lands to drilling and mining. The former Massachusetts Governor also has publicly mocked the steps that have been taken by Obama to mitigate climate disruption, and has publicly questioned whether the climate crisis even exists. Romney has also rejected the President’s call to extend the Wind Energy Production Tax Credit that supports more than 70,000 jobs nationwide and supports a budget plan that would extend billions in special oil industry tax breaks.

Given those sharp differences, the Presidential contest between Romney and Obama presents a clear choice between two candidates with very different visions regarding protecting public health, mitigating the climate crisis, and building a clean energy future."


Source: http://content.sierraclub.org/voterguide/white-house

As to the economic problems, President Obama inherited the current recession from George Bush. From a balanced budget with a surplus and no foreign wars under Clinton, Bush and his policies entangled us in two foreign wars and stood by as the economy went to hell waiting for the wealth to 'trickle down.' The momentum from the Bush policies are still with us today---you did not lose your job because of Obama, you lost your job as a part of the backwash of the failed economics under Bush. It will take much more time to heal than the four years under Obama, especially since those years have been blocked by Tea Party and radical conservatives who have blocked all compromise efforts to correct. The same political advocates who were willing to shut down the Federal government are not going to be swayed by an argument to protect a wilderness hiking trail if there is something to be gouged from the earth and turned into $$$.

Way too much radical conservative favors will need to be repaid by Romney---forget your hiking trails if they are in an area that can be exploited by oil, uranium, logging, etc.

User avatar
BaldPaul
Posts: 11
Joined: Dec 18 2010 11:06 am
City, State: Mesa, AZ

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by BaldPaul » Oct 31 2012 8:40 am

Neither of them would be good for hiking and here's why:
Obama would be all smiles and back-slapping and then, with the smile never leaving his face, he'd take all your food and water (that you just humped out to the campsite) and give it to the people in the group that had neither the inclination nor the intestinal-fortitude to bring along for themselves.
Romney would be all smiles and back-slapping and then, with the smile never leaving his face, he'd take all your food and water (that you just humped out to the campsite) and keep it for himself.
The only way either of these scenarios would change would be if the bankers (may they rot in everlasting hell) ordered them to do otherwise.
That's why I hike with RON PAUL. :SB:

User avatar
BobP
Posts: 1607
Joined: Feb 26 2008 3:43 pm
City, State: Scottsdale, AZ

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by BobP » Oct 31 2012 9:32 am

paulshikleejr wrote: I must say Cadillacs and money do hike--with better gear.
I drive a Cadillac with a HAZ sticker on it.....and most of my hiking gear has duct tape on it.

It is said that the top five evironmentally friendly Presidents are.....Lincoln, both Roosevelts,Carter, and Nixon. 3 R's 2 D's Lists can be just Mindless Competitions though depending on who is making them ;)

Anyways of those five...two are carved into rock in SD. Isn't it now unlawful to deface rock?

I prefer one canidate over the other for many reasons but neither will change any of my hiking habits.
http://www.blindmotivation.com
http://www.seeitourway.org
Always pronounce Egeszsegedre properly......
If you like this triplog you must be a friend of BrunoP

User avatar
Tough_Boots
Posts: 1723
Joined: Mar 28 2008 7:08 pm
City, State: Phoenix, AZ
Contact:

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by Tough_Boots » Oct 31 2012 12:48 pm

This is probably my least favorite forum topic... ever.
"there is no love where there is no bramble."
--bill callahan

User avatar
SuperstitionGuy
Posts: 1554
Joined: Dec 25 2005 8:24 pm
City, State: Apache Junction, Arizona

Re: Better for hiking: Obama or Romney?

Post by SuperstitionGuy » Oct 31 2012 1:42 pm

@Tough_Boots
Me to, but only an idiot would vote on a single issue anyway and hopefully we (HAZ users) are above that. ;)
A man's body may grow old, but inside his spirit can still be as young and restless as ever.
- Garth McCann from the movie Second Hand Lions

Another victim of Pixel Trivia.

Current avatar courtesy of Snakemarks

Post Reply

Return to “Political”


cron