Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 1/5/08 07:12 PM, RommelTJ wrote: So, if the population of the United States is 303,619,006 people (Current US Population), then 2% is 6,072,380 people.


You don't think that a candidate with 6 million supporters deserves coverage?

A few things here;

First, that is not really 2% of the American public but rather 2% of likely voters. Which means Dennis has far less than 6,072,380 supporters.

1) 3.9 Million ex felons cannot vote therefore subtract them from your population of likely voters. (Population drops to: 299,719,006).
2) Another 2 Million for CURRENT felons. (Population drops to: 297,719,006)
3) Roughly 22-24% of the total population is under 18 and cannot vote. (Population drops to [using 22% or 66, 796,181]: 236,822,825)
4) Only about 55% of the population cares enough to turn out to vote; I think it would be logical to conclude that therefore 45% of the population does no support anyone. (Population drops to: 130,252,553)

Therfore, Kucinich only has 2,605,051 supporters.

I guess an argument could be made that he has more than that in terms of ppl who will be barred from voting for him. However, they are not the ones who will be casting a ballot for anyone therefore it is more important for the ppl who will be making the decisions to hear the candidates who have a chance at winning because they (not Kucinich) will be in the Oval Office come January 2009.

It is important to hear minority viewpoints, however at this point Kucinich has nothing to offer other than "we need to become socialists like Europe". That is not something America is ready for (nor desirable). This is evidenced by his poor showing in Iowa contrasted with Paul who did better than expected.

At 1/5/08 09:07 PM, RommelTJ wrote: I don't know, but Kucinich consistently polls in the top 3 on internet polls.

Internet polls are not scientifically done.

1) Often they are designed so that a particular candidate wins.
2) Since they are voluntary, they may be manipulated by a small community by not making their presence well known thereby only a certain faction of the population knows to go there to get their opinion counted. (See point 1)
3) They cannot readily be monitored to make sure ppl aren't voting more than once for their candidate.

In short, internet polls are the political science equivalent of astrology.

At 1/6/08 11:26 PM, RommelTJ wrote:

At 1/6/08 11:03 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 1/6/08 09:33 PM, RommelTJ wrote:

At 1/6/08 08:58 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

I watch BBC World. And for a Christian you sure are angry all the time.

I'm a pessimist and a cynic that's just trying to kick the habit, cut me some slack here.

Mason you fucking retarded son of a bitch, Dennis was excluded form the Iowa debate, how retarded can you fucking get?

At 1/7/08 10:41 PM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: Mason you fucking retarded son of a bitch, Dennis was excluded form the Iowa debate, how retarded can you fucking get?

Uh...I wasn't arguing that point. I know Dennis was excluded. At least I'm not delusional in thinking that someone with only 2% of his party's support is going to win a general presidential election running on a obviously socialist platform in a country that is resisting openly becoming socialist.

You cussed at me...and called me names. My feelings are hurt...

At 1/7/08 10:45 PM, TheMason wrote:

You cussed at me...and called me names. My feelings are hurt...

*pats on back*

At 1/7/08 10:41 PM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: Mason you fucking retarded son of a bitch, Dennis was excluded form the Iowa debate, how retarded can you fucking get?

He wasn't addressing that, you moron.

At 1/7/08 05:53 PM, TheMason wrote: Therfore, Kucinich only has 2,605,051 supporters.

That's a conservative estimate, since I personally believe that Kucinich could easily get above 5% of the total vote. But yeah, I agree. My estimate was off. Still, 2 million supporters is something worthy.

I guess an argument could be made that he has more than that in terms of ppl who will be barred from voting for him.

Exactly!

However, they are not the ones who will be casting a ballot for anyone therefore it is more important for the ppl who will be making the decisions to hear the candidates who have a chance at winning because they (not Kucinich) will be in the Oval Office come January 2009.

Exactly again! :( *sniff

It is important to hear minority viewpoints, however at this point Kucinich has nothing to offer other than "we need to become socialists like Europe". That is not something America is ready for (nor desirable). This is evidenced by his poor showing in Iowa contrasted with Paul who did better than expected.

I believe that Kucinich has much more to offer than "we need to become socialists like Europe", but yeah, I guess I'm too far left for America(and this board). I was raised in the German school of thought. Thanks Mason for providing your point of view without flamming and don't listen to shaggy, he is making an ass of every Kucinich supporter out there. I wish I had his resilience.

Call me a fool, but I'm still voting for Kucinich in California.

By the way, does anyone else think that the majority of people vote based on who they think is going to win, rather than on who they think will represent them better?

At 1/8/08 03:03 AM, RommelTJ wrote: That's a conservative estimate, since I personally believe that Kucinich could easily get above 5% of the total vote. But yeah, I agree. My estimate was off. Still, 2 million supporters is something worthy.

2 million supporters (and he doesn't even have that) is less than 1% of the total population.

Kucinich has a few hundred thousand supporters, no more.

Exactly again! :( *sniff

What is your point here? People legally barred from voting would vote for him? This is a reason NOT to vote for him.

I believe that Kucinich has much more to offer than "we need to become socialists like Europe", but yeah, I guess I'm too far left for America(and this board). I was raised in the German school of thought. Thanks Mason for providing your point of view without flamming and don't listen to shaggy, he is making an ass of every Kucinich supporter out there. I wish I had his resilience.

There is not a single Kucinich viewpoint that isn't based on rampant socialism.

By the way, does anyone else think that the majority of people vote based on who they think is going to win, rather than on who they think will represent them better?

Most people don't actually look at the records of who they're voting for.

At 1/6/08 05:34 PM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: I can honestly say that there is no way in hell you can make fun of Dennis without sounding like an immature asshole piece of shit.

You really deserved that worst poster award.

At 1/8/08 03:03 AM, RommelTJ wrote: I believe that Kucinich has much more to offer than "we need to become socialists like Europe", but yeah, I guess I'm too far left for America(and this board). I was raised in the German school of thought. Thanks Mason for providing your point of view without flamming and don't listen to shaggy, he is making an ass of every Kucinich supporter out there. I wish I had his resilience.

I do not object to Dennis as a person, I think he honestly believes in what he's saying and his solutions for America. I object to his ideas; he is simply too far left for my tastes. I think Universal Healthcare (UHC) will bring the federal budget crashing down.

I can say that without calling anyone names; I respect opposing opinions...even when I'm pretty sure they're wrong. :)

By the way, does anyone else think that the majority of people vote based on who they think is going to win, rather than on who they think will represent them better?

In '08 I'm not sure WHO I think will represent me better. The closest on foreign policy is Richardson. Domestically; Paul (I want the govt to fix the federal budget...not talk about social issues). I'm voting for Paul...but not because he's going to win.

At 1/8/08 08:38 PM, TheMason wrote: I'm voting for Paul...but not because he's going to win.

Well, at least you know how I feel voting for someone who I know is going to win. It's rewarding, isn't it? Plus, in the end we will all have to vote between only 2 candidates, and most of us(in this board) will vote blue.

At 1/8/08 09:21 PM, RommelTJ wrote:

At 1/8/08 08:38 PM, TheMason wrote: I'm voting for Paul...but not because he's going to win.

Well, at least you know how I feel voting for someone who I know is going to win. It's rewarding, isn't it? Plus, in the end we will all have to vote between only 2 candidates, and most of us(in this board) will vote blue.

I don't know if this board is really tilted towards red or blue...

I don't see myself voting for: Huckabee, Obama, Clinton or Edwards.

At 1/8/08 02:09 AM, sdhonda wrote:

At 1/7/08 10:45 PM, TheMason wrote:

You cussed at me...and called me names. My feelings are hurt...

*pats on back*

<sob>I...I...just love this forum...so much...I just want to see what's best for it!</sob>

At 1/8/08 10:04 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote: haha kucinch got a 1% vote porbbly by his UFO buddies

Haha

At 1/8/08 09:21 PM, RommelTJ wrote:

At 1/8/08 08:38 PM, TheMason wrote: I'm voting for Paul...but not because he's going to win.

Well, at least you know how I feel voting for someone who I know is going to win. It's rewarding, isn't it? Plus, in the end we will all have to vote between only 2 candidates, and most of us(in this board) will vote blue.

Hmmm, if it were Dennis Kucinich vs Ron Paul, wouldn't that be great?
I'm still not sure about Ron, somthing tells me he isn't better for us than Dennis, could somone tell me what exactly, hang on a sec.
A few things you should answer before posting here.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH DENNIS KUCINICH'S PLAN?
HAVE YOU EVEN HEARD HIM TALK BEFORE?
WHY DO YOU THINK THE MEDIA IS LYING TO YOU?

At 1/9/08 11:32 AM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: WHY DO YOU THINK THE MEDIA IS LYING TO YOU?

LEMME GUESS COZ LIEK 9/11 WAS JUST A CONSPRICACY BY DA GOVERNMENT AND BUSH IS EVIL WASAaSASfdsdsgfsfg