When Kirth unleashes his monstrosity on a lady, and she mentions that he's sort of hurting her, he explains that he fully understands her suffering because he's a buddhist.I'm so gentle she feels like it's part of the natural order of the universe. Yeah, baby!
Well hey, baby... if ya got it, ya got it. ;)
hill would have been the right choice. of course, if the dems had just picked hill for the top spot in the first place, well, the term "landslide" comes to mind.oh, well, maybe the dems will get rid of dean for good now, dude's a screwup...
I don't think Clinton would have been a good choice as VP at all. She screwed any chemistry the match-up could have had with her abysmally run campaign and she offers little expertise to the ticket. Plus, getting Clinton anywhere near the White House would send the regular gang of Clinton-hating pundits into a froth, helping them to galvanize opposition.
No, Biden's a better choice.
|
hill would have been the right choice. of course, if the dems had just picked hill for the top spot in the first place, well, the term "landslide" comes to mind.oh, well, maybe the dems will get rid of dean for good now, dude's a screwup...
I don't think Clinton would have been a good choice as VP at all. She screwed any chemistry the match-up could have had with her abysmally run campaign and she offers little expertise to the ticket. Plus, getting Clinton anywhere near the White House would send the regular gang of Clinton-hating pundits into a froth, helping them to galvanize opposition.
No, Biden's a better choice.
Agreed. 100%. Why can't anyone else see this?
|
|
To get slightly back on topic...
So, Palin's 17-year-old daughter is 5 months pregnant out of wedlock... whoops, should be interesting how they try and spin that.When the Anchorage Daily News did report the news today, it pointed out: "The Daily News had asked Palin's press secretary, Bill McAllister, over the weekend to address rumors that Bristol was pregnant. 'I don't know. I have no evidence that Bristol's pregnant,' he said on Saturday."'
And I agree. This is irrelevant.
yep, obama gets to "take the high road" while his daily kos and DU minions do the dirty work. (and i love alan colmes questioning palin's pre-natal care, blaming her for her kid having down's syndrome).
yep, the left is SO much more genteel than the right.
if i hear one more time how much less nasty the left is than the right (who can get pretty nasty, i ain't saying they're any better) i think i'll expunge the sandwich i just ate...
note to partisans on both sides: y'all are ALL complete [fill in the plural for beasts of burden]. get over yourselves. reality isn't black and white. you're ALL wrong, neither of your parties get jack done most of the time, and they're all out to screw the average american.
i love that people who vote rep and dem tell me i'm "wasting my vote" by going third party. i think y'all are wasting it on the status quo. QED.
|
(and, from what i can tell from a lot of the dem sites - again, the ones that aren't daily kos and du - michelle obama is very UNpopular with women...bad sign).
[edit: and it appears the mccain campaign site crashed a few times after the announcement, due to traffic from people trying to donate to the campaign...]
I haven't heard any of my friends dissing Michelle Obama. Why do you think she is unpopular among women? I'm a woman, and I don't dislike her and I haven't heard my girlfriends saying anything about her, really. And how come you are comparing her to the VP pick? Shouldn't she be compared to Cindi McCain, or Mrs. Palin's husband (who is her hubby anyway? I haven't heard boo about him!)
I generally agree with that too, but I'm sure it'll cause quite a ruckus among some voters. And pundits will surely try and spin it both ways. It could get ugly or it could be a non-issue.
It should be irrelevant, but we all know it doesn't seem to be as far as voters are concerned. I predict that Palin will withdraw.
On the other hand, my estimation of Obama's character went up some more.
|
|
I haven't heard any of my friends dissing Michelle Obama. Why do you think she is unpopular among women? I'm a woman, and I don't dislike her and I haven't heard my girlfriends saying anything about her, really. And how come you are comparing her to the VP pick? Shouldn't she be compared to Cindi McCain, or Mrs. Palin's husband (who is her hubby anyway? I haven't heard boo about him!)(and, from what i can tell from a lot of the dem sites - again, the ones that aren't daily kos and du - michelle obama is very UNpopular with women...bad sign).
[edit: and it appears the mccain campaign site crashed a few times after the announcement, due to traffic from people trying to donate to the campaign...]
i was commenting on the blogosphere, pro-hillary sites and whatnot. and, frankly, a LOT of hillary supporters haven't forgiven MO for the "if she can't take care of her own house..." comment.
|
|
I don't think Clinton would have been a good choice as VP at all. She screwed any chemistry the match-up could have had with her abysmally run campaign and she offers little expertise to the ticket.
I fail to see how she lacks expertise. The woman's life has been dedicated to politics since the 70s. Whether you like her or not, and whether you agree with her or not, she knows her politics.
That said, Biden really picks up on Obama's weakness - foreign policy.
|
Both candidates picked great VPs, and both of them offer up some things that the primary ticket holder doesn't hold. Having said that, I do feel that Palin was chosen specifically to help Mccain get the white house. For those who say she's not experienced enough...she has more than Obama and she's only the VP candidate.
I'll say this. I think times are going to be better for our country no matter what. I think McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden are both outstanding tickets, and all 4 seem great in their own way. I'm pretty stoked about this election.
To get slightly back on topic...
So, Palin's 17-year-old daughter is 5 months pregnant out of wedlock... whoops, should be interesting how they try and spin that.When the Anchorage Daily News did report the news today, it pointed out: "The Daily News had asked Palin's press secretary, Bill McAllister, over the weekend to address rumors that Bristol was pregnant. 'I don't know. I have no evidence that Bristol's pregnant,' he said on Saturday."'
And I agree. This is irrelevant.
yep, obama gets to "take the high road" while his daily kos and DU minions do the dirty work. (and i love alan colmes questioning palin's pre-natal care, blaming her for her kid having down's syndrome).
yep, the left is SO much more genteel than the right.
if i hear one more time how much less nasty the left is than the right (who can get pretty nasty, i ain't saying they're any better) i think i'll expunge the sandwich i just ate...
note to partisans on both sides: y'all are ALL complete [fill in the plural for beasts of burden]. get over yourselves. reality isn't black and white. you're ALL wrong, neither of your parties get jack done most of the time, and they're all out to screw the average american.
i love that people who vote rep and dem tell me i'm "wasting my vote" by going third party. i think y'all are wasting it on the status quo. QED.
Damn Derek, I've never seen you show so much spirit before. I like it!
|
|
I don't think Clinton would have been a good choice as VP at all. She screwed any chemistry the match-up could have had with her abysmally run campaign and she offers little expertise to the ticket.I fail to see how she lacks expertise. The woman's life has been dedicated to politics since the 70s. Whether you like her or not, and whether you agree with her or not, she knows her politics.
That said, Biden really picks up on Obama's weakness - foreign policy.
a) i didn't write that.
b) i may have voted for hill if she were on top of the ticket.
|
|
That all depends on what you intend to do with those beliefs...
If you've been following this thread, you'd see that I agree with keeping religion out of the science classes. And before you start jumping to conclusions, nowhere (that I'm aware of) on the forum have I stated what my beliefs are (be it Christian, Atheist, Jewish, Agnostic, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Neo-Pagan, whatever people that practice Shinto are called, undecided, or whatever). So, um, don't make assumptions about my beliefs because you're probably wrong.
All I'm saying is don't be a jerk -- and that goes for everyone. No one group has a monopoly on jerkitude -- not the religious, not the non-religious, the human race is equally crappy no matter which way you divvy them up. None of us have to agree on politics, religion or which edition of D&D we think is best. However that doesn't justify being insulting or mean-spirited.
|
|
That all depends on what you intend to do with those beliefs...If you've been following this thread, you'd see that I agree with keeping religion out of the science classes. And before you start jumping to conclusions, nowhere (that I'm aware of) on the forum have I stated what my beliefs are (be it Christian, Atheist, Jewish, Agnostic, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Neo-Pagan, whatever people that practice Shinto are called, undecided, or whatever). So, um, don't make assumptions about my beliefs because you're probably wrong.
All I'm saying is don't be a jerk -- and that goes for everyone. No one group has a monopoly on jerkitude -- not the religious, not the non-religious, the human race is equally crappy no matter which way you divvy them up. None of us have to agree on politics, religion or which edition of D&D we think is best. However that doesn't justify being insulting or mean-spirited.
actually, i think with the advent of the internet, jerkitude has reached an all time high, crossing all groups, beliefs, creeds, and affiliations. sad, really, especially when, elsewhere on the boards, the opinion that polite discourse is unneccesary to the exchange of ideas and viewpoints.
i am by no means innocent of jerkitude, trust me, i'm just making an observation :)
I have one thing to say to all of this that I believe appropriately sums up my political beliefs, religious beliefs, thoughts on our economy and so on in one nice little nutshell. I think you should all think long and hard and consider a vote for this, the true future of America and indeed the world: Ia! Ia!
He even has his own Merchandise
[And before you start jumping to conclusions, nowhere (that I'm aware of) on the forum have I stated what my beliefs are (be it Christian, Atheist, Jewish, Agnostic, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Neo-Pagan, whatever people that practice Shinto are called, undecided, or whatever). So, um, don't make assumptions about my beliefs because you're probably wrong.
Is that a fez that your avatar is wearing? And maybe "Azzy" is short for "Aziz"?
Heh. Bet I had you going for a minute.|
|
actually, i think with the advent of the internet, jerkitude has reached an all time high, crossing all groups, beliefs, creeds, and affiliations. sad, really, especially when, elsewhere on the boards, the opinion that polite discourse is unneccesary to the exchange of ideas and viewpoints.
i am by no means innocent of jerkitude, trust me, i'm just making an observation :)
Neither am I innocent thereof, but who is? I just want things to remain fairly civil on this thread because it's been pretty fun, and I've learned a few things, and I've gotten to see some issues from different perspective.
|
|
Neither am I innocent thereof, but who is? I just want things to remain fairly civil on this thread because it's been pretty fun, and I've learned a few things, and I've gotten to see some issues from different perspective.actually, i think with the advent of the internet, jerkitude has reached an all time high, crossing all groups, beliefs, creeds, and affiliations. sad, really, especially when, elsewhere on the boards, the opinion that polite discourse is unneccesary to the exchange of ideas and viewpoints.
i am by no means innocent of jerkitude, trust me, i'm just making an observation :)
it's funny, but with the exception of a now locked movie thread, the politically themed threads seem to be much better behaved than the gaming threads (4e discussions and pathfinder playtest general, i'm looking at you...).
kinda strange considering how much more important this election is than whatever the heck we get on our "to hit" roll...
|
|
[And before you start jumping to conclusions, nowhere (that I'm aware of) on the forum have I stated what my beliefs are (be it Christian, Atheist, Jewish, Agnostic, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Neo-Pagan, whatever people that practice Shinto are called, undecided, or whatever). So, um, don't make assumptions about my beliefs because you're probably wrong.Is that a fez that your avatar is wearing? And maybe "Azzy" is short for "Aziz"?
Heh. Bet I had you going for a minute.
Close. Or maybe not. Ha!
And I'm not sure what that thing on my avatar's head is. It's kinda weird. :D
yep, obama gets to "take the high road" while his daily kos and DU minions do the dirty work.
I'm curious; what would you have him do? Say nothing? Then he gets crucified for implicit agreement.
That being said, is there an established link between Obama and the sites you mention? For a far left bigot, I'm surprising uniformed about political websites. I tend to avoid them for the same reason I don't listen to political talk shows: No one really wants to discuss anything, it is a big "make fun of how stupid the other side is" fest.
|
|
yep, obama gets to "take the high road" while his daily kos and DU minions do the dirty work.I'm curious; what would you have him do? Say nothing? Then he gets crucified for implicit agreement.
That being said, is there an established link between Obama and the sites you mention? For a far left bigot, I'm surprising uniformed about political websites (I tend to avoid them).
It's business as usual; Obama didn't invent it.
Nixon did. ;)
I don't think Clinton would have been a good choice as VP at all. She screwed any chemistry the match-up could have had with her abysmally run campaign and she offers little expertise to the ticket.I fail to see how she lacks expertise. The woman's life has been dedicated to politics since the 70s. Whether you like her or not, and whether you agree with her or not, she knows her politics.
That said, Biden really picks up on Obama's weakness - foreign policy.
But it had been largely dedicated to someone else's political career, not her own. Her own direct experience with politics outside of the Senate suggests someone who doesn't have as much experience as she lets on.
During Bill's first term in the White House, according to reasonably friendly insiders, she took a lot of flak very personally and lashed back out. She was very thin-skinned at the time, almost Nixonian. Admittedly it's something I believe she's improved on, standing on her own two feet in the Senate.But her campaign was a study in failure. Her main strategists, particularly Mark Penn, didn't seem to understand the new rules of the DNC at all. They didn't seem to understand how to rhetorically present her and her qualifications without endorsing McCain over Obama. And she didn't seem to get it until the last few weeks either.
So, no, I don't think she knows her politics as well as a lot of people thinks she does.
|
|
I don't think Clinton would have been a good choice as VP at all. She screwed any chemistry the match-up could have had with her abysmally run campaign and she offers little expertise to the ticket.I fail to see how she lacks expertise. The woman's life has been dedicated to politics since the 70s. Whether you like her or not, and whether you agree with her or not, she knows her politics.
That said, Biden really picks up on Obama's weakness - foreign policy.
a) i didn't write that.
b) i may have voted for hill if she were on top of the ticket.
My bad. I was trying to scale down the quote within a quote within a quote and messed up.
|
|
yep, obama gets to "take the high road" while his daily kos and DU minions do the dirty work.I'm curious; what would you have him do? Say nothing? Then he gets crucified for implicit agreement.
That being said, is there an established link between Obama and the sites you mention? For a far left bigot, I'm surprising uniformed about political websites. I tend to avoid them for the same reason I don't listen to political talk shows: No one really wants to discuss anything, it is a big "make fun of how stupid the other side is" fest.
i don't know if this is "established", but here's something:
Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:57:26 am PST
Suddenly appearing among the Google search results for “sarah palin gay,” a web site titled: Sarah Palin Supports Gay Rights.
Sarah Palin (GOV-Alaska-Republican), supports gay rights, says Anchorage Daily News.
Quote "Gov. Sarah Palin vetoed a bill Thursday that sought to block the state from giving public employee benefits such as health insurance to same-sex couples."
Quote ""It is the Governor’s intention to work with the legislature and to give the people of Alaska an opportunity to express their wishes and intentions whether these benefits should continue," the statement from Palin’s administration said."
Coghill said he’s interested in a new plan that would allow state employees to designate one person — maybe a same-sex partner, but also possibly a family member or roommate — who would be eligible for state-paid benefits. But the employee would have to pay to add that person to his or her benefits."
Sarah Palin’s veto gave gays the same rights as married couples in Alaska.
A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote for gay marriage.
Interesting. There’s nothing else on the page. This sure looks like the work of the dastardly right-wing anti-gay attack machine, doesn’t it?
But look who’s really behind this.
In the Linux console, if you enter the following commands, you can learn the secrets of a political dirty trick. First, look up the host of ‘sarahpalingayrights.com’ to get the site’s IP address.
host sarahpalingayrights.com
sarahpalingayrights.com has address 74.208.74.232
Then use the same command to look up the domain name pointer of that IP address.
host 74.208.74.232
232.74.208.74.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer obamadefense.com
Well, well. “Obamadefense.com,” eh?
And what happens if you enter obamadefense.com on your browser’s address line?
Why, you’re redirected to none other than FightTheSmears.com, the official Barack Obama site that’s supposed to be defending him against smears.
Looks like they may have a second purpose: to generate a few smears of their own.
take it for what you will.
|
|
My bad. I was trying to scale down the quote within a quote within a quote and messed up.I don't think Clinton would have been a good choice as VP at all. She screwed any chemistry the match-up could have had with her abysmally run campaign and she offers little expertise to the ticket.I fail to see how she lacks expertise. The woman's life has been dedicated to politics since the 70s. Whether you like her or not, and whether you agree with her or not, she knows her politics.
That said, Biden really picks up on Obama's weakness - foreign policy.
a) i didn't write that.
b) i may have voted for hill if she were on top of the ticket.
no worries, i just wanted to point it out, as i kinda admire hill, and wouldn't want something dismissive of her to be accredited to me. :)
I'm curious; what would you have him do? Say nothing? Then he gets crucified for implicit agreement.That being said, is there an established link between Obama and the sites you mention? For a far left bigot, I'm surprising uniformed about political websites. I tend to avoid them for the same reason I don't listen to political talk shows: No one really wants to discuss anything, it is a big "make fun of how stupid the other side is" fest.
i don't know if this is "established", but here's something:
(spoiler omitted)
WHOIS is giving me:
Domain Name: SARAHPALINGAYRIGHTS.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
Name Server: NS1.SUSPENDED-FOR.SPAM-AND-ABUSE.COM
Name Server: NS2.SUSPENDED-FOR.SPAM-AND-ABUSE.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientRenewProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 30-aug-2008
Creation Date: 29-aug-2008
Expiration Date: 29-aug-2009
I am currently unable to resolve the IP address for this URL. I also didn't find a way to get any more information from GoDaddy.
I'm curious: Did you see what you mentioned first hand, or are you just repeating it?
|
|
I'm curious; what would you have him do? Say nothing? Then he gets crucified for implicit agreement.That being said, is there an established link between Obama and the sites you mention? For a far left bigot, I'm surprising uniformed about political websites. I tend to avoid them for the same reason I don't listen to political talk shows: No one really wants to discuss anything, it is a big "make fun of how stupid the other side is" fest.
i don't know if this is "established", but here's something:
(spoiler omitted)
WHOIS is giving me:
Domain Name: SARAHPALINGAYRIGHTS.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
Name Server: NS1.SUSPENDED-FOR.SPAM-AND-ABUSE.COM
Name Server: NS2.SUSPENDED-FOR.SPAM-AND-ABUSE.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientRenewProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 30-aug-2008
Creation Date: 29-aug-2008
Expiration Date: 29-aug-2009I am currently unable to resolve the IP address for this URL. I also didn't find a way to get any more information from GoDaddy.
I'm curious: Did you see what you mentioned first hand, or are you just repeating it?
after you asked, i just started searching the web. i don't run linux, so i couldn't try it myself, and i'm not savvy enough to get samspade.com to work for me...
(and i love alan colmes questioning palin's pre-natal care, blaming her for her kid having down's syndrome).
That is truly sad. It just goes to show that the right's "fundies" aren't the only ones ignorant of science/biology. Down Syndrome is a "chromosomal disorder caused by the presence of all or part of an extra 21st chromosome." It has nothing what-so-ever to do with pre-natal care. Blaming mothers of down's syndrome children for not properly caring for them while in the womb is disgraceful. Of course Colmes is a bit of a moron anyway and I know that alot of libs think so as well. He is just there to make Hannity look good.
By the way, the article appears to be removed but if you follow this link, you can still see the title of the article in the address bar.
Looking further, Colmes claims that the article never was about Down's Syndrome, but:
"And part of that question of judgment has to do with life decisions that candidates make. In the case of Sarah Palin, it had to do with a choice to give a speech and then board a flight after contractions began and water began to break in the last month of pregnancy with her fifth child."
I hope he is right, but since he took down the original article, I can not verify this for myself. Still without knowing all the details, I personally would refrain from judging a woman by suggesting she didn't know her own body enough to make a judgement as to how close she was, especially having four other children before. Also apparently according to this source, she consulted a doctor before flying home and was given the ok.
So apparently, Colmes is either a moron for suggesting that Palin caused the down syndrome or for suggesting she was risking her unborn child by making a flight on a whim.
|
|
For a far left bigot, I'm surprising uniformed about political websites.
i'm a bit of a political junkie, i'm afraid. i'm constantly lurking the left and right leaning blog and forum sites, just to see how my idiological enemies are lying to everyone that day.
i will say this, though, the discourse from the posters on the righty sites tends to be a lot less rabid, profane and vile than the posters from the leftie ones. DU, the daily kos and huffington post are the nastiest, btw.
i guess that just means the righties are nicer when talking out their collective [insert plural term for beasts of burden] than the lefties are...
|
|
(and i love alan colmes questioning palin's pre-natal care, blaming her for her kid having down's syndrome).That is truly sad. It just goes to show that the right's "fundies" aren't the only ones ignorant of science/biology. Down Syndrome is a "chromosomal disorder caused by the presence of all or part of an extra 21st chromosome." It has nothing what-so-ever to do with pre-natal care. Blaming mothers of down's syndrome children for not properly caring for them while in the womb is disgraceful. Of course Colmes is a bit of a moron anyway and I know that alot of libs think so as well. He is just there to make Hannity look good.
By the way, the article appears to be removed but if you follow this link, you can still see the title of the article in the address bar.
Looking further, Colmes claims that the article never was about Down's Syndrome, but:
"And part of that question of judgment has to do with life decisions that candidates make. In the case of Sarah Palin, it had to do with a choice to give a speech and then board a flight after contractions began and water began to break in the last month of pregnancy with her fifth child."I hope he is right, but since he took down the original article, I can not verify this for myself. Still without knowing all the details, I personally would refrain from judging a woman by suggesting she didn't know her own body enough to make a judgement as to how close she was, especially having four other children before. Also apparently according to this source, she consulted a doctor before flying home and was given the ok.
So apparently, Colmes is either a moron for suggesting that Palin caused the down syndrome or for suggesting she was risking her unborn child by...
sometimes i just think colmes is a closet rightie fundie trying hard to make the lefties look dumber than they are...
Director of Narrative
|
I was a serious political junkie and activist before I decided to devote my time to hiding in imaginary worlds and devoting my time to game design. I used to read news and devote my time to activism with as much, if not more, diligence than I apply to RPGs at this point, which is a lot. I’ve done my best to stay out of political threads for a long time, but I have to break that personal restriction and put my fingers to the pulse of this community.
I just have a simple and non-aggressive question for both sides of this coin. Are you really satisfied with having the see-saw form of politics that we have in this country? Why do we have just two viable choices? Why is it that one side or the other wins for a term or two and then the general approval switches? Why is it that we have more choices for toilet paper than in viable political candidates? I know some are more smooth than others. I know that some are rough. I know that some are generic brands and don’t reach the general consumer, but isn’t this America? Shouldn’t we have more of a choice than a coin toss? When is the time that the ‘land of democracy’ can get past a two party system? I don’t have any real solution to my answers, but I’m hoping that some of you out there can help me.
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
When is the time that the ‘land of democracy’ can get past a two party system? I don’t have any real solution to my answers, but I’m hoping that some of you out there can help me.
I think it has to start in the legislature. If one district can elect a green candidate or a libertarian, and build from there, these smaller parties will gain the momentum they need to possibly be viable alternatives. As it stands now, most Americans only know the two parties they're exposed to, and the sheer cost of running a national campaign puts anyone without a solid financial base out of the running. Ross Perot or Ralph Nader can run as a third party candidate because they either have the personal resources or household name status to get their campaign up and sustaining it, but until the smaller parties can get footholds in the national arena, we will always be stuck with an either-or scenario.
Personally, my views fall pretty far to the left of even the most "liberal" of Democrats, and I'd love to see options other than one or the other side of the middle line. A varied spectrum would be great. But until that time comes, I'm going to do everything I can to keep the righties out of power. I'm forced to choose the lesser of two evils 95% of the time, but I'd love to be able to choose someone who's more in tune with my own politics.
|
Director of Narrative
|
I'm cool with that, but what scares me is the folks that want to be on the winning side and only vote with the most viable because it makes them feel like they won too. Feeling like a winner should not be the reason for a vote, no matter how likely that candidate is to win. It just seems weird to me. Then again, I've always been an outsider.
Edit: Voting with the intention of voting 'against' someone is strange to me as well. Despite what the politicians play, this isn't a game. This is livelihood.
|
Director of Narrative
|
As a side note, I chose this thread to post on because it was the most active currently. I'm not trying to stir the storm. It is a genuine call, and if I should have posted my post somewhere else I apologize. I love that we're different. I love that we can be different. Many of you know where to find me and if anyone feels greatly incensed, a lot of folks here know where to find me online in real time and my email in is in my profile, so don't blow up threads on a gaming site to debate my silly opinions. I'll discuss with you in real time if you want.
|
At any level, if you want more than two parties you need proportional representation - otherwise their support is rendered invisible/useless by the electoral system. This ends up making votes outside the big two feel like a waste. Electors then choose to make a meaningful vote for a candidate who reflects their opinions a little, rather than a meaningless vote for a candidate they're closer to.
Shouldn’t we have more of a choice than a coin toss? When is the time that the ‘land of democracy’ can get past a two party system? I don’t have any real solution to my answers, but I’m hoping that some of you out there can help me.
This has always amazed me as well, the land of the free only has two choices, that is only one removed from being totalitarian or communist (China-like).
Can't really offer any help, living in Europe and all....where getting a party off the ground is easier I think.
|
|
Edit: Voting with the intention of voting 'against' someone is strange to me as well. Despite what the politicians play, this isn't a game. This is livelihood.
Just out of curiosity: Why do you find that to be strange? I've no problems with the idea of choosing the lesser "evil" (instead of not to choose anything). And if you absolutely don't want to see a candidate's policy to become reality, you'll be inclined to put your vote against this candidate. What is strange about that?
By the way, let me say that I find this thread highly interesting and enlightening. As a german (and by extension a european) it is often quite difficult to understand what moves America and its citizens. I've learned a lot just by reading all the great stuff in this thread.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Why, you’re redirected to none other than FightTheSmears.com, the official Barack Obama site that’s supposed to be defending him against smears.
...
take it for what you will.
I'd take absolutely nothing of that. There's no permission required to redirect to a site. If I wished to, I could make a site called "Cheneyisachubbychaser.com", and redirect it to the White House Web site. Proving what, again?
That ip now has a PTR record of obamataxcut.com, btw.
I think one unintended consequence of the electorate system is that it seems to favor a two-party system. i.e: There is a "winner take all" mentality, and there is no proportional representation like you see in more parlimentary democratic systems. While some could argue that this allows for better focus among political parties, it tend to marginalize those of us who feel like a square peg being shoved in a round hole.
I think government does a lousy job of distributing aid to the needy, and I would like for it to get out of the business of doing it. Does this make me a Republican?
I think that whatever anyone chooses to do in their own personal life is their business and the government should get out of the business of trying to 'police' morality. Does this make me a Democrat?
You can see the problem. If I vote Republican I have to turn a blind eye to the 'Christian Fundamentalist' wing of the party who I dislike. If I vote Democrat I have to turn a blind eye to the 'Socialist' wing of the party which I dislike. Just for the record neither one of those terms is meant to be pejorative, merely descriptive.
Political 'fringe' cases end up voting for suboptimal choices (I have voted for Nader twice) purely because they feel there are no good choices out there. I currently like the new VP pick on the Republican side, purely because she has shown some amazing fiscal restraint while governor of her state, something that is all too rare on either side of the aisle. Selling the governor's private jet and going coach to travel? That's freakin' excellent! She might be a bit religious, but I don't care about that as long as she doesn't try to shove it down our throats. Considering her daughter just showed up preggers she is going to have to stay off morality topics anyway.
i will say this, though, the discourse from the posters on the righty sites tends to be a lot less rabid, profane and vile than the posters from the leftie ones.
Obviously "Conservapedia.com" isn't on your list...
i will say this, though, the discourse from the posters on the righty sites tends to be a lot less rabid, profane and vile than the posters from the leftie ones.Obviously "Conservapedia.com" isn't on your list...
As a conservative I have to say I find that sight to be rather disturbing.
As a conservative I have to say I find that site to be rather disturbing.
As does any sane person, of any political or religious affiliation. In their world, all suicides are due to "Hollywood values," all murders are the result of "atheistic public schools," and the Loch Ness Monster is proof that dinosaurs made it on board the Ark. I also enjoy watching the SysOps ban people for not agreeing with erroneous "factual" statements.
I'm considering creating a strongly LE-aligned plane based on the Conservapedia universe; it would be a deadly challenge for PCs of all alignments. Maybe as part of a quest to destroy the CE-aligned Sword of Kos?
As a conservative I have to say I find that site to be rather disturbing.As does any sane person, of any political or religious affiliation. In their world, all suicides are due to "Hollywood values," all murders are the result of "atheistic public schools," and the Loch Ness Monster is proof that dinosaurs made it on board the Ark. I also enjoy watching the SysOps ban people for not agreeing with erroneous "factual" statements.
I'm considering creating a strongly LE-aligned plane based on the Conservapedia universe; it would be a deadly challenge for PCs of all alignments. Maybe as part of a quest to destroy the CE-aligned Sword of Kos?
Holy crap! D&D inspiration: A good use for political websites.
You should write a book on that...
Holy crap! D&D inspiration: A good use for political websites. You should write a book on that...
Too "Castle Greyhawk"-esque, I fear. People hate parodies in their dungeons.
|
|
Political 'fringe' cases end up voting for suboptimal choices (I have voted for Nader twice) purely because they feel there are no good choices out there. I currently like the new VP pick on the Republican side, purely because she has shown some amazing fiscal restraint while governor of her state, something that is all too rare on either side of the aisle. Selling the governor's private jet and going coach to travel? That's freakin' excellent! She might be a bit religious, but I don't care about that as long as she doesn't try to shove it down our throats. Considering her daughter just showed up preggers she is going to have to stay off morality topics anyway.
I have not been able to understand the facination these last few days with Sarah Palin's daughter being pregnant. Some people on other boards have even gone so far as to say that it should disqualify her from being veep. It happens people, even in religious households where strict abstinence values are taught. I'm of the opinion that if her daughter was out stumping for McCain and talking about abstinence and such, it would be okay to call her on it. However, her daughter has not put herself in the public spotlight, and we should respect her privacy. I also think that the left wing groups like the Daily Kos and Kieth Olberman who are putting out the rumors that Sarah Palin faked her last pregnancy to cover up the fact that her Down's Syndrome son is actually her grandson should be shunned for their iresponsible journalism. Besides, this could backfire for Obama like outing Dick Cheney's daughter did for John Kerry.
|
|
Michael Moore said to Keith Olberman last night that Hurricane Gustav hitting right at the start of the Republican Convention was "proof that God exists." Meanwhile the former head of the DNC, his name escapes me right now, was caught on tape saying that Hurricane Gustav hitting New Orleans yesterday was "proof that God is on our side." I wonder if Sebastian knows that they are taking his name in vain.
Michael Moore said to Keith Olberman last night that Hurricane Gustav hitting right at the start of the Republican Convention was "proof that God exists."
Wow. You might be the only person I know who pays attention to anything that Michael Moore says!