The question... Just vote in poll. Lets do a poll here @ eoff. :D
p.s. I know it wont be so accurate since some of us are under aged to vote, and some of us arnt from the USA. Just for fun though....
Printable View
The question... Just vote in poll. Lets do a poll here @ eoff. :D
p.s. I know it wont be so accurate since some of us are under aged to vote, and some of us arnt from the USA. Just for fun though....
*voted*
Democrate? What? Ah well, it works.
Give me a "V"!
Give me a "V"!
And what do you get?
"VV"
I wouldn't vote. I like neither.
Republican. I don't especially like Bush, but I prefer him to Kerry. Also I had a nightmare about Kerry, so I believe bad things will happen if he becomes president.
Why are there only 3 parties?
.opt
2, and because Americans like to keep it simple, when it comes to politics - black and white.Quote:
Why are there only 3 parties?
Everybody loves a lil bush
Good lord, everytime i see poll results like this the grass in Canada gets alittle greener.
(*Voted Demo*)
Voted 'democrate' ;) cause I don't trust Bush and his shady oil connections....
There's not. I see these parties:Quote:
Originally Posted by Optium
1) Republican
2) Democrat
3) EVERY SINGLE OTHER PARTY
So there's more than just 3 parties as options.
I was the first to vote Independent. I, unlike most, am a supporter of his foreign policy, but it's his domestic policy that I don't like.
Bush has bad values.
Kerry has no values at all.
There's no way I could vote for either. I don't really wanna vote for Nader, either, though. If I could vote, I would do research to figure out exactly which Independent I would vote for.
Well. If the Republican candidate was anyone other than Bush, I'd vote for Nader. Since it is Bush, I'm voting for Kerry.
Then again, if the Repub candidate was McCain I'd vote for him no problem.
I :love: you Psy ;) :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Psychotic
Republican.
I think that Americans have two basic mindsets and one cannot comprehend the other. The pure concept of a democrat horrifies me. So I'll vote Republican even though Bush is going to need to make up for some heavy duty lost money here. We better have free gas in 3 years! (It'll be more like $3.00 gas in 3 years. At least it'll rhyme wth free. But that happens with anybody. Kerry could make it more expensive.)
It must be quite an honor to be truly independant of the two mindsets. It's awesome to hear people debating about democrat or republican with no biases. One minute they seem to have a good grasp on things, the next they're crazy...
Anyway, I cast my vote. The Republicans here seem to need it.
What about the concept of a democrat horrifies you?
Bush. I'd rather have a leader that'll do what he thinks is right, against all opposition, even if it later proves to be the wrong thing to do. Bush does a lot of things I disagree with; that lots of people disagree with, actually, but he thinks he's doing the right thing, and doesn't let naysayers stop him from trying. Kerry seems the type that wouldn't do what he thinks is right, if he thought the right thing to do was unpopular. I vote for leaders that I think make decisions better than me, not for leaders that fall back on me for big decisions. The congress can veto any Bush action they deem inappropriate. They can't give Kerry a spine. Further, our government is supposed to be made up of three independent branches. As far as I'm concerned, a vote for Kerry is like electing Congress for president. You'd only have two real branches of government.
Isn't that some backwards logic though? Choose a representative of theQuote:
Originally Posted by Garland
people who will do what he wants, even when the people tell him not to.
Seems strange to me...
.opt
Presidents are like parents. The people are like children. Good parents aren't ruled by their children - they don't buy every single toy on the storeshelf that catches their kids' whim. They know when that horrible tasting medicine is necessary. Electing a president that does whatever the people want is like having parents that don't make their kid stricken with pneumonia take the bitter medicine because the kid doesn't like the taste. Being popular isn't always a good thing, because the general population is largely ignorant on what it takes to be a world leader.
Well, I'm not American, but there's an election coming up in Australia and it's looking to be a similar kind of race. Anyway, I believe that if Americans could see the way that they are perceived in the outside world now compared to four years ago, George Bush wouldn't have a chance of being elected. Basically, from what I can tell he's buggered up the economy, turned America's allies neutral and neutrals hostile. He's alienated America in ways that will take years and years to repair. It's beyond most non-Americans as to how Bush even has a chance at re-election
I disagree, the entire point of democracy is to be a government of theQuote:
Originally Posted by Garland
people. It stands to reason that if 200 million people think something is
right or wrong, that should hold some weight. If a president simply ignores
the 200 million people then he is a dictator, he is no longer representing
the people. Calling the president a parent is silly. Remember, you have to
be over 18 to vote, at 18 you're a legal adult and you no longer have to
do what your parents tell you as far as the law is concerned. Doesn't it
make sense that a good deal of people who are voting, many of them
who are older than the person they're voting for, may be able to make
up their minds and form solutions for themselves rather than having
someone do it for them? Saying that the president is a parent is just
another way of calling anyone who's not in politics children.
.opt
I own a small business.Quote:
Originally Posted by nik0tine
Democrats want to do stuff like raise minimum wage to solve problems. And I'm like, "What? So I'm not going to raise my prices when I have to pay out more to these employees? What?"
The only good thing about democrats is that they don't crack down on the drug trade. Personally, I would prefer that they did, but when they don't, a lot of extra money spills into the lower middle and poor classs so they'll blow it on crap and push the economy forward just a little bit.
But democrats still stunt everything. Masters of inflation.
I'm mostly pissed at Clinton. He's the only one I really witnessed. He decimated the 80s golden age and sent the economy on a downward trout spiral. Bush comes in saying, "I'll start a depression and fix everything!" But it was too late, a year or 2 into his term terrorists smash into the two towers and the world explodes. That isn't Clintons fault, really, but it really would have been nice if he had concentrated on making money for the US instead of screwing things up, like he did for my family anyway.
Raising wages does more damage. If you raise your wages by x percent and the employer raises prices by x percent, the employer makes up the difference in prices PLUS gets an increase in 'profit'. Thus it makes absolutely no sense to get wage increases. If we kept wages stagnant, everybody will win...except the politicians.
Anyway I would vote for Bush, assuming I was 1)American and 2)wanting to vote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martyr
Ok well Clinton had the biggest budget surplus in the history of the United States. Now we have the biggest budget defciet in the history of the United States. Clinton reign signified a REAL golden age for America, and there was no down to it was he was in office. But the combination of a 1.3 TRILLON dollar tax cut for the rich, 9/11, and the slow down of the internet boom, sent us into a depression, not mention the billions needlessly thrown at the Iraq war.
I personal view those facts as Demo: 1 - Repub: 0 (*possibly -1) .
My family was thriving under Clinton. My dad made 20-30 dollars an hour doing civil engineering. Now he doesnt work. And i think people that make 200,000 dollars a year or more should have to give more back to their government, because they can, and they can do so comfortably. Then the governemnt could use that money to fix the deficet and possibly provide either health care, or fix the social security
problems. Which is why my parents are voting for Kerry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquallandZidane
I am so glad someone finally said that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by garland
That was my point exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Optium
What, pray tell, does he do if he doesn't work?Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquallandZidane
I imagine he doesn't do anything, because he's unemployed.
What's funny is Bush cuts taxes for the rich and not for the poor. Then he goes and wages two expensive wars. The rich pay a VERY LARGE percentage of the taxes. In fact i think it is a majority. Now all of a sudden they get a tax break and bush doesnt have the money he needs to go to war. So he starts cutting money from all of the programs he created, like no child left behind. Ha! what an idiot!
Sorry, missed that line when I was reading it quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garland
The question is, do you really believe that a 40 year old man can't choose
for himself what he thinks will be good for him? I think deep down we all
know more or less what is good for ourselves. We learn that quickly in
life and the law says that at the age of 18 we do know what's good for
ourselves.
I think it's very naive to think that any politician is working for what he
believes in. This is a BIT of an exaggeration, but essentially all politicians
are puppets and the ones holding the strings are those who have close
family ties, or have donated money, services, etc to the politician. I'm
not saying that no politician has his own ideas and goals, but when it
comes down to the nitty gritty, politicians usually aren't worrying about
their own goals.
.opt
Exactly. Plus the fact that Bush lets his religious beliefs influence his decisions (abortion, Stem cell research, gay rights) really irks me.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquallandZidane
Yeah. It really pisses me off to think that somebody would run for president in an attempt to make the world better according to his beliefs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azar
What planet are you from? Why do you think we have leaders? You think they're supposed to absent mindedly follow directions written in a mystical nether during an acid trip?
Your problem is that you're for abortion, stem cell research and gay marriage. How does that make Bush any worse a president. One you don't agree with, but no worse! Dammit!
As far as the surplus and Clinton golden age, I have no idea where it was. It wasn't in my city. The 90s were filled with nothing but bankruptcies and rip-offs (Because people couldn't pay the bills they'd accumulated and paid for in the 80s).
So, uh, I can't testify to any knowledge of this. And, of course, words on paper are trout if reality tells otherwise.
And if somebody was making $30.00 before and doesn't have a job now, then it means something. It means that he wasn't worth that much money and got laid off. America is a democracy, but it runs on capitalism. If you want communism, if you want to be paid beyond your worth, go to Cuba. You get an avocado a day, if I'm not mistaken.
Clinton had a plan for dealing with Osama by the end of his term. His administration placed it in the hands of Condelleza Rice when Bush took office. Of course, they never took these actions and thus 9/11 ocurred. After 9/11, Bush told Richard Clarke to have Iraq linked to the tragedy, despite his protests. Bush entered office with plans to invade Iraq, but magically fused it with the post-9/11 "war on Terror" (which is a meaningless phrase by the way, you can't fight a war against a certain type of tactic).
The economy is crap now also. Don't give me any of that "Its getting better now" crap either, because I've heard that same rhetoric a year ago and I personally don't see any improvement. I realised I used crap twice in the same paragraph. I don't care.
The only thing I like about Bush was his Immigration plans from a while back. Of coursre I don't even think those got passed, and it was just an effort to get the hispanic vote, but I still liked it.
The "80's Golden Age"? Unless by 'Golden Age' you mean huge deficits and near stock market crashes, I'd have to disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martyr
This is crazy. Your point of view is that you can either base your morals around religion or absolutely nothing at all! Instead of people basing everything they think off of the bible, maybe people could logic things out for themselves and decide on a RATIONAL course of action. To me, there's a HUGE difference between a fundamentalist and someone who holds their beliefs because they can think for themselves. Unless "morals" mean blind submission, not everyone with morals is a fundamentalist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martyr
Stem cell research saves lives. Abortion helps keep potential single moms off the streets.
Everyone who thinks Bush has morals should learn about his S. Carolina campaign against McCain. Sure, it was completely legal, but not very "moralistic" because it was intended to decieve people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martyr
Well now he applies for jobs... finds a temp every few months... then goes back into unemployment... noones hiring permenantly anymore i guess.
EDIT: YES! 19-13-3 for the demo's! The grass in Canada is looking greyer already! w00tag3
Zod is the only leader. If anybody ever dared to come to planet Houston to challenge my rule by commanding you all to "stand" as opposed to kneeling, I would kill this insolent being immediately. If you truly wish to be prepared for all circumstances, you only need but a strong desire to kneel before your one and only true leader... ZOD!
Well OBVIOUSLY. This is merely in the hypothetical situation that the planet Houston wasn't ruled by you, sir.
Quote:
Originally Posted by General Zod
omg, you sound like a cultist. :p