So it's gonna be Obama with a landslide!

Started by jetxl, Thu 23/10/2008 18:34:04

Previous topic - Next topic

Disco

Quote from: markbilly on Thu 23/10/2008 22:41:24
2. Only having two parties has already dissolved democracy, not having any room for stark disagreement between those two would only dissolve it further.

Indeed, it is sad that in 30+ states (mostly those with the most electoral votes) there will be 6 names on the ballot for president, yet a good many people have only heard of 2 or 3 of them. When you can pick between more brands of peanut butter at the shop than you can with the president, things can get 'nutty' XD

TerranRich

I'm voting for Obama. Not because I'm black (because I'm not; I'm white), and not because I want to appear non-racist (because that's not the issue at all). I'm voting for him because I like his policies, his intentions, his stances... and I'm sick of the Bush administration. McCain can claim to be a maverick all he wants, but that word is thrown around so much they've forgotten what it meant. I"m also sick of the negative campaigning from McCain's side. On McCain's site a week or two ago, there were TWO HUGE pictures of Obama, his opponent. Obama was the focus of McCain's campaign until just recently. And now McCain is grasping at straws trying to bring up people from Obama's past, but not being very successful in finding anything solid to throw at Obama.

How about this: Obama wins. There are no riots, no claims of racism or non-racism, and people are OK with it. Hell, he even makes a great president.

As for experience, that's a silly thing to bring up. I remember hearing that Reagan (or some other president) had just as much experience as Obama had, and was a great president. I can't remember specifics, so don't take my word on that. Either way, how much experience is needed to become president exactly? All that is required is for the person to be 35 or over and an American citizen. He was voted by his party to be the candidate for presidency. If other senators, congressmen, and other politicians say that he has enough experience, and if the American pubic at large voted him as the candidate, then why question his experience?
Status: Trying to come up with some ideas...

markbilly

The only time a candidate will ever have 'more experience' than the other, is when a President runs for his/her second term.
 

TerranRich

It's also funny how McCain claims that Obama will "say anything to win". He complained that Obama added a work requirement to his proposal to grant a 10% universal mortgage credit. Come to find out, the plan had always included a work requirement.

Now who's "saying anything to win"?

It's crap like that that tarnishes my view of McCain with every passing day.
Status: Trying to come up with some ideas...

Darth Mandarb

#24
Would it make everybody feel better if I changed it to, "some people" instead of, "a lot of people"?

Would  that sooth all the delicate nerves?

I never said "all voters are doing this as a race thing" ... I never even implied that.  But if everybody wants to bury their head in the sand and think that the fact that Obama is black isn't an issue by all means go right ahead.  Whether we want to play all 'enlightened', and falsely accuse me of being a bigot, it is an issue to a lot of people (as I stated in my original point). Personally I don't care that the man is black (I was raised to judge a person on their actions, not on the color of their skin).  I care that he's a presidential-level politician and, as such, I'm extremely hesitant to trust him even a little bit.  How quickly we forget the every presidential candidate campaigns on all these lofty goals and ambitions and then, when elected into office, accomplishes none of them.  "But this time it's different!" just like it was in 2004, 2000, 1996, 1992, 1988, 1984, 1980, 1976, 1972, 1266 ... blah blah blah.

Quote from: Becky on Thu 23/10/2008 22:27:15
You realise that saying:
Quotea lot of black people are simply going to vote for him 'cause he's black
is the same thing as saying:
Quotea lot of women are simply going to vote for Sarah Palin 'cause she's female
which is a ridiculous statement to make.  You cannot reduce the political agency of a whole sector of society into such black and white terms without coming across as bigoted.  And suggesting that because you said "a lot of people" rather than "every person" somehow removes you from the responsibility of the words you said is a cop out.

It's actually not ridiculous.  I'd wager there are quite a few ("some" if it makes us all feel better) women voting for McCain because of Palin being a woman.  Do you truly believe that there are no women doing this?  Or no black people voting for Obama because he's black (even though my link shows this is the case)?  Do you truly believe that McCain (and his campaign people) didn't, in some part, choose her (a woman) to compete with Obama being black? I am not reducing the 'whole sector of society' into anything.  I made a point that a lot of people will vote for Obama 'cause he's black (rather than having any idea about his politics) and then provided a link to some actual proof on the subject.  I'm not bigoted and I don't appreciate being labeled falsely like that.

Nor is it a cop out.

Anyway you look at it: 'A lot' does not equal 'all'. Period.

Again, if it's really that hard to grasp the concept of "a lot" I will amend my previous statement to use "some".  If it's really necessary.

MrColossal

Jeez dudes, does Darth not deserve the benefit of the doubt?

Was it a generalization? Sure. Is that reason to jump on him and demand satisfaction? I don't think so.

I prescribe 10ccs of Cinnabon! STAT!
"This must be a good time to live in, since Eric bothers to stay here at all"-CJ also: ACHTUNG FRANZ!

TerranRich

While Darth does have a point, I keep hearing the race issue from everyone I talk to. Why does it even have to be about that? :(
* TerranRich eats a Cinnabon roll

;D
Status: Trying to come up with some ideas...

SSH

Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Thu 23/10/2008 23:57:40
every presidential candidate campaigns on all these lofty goals and ambitions ...

Even Republicans? I thought they campaigned on greed and lining their own pockets, which certainly the last 3 Republicans presidents achieved.
12

Sam.

It is a difficult thing to talk about really, I think there will be Americans who will vote for Obama because he is black but again, there will be Americans who will vote for McCain because he is white. Policies aside.

Having a Black president of America would, to many, symbolise a step forward, but really, it shouldn't symbolise anything. If we really have made such a step. Colin Powell said he would back Obama, many said this was because he was black, but there are many ex-republicans who are backing Obama too, is this all because Colin Powell is black?

Having watched the Presidential and VP debates, I do believe in Obama's policies over those of McCain and I really do hope that the American populous will agree with me. That might be because I am a liberal student, and Obama is just saying the right things to make me interested, but as it stands, I believe that Obama's policies represent what is best for the international community.

Oh! bah! Mah!
Bye bye thankyou I love you.

Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens

The Republicrats don't offer any solutions to any of the important issues.  They prefer, instead, to sling mud at each other as per usual.  There are much better candidates you don't even know about out there, like Chuck Baldwin, who have the knowledge to repair the broken economic system in America.

Also, I don't consider voting your conscience to be throwing away a vote.  That's bullshit, and if fewer people thought that way then less-mainstream candidates would be better represented.  People need to stop being so damned pessimistic and start standing up for what they believe in, win or lose.

LimpingFish

#30
Ugh. Politics. America flips a coin.

Could be worse, I suppose.



You could start off life looking like a scrotum. Or playing second fiddle to Sy Snootles.
Steam: LimpingFish
PSN: LFishRoller
XB: TheActualLimpingFish
Spotify: LimpingFish

Darth Mandarb

Quote from: MrColossal on Fri 24/10/2008 00:05:18
Jeez dudes, does Darth not deserve the benefit of the doubt?

Was it a generalization? Sure. Is that reason to jump on him and demand satisfaction? I don't think so.

Thanks ... I think?

Although I didn't make a generalization.

Quote from: SSH on Fri 24/10/2008 00:09:33Even Republicans? I thought they campaigned on greed and lining their own pockets, which certainly the last 3 Republicans presidents achieved.

Sure, they just make lofty promises to a different group of voters than the enlightened group that frequent these forums :P

Quote from: ProgZmax on Fri 24/10/2008 02:16:37The Republicrats don't offer any solutions to any of the important issues.  They prefer, instead, to sling mud at each other as per usual.

This is another issue I have ... I cannot stand the kindergarten-playground-insults between grown men on national television ads.  When I can get through an election year where I see ads for a candidate that are only about their positive stuff and not their opponent's short-comings I might be inclined to vote for them.  It's disgusting to see two men, one of whom will be the President of the United States waging cry-baby wars with their opponent.

Kinoko

To all you people saying, "He's just a politician", "They're all the same" - I highly encourage you to step back away from that point of view and take a look at the state of things.

Obama may not be perfect, but by fucking george, he is a genuinely intelligent, thoughtful, articulate and well-educated person. For the most part, he strives, and promises to continue to strive for the future, for people, for the environment, for getting America out of so much of the shit that it's in, and for trying to do things in the most practical and smartest way possible.

I... I don't even know what to say. There are a million things that make him a far, far, far, far, far better candidate than McCain.


Be skeptical, sure.  But the decision right now is like the one between eating a piece of delicious-looking cake and a poisoned brick. The cake MAY be past it's expiry date. It MAY have yucky raisins and peel in it. But it probably doesn't. It's probably a delicious cake. But the poisonous brick will just plain suck.

McCain is an awful, awful politician. He is EXACTLY more of the fucking same. I will cry my eyes out if he gets elected.

To talk about minor issues here and there is fine, but don't get caught up in them. We are still talking about the difference between eating DELICIOUS CAKE and A POISONOUS BRICK.

I wish I could do more than just encourage you all to register (if you aren't already) and vote for Obama. I sure wish I could!

Andail

I think a lot of Americans who supported Bush - or at least not opposed him - and now see the results develop some sort of indifference as a self defense.
"It's the same shit anyway, who cares, nothing matters".

Well, the two democratic canditates who competed with Bush might have been utter bores, but they weren't glaringly incompetent. Bush is now breaking new records in terms of low approval ratings on a weekly basis. He's run both your economy and your global reputation to the bottom and no, history will not prove him right.

And for crying out loud, now you've got the chance; you have a candidate who's young and dedicated, eloquent and intelligent. Don't give us the "same stuff same shit" argument, for it is flawed. Take a step back, open your eyes. Believe in your system. It's not rotten to the core, it can be salvaged.

Matti

I'm all for Obama but still don't swell in any illusions of a so-called "change" in Americas policy*...

Especially since Obamas foreign policy advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski is one hell of a conservative asshole.

He wrote this book "The world as a grand chessboard" and that's really what he thinks. It's like a game and the goal is to defend the USA's status as the only superpower (yet). I only read articles about that in german, but here are some links and, well, of course you can google yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_Brzezinski
http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard

The second point is the little difference between Democrats and Republicans. Even if Obama would like to really change things, he just wouldn't be able. Both parties are kneedeep involved in the economy and wouldn't dare to make any imprtant businessman angry. And they wouldn't dare to stop angressions in parts of the world that keep important natural resources the USA could use for themselves.


* ..some days ago I learned the difference between policy, politics and polity, but I already forgot and don't want to look it up. In german it's just one word.

Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens

QuoteDon't give us the "same stuff same shit" argument, for it is flawed.

Sorry but a vote for Obama is just another vote for status quo, which I am thoroughly opposed to at this point.  He'll change nothing.  He'll continue America's conquest of the Middle East (which he's said numerous times, though he didn't say '100 years if necessary' as McCain did), he's got no concept of solid economics based on the very, very few actual discussions he's had about it, and he's a just a face.  He flip-flops on any given day to make himself look good to as many people possible so it's hard to find out just where the fuck he actually stands, and that's not someone I want running this country.  So no, please don't tell me that by not voting for him I'm using flawed judgment.  I've read considerable amounts of non-mainstream information on these people and neither McCain nor Obama offer anything but a total economic collapse and a continual war in the middle east.  Also, anyone who researches American economic policy (which I do) could tell that Bush did not cause this economic situation by himself, he's merely exposed a lingering problem thats been developing since 1975-77, the boom-bust cycle of inflationary currency combined with a growing lack of savings.  You can't maintain a debtor nation forever.


Ozzie

#36
Sure.
McCain prefers to bomb countries straight-out instead of first going into diplomatic talks.

McCain wants tax cuts for the rich, Obama gives tax cuts for the poor and middle class and heightens the taxes for the rich ones.

McCain also wants to lower the taxes for big corporations, though the taxes for them are already quite low because of the countless loopholes. Obama wants to plug those.

McCain may be more experienced than Obama, but while Obama isn't so long in politics I think he learns fast.

McCain (or more Palin) is talking about the real America and those wonderful small town where the world is still so happy and idyllic as it should be which sounds to me like they want to further seperate the country like Bush did in his term. Obama wants to unite the country.

Yep, status quo indeed.  :-\

Sure, you don't know if Obama will do all the things he promises. I think he won't since not all of his promises seem to be financially affordable.
But the same goes for McCain.

And Darth, Nixon or Kennedy, Carter or Reagan, Bush Sr. or Clinton, those didn't make a difference, right?  ::)
Robot Porno,   Uh   Uh!

Oddysseus

I'm voting for Obama because he seems to actually care about the middle class, unlike Republicans who make a better show of supporting the middle class, and then give tax cuts to the rich and try to privatize Social Security when they get into power.

That being said, I used to have a lot of respect for McCain, before it became obvious that he knows this is his last shot at the presidency, and he is desperate enough to do anything to get it.  Not just through negative campaigning, but by distancing himself from his own previous positions and cosying up to people like Jerry Falwell to try to suck up to his base.  I know that all politicians must do this in an election, but I thought McCain had more integrity than that.

Also, I would like the Republicans to be taken out of power, for many reasons, but mostly for the rampant cronyism.  I cannot stand when people are chosen for jobs they are not qualified for simply because they have the right political connections.  From FEMA to the politicization of the CIA and the Justice Department, Republicans have given complete schmucks immense power just because they wave the right political flag, and I'm sick of it.  I don't care whether a Democrat or a Republican holds a particular job, as long as they are qualified for that job.

Well, at least both Presidential candidates are opposed to torture. *sigh*

LimpingFish

People seem to think that the democrats are the anti-republicans, which is why I never liked the two party system.

Voting for the democrats does not mean you are automatically voting for the opposite of what the republican party stands for. This isn't the rebels vs the empire.

And it's never as simple as Obama vs McCain.

Oil, steel, the NRA, the Catholic League, the Christian Right, the Nation of Islam, OPEC, General Motors, Lockheed Martin, the tobacco lobby, Rupert Murdoch, Hollywood, Wal-Mart...

Will Obama change things? Can he? Is McCain just an extension of the Bush administration? The War on Terror couldn't have happened with the support of the Democrats, nor would the Patriot Act have been passed. If you disagree with some of McCain's policies, will voting Obama mean those policies will not come to pass?

Ugh. Politics.

Obama promises enough to make him seem like the better choice. You can't second-guess yourselves, so there's little real point in claiming nothing will change. It might, it might not. But seeing the direction America has gone under Republican leadership, I'd like to see something different.

If such change is actually attainable.
Steam: LimpingFish
PSN: LFishRoller
XB: TheActualLimpingFish
Spotify: LimpingFish

InCreator

#39
I used to ignore all the choose-the-president circus. US is directly on opposite side of the earth...

But those three debates, I watched them on youtube.
Methinks:

Obama

..."I will make world a better place"
Even though he's old enough to be president, to me he feels like an ambitious high-school kid, with "innovative" tattooed onto his arse. Head full of ideas, and empty of experience. I'm TERRIBLY sorry if this goes over someone's line defining "racism", but US is a country of white people always led by white people. All the presidents before, through short history of this country are usually old, clever white men. And well imaginable in historical cotton plantation, smoking cigars and whipping people like Obama. Simply... White House feels like totally wrong place for Obama. Like a chicken in a nest of foxes. Even though world has changed much and thinking too... but it still feels somewhat... wrong. Or exciting?

He being a muslim is another strange piece of irony in this bizarre picture. And a treehugger. Also, he doesn't leave strong image at all. Hippie to be a most influential man on earth? From this side of globe, it looks like a circus.

If he would win, it would be helluva interesting reign. I believe his character would stand out in history books to come. Judging from his debates, probably as an active education/health care/environment care reformer and author of numerous (failed, though ambitious) projects on same area, which next rulers would probably cancel.

He would lead US like a log raft over an ocean, being optimistic against all odds and realizing that it's mission impossible... probably too late.

You cannot change world much in only 4 years. Unless your first name is Adolf...

McCain

...the oldschool populist...
is definitely more president material. In historic sense. White man with white hair, white teeth and snake-like smile. Old fox who knows mass manipulation and media tricks, hungers for power and has no "fix-the-world" mentality. He would result most likely in boring, stable and un-progressive reign. Maybe start a war with Iran or sink the economy even lower. Upset masses with some gestapo'ish decisions, similar Patriot Act and people would soon get bored of him.

He would probably rule US like his personal company, plantation or farm. Or army? Kill some good projects and maybe succeed on some too. US would probably get more aggressive image in the world, military-wise. Teachers and doctors will probably hate this man. Even if country gets worse, HIS life will surely improve over those 4 years.

But he has the  smile. I don't know if it's me or some coincidence, but all US presidents I've seen have the smile. There's a voting, and the man with the smile wins. Bill Clinton? A man with potato nose and rat eyes. But smile, it made him the president. Obama does not possess the smile.  :(

This is how those 2 men make me feel about them.
To be honest, my sleep would be better with McCain on the throne - with armed men in his fist -- and morning newspaper would be better with Obama ruling -- to see what did he got into this time. Obama seems more interesting because of his ambitious and somewhat more intelligent approach.

But either way, candidates suck somehow. Then again, neither of them is Truman, the shame of the world, and that's best about them.

Or maybe I'm totally wrong here. But this is how it looks from this end.
All americans here, wish you luck with your next leader.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk