View Single Post
Old 10-10-2008, 05:26 PM   #104 (permalink)
erect
 
erect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Paradise City
Posts: 2,252
iTrader: 13 / 100%
erect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond reputeerect has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
We'll see I suppose. No sense in arguing this one till there's some data.
After we get the data it will be too late to do anything with it until 2112 ... when we'll just wait for more data. wrong answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
Politicians aren't economists(yes, even McCain) but we still have to elect them based in part on their economic
Which underscores the arguement for voting 3rd party. We should have Nobel prize winners, scientists and financially successful people like Perot and Buffet running for office.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
I'm pretty forgiving(even of repubs) for question dodging; some are loaded and there's no gettin around that.
I'm not, which is why I think we need a 3rd option. Too much bullshit and question dodging for my taste.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
The other thing you'll notice is that 99% of the appeal she had was targeted at those who would already support her. So did she serve to energize her own base a bit? Yeah. But I doubt she picked up any new votes.
Did you notice neilson's ratings for the VP debates. I don't think all those people showed up to check out a recycled Biden. Her numbers & base grew tremendously just by her holding her own. That's just my opinion though

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
She's not very experienced
Don't go there, you'll lose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
You break it you buy it.
Well said, lets not break anything else by staying out of the rest of the countries over there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
There doesn't have to be a big government for it. There has to be someone watching to make sure they're not falsely representing their financial stability.
Like that's worked in the past

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
Things that are different when you're 18 vs. 16

And I bet you're wrong. Let me ask you a question erect. How much time do you spend every week actually physically talking to someone my age? How many people is this sample size here?
Or are you forming your opinions of a generation based off of some random Spring Break video on MTV?
Shady, if you think that kids have evolved over the 10 years it's been since I was in college you are dead wrong. And to clear this up a bit, I totally dig the girls gone wild videos.

Regardless, this is a mute point as you get to vote. You have the law on your side so you win. I'm still allowed free speech to say what I feel (for a little longer anyways).

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
...this is an awesome hypothetical argument, unfortunately it has no basis in reality.
But my other 2 points about dems buying votes are not hypothetical, they are fact. I just drove it home by hypothetically saying they could easily cater to college kids to buy votes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
If you're against selfish voting, can I expect to see you ragging on republicans like popeye who blatantly say their motivation is a desire to pay as little taxes as possible?
I have no problems checking other conservatives (Zero's GW comment) when they are wrong (conservative is used loosely in Popeye's case).

I usually vote taxes and small gov't ... I'm not dodging this point or hiding from it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
I'm sorry, but I can't believe given the repubs tax plan you called students "selfish" voters.
Sure I can, there is logic behind not overtaxing the rich. Trickle down economics works if given time. Also if we tax corporations too much they'll relocate. Then instead of getting 35% of a $million you'll get 35% of $0.

It's not wise to bite the hand that feeds you as most big businessmen are not as decent as Warren Buffett.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
The people without enough food to live on. Or people without houses. I've known these people in my life, and they're not looking for a handout.
Don't paint all of any demographic with the same brush. I personally know cases that are the exact opposite of what you just described. Let me introduce you to my in-laws.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
Oh by the way, it's even better in Michigan. Republicans demolished our mental health system a bit ago.
link please

Quote:
Originally Posted by xmcp123 View Post
Agreed. But the evangelicals/nutters are almost without exception conservative.
We have our nuts, don't get me wrong. Find a hippy middle-school teacher and you'll know what I mean. But I'm sorry, trying to spread the crazy christian blame is an argument on the failboat.
I believe you're talking about white christian extremists. While they totally piss me off, you're basically angry because of the sheer number of them and their ability to sway the vote. Black and Arab religious extremists are more annoying than the white ones but their numbers are smaller, so it's not as "big" of an issue. Guess what ... they all vote democrat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pat J View Post
This is what the MAJORTIY of republicans actually believe;

* Using stem cells for medial research is wrong.
* A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body.
* If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.
* Creationism should be taught in public schools.
* Ban gay marriages and adoptions, ban the teaching of evolution, ban/censor porn, punish women who expose their breasts...

Voting for a republican candidate would be like voting for Hitler because you're not a jew and you don't give a fuck as long as you get your 3% tax cut.
I never ask this from anyone but cite this shit. This is so far from the truth.

Condoms = no sex ????
creationism = education ????
Ban evolution ????
punish breast exposure ????

By the MAJORITY of republicans???


Quote:
Well if we're throwing out stats that have nothing to do with who should run the country, here's another one: The US Post Office handles 43% of the world's mail.

It's a valid stat because in America, majority rules as long as they vote. 87% of the US being christian has everything to do with who runs the country. Sorry this contradicts your athiestic ways but you've got to come to grips with it ... like it or not.


I personally hate mixing politics and religion (Palin errs big time on this one, as does every other president in the modern age), but you can't blame people for voting what they believe ... as wrong as it may be.


Quote:
When your constitution was written was America reliant on the rest of the world as she is now?

Yep, the French helped us kick the British out



Quote:
Did you owe trillions to China back then or were you so dependant on foreign oil that you happily supplied military hardware to dictatorships?

That's a problem that we should fix internally, and yes it's possible.

Quote:
I might be wrong, but sometimes it seems that some people like to refer to the constitution in the same way as others use the bible or koran, without realising that it was written in a time when things were different.

We have ammendments that can be used if parts of it get outdated. Our constitution doesn't show a step by step of how to run a government or a country .. just some basic guidelines.



How they left out the part about not allowing a national bank is beyond me


Quote:
I'm completely against isolationism, but regarding the middle east, I think it might be a good think if America kept out of it... completely. Stop selling (or rather giving) military aid to Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt and most certainly stop the influence of the Zionist lobby groups in Washington. Not that they'll ever do that...

100% correct. I'm not for total isolationism, just not trying to run the world. We are not right about everything for every country.


To dig a little deeper, I don't think that the US gov't should even interfere with state's rights. Why does Washington DC think it knows Californians better than the state of California? Again, big government is very bad in almost all cases.


Quote:
Tax breaks for the rich... so they can take the money they've saved and invest in cheap manufacturing in China? or buy up the public services in poor countries? Or spend it on lobbying more politicians to get more money to lobby more politicians to get more...

Yep, those are some of the evils that go along with being uber wealthy. Some of the benefits are investing in new business, promoting technology like the poor can't, creating jobs & giving generously, something else poor people simply can't do. I've got more I can say here but my fingers are a bit cramped ... perhaps another discussion.



You are correct though as there are good and bad things that happen when you cater to the rich or the poor. A smart politician would cater to the middle class (f! the rich and poor) since small business is what drive america. These people vote in huge numbers.
erect is offline