Who Are You Going To Vote For / Would vote for?

edited July 19 in Politics
Y'know, for the 2008 elections. I've been watching the debates, and you should too! Read up, watch, learn about 'em, and just vote for now.
«1

Comments

  • edited August 2007
    I soundly support Frickles Mudcat.

    large_icon_fm.gif
  • edited August 2007
    David Cameron.
  • edited August 2007
    I'm not sure who I want yet. I know I don't like Hilary, and I don't want to enter our 21st year of consecutive leadership under two families (Bush Senior for 4, Clinton for 8, W Bush for 8).

    Right now I'm leaning toward Obama, but I need to research his positions a bit more.
  • edited August 2007
    As I can't vote, I haven't been following the campaigns much at all, I don't know much of anything about the candidates.

    As of right now I'd vote for Al Gore if he was running (he should be).
  • edited August 2007
    I'm goin' with Lewis Black, Santa Clause in 08!

    Either that, or Hiro Nakamura.
  • edited August 2007
    As cool as Santa and Hiro are, neither are American citizens, so they can't run. And Hiro probably isn't old enough.
  • edited August 2007
    I haven't decided who I'm gonna vote for yet... but it's exciting, since I'll turn 18 a few months before the election. Whoohoooo!
  • edited August 2007
    Umm, I haven't started paying attention to the elections yet. Mish seems excited, but me on the other hand, I am sadly apathetic right now. But I will care when time comes closer. I promise.
  • edited August 2007
    I'd vote for Eisenhower. Except he might get stuck in my nose.
  • edited August 2007
    Everything Jake puts up there either strengthens my pose for Ron Paul or doesn't provide enough information.

    Giving more power to the States? I love it. States aren't evil. They're governed for the people just like the Federal government is.

    He's against having Christianity stamped off the face of America? I'm for it. I'm Christian and I love it.

    Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007 - To require the identification of companies that conduct business operations in Sudan, to prohibit United States Government contracts with such companies, and for other purposes.
    I'd like to know what these other purposes are. Besides, it shouldn't be up to the central government to decide if a company does business in any particular country. It should be up to the consumer, to the free market. Let the free market decide who does business there.

    The skinny is, nobody's perfect, but from what little I've seen of Ron Paul, I like him. If you try to find fault with anybody you'll find it.
  • edited August 2007
    So you're saying companies should not be held to any legal responsibility by the government and everything should be up to the consumers? Most consumers are idiots and I wouldn't be surprised if a sizable percentage of Americans don't even know what Darfur is, let alone who's responsible.
  • edited August 2007
    Vote Monster Raving Loony!

    Yes, these guys are a real party and they put people forward at elections. They once got second place in a by-election, so you never know...
  • edited August 2007
    Yes, Amoeba Boy, I'm saying just that. People get the government they deserve. There'd be no law stopping the government from informing us about this Darfur stuff. If people are idiots, then we deserve a shit government. Stop making excuses for everyone. We're not children. We need to get what we deserve you fucking retard.

    Yes. You're a retard. Bring it.
  • edited August 2007
    Yikes. Getting tense.

    Reminds me of this little number:
    I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.
  • edited August 2007
    first off, how dare you say santa wasn't born in America. you communist.
    mario wrote: »
    And Hiro probably isn't old enough.

    dude. he can f*****g time travel. he could just come back when he's older, you f*****g retard.

    Yes. You're a retard. Bring it.
  • edited August 2007
    Look, brosephs, why does everyone want such a strong central government? Leaving big things up to state governments or even *gasp* the people themselves isn't a death sentence for a country. Think of it more as a test. Don't be afraid. The hip highschoolers who just learned about Karl Marx harp about how religion is a crutch. Well I'm here to say that a government being too strong is a crutch.

    EDIT: I still want to fight you Amoeba Boy. Like, hardcore fisticuffs, for being such a damned fascist. That's not even sarcasm. You don't trust the masses. You're my sworn enemy,
  • edited August 2007
    B-B! B-B!
  • edited August 2007
    John, is there something you have to get off your chest? You seem full of angst. Can't we all just get along?

    To a more serious topic, I think the government is too strong in the areas of military, privacy laws and actually, general law making. Regarding things that our contry does not do enoug of, I do not think they are doing enough for education, transportation, energy, and medical.

    Thought it is far from perfect, Canada has the right idea with their health insurance system. Health is a right, not a privilage for those who can afford it.

    That is the same for education. Our country is descent with eduation, but educators are still underpaid and tuition for college still costs too much.

    As for transportation, just look at our roads. Besides that, more should be done to fix the problem with pollution that comes from automobiles and the development for alternate fuels. Our fossil fuels are quickly depleating.

    Energy. Some of the same idea that I spoke about in transportation. More alternates need to be made. Fossil fuels are leaving our planet. There are plenty of good alternates for this one already that can be developed more. Wind, water, and thermal are all good ones. There is the one that is always a topic of heated discussion, nuclear energy.

    Well, I hope this breeds a few more threads for discussions and reasons to vote for certain candidates. That is what I think. How about all of you?
  • edited August 2007
    I still think a lot of our problems would be better solved if people took a more personal responsibility in their communities and stopped waiting for "the government" to solve it.

    I'm no economist, but Ron Paul says that most of our medical and fuel problems stem from government subsidies and medical insurance. Without these two large contributors to these industries, they wouldn't be able to charge so much, allowing Joe Schmoe to afford it on a regular paycheck.

    EDIT: What's so great about Obama anyway? I see he's leading in our poll here. I haven't read/watched much about him.
  • edited August 2007
    Of course, there should be personal responsibility, but a lot of it is how our government distributes our taxes and its other forms of income. For instance, the 2007 federal budget just for military is $699 Billion where the budget for combined federal and California for education is right around $142 billion. It is not even close. If it were even shifted slightly, it would make a huge difference in the quality of our education.

    One of our main responsibilities as Americans is to vote. We vote in the people who we think best fits the role to fill a government position at the time. That does not mean that I like who has been voted in or what they are doing with my tax dollars.

    Of course, there is other things that we can do to help improve our wellbeing. Personally, I have helped raised money for medical research, protested against our war, recycle as much as I can, take public transportation or ride my bike as much as I can. Of course, I can always do more, but that doesn't mean that does not mean that I cannot expect the government to spend the tax dollars that I paid to them in a better way.
  • edited August 2007
    I want a president who knows the right people to listen to and listens to them.
  • edited August 2007
    You mean the mob?
  • edited August 2007
    Kyle wrote: »
    ...For instance, the 2007 federal budget just for military is $699 Billion where the budget for combined federal and California for education is right around $142 billion. It is not even close. If it were even shifted slightly, it would make a huge difference in the quality of our education.

    I really don't mean to sound rude, but I'm laughing as I read this. For one, you only mentioned one state. How about the other 49? There's a big difference there, but not quite as big as you are making it look. Another and more substantial issue which is the very reason I laugh is that you seem to think throwing more money at schools will magically make them better. I don't know about you, but around here, you give some school board or whatever some extra money and they'll build a bigger office building for themselves, raise their salaries and buy funny hats. Maybe not exactly like that, but you get the idea. Simply put it does no good for a school if you can't find people who know how to spend the money they have.
    Give $10,000 to one man and he'll be rich, give $1,000,000 to another and he'll still be poor.

    And don't even talk about protesting the war. That is the silliest, most pointless thing I've ever seen people do. It's too late, we're in it now and we can't just "bring our troops home." It doesn't work that way and it's naive to think that it does. We're stuck there fo at least a good 50 years, most likely more. Deal with it. Live with it. Make it your own.
  • edited August 2007
    Kyle wrote: »
    I take public transportation or ride my bike as much as I can.
    lol, nice try kyle. Time to play devil's advoacte. that ain't cause you're all eco-green, that's because your terrible, polluting car finally just stopped running.
    and you can't point all the blame at the military budget for a lack of educational funding. The CCPOA does their share too, i mean, let's be honest, the prison system in California is out of control.
  • edited August 2007
    The real problem is that at least half the people in the government are either corrupt or incompetent. Especially in local governments. There's no formal training or education for these elected positions and not enough people take an interest in them, so you can't help but be faced with incompetence and corruption. All a person needs to do to get some of these positions in some cities is write there name on a piece of paper.

    EDIT: I'm not gonna say people need to stand up and take notice in their local governments. That'd make me a hypocrit because I certainly don't. I'm just saying that's where the problems starts.
  • edited August 2007
    And it's definitely hard to get involved in something as tiny and personal as county and state elections when there's all this glitz and glamor associated with the federal elections! Decentralize the government! Bring the focus back to state and county elections!