War Man wrote:Ban someone's voting privileges just because they voted for someone you don't agree with? The intolerant should lose voting privileges with that attitude.
i promise to never again make a hyperbolic statement on this forum.
i just dont see, when looking at it all objectively how anyone can think voting for him is a good idea. from what i can tell, and i may be completely wrong, so anyone feel free to correct me, but a significant portion of his voters automatically choose him, and the party as their wanted representatives due to their religious views, which is worse than being completely irrelevant to the presidential post, but goes against the constitution and separation of religion from all political state matters.
again, as i said, i may be wrong
this is a pretty dumb post. you can't stop people in democracies from voting on whim and personal preference. it has nothing to do with "separation of church and state" when religious people vote for other people of the same religion. that's like saying "separation of state and race" when black people vote en masse for obama without giving a shit for his politics. yes, the mass are capricious and whimsical. yes, hardly anyone gives a fuck enough about politics to make an informed-choice and responsible vote. but what can you do? the only thing you can hope for at the end of the day is that your voting public has less religious nutjobs than ordinary rational citizens; you have to simply outnumber the people that vote in blocs according to colour/creed/class/fashion sense/whatever.
its a good point about the separation of race and state point, as i do believe that in the last election, obamas race was way too big an issue and was a factor in losing and gaining him votes dependant on the voters inclinations, and that was the wrong way for voting to take place. essentially what i am saying is that i believe that this election, the religious aspect is the thing that is weighing the election away from objective voting more than any other issue, and if i had given my opinion in the last election, i would have thought exactly the same about the race issue, essentially i was just attempting to say that i wish the whole public would vote objectively as opposed to using a trait that a candidate has that is irrelevant to the job, and that i think this time, the trait in question is Romney's religious views
edit: to Jay in his post.
I understand the concept of people wanting someone in office who relates to them, and is similar to them in certain ways, such as religious people wanting a religious leader, black people wanting to see a black leader, women wanting a female leader etc, but as i said above my main point is that just because someone is similar to you in a certain way, isnt going to make their policies the best, or them the better man/woman for the job, and people let that cloud their judgement
Last edited by mkxiii (2012-10-07 13:08:39)