Let's see how the world would vote: Pre-VP Edition

[cvrefugee]

Maybe "benefits" wasn't the right word. What I meant was that if the government starts going overly bat shit crazy there are ways to change things. Complaining to your representatives, impeachments, limited terms, and the like. If we have smaller government and less regulation of industries that puts more power in the hands of executives and generally the public has no influence over those so they can run free.

First and foremost, the goal of a corporation is to make profit for its stockholders. Some of the practices that corporations utilize to make profits are detrimental to Americans in some shape or form, but they are also beneficial. Take outsourcing, for example. Why do corporations outsource jobs to other countries? They spend less money making goods (viva Mexico!) or providing services (call centers!) that may cost some Americans (usually unionized workers) potential jobs. However, in the end, savings are made that benefit the consumer, stockholder, and the corporation. I'm not saying outsourcing is good, but it is a common practice when Americans demand high wages for unskilled labor. Increases in minimum wage (thanks Democrats) only makes matters worse. Corporations will just pass along the increase to the consumer in form of higher prices. Or they may move their main operations to another city.

So how does the consumer control corporations? With your wallet. I think some people believe corporations are slave-driving, evil dictators that have free reign over the "proletariat". Maybe 100 years ago with the steel and oil trusts we had a problem, but today it isn't the same. Yes, I know about Enron and all the other corporations but those are exceptions to the rule. My point is this: elected government officials will do whatever it takes to get elected, and those who elected them have some control over their decisions. Corporate executives will do whatever it takes to make a profit, and those that buy their product have some control over their decisions.

Same thing dude, same thing.

 

[Lilleput]

McCain is like Bush v.3


If i could vote i'd vote for Obama, if nothing else he has the ability to bring hope to you're country.

 

[KaJuN]

Oh I'm not suggesting things are really any different with more government control. I just prefer having things run that way with more accountability (hello Enron as you said). I'd rather watch decisions being made on C-SPAN than locked away in some boardroom.

I also believe bigger government is more fair to more people. It's a bit harder to vote with your money if you're living from paycheck to paycheck and just barely scraping by. At least with voting all currency is the same and everyone is, at least in theory, equal.

But really it's a case of picking the lesser of two evils and it's largely a case of personal preference about which one you like. Both systems have big flaws and it's impossible to make them work for everyone. The best we can hope to do is find a happy medium that suits the majority. Unfortunately that's much easier said than done.

 

[Scott]

McCain is like Bush v.3

Actually not even close, but since you are throwing stupid generalizations out there then Obama is a repeat of Jimmy Carter...

Look, the bottom line is that Bush made mistakes... LOTS of them, but he also faced several situations that no one in your lifetime has ever had to deal with. I voted for him, and I am not ashamed to say I did, because John Kerry was just a TERRIBLE choice, and Bush at least had the balls to stand up for what he saw as the right path. Yes, fine... he made a lot of stupid decisions and he made my life personally harder since I am a Soldier and all, but damn... just imagine the trainwreck we would have if Kerry's weak ass had been put in office?

If you vote in Obama, and you have an already liberal Congress, this country will be in DEEP trouble within 36 months. With McCain's much more moderate stance on several major areas at least we stand a chance of not putting the Government in charge of our entire lives.

I agree that a third party vote is akin to pissing into the wind, but at what point are we going to tell those two parties that we are tired of them and want real people with real policies and real plans to get them done? If we just keep electing either a Democrat or Republican then it is just as much our fault as theirs. The big question though, is how do you rally enough people to send that message???

I can tell you that registered independents are the fastest growing political group in the country... that is one good sign... now who wants to step out on the limb and actually place a vote that won't be for an elephant or donkey?

 

[Viper007Bond]

but he also faced several situations that no one in your lifetime has ever had to deal with.

What does that have to do with anything? It's not like he stepped up to be in that situation -- he was in office with the shit hit the fan. And what did he do? He made it worse.

He has a low popularity rating and is disliked by the majority of the world for a reason.

 

[Scott]

You made my point for me... he was in office when the shit hit the fan, and his INITIAL reaction was 100% appropriate, but as things progressed he failed to make a decent argument and he admitted that just a few days ago. I don't agree with the primary reasons he used to enter Iraq, but there were PLENTY of legitimate reasons (like the 17 UN resolutions they failed to follow) to do just what we did, it was just a matter of using what can only be described as an effective "sales pitch" that he messed up. (this is all of course just my opinion)

 

[phuckingduck]

Actually not even close, but since you are throwing stupid generalizations out there then Obama is a repeat of Jimmy Carter...

Look, the bottom line is that Bush made mistakes... LOTS of them, but he also faced several situations that no one in your lifetime has ever had to deal with. I voted for him, and I am not ashamed to say I did, because John Kerry was just a TERRIBLE choice, and Bush at least had the balls to stand up for what he saw as the right path. Yes, fine... he made a lot of stupid decisions and he made my life personally harder since I am a Soldier and all, but damn... just imagine the trainwreck we would have if Kerry's weak ass had been put in office?

If you vote in Obama, and you have an already liberal Congress, this country will be in DEEP trouble within 36 months. With McCain's much more moderate stance on several major areas at least we stand a chance of not putting the Government in charge of our entire lives.

I agree that a third party vote is akin to pissing into the wind, but at what point are we going to tell those two parties that we are tired of them and want real people with real policies and real plans to get them done? If we just keep electing either a Democrat or Republican then it is just as much our fault as theirs. The big question though, is how do you rally enough people to send that message???

I can tell you that registered independents are the fastest growing political group in the country... that is one good sign... now who wants to step out on the limb and actually place a vote that won't be for an elephant or donkey?

My problem with McCain is that he's pushing hard to his right. He doesn't have that same maverick aura he had in '00 or '04. Everything from his answers to questions, his stance on a few issues, to the shit-eating-self-confidence-grin he's bearing aren't the hallmarks of the McCain I rallied for in previous elections. Bush won both times on the back of a great voter movement initiative by Rove where the Christian right in swing states was brought out to vote on other initiatives as well as the presidency. McCain and his staff know they don't have that, but they know they need that right wing support as they're not likely to pick up enough independents as it stands right now. So their pushing McCain hard to the right, and I can't shake the feeling that whoever has his ear is some mouth breathing, draconian, Machiavelli-loving, MBA possessing, BMW X5 driving douche bag. The shear weight of the staffers that have already been excised from his campaign is enough to make me question his decisions in campaigning this time around. I still love McCain the maverick, but has that angel lost out to the devil of excessive aspirations? I think it has. This to me is why his VP choice will probably be my deciding factor. If he goes right with his choice like Huckadumb or Romney I'll have a real tough choice. But if he chooses a true conservative, or reaches for a moderate like Lieberman then I'll probably have a very easy decision.

/senseless mid-finals ramblings

 

[Firecat]

I guess this is the thread for general elections news. I wanted to post this because i'm sure that it will get greater media attention soon, and there wouldn't be any context to it.

Just saw on CNN that Nader said Obama is "trying to talk white"...which kinda shocked me. I searched for the article, and taken into context...I don't think he's too far off base.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/25/nader.obama/index.html?section=cnn_latest

"There's only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate. He's half African-American," Nader told the paper in comments published Tuesday.

"Whether that will make any difference, I don't know. I haven't heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. Payday loans, predatory lending, asbestos, lead. What's keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn't want to appear like Jesse Jackson? We'll see all that play out in the next few months and if he gets elected afterwards," Nader added.

"I mean, first of all, the number one thing that a black American politician aspiring to the presidency should be is to candidly describe the plight of the poor, especially in the inner cities and the rural areas, and have a very detailed platform about how the poor is going to be defended by the law, is going to be protected by the law and is going to be liberated by the law," he said. "Haven't heard a thing."

"He wants to appeal to white guilt. You appeal to white guilt not by coming on as black is beautiful, black is powerful. Basically, he's coming on as someone who is not going to threaten the white power structure, whether it's corporate or whether it's simply oligarchic. And they love it. Whites just eat it up."

To sum up. I believe he meant that his message is more geared towards issues that white-americans care about than black-americans

 

[MattD1zzl3]

People are trying to turn this into a don imus thing.


What he's saying is barak obama is avoiding black issues because he's afraid to be pushed into the "black politician" niche that never gets anyone elected.

 

[Firecat]

This is the cover of an upcoming issue of "The New Yorker"....both campaigns have called it tasteless and offensive. I get what the magazine is trying to say, but the cartoon should have rather been inside the magazine instead of on the cover.

 

[jetsetter]

Apparently they are trying to parody the online Obama criticisms.