Katzaniel Posted October 27, 2004 Report Posted October 27, 2004 Nyyark said he would start this, but he hasn't been around. I was really looking forward to reading some debate like we got for the Canadian Election, so I thought I'd start this even though the election is coming up quickly. (It's on the second, isn't it?) Please, comments, rants, whatever!
Peredhil Posted October 27, 2004 Report Posted October 27, 2004 But let's debate ideology, politics, etc, not each other. Politics, like most emotional subjects, can get ugly. Please be Polite. That said, I just did my absentee ballot and ended up voting against, not for. Or, like the bumper sticker said, "If God had wanted me to vote, he'd have given me candidates instead of politicians."
Mira Posted October 27, 2004 Report Posted October 27, 2004 I was planning on voting NO for president, and even had made a poster urging others to do so which I placed on my dorm room door, but now I'm thinking I will vote for Brown/Herbert. I seem to agree with their platform the most. If anyone else is looking for a third party alternative I suggest you look here and read up on their stances on the issues.
The Big Pointy One Posted October 27, 2004 Report Posted October 27, 2004 Well, I don't have much of an opinion on the election in general. All that I've noticed so far is that it's been all about how much Kerry and Bush can talk smack about each other, basically. But then again, that's most elections. In any case, I think it's going to be a close election, but in the end Bush will probably pull out enough votes for the win, although there will probably be another controversy of some sort like last time. To me, Kerry's campaign just seems to weak. Again, to me, it seems like his whole campaign is: "I'm not George Bush." I won't touch on the *actual* issues, because I don't know enough about them. Oh, and I find it funny how they get celebrities to come out to those rallying campaigns or whatever they are. Because you know, movie stars and actors in general are renowned for their political intelligence, especially people like Ben Afflect and Ashton Kutcher! Yikes. Anyways, hope I strayed from offending anyone there, just calling 'em as I see 'em. In any case, good luck to everyone in the States; may your voting be worthwhile (if you choose to vote) and may your president not be responsible for the destruction of the free world ;p (just kidding... or am I?)
troubled sleep Posted October 27, 2004 Report Posted October 27, 2004 On the election in general: Truth be told, I'm still two years shy of voting age. In fact, hardly anyone at my school can actually vote as of yet, but that hasn't stopped my entire school from being taken over by the Young Democrats Club and the Young Republicans Club who have debates every few weeks in which they do nothing but scream at each other for an hour or so. While this may help to release all of the repressed anger that teenagers like myself are supposedly carrying around, and being an informed citizen is always a positive, I can't help but feel that enough is enough. Even among my friends(most of which, like me, can't vote yet) it's considered terribly important to choose now: democrat or republican? Kerry or Bush? John-John or Bush-Cheney? I've tried to stay out of it, stay neutral and even while the graphic arts department was cranking out 'vote bush' and 'vote Kerry' buttons, I bought both and put them both on the front of my purse, causing me to earn many stares and strange, puzzled glances. On the other hand, having conflicting buttons really helped me out on more than one occasion...like the time I had to infiltrate the Young Republicans meeting to convince someone to edit my 100 point essay for English class. All I had to do to make it past the Republican bouncers stationed at the door of classroom where the meeting was being held was pull off my Kerry button and I was in. I also took the Bush button off my purse and infiltrated the Young Democrats yearbook picture, something that caused me to merit even *more* puzzled glances from the board of the Young Democrats, some of which have now threatened to drag me to meetings. But the point of this little rant of mine is to say that even on issues I cannot agree with either candidate, so therefore I am caught in the middle. And the middle is *not* a fun place to be. I'm all for being informed citizens and keeping up with current events, but I'm feeling that there is a point where it takes over your life, and I'm convinced that once high school students begin threatening each other to choose ideologies, politics has gone too far. And frankly...George Bush isn't that bad of a guy, though I suppose coming from a military family(remember those Florida absentee ballots? Yeah, those were my parents) I'm a bit biased. But then, I don’t completely agree with Bush on the “issues”, though I don’t agree with Kerry either. So I suppose it's a good thing I can't vote, since I would probably end up sitting in the booth for hours and hours on end, trying to decide, then finally giving up several days later, storming out of the booth. Ah well, I have another four years before I have to worry about helping to choose the president.
Appy Posted October 27, 2004 Report Posted October 27, 2004 (edited) I'm just afraid .. afraid? well not sure if it's afraid, but I sorta predict that bush will get re-elected just because they know him now... and the one thing USA seems to want is stability. What better stability is there than choosing the same president again? But that's from a far away part of the world and completely biased by whatever they show us in the media... I have no idea what to expect, I'm just glad I don't have to choose, or even follow it. I'll just hear the outcome and groan prolly Edited October 27, 2004 by Appy
Lady Celes Crusader Posted October 27, 2004 Report Posted October 27, 2004 What concerns me the most is the place religion is taking in the political debates. Looking back at my own province's history, I know that they should be mutually exclusive as combining them both often leads to a fanatism that usually have heavy consequences. You cannot shaped a society accoring to one group's faith as I do believe it is a personnal matter. However, you can shaped society based upon ideas proposed by different communities and individuals, trying to find the best solutions for everyone.
Degenero Angelus Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 (edited) I think South Park did it best. "I'm forced to choose between a giant douche and a turd sandwich." Excuse the language, but it fits perfectly. Bush is a moron. Plain, simple. He's dumb, and his policies suck. Kerry is almost as dumb. He tries far too hard to be a "cool" guy, completely ignoring his duties as an actual president. For me, it came down to a battle of vice presidents. Dick Cheney = Evil Incarnate John Edwards... Seems nice. Regardless of that. I vote Green. Edited October 28, 2004 by Degenero Angelus
Tyrion Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 (edited) I've actually not been following the U.S. elections as there are way more important things going on... like the Red Sox winning the World Series. Frankly I'd be happy if Bush could get out of there but even if he doesn't I don't really care. It'll probably be about the same for me either way: U.S. does something. Some part of world complains. I shrug. Edited October 28, 2004 by Tyrion
Quincunx Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Most of my life's decisions are made against, not for (Starlight being the major counter-example). I'm not certain that my request for absentee ballot made it to the proper offices in time, but if it did--My driving concern is getting John Ashcroft out of his appointed position, and swamping all elected federal positions with Democrats is the only way I can think of to influence that. (Every local. . .um, Scandinavian, if you count also the people who asked me online, only asked me "Are you voting for Bush?. . .No? Good!") I don't remember too much political uproar when I was in high school, but I was in middle school when the '92 election and Ross Perot hit the scene, and whew, what a mindless outpouring of support. I'm surprised that we didn't go around the school chanting Three Three Three Three for sheer joy at having a third party.
Savannah Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 Not to be argumentative *she says with a smile* but what is wrong with John Ashcroft? Let us keep in mind that he is basically a good guy-trying to do a job that is almost impossible. I say this because any job done on behalf of the government is an impossible task. Somehow the government becomes a huge thought eating process. Individual people no longer manage this group. It should not be a battle against the lesser of two weevils. If it is I prefer the known weaknesses of the current president. There are many things I believe should have been done differently and Iraq is one of them. However he did what he thought best at the time-and he at least believes in what he is doing. Every decision he makes has been approved by the Congress-not that I think they are an all knowing and/or intelligent bunch of people either. It is way to easy for Kerry to stand up and say what was done wrong and how all of our foreign allies will welcome him with open arms when he has not been in the position of trying it. All he has done is stand up with his arms out and his ketchup queen behind him. And if we want to look past the candidates and what we will be putting up with for the next 4 years-lets look at first lady material. Laura Bush has more charm and grace in her little finger than Teresa Heinz Kerry has in her entire family. Do we really want to listen to her insult people for the next 4 years? *sighs* I only think this will be a very close race and I think it too ugly on both sides. I guess it is obvious who I voted for in early voting.
Quincunx Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 We were advised not to argue people, so I'll gladly leave your comments about the wives alone--saves me having to look up anything about them. Ashcroft is in a position where he can make his morals into law, and he is doing it, and I object to his morals. I am most nervous about the slow rollback of legal abortion. On an unrelated note, it still chafes me that he failed to be elected in 2000 to a state position, and that he was appointed to a federal position. . .against the wishes of the voting population? Ever since I've been old enough to notice politics, there have been charismatic presidents. I'm curious to know what happens in the time of a bland president.
Finnius Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 (edited) Well, I've been watching this one for a good long while, even to the point of voraciously scouring the local news for signs of partisan-ness... er... not that that's a word. Anywho, my problem with the current Presidential platform (Bush/Cheney/Ashcroft) is the same as Quincunx's, essentially. We have a group of individuals who are in a position to create legislature, and who are abusing that power by basically rolling back the laws that separate Church and State. Not to mention that I keep coming back to a kind of disturbing question: Assume that Gore had gotten elected, or that 9/11 had happened under Clinton. Assume that the Democratic president had then gone after Bin Laden, same as Bush. Assume that the Democratic president had then essentially removed the majority of that task force from looking for him in order to attack a different country under false pretenses. (And yes, that's pretty much how I see Iraq. I remember Bush constantly emphasizing that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, without any kind of intelligence from the UN Inspectors to coroborate that. Did Hussein have WMD's? Nope. Did the UN approve our going into Iraq? Nope. Bad policy? Yup.) Assume that the same amount of people; US troops, Iraqi insurgents, and Iraqi civilians, had died in said glass war. What would the Republican Congress do? Would they impeach the Democratic president? Call him a war criminal? I kind of think so. On a more local level, the Republican party finally looks to be losing some of its control over South Carolina, with the death(?) ((I think he's just hibernating.)) of Strom Thurmond. Hollings, our current senior senator, is retiring this year, and the two people looking to fill his spot are one Jim DeMint <R> and Inez Tennanbaum (D). DeMint has gone on the record saying he wants to remove gay and lesbian teachers from classrooms, and that he'd like to remove the federal income tax and replace it with a 23% sales tax. (Which, by the way, would end up substantially raising taxes for a good 80% of the SC population.) Tennanbaum wants a short-term tax increase, to pay for improvements to our education system, which never got most of the money that the Lottery Commission <R> said it would. All in all, after living in a state run by Republicans for the last... er... ever... I've pretty much come to hate them. Civil rights, labor laws, separation of Church and State, these things mean very little right now. For instance, we still have Sunday Blue Laws. You can't buy and sell alchohol on Sundays. No reason for that, except that the religious leaders are putting pressure on the political leaders. Anyway, imma get off my soap-box now. Danke. Editted because neither Jim DeMint, nor Lottery Commission are registered trademarks. Edited October 29, 2004 by Finnius
Regel Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 How people make up their mind and decide on a candidate is a complete mystery to me. I don't think there could be a more important event about to happen in a few days. It makes me sad that most of the people I speak to about these two men see parties they support before the see the individuals. These two men have the ideologies that their respective parties want them to have. My own personal ideas on what constitutes a reason to send young men and women in harms way is obviously not relevant. I am not a U.S. citizen. It bothers me the the United States of American has the most powerful military machine in the world and people stay home when they are sick instead of seeking medical help because they can't afford it. Our neighbours and I say friends need to remember what a terrible price people have paid to allow them the right to vote. To see apathy and poor attitudes about voting is disturbing. What difference will it make? They are all the same. Well they couldn't be more different. It's your country and your decisions will affect more than just your own people, it will affect us all. So vote! Vote for the kind of country you want the USA to be. If you think things are going great. You'll vote one way if you aren't so happy you vote for change. But if you don't vote shut the hell up. Now you really don't count. Good luck to all of you.
Valdar and Astralis Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 Without throwing in my views on the actual political parties and candidates, as I'm not a citizen of the United States. . . I'm just praying that voters realize that what the United States does today _will_ have reprocussions in the future, and you should be concerned instead of just shrugging it off.
Falcon2001 Posted October 30, 2004 Report Posted October 30, 2004 I hold what are considered to be - by a lot of people - unpopular political opinions. I personally believe that while things such as the capture of Saddam were fine and warranted almost, I don't believe that our reason for going over there was correct. The ends don't justify the means, especially on a much larger level such as the invasion of a country. The war on terror is a similar case - while I believe that the attacks on the world trade center were totally, completely unprecedented, I don't believe there's any differnce between that or any of the other terrorist attacks going on around the globe. If a war on terror is the right thing to do - and I most definately believe that any form of terrorism by any government, especially the US, should be heavily discouraged and dealt with - then it should be a global problem, not the US riding tail on everyone. In other news, a NASA photo analyst recently released hi-def photos of Bush wearing a wire during the presidential debates. Kerry continues to claim that 'I'm not Bush!"! Bush/Cheney ads reach a new low - now featuring several large, colorful pictures of the twin towers burning. Other than that, I'm not voting - I forgot to get my stuff in, and I'll have to drive for 3 hours (I don't have a car) one way to go vote.
Peredhil Posted October 30, 2004 Report Posted October 30, 2004 Falcon, you'd be in huge trouble - of a kind, in my family. The Patriarch of my side of the family instituted a Rule that if you are eligible to vote and don't (for whatever reason), you weren't allowed to make any political comments until you voted. I remember my family setting up one of my brothers who'd not voted, saying things that were guaranteed to set him off, and him fuming in silence. Heh. It was a lesson to us all. Is there Political Viagra? Last Presidential Election, if I recall, Florida had Electile Disfunction...
Finnius Posted October 30, 2004 Report Posted October 30, 2004 *looks up* Electile Disfunction... Mr. P, you do kill me sometimes.
The Portrait of Zool Posted October 30, 2004 Report Posted October 30, 2004 I'm voting for not diluting our chance at ousting the Bush regime. I'm voting for the other camp. I'm voting for pulling the US constitution out of the shredder - Patriot Act - GRRRRR!
reverie Posted October 30, 2004 Report Posted October 30, 2004 have already voted via absentee ballot... I made up my mind who I was not voting for the day troops started training to go to Iraq...(helps to know people in a few key places) And it was well, well, well before any talks even got off the ground... 7 years of military experience say vote for reality. Learn from the lessons of Rome. I diagree with my brother who said, "the republic died on 911..." It only dies if we let. ...on a side note a liberatarian friend of mine once had me take a politics quiz... (i'm a registered independant.) I came up a split between the Authoritative/Liberal mindset... Well, it took a moment to take that in... but after a few seconds I concluded my philophy must be this then: "You can do what ever you want, but you WILL DO IT! have fun, rev...
Lady Celes Crusader Posted October 31, 2004 Report Posted October 31, 2004 If the USA had the politic will to applied its knowledge to actually help defavoriased regions around the world, it would have been a way more efficient way to fight terrorism.
Katzaniel Posted October 31, 2004 Author Report Posted October 31, 2004 In other news, a NASA photo analyst recently released hi-def photos of Bush wearing a wire during the presidential debates. Regardless of whether this is true, it's fun to imagine. I watched an hour or so from one of the debates with a few friends, and we had heard rumours of the hidden mic. So we pretended we were the people helping him out. "Tell them that ... (blah blah blah)." "Okay, no no, backpedal, backpedal!" "You can still save yourself if you say that ... (blah blah blah)." "Oh dear God!" (Takes a drink). It would make a good drinking game. Apparently Canadians are something like 70-30 for Kerry, so it's fascinating to me that Americans are so divided. Presumably you're paying more attention than we are... I just don't understand what's so great about Bush. I found it disturbing that he laughed every time Kerry made a good point against him. I was worried about his policies. ("I strongly encourage all healthy people to *not* take their flu shot!" Isn't it possible to handle the problem some other way?). Kerry didn't seem like a genius either, but at least he had some small respect for homosexuals and others, and if he had a hidden mic the prompters wouldn't have given up halfway through and gotten drunk. By the sounds of it, Americans like Bush because he's known. What happens in four years? The war will still be going on. Bush can't be elected again. I guess I just don't understand the logic. As for all of you voting for independents, it's the same old argument we had about the Canadian election, isn't it? Unfortunately it's no less clear in this case. At least you're able to stand up for what you believe. Perhaps this will prompt some rebuttal.
Tamaranis Posted October 31, 2004 Report Posted October 31, 2004 (edited) The thing I see wrong with Kerry is that he seems to like citing everything that's gone wrong in Iraq and then saying "If I had been president at the time, then that wouldn't have happened." I mean, unless he's going to personally go over there review and reorganize security, and do a better job of it than the military experts are already doing, I don't think him being present will make things run any smoother over there. Edited October 31, 2004 by Tamaranis
Recommended Posts