Register - Login
Views: 99802752
 Main - Memberlist - Active users - Calendar - Wiki - IRC Chat - Online users
Ranks - Rules/FAQ - Stats - Latest Posts - Color Chart - Smilies 		05-03-22 07:11:46 AM
Jul - General Chat - The Clinton-Obama Quagmire New poll - New thread - New reply
Pages: 1 2 3Next newer thread | Next older thread
If you support either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, and your chosen candidate DOES NOT get the nomination, what will you do in the general election?
Vote for the Democratic nominee
 
 38.1%, 8 votes
Abstain... courteously.
 
 14.3%, 3 votes
Yay McCain?
 
 14.3%, 3 votes
Punch a Paultard   0.0%, 0 votes
The two-party system's boring and fascist anyway
 
 33.3%, 7 votes
Multi-voting is disabled. 21 users have voted.

Nicole

Disk-kun
Level: 146


Posts: 862/6469
EXP: 38284794
For next: 228500

Since: 07-07-07

Pronouns: she/her
From: Boston, MA

Since last post: 78 days
Last activity: 1 day
Posted on 03-17-08 09:09:13 PM Link | Quote

Originally posted by CyclopsCaveman
Before I get my ass handed to me for voting on McCain, here's the thing:

It wasn't Bush's fault that we're were we are currently. It was, technically, a combination between Clinton and the Congress, along with some help from Al Qaeda. We can't seriously blame Bush fro anything. Yet.

Now, another reason I'd want McCain in can be summed up in a quoute from Hillary Clinton:

"Shared Prosperity"

Something we don't want is for America to be completely equal. We can't seriously trust that a Dem will run our country correctly, mainly because the Dems have no business in the Whit House right now. I don't care what anybody else thinks, but I believe that Bush - and every other sensible person - at least knows that a republican is a good choice, for now, and that McCain at least knows what to, and can, do what needs to be done.

Hm, "Shared Prosperity" doesn't necessarily mean perfect communism, and I honestly doubt that was anywhere near what Hillary meant when she said it, either. (Of course, those who are in the "Hillary = Satan" crowd may say otherwise) My guess is that it refers to the long-standing position of both parties (the Democrats are much more public about this than the Republicans) that the wealthier segments of the population can be taxed to help the lower segments.

Now, I won't disagree with you that a Republican is a good choice- the Republican Party certainly could be a lot worse (thank god the Ron Paul folks aren't in charge, for example)... President McCain wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, and I wouldn't go to Canada or something. (after all, I'm medically ineligible for the draft) I just think the Democrats are better

____________________
Xkeeper

Level: 263


Posts: 5124/25353
EXP: 297141195
For next: 1819258

Since: 07-03-07

Pronouns: they/them/????????

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 11 min.
Posted on 03-17-08 10:37:06 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by CyclopsCaveman
It wasn't Bush's fault that we're were we are currently. It was, technically, a combination between Clinton and the Congress, along with some help from Al Qaeda. We can't seriously blame Bush for anything. Yet.

Who put in all of the new administration that is constantly revoking rights, abusing privlidges, lying, ruining America?

Who is it who constantly threatens to veto any bill that doesn't meet his exact demands?

Who was it who took us to war IN IRAQ (note: Iraq IS NOT Afghanistan) because of mysterious "WMD"s that were later found to all be a big lie?


Not a single one of these things was caused by somebody other than G.W. Bush. There is a reason why his approval rating is pure trash.

Though I am interested in how you plan on pointing fingers at Clinton, do tell.

Something we don't want is for America to be completely equal. We can't seriously trust that a Dem will run our country correctly, mainly because the Dems have no business in the Whit House right now.

If you're saying they have "no business" because they don't have some megacorporation shoving $$$$$$$$ into their pockets, then you are correct.*



*There are exceptions, of course, but the ratio of corrupted v. non-corrupt is a bit better for Dems than Repubs.

____________________
Xkeeper

Level: 263


Posts: 5125/25353
EXP: 297141195
For next: 1819258

Since: 07-03-07

Pronouns: they/them/????????

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 11 min.
Posted on 03-17-08 10:44:47 PM Link | Quote
Addendum: an excellent post on why Hillary is a horrible choice for President

If she's willing to divide her own party and throw it into a miniature civil war, what will she do with the US?

She's already said (on multiple occasions) that "most states" aren't worth bothering about.

This is not the kind of person who is likely to adhere to one of the founding principles of America (undivided).

____________________
Skreeny
Member
I have a custom title.
Level: 54


Posts: 283/636
EXP: 1172540
For next: 61330

Since: 09-15-07


Since last post: 9.3 years
Last activity: 1.2 years
Posted on 03-17-08 10:49:53 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by CyclopsCaveman
We can't seriously blame Bush fro anything. Yet.
How about that impassioned (read: blackmail) speech to Congress about how if they didn't remove all the restrictions from the funding bill last year, he would be unable to guarantee the safety of the troops in Iraq?

Actually, Congress is partially at fault for that, too. They fed the crocodile...
DigitalBasic
Pancakes!
Level: 174


Posts: 2400/9712
EXP: 70450092
For next: 447775

Since: 07-03-07

Pronouns: they/them

Since last post: 75 days
Last activity: 3 days
Posted on 03-17-08 10:51:48 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Metal_Man88
On another note, the very existence of parties is stupid. I'm with George Washington; why don't we all support the Constitution and stop making divisions in our own nation over nothing?

Because people are stupid and want to fight over being better than the other side rather than any other issue.

I'm tired of anything political and refuse to participate in anything involving politics. In high school everyone pretty much "proved" their points by stating their party affiliation and saying it must be true, which caused debates over which party is better before what is the best course of action in a certain event.

It is like America has a thing for competiting with itself, be it politics, sports, or anything else. I hate it and wish to move out of the states for this very reason.

____________________
Deleted User
Collection of nobodies
Posted on 03-17-08 11:59:33 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Shadic

Originally posted by Colin
I don't think Obama's ready yet for the top job and something about him rubs me the wrong way... I don't know exactly what though. At least Hillary can rely on Bill for advice and that - maybe not the BEST advice but better than a kick in the head...

That "experience" argument is bullshit. Hillary didn't do much as first lady, and Obama has been a Senator (Illinois + DC) for longer than she has.


I don't even live in the U.S. mainland and I know Hillary since way before I knew who Obama was, actually I knew who he was in these primaries. Another note, not to sound racist or something but are you actually trusting more a black man, born outside the U.S. mainland with most of his family living in Africa more than a woman, whose husband was the president, and I bet most of her family were born and died in the U.S. Oh and she was first lady...

I think your statement is bullshit, I fully agree with Colin.

____________________


===================
[Posted by Jelly Beanie]
Nicole

Disk-kun
Level: 146


Posts: 864/6469
EXP: 38284794
For next: 228500

Since: 07-07-07

Pronouns: she/her
From: Boston, MA

Since last post: 78 days
Last activity: 1 day
Posted on 03-18-08 12:20:48 AM Link | Quote

Originally posted by Xkeeper
Addendum: an excellent post on why Hillary is a horrible choice for President

If she's willing to divide her own party and throw it into a miniature civil war, what will she do with the US?

She's already said (on multiple occasions) that "most states" aren't worth bothering about.

This is not the kind of person who is likely to adhere to one of the founding principles of America (undivided).

Well, the 50-state strategy I think is a waste of resources as well... I mean, there honestly isn't any reason for the Democrats to do more than token campaigning in Massachusetts, for example. Under the current electoral college system, any campaigning in Massachusetts is essentially worthless except as a sign or gesture, but it isn't going to affect the general election- I'd prefer the candidate I support to focus their resources on states that actually matter and can push the election...

Though that's really a problem with the current system... competition brings out a lot of people. Recently, when Massachusetts moved our primary, we became an important state and started getting campaign ads and such (previously only getting them because the Boston stations broadcast signals reach New Hampshire) and turnout jumped much higher from past Massachusetts primaries, which were pretty much universally too late to matter.

By the way, on Florida, the issue of which is a large one in relation to Hillary Clinton's presidential run, since getting FL (and possibly MI) are one of the few ways she can win, the state has basically ruled out doing any new election since the DNC shot down their mail-in primary idea. I don't know if I agree with this- it's unfair to rule out the voice of these states entirely, and a new primary is a rather large expense, especially in the present economic situation... Florida's primary was a bit more legitimate than Michigan, though, wasn't it? As I recall, and I could be wrong, everyone was on the ballot, but none of the candidates campaigned in the state... as opposed to Michigan, where only Hillary was on the ballot... (Yeah, seat those delegates and it's basically going to be seen just as illegitimate as a superdelegate victory... which isn't really that illegitimate but the media will spin it that way)

____________________
Skreeny
Member
I have a custom title.
Level: 54


Posts: 284/636
EXP: 1172540
For next: 61330

Since: 09-15-07


Since last post: 9.3 years
Last activity: 1.2 years
Posted on 03-18-08 12:36:27 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Jelly Beanie
Another note, not to sound racist or something but are you actually trusting more
Not to sound racist?
Originally posted by Jelly Beanie
a black man
Damned black people.
Originally posted by Jelly Beanie
born outside the U.S. mainland
Damned Hawaiians.

Originally posted by Jelly Beanie
with most of his family living in Africa
Most of his family being... his father's side? His mother's side of the family was from Kansas.

Originally posted by Jelly Beanie
I bet most of her family were born and died in the U.S.
ALL HAIL OUR WHITE (NON-HAWAIIAN) OVERLORDS

Originally posted by Jelly Beanie
Oh and she was first lady...
Don't insult our intelligence. We know that's what it means when she's married to the president.

Originally posted by Jelly Beanie
I think your statement is bullshit
Then retort with something that doesn't rely mostly on the candidate's ethnicity.

Imajin: Funny thing about the situation as it was this year is that all of those states who moved forward to be more important settled... nothing. At the same time, if Michigan/Florida hadn't been hit for moving theirs forward, they'd be very important by now.
Nicole

Disk-kun
Level: 146


Posts: 865/6469
EXP: 38284794
For next: 228500

Since: 07-07-07

Pronouns: she/her
From: Boston, MA

Since last post: 78 days
Last activity: 1 day
Posted on 03-18-08 12:39:40 AM Link | Quote

Imajin: Funny thing about the situation as it was this year is that all of those states who moved forward to be more important settled... nothing. At the same time, if Michigan/Florida hadn't been hit for moving theirs forward, they'd be very important by now.

Indeed... the funny thing is that had Michigan and Florida gone and moved to a less early time, like Massachusetts did, their votes probably would have been enough to push Hillary Clinton (who IIRC was expected to win in those states anyway, though the polls come from the time when Clinton was expected to win everywhere) ahead and win early...

____________________
Deleted User
Collection of nobodies
Posted on 03-18-08 12:58:22 AM Link | Quote
I was talking about experience, Skreeny. Hillary clearly has more experience than Obama. In my opinion, is Obama who should quit. It is even rumored that if he gets elected president, his days will be counted.

____________________


===================
[Posted by Jelly Beanie]
Xkeeper

Level: 263


Posts: 5126/25353
EXP: 297141195
For next: 1819258

Since: 07-03-07

Pronouns: they/them/????????

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 11 min.
Posted on 03-18-08 01:25:27 AM (last edited by Xkeeper at 03-17-08 10:28 PM) Link | Quote
Originally posted by Jelly Beanie
... trusting more a black man, born outside the U.S. mainland with most of his family living in Africa more than a woman, whose husband was the president, and I bet most of her family were born and died in the U.S. Oh and she was first lady...

Let me just be blazingly clear on this: You are a millimeter away from getting a very permanent ban.

Not only are you being racist...
Obama was born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. (born in Nyangoma-Kogelo, Bondo District, Nyanza Province, Kenya,[8] of Luo ethnicity) and Ann Dunham (born in Wichita, Kansas).

...you're completely fucking wrong.


I will not hesitate to end your membership of this board if you do this again.

____________________
DigitalBasic
Pancakes!
Level: 174


Posts: 2401/9712
EXP: 70450092
For next: 447775

Since: 07-03-07

Pronouns: they/them

Since last post: 75 days
Last activity: 3 days
Posted on 03-18-08 01:36:54 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Jelly Beanie
In my opinion, is Obama who should quit. It is even rumored that if he gets elected president, his days will be counted.

And I guess Hillary will do a better job because, hell, she is HILLARY CLINTON, right?

No. I won't take that as a valid reason why Obama should quit.

Present facts to prove that Hillary is better, and don't just give me HER side. Give me Obama's side as well. I won't listen to one side without the other, and I won't listen to positives one side negatives other either. You can't properly voice who is better by presenting such biased views.

____________________
Deleted User
Collection of nobodies
Posted on 03-18-08 02:16:20 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Xkeeper
Who is it who constantly threatens to veto any bill that doesn't meet his exact demands?
Bill Richardson!

I don't like talking politics because everyone fights with each other.

____________________


===================
[Posted by IIMarckus]
Shadic
Alakadoof?
Level: 151


Posts: 1829/6929
EXP: 42377706
For next: 918770

Since: 07-22-07

Pronouns: he/him
From: Olympia, WA

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 14 hours
Posted on 03-18-08 02:17:57 AM (last edited by Shadic at 03-17-08 11:42 PM) Link | Quote
Xkeeper

Level: 263


Posts: 5128/25353
EXP: 297141195
For next: 1819258

Since: 07-03-07

Pronouns: they/them/????????

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 11 min.
Posted on 03-18-08 02:47:52 AM Link | Quote
Hillary has done a whole slew of things that really make you question her...

Daily Kos might have some of it if you feel like digging into the archives.

____________________
Rachel Mae

Creature of Chaos
Level: 141


Posts: 626/5929
EXP: 33603967
For next: 516047

Since: 07-03-07

Pronouns: she/her
From: Foxglen

Since last post: 21 days
Last activity: 26 min.
Posted on 03-18-08 03:32:07 AM Link | Quote

On top of all that, I just don't like her. There's something about her that just makes me feel...icky, for lack of a better word.

____________________
Shadic
Alakadoof?
Level: 151


Posts: 1832/6929
EXP: 42377706
For next: 918770

Since: 07-22-07

Pronouns: he/him
From: Olympia, WA

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 14 hours
Posted on 03-18-08 03:33:18 AM (last edited by Shadic at 03-18-08 12:33 AM) Link | Quote
Rachel Mae

Creature of Chaos
Level: 141


Posts: 627/5929
EXP: 33603967
For next: 516047

Since: 07-03-07

Pronouns: she/her
From: Foxglen

Since last post: 21 days
Last activity: 26 min.
Posted on 03-18-08 03:35:18 AM Link | Quote

That's probably a good part of it...

____________________
Shadic
Alakadoof?
Level: 151


Posts: 1834/6929
EXP: 42377706
For next: 918770

Since: 07-22-07

Pronouns: he/him
From: Olympia, WA

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 14 hours
Posted on 03-18-08 04:38:44 AM (last edited by Shadic at 03-18-08 01:39 AM) Link | Quote
Lyskar
12210
-The Chaos within trumps the Chaos without-
Level: 192


Posts: 1365/12211
EXP: 99321179
For next: 552392

Since: 07-03-07

From: 52-2-88-7

Since last post: 7.4 years
Last activity: 7.3 years
Posted on 03-18-08 04:49:19 AM Link | Quote

Time/Date

03-17-08 10:49:19pm

Posts

1365

Days Here

258

Level

48
Metal_Man88
Local Moderator
So, let me get this straight. The woman who causes Dems like me to want to vote for McCain just to stop her if she wins the Democratic nomination is a good choice?

The one who has gone down and dirty, throwing the gender, race, and experience card without actually basing any of her things on logical evidence?

I mean, heck. McCain over that noise. At least he's not so much churning out new lies as recycycling old ones.

And I should vote for Hillary because she was wife to a president?

C'mon, man. You tell me how that makes sense. Suddenly the wife of every president is a potential new president?

Regardless of their actual viability?

Or their effect on party politics.

Anyway...

As for the Constitution Party, it, ironically, violates what I said by being a party. My statement is all parties, even a party which tries to say what I'm saying, by nature are parties, and therefore contradictory to how it should be.

(Additionally it has some pro-God stuff I really don't believe in--yet the Constitution doesn't have that verbatim inside it)

Ultimately, I submit this topic as a reason why parties are null and void when it comes to helping America. Most of us (Well, most of us but the man who is afraid of people different from himself) have a similar idea of wanting to help America, but we let our differences get in the way. If we all worked together without nonsensical party lines, and had presidents who had a balanced cabinet and tried to listen to both (or more) sides on the issues and pick the most balanced one, we wouldn't be in this mess right now.

____________________
Original Layout © Tobias Kelmandia
Pages: 1 2 3Next newer thread | Next older thread
Jul - General Chat - The Clinton-Obama Quagmire New poll - New thread - New reply


Rusted Logic

Acmlmboard - commit 47be4dc [2021-08-23]
©2000-2022 Acmlm, Xkeeper, Kaito Sinclaire, et al.

35 database queries, 1 query cache hits.
Query execution time: 0.141119 seconds
Script execution time: 0.047309 seconds
Total render time: 0.188428 seconds