Ok, I still have no clue who I'm voting for...

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sun Aug 31, 2008 11:48 pm

Alright, so Obama's nice, but too idealistic, McCain's... McCain and has Palin as his VP... and the third party Candidate that sounds best to me can't speak or walk, and suffers from cerebral palsy...

I'm seriously close to a flippant write in vote... anyone able to fill me in on the third party candidates more than wikipedia can?

tzor · Post by **tzor** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:38 am

Well if you want to throw away your vote ... why not vote for Paris Hilton. Heck she still has the best political campaign ad ever.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:41 am

Y'know, I've considered it... I want to know who put their words in her mouth for that thing... far as I'm concerned the writer should be president...

tzor · Post by **tzor** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:48 am

You know I have been wondering what my 2008 NaNoWriMo should be ...n n perhaps a spoof about a Hilton presidency ... "The April of Paris."

Surgo · Post by **Surgo** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 3:30 am

How exactly can one be "too idealistic"? I only half-understand this. Could you define that for me, and then explain how Obama is such?

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 3:33 am

Idealism is generally a good thing, but he's idealistic enough to think he can have a sit down chat with the terrorists like he's dr. Phil... I may think he's likely to be assassinated if he gets elected, but I don't want a president who's going to walk into the middle east and ignore the "kick me" sign on his back.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:30 am

Wait, let me get this straight, by "the terrorists" you seem to mean guys in the middle east, by which you probably mean basically Iran.

You think Obama is too idealistic because he might actually TALK to Iran...

What? Really? I mean I don't want to put words in your mouth but there are very few coming out and that's the best I can manage to decipher.

But that's crazy on numerous levels, including for instance the comparison to certain other "idealists"... You can find this everywhere, but I wanted a good source so I found it ON PLAYBOY

Count Arioch the 28th · Mon Sep 01, 2008 5:11 am

I consider Obama to be another centrist bullshit politician that will spend the next 4-8 years bullshitting around and making useless proclaimations without disturbing the status quo of our nation.

However, the republicans have done a pretty shit job running the country, and they need to be fired. That's my first point.

My second point is that the more people voting for socialist issues, the more they'll come up. Obama might be ineffectual, but maybe the next person might not be? Our system has been designed specifically to be slow to change. That's not always a bad thing, but there are in fact things that need to be changed right now, in my opinion. (Note that I'm not an economist, nor a politician, and I only have a rudimentary grasp on environmental and social issues. I see things in simple terms, that's just the way I roll. If you don't like it, cram it.) But anyway, at least a slightly liberal centrist in office might pave the way for slightly more liberal government in the future. Not much, but I am generally opposed to armed revolt. I don't want war on American soil, that's where I keep all my stuff.

I consider those reason sufficient in my voting decision.

Draco_Argentum · Post by **Draco_Argentum** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 9:25 am

Your choices are:

1) Vote Obama.

2) Vote McCain.

3) Vote third party/don't vote.

Thats the way your system works, its stupid but you only have two real choices.

RiotGearEpsilon · Post by **RiotGearEpsilon** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:29 pm

Vote for Obama. History needs to repudiate the republican party's performance over the last eight years.

Josh_Kablack · Post by **Josh_Kablack** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:31 pm

Lemme see if I can do this fairly:

Vote for McCain if you think Bush has the country on the right track
Vote for Obama if you think Clinton had the country on the right track

Vote for McCain is you think the top corporate tax rate needs to be cut, and reducing spending and "entitlements" are the best way to balance the budget
Vote for Obama if you think that repealing some of the Bush tax cuts, reducing spending in Iraq and closing corporate tax loopholes is the best way to balance the budget.

Vote for McCain if you think that a market-based system and tax credits are the best way to approach health care Link
Vote for Obama if you think that the federal government establishing a medicare-like program to dramatically increase the number of people with health insurace is the best way to approach health care.
Link

Vote for McCain if you think our troops need to stay in Iraq
Vote for Obama if you think they need to come home / be redeployed to Afghanistan.

Vote for McCain if you think that This was a really good idea
Vote for Obama if you think that this
was a really good idea (sorry that the source is a bit biased, but the more neutral Chicago tribune article about the legislation is a pay-to-play.

Vote for McCain if you think that more oil drilling is the best way to improve our energy policy.
Vote for Obama if you think that increased government spending and incentives to develop alternative energy sources is the best way to improve our energy policy.
[In fairness, this isn't totally clear, as both candidates say they are to some degree in favor of both, they keep flip-flopping and the current campaign rhetoric does not match actual votes on record - if it really matters to you, please do further research]

Vote for McCain if you also oppose the Ledbetter act Linky
Vote for Obama if you think that workers should be able to sue employers for discrimination even if they fail to file a claim during their first 180 days of employment Ruth Bader Ginsburg does.

Vote for McCain if you are for tighter abortion restrictions, and want a president who would like to see Roe v Wade overturned Linky
Vote for Obama if you are against tighter abortion restrictions and want a president who Planned Parenthood and NARAL rate favorably Linky

Vote for McCain if you tend to agree with Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and Bill O'Reilly
Vote for Obama if you tend to agree with Al Franken, Paul Krugman and Michael Moore

Vote for McCain if you want to elect our nation's oldest first-term president and our first female vice-president.
Vote for Obama if you want to elect our nation's first African-American president.

Vote for Anyone Else if you feel that the majority will make the right choice between those two.

All links are work-safe, aside from occasional profanity on some of the blog/comments.

Josh_Kablack · Post by **Josh_Kablack** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:43 pm

And of course, there is also absolutely nothing wrong with the Count's position:

I see things in simple terms, that's just the way I roll. If you don't like it, cram it.

That is one of the key principles of the democracy that guides our American republic.

Fwib · Post by **Fwib** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:49 pm

Draco_Argentum wrote:Your choices are:

1) Vote Obama.

2) Vote McCain.

3) Vote third party/don't vote.

Thats the way your system works, its stupid but you only have two real choices.

What prominent countries have a system with more than two real choices?

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 7:55 pm

If you vote Green, there's a good chance they'll get public funding next time around.

Look, there's never, ever going to be that perfect candidate. Democrats have many Liberals and leftist... But the majority always chooses a centrist. At least this time we got Biden and not Bayh as our VP choice.

If you don't vote, I don't believe I'll listen to you whine about the country.

-Crissa

Count Arioch the 28th · Mon Sep 01, 2008 8:24 pm

Fwib wrote:What prominent countries have a system with more than two real choices?

From what a guy I knew told me, Italy. He also said it was pretty chaotic during election season.

Dude was Italian, so I assumed he knew more about Italian politics than I did.

Bigode · Post by **Bigode** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 8:37 pm

Brazil too. Of course, it does end at a second round with just 2, but who goes there tends to be from 3 or 4 candidates; also, the party blocks change somewhat from election to election.

But the best was in the last election for my state's governor. Part of the people supposedly loyal to the "clearly major" candidate voted for other 2 because they feared theirs might lose to a 4th one. Result: those 2 go to second round. ROTFLMAO!!!

Neeeek · Post by **Neeeek** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 10:22 pm

Crissa wrote:If you vote Green, there's a good chance they'll get public funding next time around.

That would require voting for the batshit insane Cynthia McKinney. No thanks.

CatharzGodfoot · Post by **CatharzGodfoot** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 10:25 pm

Bigode wrote:But the best was in the last election for my state's governor. Part of the people supposedly loyal to the "clearly major" candidate voted for other 2 because they feared theirs might lose to a 4th one. Result: those 2 go to second round. ROTFLMAO!!!

And this is the problem with "instant runoff".

Fwib · Post by **Fwib** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 10:26 pm

Count_Arioch_the_28th wrote:
Fwib wrote:What prominent countries have a system with more than two real choices?

From what a guy I knew told me, Italy. He also said it was pretty chaotic during election season.

Dude was Italian, so I assumed he knew more about Italian politics than I did.

I had thought that about Italy, as I know a guy from there - then I looked it up (on Wikipedia, so some possibility of error) and it seems that they have basically two big coalitions there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_politics

I don't know how flexible with policies the fact that parties shift from one coalition to another with the political wind makes things there, though.

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 11:04 pm

Neeeek wrote:That would require voting for the batshit insane Cynthia McKinney. No thanks.

...And she's insane more than Palin, McCain, or Biden how, exactly?

-Crissa

Neeeek · Post by **Neeeek** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 11:24 pm

Crissa wrote:
Neeeek wrote:That would require voting for the batshit insane Cynthia McKinney. No thanks.
...And she's insane more than Palin, McCain, or Biden how, exactly?

She tried to stab one of the security guards at the Capitol building (EDIT: with her cell phone) for doing his job, then tried to blame him for it. She is either seriously delusional or a spoiled ass.

The 13 Wise Buttlords · Mon Sep 01, 2008 11:56 pm

I'd vote Green (or Libertarian, if I still lived in Texas) if they made more of an effort to get elected at the local level. We'll start there and work our way up, not start with some ridiculously screwy top-down campaign where the Green candidate becomes President and THEN comes the lower-tier politicians.

But in a nod towards Ross Perot, Mr. You Know Who has run the party into the ground to support his image. Sigh.

I'm not totally on board with Obama and probably never will(though Biden helps), but the infrastructure he put into place to help the Democratic party has been top notch. The only bright side about Hurricane Gustav is that the United States might get to see what happen when we use this election engine for awesome rather than presidential wank.

Vote for the movement, not the man.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 12:25 am

if they made more of an effort to get elected at the local level.

Out here our version of the Green party is actually very strong at a local government level.

I say this living in one of the strongest local electorates for the Green party where the locals are so pissed off about the rather blatantly corrupt and incompetent dealings of the major parties in regards to the region that the Greens are our only real alternative and only helpful representation.

When locals need help or want a voice they don't seek out their local council member, they seek out the greens and their associates. They're the only ones you can get to help you for free.

Every single election, not just every local election but EVERY election (local, state, federal) in the region sees the regional green vote grow over here (it grows Australia wide, but our local region sees somewhat greater growth than most), because people are recognising who is helping the community.

At the local level they have grown so strong that the two major supposedly opposed conservative (and supposedly) labour parties are swapping preferences with each other in order to prevent the Greens from gaining more seats.

And that's looking like it's only going to work as a delaying tactic.

The 13 Wise Buttlords · Tue Sep 02, 2008 1:57 am

But Australia's legislative system is nowhere near as fucked up as the United States' is.

Seriously. This thing is boned from out the gates.

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 4:14 am

Neeeek wrote:She tried to stab one of the security guards at the Capitol building (EDIT: with her cell phone) for doing his job, then tried to blame him for it. She is either seriously delusional or a spoiled ass.

Umm, what? For stopping her, a senior Representative while letting a junior through without being searched? The guard was being a twit. Elected officials are supposed to be waved, not repeatedly pulled aside.

This is different than nearly starting a fist-fight on the floor of the senate how exactly?

All of them have been caught on camera or off yelling and screaming their fool heads off. Palin even has crazy-nutjob Christian on her resume.

-Crissa