McCain?

[Alex_P]

No Alex, I'm not suggesting you do anything of that sort. What I am suggesting is that in a democractic process you cannot in any way discriminate against a voter, which you seem to be okay with. We have laws against that sort of thing for a reason. You vote how you want, thats what everyone does, and no one has any right to disvalue anyone elses vote.

Then you're arguing with a strawman.

I never said their votes shouldn't count. I said that, in this election, they are going to be out-voted by the people who disagree. And that I've got no problem with that in the short term, even if it means one party controls both the White House and Congress.

-- Alex

 

[mike1921]

What we need is a new Teddy Roosevelt... Best. President. Ever.

Oh, curse Franklin Roosevelt for having the same last name as him. Well, if Teddy is the one who supported the Japanese encampments than the only president who I'd rather watch die than him is John Adams. And John Adams deserved to be raped by a man wearing a chainsaw that was turned on.

Are Democrats going to use their power to introduce MEGA-ABORTIONS or something?

LOL.

McCain = crazy
Palin = corrupt and power hungry

I disagree. my problem with Palin isn't that she's power hungry. It's that she's even worse than Bush in the religion to government ideals. and why does reading this make me want McCain in office more instead of less?

 

[Claytonic3000]

Then you're arguing with a strawman.

I never said their votes shouldn't count. I said that, in this election, they are going to be out-voted by the people who disagree. And that I've got no problem with that in the short term, even if it means one party controls both the White House and Congress.

-- Alex

And you said that "they should take a time out from politics". What did that mean, exactly?

I also don't get how you'd be okay with a democractic controlled congress + president even "If they fuck it up there'll be a huge backlash in two years". Things are messed up enough, don't you think? And where does this pendulum 'it's their turn now' stuff come from? Is the democratic party now somehow entitled to controll everything for 8 years? I really don't see how. Both parties cock things up because they are made of people, people arn't perfect.

"at the moment, the Democrats aren't the party of ideological purity"

How are they not? They always have been. In fact both parties play the 'holier than thou' card all the time. They both go for idealogical purity, because they have to be absolutely right, and their opponents have to be absolutely wrong. They are that divided.

 

[jdguy]

But I'm just a political science and American history double major... not like I know what I'm talking about.

Yay let's all show off our degrees.
Me next! I'm a Enterprise Mgmt major with a minor in logistics and a co lateral in information managment. Lol don't throw degrees around they don't mean too much let your points stand for themselves rather than trying to bolster an argument with a boast. People should see your educated with your writings rather than you having to pronounce it
Just a pet peeve of mine

Don't have a degree major means I'm working on it. Also I'm not throwing around my education for clout just as a clarification that I am indeed educated on the subject matter. If a business discussion comes around I'm sure you would use your education to clarify your standing on the subject...

Hell it would be like a talk about health and a medical student coming on the boards and talking about his education.


EDIT: also after reading half of these posts... Its clear most of the people here don't know the issues... Most voters refuse to talk about one of the key issues involving Obama "his race"

5 of our presidents (some even good) have had no political training, on education Obama is top of his class (McCain next to last), Bush has a 20% approvial and McCain is 90+% Bush, our economy is in the toliet and historically speaking no president who has compleatly tanked an ecomomy party has ever stayed in office, Obama has a middle class upbringing that is the closest like the average american (biography speaking) than McCain, also Obama has earned everything while McCain (sans his vietnam heroism) has been given everything, and lastly no one really focus' on McCain/Palin scandles yet anything Obama does becomes a smear issue.

Look at the true facts and really ask why do you want to vote McCain?

 

[Mistah Kurtz]

Ok, its getting close to the US election, and I've noticed a few threads on here anti-obama in title and OP, but mixed in replies.

But so far, I've seen no anti-McCain or even pro-McCain.

Now, forgive me as I'm a non-US person, so I can't comment on the domestic policies of either (as I know nothing about them), but from an internation view, it seems to me McCain thinks America's role in the world is simply being the best, forcing others to accept that, etc - i.e. George "Double-ya" Bush. Obama seems aware that their is a world beyond the borders of the USA (Plus Canada and Russia given Palins view that being next to both gives her international experience).

So, Why all the Obama-hate? Or why the lack of McCain hate? Or why the lack of McCain love? I've no idea where this'll go, but it should be interesting (factual comments with sources, please)

It's because even we conservatives don't like McCain. We don't love him, we don't hate him. What's important to us is making sure Obama stays out of office.

 

[Alex_P]

And you said that "they should take a time out from politics". What did that mean, exactly?

"Political wilderness" just means "nobody voted for you and your party, so your influence is very low until you can bring something different to the table for the next election."

-- Alex

 

[Vigormortis]

Alex, I have to disagree with you on your idea that having the "right" sit this one out while we put a very far "left" governmental structure in place is the solution to balancing things out. If we swing things that far to the left, come next election year, there'll be an outcry for it to swing back to the right, thus, keeping things always out of balance and having each side thinking they need to out-do the other. Much like what happened in 1992 and then again in 2000. The way to balance things out is to have truly equal influence from both parties while having a third to provide an objective point of view. What should this "mystical" third party be? Hell if I know. I've yet to see one that made sense.