US Presidential Election 2012

JoshNH4H · 2012-02-03 18:47:06

Well, Election fervor seems to have long since taken over the US. At this point, it seems likely that the general election will be between Obama and Romney, though it is not quite impossible for Gingrich to win the nomination, even if he is seen as unlikely to win the general election.

Of all of these candidates, Gingrich is the only one who is a strong advocate for space. Romney is on record saying he would like to slash NASA's budget and feels that space exploration isn't worth the cost. I can only imagine that Paul would slash budgets. Santorum hasn't spoken on the issue. While not the strongest supporter of space, Obama has proposed some decent programs and seems to support the COTS program as well as the CRS program, which essentially translates into monetary awards for development of rockets by companies like SpaceX.

What does this election mean for space? Is there any candidate who we could expect to be a particularly strong advocate?

SpaceNut · 2012-02-03 21:02:44

Gingrich has been a space support since long before Hubble, ISS and more but being that he is also seen as an extreemist for space for all of that zeal....
Recent articles on the subject...

Newt Skywalker: Less NASA, More Space with a Moon base and prize money top Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich's to-do list for space exploration.

Gingrich proposes to spend 10 percent of NASA's budget, which is currently $17.8 billion, for prizes for an array of competitions. Which is not a bad slice of the pie...

Gingrich wrote:

"I think you've got to look at some of these science projects," he told Discovery News. "The fact that the Webb telescope has gone from $1.5 billion to $9 billion -- and I'm told that people don't believe that at $9 billion it's going to be on budget -- at some point you have to stop and say, 'There's something systemically wrong when you get into this scale of an overrun. I think that deserves serious review.'"

Nasa should have reviewed this long ago as to why even though we know that we need this telescope to replace so many other telescopes that we now have in orbit which are long past there time and prime....

Gingrich on space: 'NASA is standing in the way'

Russia's space program $63 million per seat to fly American astronauts on Soyuz spacecraft for trips to the International Space Station until commercial U.S. spacecraft become available.

Really we should be pay an american company for this travel in all honesty... something that Boeing, Lockheed should have seen and done along time ago....

http://news.yahoo.com/gingrich-calls-mo … 48955.html

Glandu · 2012-02-06 04:43:00

Seen from the other side of the atlantic, seems like Obama does not care, & republicans are even worse. Newt being the exception(but his projections seem, huh, like promising laser swords & hyper travel within 20 years).

At least, your presidential candidates speak about space. None here in France did. Their only obsession is wether sales tax should go up by 1.6%(Sarkozy) or 1.8%(Hollande). Space exploration is for low-level sub-ministers. And that's France, main engine for space exploration in Europe.

JoshNH4H · 2012-02-06 18:08:11

Glandu- That's a pretty fair summary of the state of things, I would say. I suppose one could argue that Obama does care about space exploration, but not enough for him to make it a high priority compared to the economy and armed conflicts and Iran and energy. In the end it doesn't matter, since not caring and caring but not enough to really push for it are functionally the same thing.

I would say that, at this point, there is not any country in the world where space exploration is considered to be a big deal. The US is by far the most invested, though we lack direction; some countries build rockets for weapons. Europe has a space program with a fair budget but is beset by lack of vision. Russia is a decent partner in ISS but has trouble doing much else. China has a space program but doesn't seem to actually care all that much. I haven't heard much out of Japan recently. Canada doesn't have the funding to do more than partner with others.

This is certainly not a great time for space.

Adaptation · 2012-02-07 00:18:53

There was a time when industry benefited from advancements in computers, production methods and materials developed for space; today space lags far behind the industry as a whole and clings to 40 year old technology. Nasa still has a ban on lithium based batteries over concerns addressed a decade ago. They refused to allow ATK to develop carbon fiber boosters that would have cut the dry mass by 1/3 or develop mechanical counter pressure suits what would be cheaper, more agile and have lower mass. Contractors are rewarded to overrun budgets and penalized for being under budget. I could offer them a $130,000 vacuum pump new in box for $20,000 and they still would buy it at full price plus some from the manufacturer because no one at NASA has the authority to buy from a non authorized source and you cant become an authorized source unless your the manufacturer or distributor. Rocket design is based on appeasing space states with each state vying to have the maximum amount of money wasted in its boarders as possible. Political infighting kills all long term

Dear presidents of the future, these problems are a systemic cancer that has grown deep into the culture. NASA needs to be reformed as a government owned non profit.

JoshNH4H · 2012-02-07 00:58:16

^Either that, or make use of extensive contracting with government specifications of capability but not of actual design. Essentially, it is the Zubrin method, which Gingrich generally seems to be in favor of.

GW Johnson · 2012-02-24 02:33:20

If Gingrich does get the nomination, which I doubt, he would still have to beat Obama, which the polls indicate as a lower probability, at best.

But, if Gingrich did become president, why should anyone believe he would make good on his promises as regards space (or anything else)? His decades of history in Congress, and as an influence peddler/lobbyist advisor, indicate pretty strongly that he typically tells people what they want to hear, then just does whatever he thinks is best for him personally.

Of course, that kind of misbehavior is no different from all the rest. But, Gingrich is the only one talking bases on the moon while in Florida, but nowhere else. See the pattern? Again?

GW

Tom Kalbfus · 2013-11-06 07:27:57

GW Johnson wrote:

If Gingrich does get the nomination, which I doubt, he would still have to beat Obama, which the polls indicate as a lower probability, at best.

Well we certainly know that Mitt Romney didn't beat Obama, who can say whether Gingrich would have, I do think he would have been more likely to attack Obama on Benghazi during the Presidential Debates! So Gingrich gets the benefit of the doubt since he was not there, the voters picked someone they thought would win and they were wrong!

GW Johnson wrote:

But, if Gingrich did become president, why should anyone believe he would make good on his promises as regards space (or anything else)?

After Obama's promise on Healthcare, "If you like your healthcare coverage, you can keep your healthcare coverage period!" and many people are receiving letters that they are losing their healthcare coverage after the Obamacare rollout, then why should we believe any promises Obama makes period?

GW Johnson wrote:

His decades of history in Congress, and as an influence peddler/lobbyist advisor, indicate pretty strongly that he typically tells people what they want to hear, then just does whatever he thinks is best for him personally.

No doubt, he was part of the establishment, but his congress did balance the Budget, don't forget that, and balancing the budget is considered an extreme right wing position by the main stream press.

GW Johnson wrote:

Of course, that kind of misbehavior is no different from all the rest. But, Gingrich is the only one talking bases on the moon while in Florida, but nowhere else. See the pattern? Again?
GW

At least Gingrich wasn't the "Grinch" that stole everyone's healthcare after telling them they could keep it. I think if Obama lies about that, he can't really be trusted on anything in the future. Obama is the worst case of a lying President who lies to get reelected, and we picked a moderate candidate who didn't challenge Obama on his lies and now were stuck with him for the next 3 years unless he's impeached!

MichaelGoota · 2017-09-23 05:09:30

I have to say, living in Ohio has been pretty crazy through this whole election process.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2012-02-03 18:47:06

US Presidential Election 2012

#2 2012-02-03 21:02:44

Re: US Presidential Election 2012

#3 2012-02-06 04:43:00

Re: US Presidential Election 2012

#4 2012-02-06 18:08:11

Re: US Presidential Election 2012

#5 2012-02-07 00:18:53

Re: US Presidential Election 2012

#6 2012-02-07 00:58:16

Re: US Presidential Election 2012

#7 2012-02-24 02:33:20

Re: US Presidential Election 2012

#8 2013-11-06 07:27:57

Re: US Presidential Election 2012

#9 2017-09-23 05:09:30

Re: US Presidential Election 2012

Board footer