2008 US Presidential Elections

[Red Devil]

Since corporations run countries by proxy now-a-days via their lobbyists, donations, and back-door dealings, Presidents are more or less figureheads, so our votes should be based on the potential for comic relief and eye appeal.

Obama is pretty much one dimensional (selling/making 'change' like the guy at the ballgame), but McCain will probably either kick off or retire after he takes office, leaving Palin (related to Michael Palin of Monty Python fame? ) to take his place and *that* will give Tina Fey *tons* of good material.  Plus, she'd probably pick McCain's wife (or maybe even Dennis Kucinich's wife) as VP, so that would be be like winning the Daily Double.

And so I ask you my fellow citizens, who would you rather see delivering canned speeches and press conferences?  Some guy constantly rattling on about change (yawn), a geriatric with anger management issues, or a couple of entertaining babes?  They'd have the best ratings for State of the Union addresses in history.

Now *that's* change we can live with!   

[Dataanti]

im dont liv in the US but if i did and if i was 18 i would vote for Obama

[VSMIT]

Bush is not that bad. A lot of his 'failures' are things he actually vetoed or the result of policies implemented by the Clinton administration. 90% of the time a good president gets a bad wrap for what the previous one did, and the previous a good for the one before him. Bush has an interesting way of speaking, which makes him look like an idiot. When he forgets something, as many of us do (we call it a 'brain fart' where I live), instead of pausing to remember, or running over it as others do, he makes a humorous situation out of it. You can actually see Bush has a standard pose that he takes in these moments (though he slightly modifies it each time). Hands out, palms forward, head leaning forward, slightly tilted to the side. He made this motion in the "left hand (shows right) doesn't know what the left hand (shows right) is doing" and he did the same but showing his hands the other way because he was leaning on his elbows to one side in the famous "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... I ain't gan'na get fooled again".

The main reason why so many people dislike Bush is not because of the policies he vetoed, but because he went against the general populace a lot of the time regarding Iraq.  And because we now know that he and his cabinet basically faked records of WMDs in Iraq.  Saddam needed to be removed from a place of power in Iraq, but we shouldn't have been the ones to do it.

Prime example of what I spoke of earlier: Herbert Hoover. Hoover had many failures in trying to combat the Great Depression, ones that FDR learned from, but he also had a number of successes that did not become fruitful until FDR took office (though no act of FDR). Hoover is sometimes even blamed for the depression that happened shortly after he became president! poppycock...

This is very true.  The downward slide toward the Great Depression had started before Hoover was elected.  Hoover just didn't do enough fast enough to combat it.  And thus he is blamed.

Speaking of the economy, I saw something interesting yesterday (or it might have been the day before). I was watching teh news, the stocks were doing rather well, but then it came time for Obama to speak. Something he said hit some sort of bad cord because suddenly the stock market lost all its gains and went far into the negative. Issues with the economy, though also caused by the companies, are mainly the fault of the people to participate. They panic, sell, panic, sell, panic, sell, panic, sell in an endless cycle (the panic is caused by the media, then they sell, it drops, they panic again, etc etc). The economic difficulties are not Bush's fault.

I could have a counterpoint for that.  There was one point where the Dow was up, Bush made a speech, and it plummeted.  Blaming the falling Dow on Obama is basically warmongering.  And I could also blame McCain for the Dow falling, as it has come to a time in the campaigns where they are speaking almost all the time.

Once and for all, for the general dissidence:
Bush did not cause 9/11, actions of Clinton helped facilitate it, bu no one could have seen it coming.
Bush did not botch Katrina. The FEDERAL government can not force an evacuation of a city. They told the local government that they should, and even that they must! The LOCAL government did not make it mandatory, and the people themselves, complacent, stayed where they where. Federal aid came immediately once the local government allowed it, and Bush did not visit New Orleans because it would have slowed the rescue work.

I didn't know that anyone was blaming Bush for 9/11.  It's not like it was something anyone could have prevented.

Finally, the terrorist ARE in Iraq. They didn't start there, but they went in there when we did, so STOP saying there are no terrorists. We won the Iraq war, its over. Now it is a police action against insurgents.

I understand there are terrorists in Iraq.  There are terrorists everywhere.  The Weather Underground was a terrorist organization based in the US.  Nobody (nobody I know, anyway) is saying there are no terrorists in Iraq.  There are no WMDs, which is the reason why we invaded in the first place.  We also should have pulled out of Iraq a while ago, basically since we found Saddam and set up the puppet government, seeing as how it has degenerated into a civil war between the two factions of Islam.  By the Geneva Accords, we should no longer be a part of any kind of fighting.

few... I strayed a bit from the topic but I covered much of what is used against Bush, as the name Bush is used incessantly in this election.

The reason Bush is used so much is because of the fact that McCain's policies would probably just be a continuance of Bush's.

There.  I'm done for a little bit.

VSMIT.

[Nielk1]

The main reason why so many people dislike Bush is not because of the policies he vetoed, but because he went against the general populace a lot of the time regarding Iraq.  And because we now know that he and his cabinet basically faked records of WMDs in Iraq.  Saddam needed to be removed from a place of power in Iraq, but we shouldn't have been the ones to do it.

I didn't say because he vetoed them, I was saying that he is blamed for things that pass even IF he vetoed them. The records were NOT forged, they were plain wrong. Don't go confusing bad intelligence with fake intelligence.

There was one point where the Dow was up, Bush made a speech, and it plummeted.  Blaming the falling Dow on Obama is basically warmongering.  And I could also blame McCain for the Dow falling, as it has come to a time in the campaigns where they are speaking almost all the time.

But mongering is fun!

There are no WMDs, which is the reason why we invaded in the first place.  We also should have pulled out of Iraq a while ago, basically since we found Saddam and set up the puppet government, seeing as how it has degenerated into a civil war between the two factions of Islam.  By the Geneva Accords, we should no longer be a part of any kind of fighting.
The reason Bush is used so much is because of the fact that McCain's policies would probably just be a continuance of Bush's.

McCain's policies are NOT a continuation of Bush (although he did say he voted with him a lot, but if bush doesn't have something to vote with, it can go in a new direction). And they did find gas weaponry. I thought gas was a WMD as it was indiscriminate and could go over a large area. Also, they gave a long warning and trucks were sited carrying things all about before the inspectors arrived. Yes, it did degenerated to a civil war, and then it became an insurgency when much of that civil war was quelled.


What do you like about Obama?

[bigbadbogie]

By the Geneva Accords, we should no longer be a part of any kind of fighting.

Exactly the reason why Australia recently pulled out.

[Nielk1]

By the Geneva Accords, we should no longer be a part of any kind of fighting.

Which one/part, so I don't have to search.

[AcneVulgaris]

Since corporations run countries by proxy now-a-days via their lobbyists, donations, and back-door dealings, Presidents are more or less figureheads, so our votes should be based on the potential for comic relief and eye appeal.

Obama is pretty much one dimensional (selling/making 'change' like the guy at the ballgame), but McCain will probably either kick off or retire after he takes office, leaving Palin (related to Michael Palin of Monty Python fame? ) to take his place and *that* will give Tina Fey *tons* of good material.  Plus, she'd probably pick McCain's wife (or maybe even Dennis Kucinich's wife) as VP, so that would be be like winning the Daily Double.

And so I ask you my fellow citizens, who would you rather see delivering canned speeches and press conferences?  Some guy constantly rattling on about change (yawn), a geriatric with anger management issues, or a couple of entertaining babes?  They'd have the best ratings for State of the Union addresses in history.

Now *that's* change we can live with!   

Bush has been awesome for all that...Laura and the twins...yummy!  I can concede empirically, that Palin is hot, but she looks a lot like my second grade teacher, who was the first human I ever wanted to kill. 

Mrs. McCain was once hot, but she's got a queen of the undead vibe that I can't get past.

My ideal peripresidential lineup would be If Obama kept Leeza Rice and the Bush Twins on, and had televised fireside mud rasslin With Mrs. Obama and Mrs. Kucinich to guide us through the coming depression.

I've decided I'm not going to write in Ron Paul.

I'm writing in CAMACHO!

[† Trinity †]

What about the unacceptable amount of experience Obama has? Shouldn't that make most rational people think not to vote Democrat, because Obama is running to be the president, not vice president?

The primary role of the VP is to be prepared to be the president should circumstances warrant. In the case of the 72 year old Sen. McCain the likelihood that Gov. Palin would get that opportunity is rather high. Besides.... what did all that experience get Bush/Cheney or Sen McCain for that matter in the last few years?

[VSMIT]

Which one/part, so I don't have to search.

Protocol II, of the 1949 Convention, if I'm not mistaken.

VSMIT.

[Nielk1]

Breezing over it quickly, it looks like it doesn't apply because we were already in there. It is specific to entering a sovereign country that is in civil war, but we were already in there when said internal conflict started.

[Feared_1]

The primary role of the VP is to be prepared to be the president should circumstances warrant. In the case of the 72 year old Sen. McCain the likelihood that Gov. Palin would get that opportunity is rather high. Besides.... what did all that experience get Bush/Cheney or Sen McCain for that matter in the last few years?

I'm sure it's hard to be a Republican president with a Democratic senate and House of Representatives. Anything he proposed would be shot down, everything they proposed would be shot down.

[Feared_1]

Vote for your candidate tomorrow! Don't forget to go vote!

[bigbadbogie]

Don't listen to him! Your vote is a waste of time!

Its not like a single vote has ever won or lost an election with about 100,000,000 other votes!

[Feared_1]

A million single votes will win it. If everyone says "my vote doesn't matter", then we're going nowhere, are we?

[bigbadbogie]

Exactly. And nobody wins the election because nobody turned up to vote.

Then anarchy and turmoil ensue in the US and then comes the chance for the new communist union between China and Russia to destroy the western world!!

HAHAHAHA!!

I gotta quit overdosing on vitamin c.