Record crowds is a good sign for Obama.
Vote Obama so you never, ever have to even worry about having Sarah Palin anywhere near the White House.
Can't be. It's only a two party system. Just ask euros and uninformed Americans.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
What the fuck are the:
PSL
CPF
PRO
OBJ
SWEP
AIP
SPF
BTP
parties?
Also, lol, they should have a "None" option for tax collector >_>
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Vote Obama if you want Europe to like you, tbh.
You know very well why it is essentially a two party system - because none of them have any chance whatsoever of ever being elected. It's the same in my country and in many more. So if you cut the bs we all know what we're talking about.FEOS wrote:
Can't be. It's only a two party system. Just ask euros and uninformed Americans.
ƒ³
Only if you don't know what Reaganomics actually are.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Reaganomics have failed.
So give Democrats unfettered power in both the Legislative and Executive branches so they don't have to worry about working together. Great plan.TAR wrote:
The bailout plan saw the Republicans and Democrats only work together when they were trying to fight the disaster "after" it was caused by a non-regulated economy.
Based on what?TAR wrote:
The disaster Bush's term has been, is going to continue with McCain and Palin.
Obama hasn't said anything about cutting the military budget, either.TAR wrote:
The Republicans are going to stare down Russian, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and who knows where else by increasing the military budget. Your already in huge debt.
The top 10% already pay 70% of the taxes. The top 5% pay more than 30%. How much more should they be taxed?TAR wrote:
You need to raise taxes for the highest income owners, increase bank regulation until the financial market stabilizes, ease taxes on the low income earners to promote spending.
No he doesn't. He's the only one who hasn't provided any plans for spending cuts to offset his $800B+ spending initiatives.TAR wrote:
Only Obama has a plan for stimulating an economy that doesn't result in another budget deficit.
So does McCain.TAR wrote:
And he believes in global warming + finding a solution.
And so McCain is advocating for a federal requirement to teach creationism? Didn't think so.TAR wrote:
Evolution should be taught in schools. Not creationism. State and Church kept separate. Republicans will introduce intelligent design and dumb down your whole nation.
Dem talking points, tbh.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Whether or not they have a chance to win is irrelevant. Hell, if it was about a chance to win, this year it would be a single-party system.oug wrote:
You know very well why it is essentially a two party system - because none of them have any chance whatsoever of ever being elected. It's the same in my country and in many more. So if you cut the bs we all know what we're talking about.FEOS wrote:
Can't be. It's only a two party system. Just ask euros and uninformed Americans.
Why don't you guys cut the BS and just admit that it's NOT a two-party system? The proof is in the OP.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Again. Same as in Greece, the two major parties are so much more popular than the others, that a vote for a third party is guaranteed not to make said party rule. In the case of the US, things are so bad that even the extreme scenario of a coalition government - a major party needing the votes of a smaller one to create a government - would require some kind of a massive switch of votes toward smaller parties in general.FEOS wrote:
Whether or not they have a chance to win is irrelevant. Hell, if it was about a chance to win, this year it would be a single-party system.oug wrote:
You know very well why it is essentially a two party system - because none of them have any chance whatsoever of ever being elected. It's the same in my country and in many more. So if you cut the bs we all know what we're talking about.FEOS wrote:
Can't be. It's only a two party system. Just ask euros and uninformed Americans.
Why don't you guys cut the BS and just admit that it's NOT a two-party system? The proof is in the OP.
At least around here, smaller parties put together might get a 20% at best. In essence, in the case of the US, a vote for a third party is reduced to a mere vote of deprecation for the two major ones. Not to mention the fact that there is no real difference between the two parties...
ƒ³
There's no such thing as a "coalition government" in the US. That's a parliamentary kind of thing, totally alien to our system of government.oug wrote:
In the case of the US, things are so bad that even the extreme scenario of a coalition government - a major party needing the votes of a smaller one to create a government - would require some kind of a massive switch of votes toward smaller parties in general.
1. We have had at least one governor (state executive) from a third party (Libertarian). The reason the other parties don't do well is that their "big ticket" concepts typically get adopted by either the Dems or Reps as platform planks.oug wrote:
At least around here, smaller parties put together might get a 20% at best. In essence, in the case of the US, a vote for a third party is reduced to a mere vote of deprecation for the two major ones. Not to mention the fact that there is no real difference between the two parties...
2. There is a HUGE difference between the two parties, at least philosophically. The neocons have hijacked the Republican party at this point, which explains why many are disillusioned with them. Generally, the Republicans are for lower taxes (both individual and business), smaller government, fiscal constraint, community-based social programs. Democrats are for increased taxes (particularly on high earners and businesses), larger government, fiscal largesse (using increased tax revenue), government-based social programs.
So yeah...just alike.
Seriously, if you're going to make definitive statements like that about US governmental issues, you really need to learn more about the US system of government and the actual platforms of the major political parties.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
1. So what did that ever change?FEOS wrote:
There's no such thing as a "coalition government" in the US. That's a parliamentary kind of thing, totally alien to our system of government.oug wrote:
In the case of the US, things are so bad that even the extreme scenario of a coalition government - a major party needing the votes of a smaller one to create a government - would require some kind of a massive switch of votes toward smaller parties in general.1. We have had at least one governor (state executive) from a third party (Libertarian). The reason the other parties don't do well is that their "big ticket" concepts typically get adopted by either the Dems or Reps as platform planks.oug wrote:
At least around here, smaller parties put together might get a 20% at best. In essence, in the case of the US, a vote for a third party is reduced to a mere vote of deprecation for the two major ones. Not to mention the fact that there is no real difference between the two parties...
2. There is a HUGE difference between the two parties, at least philosophically. The neocons have hijacked the Republican party at this point, which explains why many are disillusioned with them. Generally, the Republicans are for lower taxes (both individual and business), smaller government, fiscal constraint, community-based social programs. Democrats are for increased taxes (particularly on high earners and businesses), larger government, fiscal largesse (using increased tax revenue), government-based social programs.
So yeah...just alike.
Seriously, if you're going to make definitive statements like that about US governmental issues, you really need to learn more about the US system of government and the actual platforms of the major political parties.
2. I know all this. But bottom line is that both parties adhere to the same set of basic principles. Proof is that we've reached 2008 and still talking about universal health care and other major reforms that would have been implemented years ago if the Dems at least fitted your description.
Truth is that by universal standards the Dems are a right-wing party. That leaves the US with virtually no left wing representation - save Ralph maybe... As far as the two major parties are concerned, it is a corporatocracy - to use a popular term as of late.
ƒ³
Don't you? Here, I'll describe them for you:FEOS wrote:
Only if you don't know what Reaganomics actually are.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Reaganomics have failed.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 4#p2350084
They'll still work together. Have you not heard some of the names Obama has nominated to be his top advisers? The list includes people such asFEOS wrote:
So give Democrats unfettered power in both the Legislative and Executive branches so they don't have to worry about working together. Great plan.TAR wrote:
The bailout plan saw the Republicans and Democrats only work together when they were trying to fight the disaster "after" it was caused by a non-regulated economy.
"He (Powell) will have a role as one of my advisers. He has already served in that function, even before he endorsed me." Obama said on NBC's Today show.
Source
Oh, I dunno. Maybe because he's supported Bush "actively and very impassioned"FEOS wrote:
Based on what?TAR wrote:
The disaster Bush's term has been, is going to continue with McCain and Palin.
He's campaigned for Bush. Voted for Bush. Stood by Bush time and time again. Has never spoken out about the Iraq war. Or any conflict the US has been involved in.
Obama opposed the war in Iraq from the start.FEOS wrote:
Obama hasn't said anything about cutting the military budget, either.TAR wrote:
The Republicans are going to stare down Russian, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and who knows where else by increasing the military budget. Your already in huge debt.
Think Biden is for or against the war? Watch this, direct from the Senate:
They want to be more cooperative with Pakistan. That's a known fact, probably something you've even argued they shouldn't be doing. In my opinion, it's better than raiding villages for AQ, crossing into Pakistan and killing civilians and\or getting shot by the Pakistani's trying to defend their borders.
McCain won't meet Russia, Iran, North Korea, anyone, without pre-conditions. I don't think many are going to even come to the negotiating table if that's the case.
The top 10% have over 70% of the wealth. Ease taxes on the low income earners will promote spending and speed up the economy.FEOS wrote:
The top 10% already pay 70% of the taxes. The top 5% pay more than 30%. How much more should they be taxed?TAR wrote:
You need to raise taxes for the highest income owners, increase bank regulation until the financial market stabilizes, ease taxes on the low income earners to promote spending.
Spending cuts isn't going to help the economy, it will worsen it. Slower productivity and less Government created jobs will result in higher unemployment. Refer to here: http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 4#p2350084 once again.FEOS wrote:
No he doesn't. He's the only one who hasn't provided any plans for spending cuts to offset his $800B+ spending initiatives.TAR wrote:
Only Obama has a plan for stimulating an economy that doesn't result in another budget deficit.
McCain's so called solution, is to cut back the reliance of fuels from the Middle East, by investing in green technology, but by also drilling the oil reserves. He's sitting on the fence on this one.FEOS wrote:
So does McCain.TAR wrote:
And he believes in global warming + finding a solution.
Palin however, well, she speaks for herself:
Global warming isn't man made? How is that finding a solution, if you don't understand the cause of the problem?
Haha, is McCain advocating a federal requirement? Not yet. But they WILL. With Republicans like this...FEOS wrote:
And so McCain is advocating for a federal requirement to teach creationism? Didn't think so.TAR wrote:
Evolution should be taught in schools. Not creationism. State and Church kept separate. Republicans will introduce intelligent design and dumb down your whole nation.
^That was from the GOP debate
And again, good ole Palin:
SourceANCHORAGE -- Soon after Sarah Palin was elected mayor of the foothill town of Wasilla, Alaska, she startled a local music teacher by insisting in casual conversation that men and dinosaurs coexisted on an Earth created 6,000 years ago -- about 65 million years after scientists say most dinosaurs became extinct -- the teacher said.
About Palin and Global Warming, she has a point (yes, I said it), and it doesn't really matter if it's man made or not. Why? Because if it isn't, well, we still have to prepare for it anyway. And we still have to cut down on pollution, because it's bad in more ways than just that. And if it is. Then you still have to prepare for it and cut down on pollution anyway. I don't see why people argue about it so much. It really doesn't make that much of a difference.
It's annoying to see people who'd rather just point their finger at something and blame it, rather than actually try to do anything about the problem itself.
It's annoying to see people who'd rather just point their finger at something and blame it, rather than actually try to do anything about the problem itself.
Last edited by Mek-Stizzle (2008-10-21 06:05:02)
Vote for that guy called H. Chad.
Hanging Chad
Hanging Chad
Vote McCain - Your country will attack Iran which will bring about world peace - if you don't count several billion pissed off Moslems hell-bent on destroying the US you can call it peace.
Vote Obama - It'll make Lowing's head explode, so a) No more 15 page threads which are basically 'No U', b) We find out who Lowing is/was as someone's head exploding should make the news.
Only kidding, I don't think an election could really make someone's head pop, and I for one would miss Lowing.
Vote Obama - It'll make Lowing's head explode, so a) No more 15 page threads which are basically 'No U', b) We find out who Lowing is/was as someone's head exploding should make the news.
Only kidding, I don't think an election could really make someone's head pop, and I for one would miss Lowing.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Vote yes on Constitutional Amendment 2...
Oh yea vote for McCain. He has more experience in the areas of foreign policy, military, leadership, Senate service.
Oh yea vote for McCain. He has more experience in the areas of foreign policy, military, leadership, Senate service.
Last edited by DBBrinson1 (2008-10-21 06:48:16)
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
www.ontheissues.org
Look at their stances and records, then vote for the person you agree with the most.
Personally, I'm probably going to vote Libertarian, although the Constitution Party is somewhat attractive as well.
Look at their stances and records, then vote for the person you agree with the most.
Personally, I'm probably going to vote Libertarian, although the Constitution Party is somewhat attractive as well.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I see you have an option in the Legislative section for a "Ron Reagan"... any relation?
vote for mccain so you could be a part of the bradley effect.
Hm, mine doesn't have proposed constitutional amendments...
http://www.co.fort-bend.tx.us/upload/im … 3004_L.pdf
Call it overkill but I'm interested in comparing the votes from 2004 to 2008 in my area. Since it's pretty much cut dry republican, I want to see how die hard these dedicated reps are... Especially since education is pretty shoddy in my state.
http://www.co.fort-bend.tx.us/upload/im … 3004_L.pdf
Call it overkill but I'm interested in comparing the votes from 2004 to 2008 in my area. Since it's pretty much cut dry republican, I want to see how die hard these dedicated reps are... Especially since education is pretty shoddy in my state.
Last edited by Icleos (2008-10-21 11:27:35)
I'm not voting till Thursday now. I drove right by my voting precinct today. The line was around the building.. I've got to get home to meet the guy installing my fios TV. The fate of the world can wait.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
getting a fios TV > voting for McCain tbh
I don't think Obama knows what hes doing, but hes gonna win.
I just requested an absentee ballot for the Missus...Kmarion wrote:
I'm not voting till Thursday now. I drove right by my voting precinct today. The line was around the building.. I've got to get home to meet the guy installing my fios TV. The fate of the world can wait.
No fancy FIOS here in tallie, but I did manage to a Samsung 850. I've realized that the thing puts out a better picture than my eyes can comprehend.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
lol sucks kmar. I wouldn't make voting ?paper? in any other lingo besides English if I were making the constitution-if you wanna live and vote here you can at least learn the official language! Right?
