Political Discussion

[danaf]

Ok - now after hearing Biden's speach - a man who voted for many of Bush's initiatives - I am convinced that the democrats royally screwed up!

I was never a big Hillary fan but I see now that an Obama/Hillary ticket would have been much better than the current Obama/Biden ticket.

What a shame!

[fltoo]

Im voting for Obama just to make my co-workers mad. They hate him for only one reason, his race. They are all backwoods country folk who scrape up roadkill and eat it (no lie) and can't use any argument for or against either candidate except that Obama is black.

I have to agree I don't see either making much difference though, infact I didn't care for any of the candidates. I guess I just dont like polititians!

When your co-workers tell you that they don't like Obama because he is black, look them in the eye with all seriousness and tell them you don't like inbreeding!

[JRScott]

Im voting for Obama just to make my co-workers mad. They hate him for only one reason, his race. They are all backwoods country folk who scrape up roadkill and eat it (no lie) and can't use any argument for or against either candidate except that Obama is black.

I have to agree I don't see either making much difference though, infact I didn't care for any of the candidates. I guess I just dont like polititians!

If that's the best reason you got for voting for him I strongly suggest looking at other candidates other than McCain and Obama. The Constitution party has Chuck Baldwin, Libertarian Party has Robert Barr, Green Party has Cyntheia McKinney, and US Socialist Party has Brian Moore.

What your suggesting is no better really than them not voting for him because he's black. Incidentally he's half white, you might want to point that out to them.

[JRScott]

Ok - now after hearing Biden's speach - a man who voted for many of Bush's initiatives - I am convinced that the democrats royally screwed up!

I was never a big Hillary fan but I see now that an Obama/Hillary ticket would have been much better than the current Obama/Biden ticket.

What a shame!

Biden is part of the problem in Washington. 35 years there and what has the man accomplished? I mean off the top of your head what has the man ever done? If he could accomplish so little in 35 years, what makes you think he can accomplish anything great in 4.

[danaf]

well - all said and done, the dem convention was at least nicely put together. it was nice that they opened it up to so many people.

let's see how McCain does.

[FLBK7]

I predict that McCain's VP will be Pawlenty. He's the only one of the finalists who has always been pro-life. This is a must among the conservatives.

He lacks Romney's financial expertise, but to the conservatives that means nothing as long as the candidate is PRO-LIFE, period.

Of course, I could be wrong, and that's just fine with me.

I'm voting for Obama.

[JRScott]

I predict that McCain's VP will be Pawlenty. He's the only one of the finalists who has always been pro-life. This is a must among the conservatives.

He lacks Romney's financial expertise, but to the conservatives that means nothing as long as the candidate is PRO-LIFE, period.

Of course, I could be wrong, and that's just fine with me.

I'm voting for Obama.

Actually there is no one McCain could pick just like Obama that would cause me to vote for either, however as a conservative I'm more concerned fiscally right now than socially.

I think McCain would do better to pick a woman actually since Obama didn't pick Clinton, I think he could capitalize on how many feel abandoned even despite Hillary's talk. It would also negate any hoopla about a historic ticket, because in that case either ticket would be historic if it won. I strongly believe McCain should pick a woman or racial minority as his running mate.

Mike Huckabee: To many ethical violations, more liberal defense and fiscally than McCain, Socially considering his own ethical violations his a risk there as well. Pick him and you potentially alienate all the Mormons in the west due to his anti Mormon tirade in the primaries. McCain can't afford to lose the western states and win the presidency.

Mitt Romney: Romney would be a solid choice except for two things. He is a Mormon which is a religious minority and despite the 1st Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion to many Americans are willing to smear religious minorities as exhibited by Huckabee's supporters in the primaries. I do believe more southern evangelicals would vote for Romney than Mormons would vote for Huckabee though. His greatest problem is his change in life stances in recent years. His current stance is in keeping with his Religion more than a pro choice stance is.

Fred Thompson: Fred has a problem with his age, matching him with McCain might cause a generational split. McCain needs someone younger than Thompson so as to appeal to younger voters, otherwise Fred would be a solid choice.

Duncan Hunter: Most Americans have little knowledge of what Hunter stands for, he probably would have made a better president than McCain or Obama will (as I also believe Romney or Thompson wold have done). Again McCain needs someone more energetic and younger.

Ron Paul: Mr. Paul does have a record of introducing things to strengthen the Constitution and reduce the federal government. The problem is he doesn't seem to have the leadership necessary to move the ideas out of committee and into general voting. His age is also a great concern, McCain needs someone younger.

Rudy Giuliani: Like Romney Rudy suffers from the stigma of a moderate viewpoint socially. This will not sit well with conservatives. He does have the energy to compliment McCain but I think overall McCain would be better off selecting someone else.

Alan Keyes: A minor factor in the elections, Keyes though is a solid conservative. Served in the Reagan Administration. Is a racial minority (he's black) and also He is Catholic (as is Biden). So basically adding Keyes could appeal to conservatives, the problem is he doesn't have the charisma to generate a large following. He's run multiple times and has made little headway, he would make a good VP or President though.

Tim Pawlenty: Was not a contender for President in the Primaries. He is an Evangelical Christian like Huckabee however he has not used the Anti Mormon rhetoric that Huckabee is famous for. Adding him to the ticket would not offend the Western States as much as if you added Huckabee. He also helps in MN where he is popular. He is younger and more energetic than McCain. He is not a woman though and it would be hard for him to get the Clinton vote.

Condolezza Rice: She's black and a woman. She is smart, deligent and honest. However much like Colin Powell she is associated with the Bush administration and that could hurt McCain. Thus I wouldn't pick her.

Colin Powell: Respected General. Black. Sadly though is his performance as Sec. of State under Bush, it would be a large mark on the ticket and bring it down, wouldn't pick him.

Alveda King: Niece of the late Martin Luther King. She is a senior member of a conservative think tank. Served in the Georgia house but never in the US Congress. Masters in Business. (Financial Creds). Strongly pro life. Founder of King for America. Doctorate in Law. Former College Professor in MI. Strong Civil Rights Advocate. Probably of R minority females she would make the best and strongest choice. Putting her on the ticket gives woman someone they can believe in, it also largely negates Obama's race since Alveda has done far more for civil rights than Barrack Obama.

[FLBK7]

Well, it wasn't Pawlenty after all but as I mentioned in a previous post, McCain is desperate enough to choose a female in hopes for an election boost. And he did. LOL

My surprise is that he chose someone with even less experience than Obama. A first-term governor of a state with the population of the city of Austin, Texas. Her only previous public service experience is managing a city of 7,000 people. And on top of everything, she is apparently in the midst of some ethics probe? I don't know if this is really true or some exaggeration created by the media.

But geeze, if he was desperate enough to pick a female, he had several other much more experienced women to choose from. Considering that his VP running mate HAD to be pro-choice and anti-gay, he could have gone with Kay Bailey Hutchinson of Texas who has a lot of experience.

Oh well...... good luck, McBush.

I'm still voting for Obama, because I'm 200% anti McBush. And voting for a 3rd party candidate in this election would simply be another vote for McBush.

[JRScott]

Well, it wasn't Pawlenty after all but as I mentioned in a previous post, McCain is desperate enough to choose a female in hopes for an election boost. And he did. LOL

My surprise is that he chose someone with even less experience than Obama. A first-term governor of a state with the population of the city of Austin, Texas. Her only previous public service experience is managing a city of 7,000 people. And on top of everything, she is apparently in the midst of some ethics probe? I don't know if this is really true or some exaggeration created by the media.

But geeze, if he was desperate enough to pick a female, he had several other much more experienced women to choose from. Considering that his VP running mate HAD to be pro-choice and anti-gay, he could have gone with Kay Bailey Hutchinson of Texas who has a lot of experience.

Oh well...... good luck, McBush.

I'm still voting for Obama, because I'm 200% anti McBush. And voting for a 3rd party candidate in this election would simply be another vote for McBush.

Hutchinson would have been a bad choice primarily due to the poor ratings congress has. That's going to ultimately hurt the all congress ticket of the Democrats I think.

[Scott50]

We are looking at total economic collapse of the United States sometime between 2020 and 2040. We simply cannot afford the various programs and promises the government has made, even if we raised taxes to 100% GDP. God help us if they pass National Health Care that will just decrease the time to government insolvency.

By starting to scale back now we can hopefully avert that situation. But only if we reign in spending, pay down the national debt, and return to the States the rightful power that is theirs.

The Founding Fathers were extremely wise men, they were statesmen not politicians. They realized that for many things it was not possible to shoehorn a one plan fits all solution. So they enumerated only certain very basic rights to the Federal Government and reserved all other power to the States. In the last 100 years of partisan bickering, populism politics, and grandstanding by R and D we have lost the way, we have tried to do that which was neither prudent nor productive and it is time to turn the clock back and go with that which was intended initially.

JRScott- hope you don't mind that I copied one of your posts from another thread that the mods had closed..

I agree that our country is headed towards financial demise with the next 20 years. I don't believe McCain or even the Messiah (Obama) can fix the status quo. I believe this crisis should be the number one issue in the election and neither candidates have addressed it. The american public doesn't want to hear about raising taxes or cutting govt programs.. I personally could care less about a candidates view on abortion or if they were a war hero.. I've always agreed with the view that the US is in a decline and will soon go the way of the Roman Empire..

[JRScott]

Well its interesting your analogy of the Roman Empire. We indeed are going down the road it did, in actually a much shorter span.

The economic situation of the nation I fully believe will be worse in 4 years rather than better regardless of whether it is McCain or Obama, basically looking at their economic plans they just don't get it. While many Americans call their plans drastic Baldwin (C) and Barr (L) actually do have the right direction towards true reform. Now even in the highly unlikely event either won the presidency I do not kid myself because without a like minded congress they will find it very difficult to do. Though I suppose they could always pull the FDR trick. Replace the Supreme Court and then have them declare certain things unconstituitional, assuming they could get nominees through Congress. (That's how we got the New Deal, the Supreme Court initially declared it unconstitutional, FDR replaced all of them by having Congress impose a federal age limit. The new Supreme Court found it Constitutional.....)

[jtrenton]

We are looking at total economic collapse of the United States sometime between 2020 and 2040.

Or earlier...

[Scott50]

I was impressed with Bob Barr (Libertarian party) when he was on the Glenn Beck show a couple of weeks ago.. I don't consider myself a republican or a democrat- I feel that both parties have been out of touch with whats really going on in this country. I personally would like us to get rid of political parties (Dems and Republicans)..

[JRScott]

I was impressed with Bob Barr (Libertarian party) when he was on the Glenn Beck show a couple of weeks ago.. I don't consider myself a republican or a democrat- I feel that both parties have been out of touch with whats really going on in this country. I personally would like us to get rid of political parties (Dems and Republicans)..

You should read George Washington's farewell address. He actually warned against partisanship and political parties. He is also the only president who was not part of a political party.

Some other interesting writings would be Jefferson's Kentucky Resolutions and Madison's Virginia Resolution. Although they primarily applied to the Alien and Sedition acts they could be largely applicable to what is occurring today.

[JRScott]

Or earlier...

Scot was quoting me there from another thread which is cool .

If National Health Care passes it'll be much sooner within a decade. Otherwise total collapse will not occur until I believe as I said between 2020 and 2040. Now there could be other factors that could hasten it.....major war, series of major disasters, etc.