I'm a moron, but I get to vote

[Acid]

My birthday is October 13th, '08

I turn 18.

So I get to vote for the next president of the United States of America.

I've done some research, about how mcain wants to do this, and how obama wants to do that. I do know what they both want to do and how they aim to do it.

But my problem lies with knowing what's best for our country, I really don't know which goal between the two presidents is the right one.

What makes a good voter? Someone who doesn't vote for a certain president because they don't like the color of their skin, their sex, or their party?

I want to hear people's opinions on who should be the next president and why.

[cellardoor6]

At 9/8/08 12:48 AM, Acid wrote: What makes a good voter? Someone who doesn't vote for a certain president because they don't like the color of their skin, their sex, or their party?

I want to hear people's opinions on who should be the next president and why.

That makes you a bad voter right there.

Don't listen to other people's opinions of who should be president because everybody has a bias. Even if they try to be objective, their personal views will taint the picture if they go into any great detail.

Think for yourself.

By voting for McCain lolzomg.

[Musician]

Listening to someone else's opinion before making your own decision doesn't make you a bad voter. It opens your mind to multiple political viewpoints, which makes you a more informed voter.

On topic, I plan to vote Obama. my reasons in a nutshell:

-I dislike the conservative philosophy of "you're on your own". A society needs to be considerate of it's lower and middle classes, and not just its upper class. McCains policies on taxes, healthcare, what have you, all reflect his lack of consideration for the working class.

-US citizens have seen major breaches of their rights under George W. Bush policies, which McCain intends to continue.

-Palin... McCains VP choice basically shows that he cares more about bringing in more votes from the bigoted evangelical extreme right republican base, then he cares about the policies he was formerly preaching. Not to mention, it totally undermines his argument that Obama is inexperienced.

-Obama plans to implement a lighter form of Universal Healthcare, something that the US desperately needs.

-Obama plans to increase taxes on the top 1% of the US and cut taxes for 99% of the US, while at the same time ending a very expensive and strenuous war. Furthermore, he plans to cut the bloated military budget to allow more spending to be allocated to social programs that will benefit the US infrastructure.

-Most importantly, Obama doesn't accept money from personal interests. He runs a campaign from money donated to him by the US population, which means that he represents the people, and not corporate interests, something that cannot be said about the vast majority of both Republicans and Democrats.

[n64kid]

At 9/8/08 01:40 AM, Musician wrote:

-I dislike the conservative philosophy of "you're on your own".

But America was founded on it. Move to France if you don't like the American ideology.

A society needs to be considerate of it's lower and middle classes, and not just its upper class. McCains policies on taxes, healthcare, what have you, all reflect his lack of consideration for the working class.

Trickle down economics works, and keeping the free market flowing without government interference and wealth distrubution leads to higher standard of living for everyone. McCains policy would help the country as a whole. If you disagree, defend Obama's policy with a post here.

-US citizens have seen major breaches of their rights under George W. Bush policies, which McCain intends to continue.

Elaborate.

-Palin... McCains VP choice basically shows that he cares more about bringing in more votes from the bigoted evangelical extreme right republican base, then he cares about the policies he was formerly preaching. Not to mention, it totally undermines his argument that Obama is inexperienced.

1) Palin has more executive experience than Biden, McCain and Obama.
2) What's wrong with securing votes to get into power and help the country with real policies?

-Obama plans to implement a lighter form of Universal Healthcare, something that the US desperately needs.

Which will cost 500 billion a year, which is basically an increase in our total Federal spending by over 20%

-Obama plans to increase taxes on the top 1% of the US and cut taxes for 99% of the US, while at the same time ending a very expensive and strenuous war.

Obama wants a war with Pakistan and to continue the war in Afghanistan. Obama also flip flopped on his previous immediate withdrawal plan.

Furthermore, he plans to cut the bloated military budget to allow more spending to be allocated to social programs that will benefit the US infrastructure.

-Most importantly, Obama doesn't accept money from personal interests.

He used to, but stopped for the time being.

He runs a campaign from money donated to him by the US population, which means that he represents the people, and not corporate interests, something that cannot be said about the vast majority of both Republicans and Democrats.

Do you know what you're talking about?

[Viros]

At 9/8/08 01:40 AM, Musician wrote: Listening to someone else's opinion before making your own decision doesn't make you a bad voter. It opens your mind to multiple political viewpoints, which makes you a more informed voter.

This line wins. no argument, hands down. A closed minded voter is a bad voter.

On topic, I plan to vote Obama. my reasons in a nutshell:

-I dislike the conservative philosophy of "you're on your own". A society needs to be considerate of it's lower and middle classes, and not just its upper class. McCains policies on taxes, healthcare, what have you, all reflect his lack of consideration for the working class.

Fine. But Obama's plans will bankrupt the country. I wrote an article on this and other things (I'd post the article instead of linking but it's LOOOOOONG). I have many more arguments for this, but it's late, and i'm not going to dig up the refernces right now, so I won't argue it. You look foolish if you make really big counterclaims without proof, and you cant defend yourself * (see footnote)

-US citizens have seen major breaches of their rights under George W. Bush policies, which McCain intends to continue.

I have no way to argue for or against this topic, so in order not to spout FUD, i'll leave it alone. I'm not sure what way this goes anyway. Yes, the Bush Administration took away some freedoms, but I'm pretty sure Obama will to. What of that Change? The documents on his site tell a lot...

-Palin... McCains VP choice basically shows that he cares more about bringing in more votes from the bigoted evangelical extreme right republican base, then he cares about the policies he was formerly preaching.

No. Selecting Palin as a VP is the answer to Obama in general. I hate to say it, but this election is all about feelings and prejudice now. McCain, being an old white guy, would have a lot of difficulty beating a young black guy. A lot of people would have voted for Obama just because it would make history if he won. Introducing Palin ensures that history will be made either way. On one side, you have the first black president, on the other, the first female VP. Those republican voters now have a reason to vote for history's sake on the conservative side again.

Not to mention, it totally undermines his argument that Obama is inexperienced.

sort of, but not entirely. Palin is considerably more experienced than Obama. She's been a governor, a mayor, and had a bunch of major victories against incumbents from her own party. That says a lot.

-Obama plans to implement a lighter form of Universal Healthcare, something that the US desperately needs.

This is debatable. We can discuss this later. If i start now, we will probably start a flame war.

-Obama plans to increase taxes on the top 1% of the US and cut taxes for 99% of the US, while at the same time ending a very expensive and strenuous war. Furthermore, he plans to cut the bloated military budget to allow more spending to be allocated to social programs that will benefit the US infrastructure.

Read the article posted before, in reference to the taxation. Seriously. One thing you need to always remember is that those rich people that everyone likes to hate are the same people who hand out jobs and charity. You tax them heavily, and they are going to pass it on, either by cutting jobs or reducing donations. The same goes for corporations. You tax them, and they will just raise the price of goods and services to compensate. The corporations are not going to let their bottom line sink over taxation. It sucks, but that's the way our economy works. The small business guys (guess what? they are rich by Obama standards...fancy that) are the ones who are going to suffer the most.

Blah blah blah END WAR blah blah blah. This is a bit closer to me because I am ex-military. This war is not useless. Despite what the media feeds you, I can say from first hand experience that the people over there sincerely appreciate what we have done. not all of them, but enough to make some of us soldiers feel good about it. You don't know what its like to be riding convoy to Talil and see a whole gaggle of kids cheering you on while their fathers stand behind them waving and smiling. We may not have gone over there for the right reasons, but what we are ultimately doing is really good.

-Most importantly, Obama doesn't accept money from personal interests. He runs a campaign from money donated to him by the US population, which means that he represents the people, and not corporate interests, something that cannot be said about the vast majority of both Republicans and Democrats.

There's not solid proof of this, but it does say a good bit about his ideals if it's true. Of course, politics is always about propoganda in the end... so what's to say that there AREN'T alterior motives? Again, i can't argue this, because i have no information with which to argue.

*I am in no way accusing you of not being able to back up your comments. I am, however, stating that i will not make comments that i don't currently have the resources to back up. You've made your point, and it would look really foolish for me to counter-point, only to have you say something back with documantation when i cannot produce anything.

[NewBeginning]

Obama all the way!
McCain is just going to be like another George Bush
Honestly, he says he's going to change things yet he's still making tax breaks for the upper class and oil industries

Not right

[Viros]

At 9/8/08 02:25 AM, NewBeginning wrote: Obama all the way!
McCain is just going to be like another George Bush
Honestly, he says he's going to change things yet he's still making tax breaks for the upper class and oil industries

Not right

Worst. Argument. Evar.

[Leeloo-Minai]

I had been internally tearing myself apart over whether or not to vote for McCain. I wasn't going to uintil I heard him say he'd push for nuclear energy along with other forms of alternative power. We haven't built any modern nuclear power plants for almost 30 years, and it's long overdue we exercise some of that great fissive technology that's developed in the last decade.

Then he picked Palin for VP, a true conservative to Yang his progressive Yin. Obama picked Senator Joe Biden, someone who I've little respect for after watching several performances of his on oversight committees and hearings throughout the last 6 years. I wasn't impressed with McCain until I realized the democrats were actually putting forth a candidate so out of touch with ME, your typical middle American white male worker. I don't cling bitterly to my firearms because I can't explain my frustrations in other ways, I don't wear my religion on my sleeve then tear it off when it becomes inconvenient.

I honestly feel that Barack Obama isn't running for Americans, he's running for himself and the idea that even black, funny-named politicians can lead our nation without being in touch with the spirit of middle America. I've never seen anyone running for public office that's as two-faced and condescending and messianic as this joker known as Obama.

When someone shoots the fucker, I won't cry for him, but if he's president when it happens it'll hurt, for sure.

[adrshepard]

At 9/8/08 12:48 AM, Acid wrote: But my problem lies with knowing what's best for our country, I really don't know which goal between the two presidents is the right one.

It's sounds like the problem is that you don't know exactly what you want, not that you don't know the candidates' policies. That's ok, there's no rule you have to know anything to vote. Vote for the party who has the best hairstyle if you want to.

If you want my advice, think of the things that piss you off on a national level, and vote against the guy who stands for them, tolerates them, or is willing to submit to them. I think that's how my interest grew in politics in the beginning. Only later did I care about who has good ideas.

[Musician]

At 9/8/08 02:05 AM, n64kid wrote: But America was founded on it. Move to France if you don't like the American ideology.

That's a terrible argument. Even if America was founded on the philosophy "You're on your own", it doesn't matter because America 200 years ago isn't America today. Time moves forward. Values change. Ideologies change. America shouldn't be hindered for the sake of tradition.

Trickle down economics works, and keeping the free market flowing without government interference and wealth distrubution leads to higher standard of living for everyone. McCains policy would help the country as a whole.

Define "works". Every time trickle down economics has been implemented by in the US , the wealth gap between the rich and the poor has subsequently increased. I agree that trickle down is great in theory, but it's based completely on the assumption people follow incentives, which is a risky assumption. In reality the nation as a whole benifits more from Obamas tax plan which redistributes the wealth and brings the rich and the poor closer together.

Elaborate.

The case of Jose Padilla. Warrentless Wiretapping. etc.

1) Palin has more executive experience than Biden, McCain and Obama.

Doesn't count for much unfortunately. It's still only 20 months of experience in charge of a state with a smaller population than most large cities. You can't claim she has more experience in politics in general then Obama, Biden, or McCain.

2) What's wrong with securing votes to get into power and help the country with real policies?

Well, the biggest problem is that Palin is an extreme right evangelical christian, contrary to McCain who's allegedly supposed to be preaching a more moderate message. It shows that he cares more about winning than his actual policies.

Which will cost 500 billion a year, which is basically an increase in our total Federal spending by over 20%

Source? if you're right and it is 500 billion a year then it's not going to be much of a problem seeing as medicaid and medicare would both be obsolete and not needed after universal healthcare is implemented... and they total to over 500 billion.

Obama wants a war with Pakistan

Source?

and to continue the war in Afghanistan.

I don't agree with everything he does, but at the end of the day he's still ending at least one ridiculously expensive war, something which McCain isn't doing.

Obama also flip flopped on his previous immediate withdrawal plan.

Expand on that. Also, provide a source.

He used to, but stopped for the time being.

Source?

[Viros]

Musician wrote a lot of stuff

What, don't want to respond to mine? c'mon, i want a discussion here too!

[Korriken]

At 9/8/08 11:23 PM, Musician wrote:

Define "works". Every time trickle down economics has been implemented by in the US , the wealth gap between the rich and the poor has subsequently increased. I agree that trickle down is great in theory, but it's based completely on the assumption people follow incentives, which is a risky assumption. In reality the nation as a whole benifits more from Obamas tax plan which redistributes the wealth and brings the rich and the poor closer together.

It's a terrible idea really. If you place a heavy burden no the rich, they have plenty of options, such as leaving the country, or placing large sums of their money in other countries. Its much the same way that these large corporations are sending all their work overseas for the cheap labor. What would happen if our super rich elite began moving to, say, the UK? Everyone should take some of the tax burden, even if just a small amount, instead of trying to place all the burden on a few who have through hard work, ingenuity, dumb luck, or otherwise managed to amass a fortune. also the concept of "wealth redistribution" punishes the successful to the benefit of those who do not wish to put forth the enormous effort to better themselves in life.

The rich should bear more burden than the poor, however, to place a huge burden on them to say, "Grats on amassing your fortune, but, we're gonna take a large portion away from you in order to give it to those who don't wish to help themselves."

You wanna make the government more efficient with their money? make the jailhouses self sufficient. make the prisoners toil daily to earn their room and board. That would remove a HUGE burden from the government.

I don't agree with everything he does, but at the end of the day he's still ending at least one ridiculously expensive war, something which McCain isn't doing.

The war is almost over anyway. By the end of next year the Iraqis should be able to control their own country. the violence is lessening and we're handing over more and more of the country to the Iraqi forces.

Obama also flip flopped on his previous immediate withdrawal plan.

Expand on that. Also, provide a source.

Its an ad, but its got actual obama clips.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVy5REoiD Jo

[Korriken]

At 9/8/08 02:25 AM, NewBeginning wrote: Obama all the way!
McCain is just going to be like another George Bush
Honestly, he says he's going to change things yet he's still making tax breaks for the upper class and oil industries

Not right

Do this nation a favor and do 1 of 2 options.

1. Do more research than watching the advertisements on TV, then go vote
2. Don't vote.

If the best argument people can come up with is

Obama is a rock star/celebrity

and

McCain is another Bush

Then you are obviously completely ignorant of the actual issues and should not be voting. And if you vote for a candidate in order "to make history" then you should douse yourself in gasoline and throw yourself into a bonfire.

[hrb5711]

At 9/8/08 11:23 PM, Musician wrote: The case of Jose Padilla. Warrentless Wiretapping. etc.

:Keep in mind Obama voted for FISA....

Doesn't count for much unfortunately. It's still only 20 months of experience in charge of a state with a smaller population than most large cities. You can't claim she has more experience in politics in general then Obama, Biden, or McCain.

:But Obama holding a basically worthless seat in the senate for three years means more? Or how about the 150ish days he actually sat in the senate... Besides if you want to talk about good "experience" for a president, look and see when the last time we elected a seated senator was. Should be around JFK time-frame.

I don't agree with everything he does, but at the end of the day he's still ending at least one ridiculously expensive war, something which McCain isn't doing.

:Show me the source where he is going to end the war in Iraq. All he has said is he will remove combat forces and leave a "force" to train Iraqis, carry out limited missions, and protect American interest in Iraq. He has yet to give any idea of how big this "force" will be. Besides Iraq is almost a non issue now, the troops are pulling out. Hell my unit just got pulled from our Iraq deployment next year.

"a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel."

His own words.

[CaiWengi]

Ok so you guys have done you bit by ripping obama up, but Ive seen very little to justify why to vote Mccain, unless its just because in your eyes obama is so bad that anyone is better.

[fli]

At 9/9/08 12:29 AM, Korriken wrote: Obama is a rock star/celebrity

ella le gusta la gasolina (dame mas gasolina)
Como le encanta la gasolina (dame mas gasolina)

Damn... the lyrics could the the national anthem for Republicans... or something.

[Der-Lowe]

At 9/9/08 12:24 AM, Korriken wrote:

At 9/8/08 11:23 PM, Musician wrote:

Define "works". Every time trickle down economics has been implemented by in the US , the wealth gap between the rich and the poor has subsequently increased. I agree that trickle down is great in theory, but it's based completely on the assumption people follow incentives, which is a risky assumption. In reality the nation as a whole benifits more from Obamas tax plan which redistributes the wealth and brings the rich and the poor closer together.

It's a terrible idea really. If you place a heavy burden no the rich, they have plenty of options, such as leaving the country, or placing large sums of their money in other countries.

Doesn't it go against your morals to attack the weak, those who don't stand a chance?

Its much the same way that these large corporations are sending all their work overseas for the cheap labor. What would happen if our super rich elite began moving to, say, the UK?

The Us is the developed country with the least tax burden, and govt regulations in businesses.
It has also one of the most qualified work-forces; I don't think the corporations would go "OMG LET'S GO, 22% instead of 18!!!111"
Not to mention protectionism.

Everyone should take some of the tax burden, even if just a small amount, instead of trying to place all the burden on a few who have through hard work, ingenuity, dumb luck, or otherwise managed to amass a fortune.

This is not what it is being said . Not to make them the sole taxpayers, but the most important ones.

also the concept of "wealth redistribution" punishes the successful to the benefit of those who do not wish to put forth the enormous effort to better themselves in life.

Or those who have not been born the sons of professional middle class.

You wanna make the government more efficient with their money? make the jailhouses self sufficient. make the prisoners toil daily to earn their room and board. That would remove a HUGE burden from the government.

Don't you do this to some extent?
Also, you should try to spend less by solving crime.

At 9/9/08 05:25 AM, fli wrote:

At 9/9/08 12:29 AM, Korriken wrote: Obama is a rock star/celebrity

ella le gusta la gasolina (dame mas gasolina)
Como le encanta la gasolina (dame mas gasolina)

Damn... the lyrics could the the national anthem for Republicans... or something.

LOL
Oh, you and your almost music.

[Elfer]

At 9/8/08 01:16 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Don't listen to other people's opinions of who should be president because everybody has a bias.

That's why it's good to hear a whole bunch of opinions. Considering that bias is inherent in reporting as well, reading stuff by reporters isn't really likely to leave you with a more justified opinion that asking other people.

Of course, this is only provided that the people who you're asking can actually give you evidence to support what they're saying.

[fli]

At 9/9/08 08:01 PM, Der-Lowe wrote: Damn... the lyrics could the the national anthem for Republicans... or something.

LOL
Oh, you and your almost music.

It was bound to happen....
and I HATE Raggeaton.

I like the new scene going on in Mexico City... which is sort of similar to the scenes going all over in California and the Bay Area.

I've been enjoying Fobia's album, Rosa Venus lately...

[Korriken]

At 9/9/08 08:01 PM, Der-Lowe wrote:

It's a terrible idea really. If you place a heavy burden no the rich, they have plenty of options, such as leaving the country, or placing large sums of their money in other countries.

Doesn't it go against your morals to attack the weak, those who don't stand a chance?

No, not really, but i must ask you to elaborate on this. I in no way mean to put the burden on the poor. The wealthiest should pay more, but is it wise to keep putting more and more on their shoulders while taking the weight from everyone else? Remember what happened with the American Colonies. Britain taxed them into rebellion. Of course, that's a whole different set of circumstances. However, the idea is the same. eventually, if you keep saying, "OK, I'm going to add this in our budget and YOU get to pay for it!" Eventually the corporations and the wealthy may find themselves operating in other countries in order to avoid our insanely high taxes.

Its much the same way that these large corporations are sending all their work overseas for the cheap labor. What would happen if our super rich elite began moving to, say, the UK?

The Us is the developed country with the least tax burden, and govt regulations in businesses.
It has also one of the most qualified work-forces; I don't think the corporations would go "OMG LET'S GO, 22% instead of 18!!!111"
Not to mention protectionism.

Actually, America has one of the heaviest tax burdens on corporations, and its WELL over 22%. http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1 175.html
Problem is, with other countries have lower tax rates, not to mention giving incentives for corporations to export jobs to their country.

also the concept of "wealth redistribution" punishes the successful to the benefit of those who do not wish to put forth the enormous effort to better themselves in life.

Or those who have not been born the sons of professional middle class.

Not everyone born of the professional class fail, and not everyone who is born of them succeed. It takes a lot of effort on the part of both the parent and the child for that child to succeed in adulthood. Many parent's don't REALLY care if their child does well. They do not check and make sure their child(ren) do well in school. They never speak to the teachers unless the kid done messed up big time, like getting in a fight or something. They never check and make sure the teacher is doing their job, which is a big thing. Many teachers are crap at their job and will pass children just to get them out of their hair. I've seen many teachers in the school i went to do it, and considering that Obama is fighting for performance based pay, which is something I would LOVE to see happen, to an extent. Except the oversight to make sure the teachers aren't padding the books for more pay would be pretty damned expensive.

A lot of the reason why people are doing so poorly in this day has a lot to do with the pop culture. People try to emulate celebrities of all kinds, music stars, movie stars, socialite sluts (paris hilton!). which is something that boggles my mind. Many of the people I went to school with were so busy trying to emulate some rap or country star that they never bothered to learn anything academic and are now dumber than pig shit and can't find a decent paying job. There are, of course, other factors.

You wanna make the government more efficient with their money? make the jailhouses self sufficient. make the prisoners toil daily to earn their room and board. That would remove a HUGE burden from the government.

Don't you do this to some extent?
Also, you should try to spend less by solving crime.

Solving crime? I'm not sure how that would reduce costs. the police already solve crimes.

I'll put it like this. Angola has a giant farm setup that the prisoners work at. If more prisons could be run like this, then we would spend FAR less on prisoners. Say, some prisons grow crops, another prison could make clothing for their own inmates from the cotton grown and processed on another plantation. It would provide the prisoners with work to keep them productive.

Prisons cost a LOT of money, with feeding, clothing, providing activities, medical. I'm not gonna even TRY and say we could eliminate the burden of the prisons, but it could be lessened by a decent amount.

[Nylo]

At 9/8/08 12:48 AM, Acid wrote: I want to hear people's opinions on who should be the next president and why.

I vote for which direction I want to see the country taken in.

McCain's philosophy on foreign policy empowers the idea that America should spend billions of dollars funding our dominance over the middle-east. I'd rather see that money used for something else.

I'm voting for Obama, because his demeanor, his policies, and his general outlook on the world are very forward looking, rather than coercively trying to keep hold of the status quo.

In general, I like Obama because he's a rational, down to earth, extremely educated person, and although I don't agree with him on a lot of issues (like abortion) I agree with him more than I disagree with him. As for McCain, I don't like where he wants to lead us for the next 4 years. Plain and simple.

[aviewaskewed]

At 9/8/08 02:05 AM, n64kid wrote: But America was founded on it. Move to France if you don't like the American ideology.

Do you really think lines like this strengthen any arguments you might make afterwards? Just makes you sound like one of these goosteppers who swears they're "just being a patriot". Questioning the current ideology of your government in an effort to keep it honest and running for the people is very very American. By the logic people tend to use of "if you don't like how things are done around here, get out" we'd still be under British rule.

Questioning the direction of this country isn't a bad thing, but hating on it with no clear reason or damning the whole citizenry because your not in love with the way the government does things sure is. Love your country, but never stop questioning it's leaders, or fighting to keep it honest and great.

[Sajberhippien]

At 9/10/08 12:53 AM, Korriken wrote: I'll put it like this. Angola has a giant farm setup that the prisoners work at.

YES! That is an excellent idea. And a VERY important effect is that when the prisoners become free, they have learned a trade and have an easier time joining the regular society. Which will reduce the rate of people falling back to crime. Which will further reduce the cost for prisons, apart from the humanitarian benefits of less suffering.

[Maximus]

mcain because hes all white and stuff.

i dont live in the US.......

but yeah elect a white guy

[Maximus]

oh and obama (because he is black) will get assassinated if elected. because america cant handle change. Its what happened to JFK and Abe Lincoln.

[The-evil-bucket]

At 9/10/08 05:58 AM, maximuspower wrote: mcain because hes all white and stuff.

i dont live in the US.......

but yeah elect a white guy

No bias here.

[HogWashSoup]

Just flip a coin for god sake if you cant decide.
You know all they say is just bullshit.
"I promis to do this. I wont do that. This needs to be done."

Its just a show. Who ever makes the better jazz and lights gets to be president pretty much,

A good voter is someone who actually votes. Most people dont vote unless it is for american idol or something. But after Bush I think more people will vote. He has like a -20% aproval rating. (negative20%)
Meaning no one person likes him at all.

Anyways, Im voting for other, and putting in a random name or something.
They both suck.

[TheMason]

At 9/8/08 01:40 AM, Musician wrote: Listening to someone else's opinion before making your own decision doesn't make you a bad voter. It opens your mind to multiple political viewpoints, which makes you a more informed voter.

Very well-written post Musician. I agree with you that listening to others discuss their opinion is actually a good thing. However, you must always be careful and keep in mind a few things about the other person:
1) What are their qualifications to speak?
2) What are their biases?
3) Are they just expressing an opinion...or are they attempting to manipulate me?

I am replying to it not to start a debate with you...but rather your post provides me with a convient point-by-point comparison of the two candidates. I like your style here and I am following suit.

On topic, I plan to vote Obama. my reasons in a nutshell:

On topic, I am leaning McCain. My reasons in a nutshell:

-I dislike the conservative philosophy of "you're on your own". A society needs to be considerate of it's lower and middle classes, and not just its upper class. McCains policies on taxes, healthcare, what have you, all reflect his lack of consideration for the working class.

In reality this is not a "conservative" philosophy but what is meant by the term liberal. The talk of classes and "leveling the playing field" is socialist. Now I'm not through the socialist term around as a negative. Marxist thought does provide a meaningful theoretical framework from which to study politics...but has been shown to have poor performance when applied politicaly.

Furthermore, I do not see where massive government intervention through open-ended entitlements has really helped. We've had decades of LBJ's "war on poverty" to no avail. There are some examples where government intervention has been a good thing: Pell Grant, student loan programs and the GI Bill immediately spring to mind. Thus government intervention should be directed in such a way where people are given a hand-up (the tools to survive economically on their own) instead of a hand-out.

-US citizens have seen major breaches of their rights under George W. Bush policies, which McCain intends to continue.

The sad truth is Obama will likely continue this trend. Afterall the person who set the precedent for wire-tapping international calls was the Democrat Woodrow Willson.

-Palin... McCains VP choice basically shows that he cares more about bringing in more votes from the bigoted evangelical extreme right republican base, then he cares about the policies he was formerly preaching. Not to mention, it totally undermines his argument that Obama is inexperienced.

One could argue that this shows that McCain is more of a uniter than Obama. Both parties have numerous competing factions. However, the Democratic party is far more divided than the Republican party and Obama ran a campaign that split the party in two. Biden as his choice has done little to restore "party unity". In fact Obama's decision not to vett Hilary at all further alienated a wing of his party.

Why is internal party politics important? For me I look at it this way: Obama is running as someone who can reach across the aisle and unite people instead of dividing them. His divisive campaign (which on the surface promoted "change", "unity" and "yes we can") is at odds with his message and actions speak louder than words. From his actions I expect more of the same partisanship coming out of Washington rather than "change".

On the other hand Palin's selection I think is more than just a superficial grab for votes from women. I think that it is an attempt to steal the "change" message from Obama. Obama actively sought national office rising through Chicago politics with the presidency in mind and he choose a path through Washington; again his actions are at odds with his message. McCain picks someone who is as far away from Washington as you can get.

-Obama plans to implement a lighter form of Universal Healthcare, something that the US desperately needs.

I think that healthcare costs can be brought down without implementing Universal Healthcare. Furthermore, Bush severly hurt this economy when he expanded government exponentially. I misspoke in an earlier post when I said he produced a perscription benefit that adds over $1Trillion annually. It is not annually...but rather over ten years. Still a hefty chunk of change. So the past 8 years has been expanded social spending (on top of expanded military spending) that has corresponded with irresponsible tax cuts. Obama has recently come out and said that he would keep the Bush tax cuts if he feared raising taxes would hurt the economy.

Have we not learned anything? We need to do away with the Bush tax cuts and cut spending...not add another massive government program that will equal to Social Security, Medicare or Defense spending. Think of it this way; you're in a boat taking on water and you've got a bucket. What do you do? Scoop water out or scoop water in? George Bush has spent the last eight years scooping water in...Obama wants to keep doing what Bush has done.

Unfortunately, McCain's economic policy is about as ruinous.

-Obama plans to increase taxes on the top 1% of the US and cut taxes for 99% of the US, while at the same time ending a very expensive and strenuous war. Furthermore, he plans to cut the bloated military budget to allow more spending to be allocated to social programs that will benefit the US infrastructure.

We do not have an unfair tax structure in this country and the rich pay their fair share. The top incomes pay 35% of the income tax while the bottom pays 10%. Furthermore, it is well proven that the top earners provide the tax revenue for this country.

If you really take a close look at spending under the Bush years you'll see an expansion of federal social spending. If these programs really are beneficial...why is our economy tanking? Musician has studied this and truly believes this is the right direction. However, he has been mislead in that his candidate has been able to frame the discussion on the economy as having happened because of a drain from Iraq. What Obama does not want you to know is that expansion of federal programs is a huge contributor to our budget woes.

-Most importantly, Obama doesn't accept money from personal interests. He runs a campaign from money donated to him by the US population, which means that he represents the people, and not corporate interests, something that cannot be said about the vast majority of both Republicans and Democrats.

This is actually out-right wrong. Obama has accepted large checks from Hollywood and industry...after he promised to accept only public funds. Furthermore, by not following through with his campaign finance promises he is sticking to the old way of politics and a system where it is easily manipulated. For example, say I'm running a business and I have five employees. I can donate up to the federal maximum for each of them.

This is a little harder to do with McCain's acceptance of federal funds (truly donated by the American people). While appreciate that you included both Republican and Democrats as accepting corporate interest money...on this McCain is better than Obama. Afterall, the campaign finance bill that he is getting his money from is called McCain.-Fiengold.

[LazyDrunk]

At 9/10/08 06:31 AM, The-evil-bucket wrote:

At 9/10/08 05:58 AM, maximuspower wrote: mcain because hes all white and stuff.

i dont live in the US.......

but yeah elect a white guy

No bias here.

You don't think Obama's white.

You racist.

[ILovezoms]

meh see which one helps you the most or i advise you not to vote