[heretic]

do the right thing, vote McCain.

[phreak]

McCain would be rather refreshing, but its not going to happen.  That or Colin Powell

[Rictor]

Kerry is anti-war? And Hitler celebrated Passover.

I love it how the race has devolved into this

*points around*

McCain? I'm sorry if I insult your beliefs, but McCain has all the values of a Republican. Same as Kerry, which is probably why there is talk of him being Kerry's running mate. They're not dedicated to anything that the Dems should stand for, they are as deep in the corporate wallets as Dubya or Cheyney.

The only real candidates were Kucinich, Sharpton and Dean. The rest are a sad joke, Hillary included (especially her). Also, nuclear1, I think the Dean yell has been done to death by the media. Apparently Amercia doesn't want a candidate who is passionate, they want someone to tell them happy lies and smile a big fake grin.

[vyper]

Originally posted by Kazan


vyper: you're willing to sacrifice the constitution because you want to pay less it taxes - how dispicable

$100 out of a business owners pocket doesn't hurt them as much as $100 out of a blue collar workers pocket

Do I look American to you?

I come from a country that built an empire based on economics and the gun before America existed as it does today, so please spare me the morality talk.

Money is power, power provides security. Go figure.

[Nix]

Judging from how Kerry can't decide on what side of the issue he's on with everything, I wish Dean was still in the race.  Honestly, with the latest "ribbon toss" fiasco he's in right now, and how hard ABC(BS) is grilling him over lying to Peter Jennings, I'd rather see someone else in the Democrat spot than Kerry.  Then it'd actually look like a fair competition between Conservatives and Liberals.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Lonestar
You all honestly beleive that a vote will change things? You think people decide who will lead the US? LOL, if this is what the Democrats beleive, maybe the world isnt that bad off after all!

One thing I've never understood about the American electorial system. What's to stop republicans voting in the primaries for a candidate they know can't win and thereby screwing up the entire system?

[IceFire]

Originally posted by Flipside
Well, I suppose the only thing I would say is look at the whole team, not just the leader. In other words, it's not just a question of ****, it's the whole collection of them, from Colin Powell (And that CO-LIN, not CO-LAN, dammit), who is probably the most moderate of the bunch, to Rumsfield, who even **** Senior wouldn't let anywhere near his cabinet!

Yeah my name is Colin and I hate how they say his name...its terrible, its twisted, and it bears little resemblance to the real irish pronounciation (which as you pointed out is CO-LIN).  

Now we'll just have to work on getting all of you Americans to say 'Zed' instead of 'Zee'.

I find it ironic that **** is trying to bring "democracy" to Iraq when there are so many problems with democracy at home for the moment.  The whole terrorism scare has hurt of democratic values...and so did the Iraq war.

I remember on CNN one night before the war when they interviewed some women on the street and she was prostesting the people protesting the war...she said they were "traitors and they should be arrested and tried for treason."  I was utterly shocked and dismayed at that statement...apparently the right to free speech and peaceful protest isn't important at all to these people and yet thats what is supposed to be brought into Iraq.  It scares me...it really does.

[übermetroid]

How come it always seems like I have to vote for ht lesser of 2 evils?  That makes me sad.  

[Kazan]

 Also, nuclear1, I think the Dean yell has been done to death by the media. Apparently Amercia doesn't want a candidate who is passionate, they want someone to tell them happy lies and smile a big fake grin.

wow, rictor and I agree


--------

IceFire: you think that's bad.. delve deeply into what's really going on - the NeoConservative/Christian Right/Christian Fundamentalist movement

[ionia23]

Is there anyone running against **** on the Republican side?

[Su-tehp]

Originally posted by ionia23
Is there anyone running against Bush on the Republican side?

No, the Republicans know better than to let someone try to screw up Bush's chance of winning the republican primaries. Bush has no competitors, so far as I know.

There are rumors that Judge Moore (the "Ten Commandments appeals court judge who was removed from his post for refusing to get rid of an unconstitutional Ten Commandments display in the Alabama state courthouse) might run as the Constitutional party candidate, and so might siphon votes from Bush in the national election. But they're only rumors so far.

But Bush really needs someone to siphon votes from him the way Nader did to Gore (and will likely do to Kerry).

[Grey Wolf]

Speaking of Nader, since he's not running on the Green Party platform, how many states has he managed to get into the actual elections of?

[Janos]

Hey Kazan, you know what?
Even though I am not American,  I think that by sacking Kerry the democratic party would split apart. Who would they put in his place without looking totally ridiculous? I mean, if they did it, no matter what they'd do after that, they'd be totally screwed.

Also, throwing away candidate that they elected at least somewhat democratically:

[Kazan]

Janos: because it works in the same mamner as the electrial college

the EC is there to prevent people like **** from getting elected... they failed because our current implementation doesn't use independant electors

[Su-tehp]

Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
Speaking of Nader, since he's not running on the Green Party platform, how many states has he managed to get into the actual elections of?

I don't know, but I doubt it's very many. He's running as an independent so he's going to have a tough time getting on a lot of state ballots. Cry me a river...

[Janos]

Originally posted by Kazan
Janos: because it works in the same mamner as the electrial college

the EC is there to prevent people like **** from getting elected... they failed because our current implementation doesn't use independant electors

I lived under impression that USA's somewhat confusing-looking electorial system is actually quite carefully-triggered thing designed to represent the will of people in not-so-strictly-democratical way? Such that large cities - who quite often support more democratic people - don't get overrepresented in election? I don't know, please educate me. As well as of electorial methods of party candidates, like Kerry.

Kerry, BTW, seems quite a good presidential candidate, even though his opinions seem to change pretty fast. Perhaps because he's democratic and knows something about foreign policy?

[Kazan]

The Electoral College was origionally instituted as a buffer between the "unwashed masses" that may not know everything about a candidate because the speed of information

It basically was meant to buffer against people like Hitler being elected - the electors could be much better informed - just in practice it hasn't been implemented well, partisan electors pretty much defeat the system from ever doing what it's suppose to.

The nominations for the candidates internally in the party works much the same

[Grey Wolf]

You realize that the corporations and the people currently in power don't want it to be simpler? It would destroy their own power base. The government wants a fat, stupid, happy populace.

[Kazan]

more importantly they don't want thinking human beings walking around - they want people who will believe and do whatever they say

[karajorma]

Hmmm. The democratic party, knowing that they are facing the most unpopular president in years put up the most right wing candidate they have. One unpopular even with most democrats because they can't see much difference between him and the current president.

I'm starting to wonder if my theory above about republicans voting for Kerry in the primaries didn't have some validity.