I've chosen. McCain. Sign up here.

[Sean of the Thread]

There it is.

Of course there is plenty behind my decision but why bother here.

McCain people sign on this thread.

/enjoy

[Warriorbird]

I doubt there was much question.

[Sean of the Thread]

I honestly just made up my mind today.

<---registered democrat

[Warriorbird]

I so wouldn't have guessed that.

[Bobmuhthol]

Also a registered democrat. Also voting for McCain. Me and Sean2, we're tight.

[Mabus]

Independent that leans Libertarian, voting McCain.

No surprise, I am sure.

[Zarli]

I'm a registered Democrat, voting McCain as well. Though I have to add that I'm not happy with either of them. It was either McCain or write in my dog.

[Warriorbird]

And thus America. If you get your wish I hope you appreciate the results.

[Khariz]

<--- Another Libertarian voting for McCain.

[Drew]

And thus America. If you get your wish I hope you appreciate the results.


If you vote for Obama, the same applies to you.

[Hulkein]

Libertarian leaning Republican (AKA old style Republican) and I'm voting for McCain.

[BandaorICE]

Registered Demi. Voting McDonalds...I mean McCain.

[Jaimaltz]

<--- Another Libertarian voting for McCain.

I'll give you a million silvers if you can come up with one issue, backed by his voting record as well as his rhetoric, on which McCain supports the libertarian position.

[Mabus]

I'll give you a million silvers if you can come up with one issue, backed by his voting record as well as his rhetoric, on which McCain supports the libertarian position.
Gay marriage.

He is personally opposed (as is Obama), but does not support a US Constitutional amendment. He believes that it should be left up to each state to decide. He voted against the amendment in defiance of the GOP leadership and GW Bush, as seen in this 2004 CNN Article (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/14/mccain.marriage/). He has stated this position several times publicly.

While a full-blown Libertarian position would call for an end to all laws dealing with sexuality between consenting adults, the United States Libertarian Party position does also call for opposing any Constitutional amendments defining terms for personal, private relationships.

Payment:
Find another member of the forums that still plays GS, meet them, find the best, nicest, trying-to-role-play character in Ta'Vaalor that seems like they do not have much, and give the silvers to them. Role-play out that it was a lost relative that had told you of them, and that their dying wish was for them to receive the coin.

Don't bicker or renege.
:)

[Bobmuhthol]

ROFL

[Numbers]

Registered rastafarian. Voting Pee Wee.

[Snapp]

<---registered democrat
Only surprise in this thread.

[Clove]

Only surprise in this thread.That was quite the knowledge bomb, Sean2 dropped. One of those wait-wha? Moments.

[Jaimaltz]

Gay marriage.

He is personally opposed (as is Obama),

Well...sort of. He did publicly endorse an amendment to the California State Constitution to ban gay marriage there. You can make an argument that his position on gay marriage isn't libertarian from that alone, given that the libertarian position is that marriage should have nothing to do with government in the first place.


but does not support a US Constitutional amendment. He believes that it should be left up to each state to decide. He voted against the amendment in defiance of the GOP leadership and GW Bush, as seen in this 2004 CNN Article (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/14/mccain.marriage/). He has stated this position several times publicly.

I admit he does deserve some credit for that one.


While a full-blown Libertarian position would call for an end to all laws dealing with sexuality between consenting adults, the United States Libertarian Party position does also call for opposing any Constitutional amendments defining terms for personal, private relationships.

I agree, not full blown, but as far as his job as Senator of Arizona is concerned, he did take a libertarian position on the gay marriage issue.


Payment:
Find another member of the forums that still plays GS, meet them, find the best, nicest, trying-to-role-play character in Ta'Vaalor that seems like they do not have much, and give the silvers to them. Role-play out that it was a lost relative that had told you of them, and that their dying wish was for them to receive the coin.

That's a lot of work, and isn't part of my offer. I'm not spending 4 hours tracking people down, and roleplaying a ridiculous scenario that started out OOC to begin with. I can work for 15 minutes and buy a million silvers. If you want it, PM me and claim it, then you can take the 1 million silver and role play giving it away.

[Mabus]

If you want it, PM me and claim it, then you can take the 1 million silver and role play giving it away.
PM sent.

[Mabus]

PM sent.
Just wanted to post, he paid up.

Damn good sport. You deserve recognition of being truthful.

[Tisket]

McCain.

[Gan]

McCain

Biden's tap for Obama clinched it for me.

[Khariz]

I'll give you a million silvers if you can come up with one issue, backed by his voting record as well as his rhetoric, on which McCain supports the libertarian position.

WTF...

I'm not voting for McCain because his voting record supports the Libertarian agenda, ROFL! I'm voting for McCain because if I actually vote for the Libertarian candidate, I both waste my vote AND help Barack Obama to get voted in. Being an objectivist, and knowing that reality exists beyond how I would like it to, I must vote for John McCain.

Since the candidate of my choice CANNOT be president, I will help the one that I would RATHER have in office become president. It's a simple concept.

[Solkern]

Registered Democrat

Voting McCain

[TheEschaton]

I have to ask a serious question: All these registered Democrats who are voting for McCain - why did you register as a Democrat? Furthermore, how does a) Obama not fulfill these ideals and values, and b) McCain reflect these ideals and values which made you register Democrat?

-TheE-

[Solkern]

I just feel Obama isn't ready to lead, or can lead this country right now.
I also dislike his VP selection, which pushed me to go towards McCain.

[Mabus]

I have to ask a serious question: All these registered Democrats who are voting for McCain - why did you register as a Democrat? Furthermore, how does a) Obama not fulfill these ideals and values, and b) McCain reflect these ideals and values which made you register Democrat?

Just ask most Obama supporters. They will tell you that these people must be trailer-trash, racist malcontents supporting a 3rd Bush term.

Never mind Obama's lack of experience, never having any executive position, past (and present) affiliations, beliefs, political tactics or any of the myriad other reasons that anyone could find objectionable, just boil it down to a personal attack on the voter's character and/or intelligence.

That is the "new kind of politics" many are rejecting.

[TheEschaton]

That's not what I asked, dumbass. Nor is it what I believe. Your objections, secondly, perhaps raise another question: For those who would identify as Democrat (or Republican, I guess), is it more important to have someone who has ideas and values close to yours (which I'm making a perhaps naive assumption is why you registered as you did), or someone with executive experience (something John McCain doesn't have either)? For example, if Obama held all of McCain's ideas, and vice versa, but they had still led the lives they've led, would you vote for the inexperienced yet conservative Republican Obama, or the experienced yet "socialist" liberal McCain? Oh, and I love that you paint the personal attack as a weapon of Obama, a tactic which has been perfected, and performed daily, by the right.

As to Solkern's response: a) What about Obama indicates his unreadiness to lead (edit: in comparison to his counterpart, McCain), and b) Joe Biden has been, if you will, a "typical" Democrat in the Senate for the past THIRTY SIX YEARS - what is it about his selection that bothers you, if you supposedly identify with the Democrat Party?

My feeling is that some people have no idea what the parties stand for, as Obama and Biden are rather straight-from-the-mold Democrat. Maybe less so for Obama, but definitely Biden.

-TheE-

[Warriorbird]

They said Reagan didn't have experience. Lincoln had the exact same legislative background as Obama.

If McCain wins it is due to quality campaigning and Obama campaign missteps. I liked what he'd done right up until the point he threw Wes Clark under the bus when he was prepped to give McCain some serious body blows.

[Mabus]

or someone with executive experience (something John McCain doesn't have either)?
McCain was a US Navy Captain, and also chaired the Senate Commerce Committee (you could argue that was legislative, even though he was the chair of that powerful committee), while Obama has less experience then a kid running a popsicle stand in comparison. What has Obama ran other then his campaigns? Did he ever even manage a Burger King?

Hell, I am a "community activist", I guess that makes me as experienced as Obama. Vote for me!

[Mabus]

They said Reagan didn't have experience.
Reagan? He was president of the Screen Actors Guild and (oh, guess this isn't executive...) Governor of California.

[ViridianAsp]

I've actually backed voting for McCain for awhile, I'm extremely pleased to cast a vote for him.

Registered Independent voting for McCain.

[Warriorbird]

So... Abraham Lincoln and Reagan were totally terrible Presidents. Really!

I'm actually annoyed that Obama went with such an insider as VP.

[Atlanteax]

McCain, obviously

[Kembal]

I'm actually fairly surprised by Sean2's choice of McCain, considering that he liked Obama's speech on race.

I suppose events since then have changed that. (and yeah, Sean2 saying he was a Dem surprised me as well.)

[Daniel]

McCain

Biden's tap for Obama clinched it for me.

rofl. Self delusion at its finest. You were no more likely to vote for Obama than rush limbaugh was.

[g++]

Ill be voting for McCain but I dont really care who wins, I just want to visit my local middle school and rob them of a sticker.

[Parkbandit]

McCain

Biden's tap for Obama clinched it for me.

Why would you make that decision before McCain picks his though? He could get someone crazy like Hucklebee...

I'm waiting. I think there's still "HOPE" that McCain fucks up his pick.

[Parkbandit]

I have to ask a serious question: All these registered Democrats who are voting for McCain - why did you register as a Democrat? Furthermore, how does a) Obama not fulfill these ideals and values, and b) McCain reflect these ideals and values which made you register Democrat?

-TheE-

Let's be perfectly honest.. McCain is closer to being a real Democrat than Obama is.

Well, unless you buy into socialism being the new Democratic Party..

[Parkbandit]

So... Abraham Lincoln and Reagan were totally terrible Presidents. Really!

I'm actually annoyed that Obama went with such an insider as VP.

I really think that was one of the worst picks in recent memory as VP. Biden brings nothing to the ticket imo, except inside Washington experience.. something Obama has kept as the centerpiece of his platform. "We need Change in Washington, so I'm bringing someone who's been there over thirty years"


Obama looks like he was trying to take this pick to somehow gain 'experience' or ability to lead on his ticket.. it only ruined his platform and put his inexperience under a bright spotlight.

[Parkbandit]

rofl. Self delusion at its finest. You were no more likely to vote for Obama than rush limbaugh was.

Is it in the same realm of self delusion when you said Obama lost your vote by throwing Wright under the bus? Kinda like that?

:rofl:

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/L/2/2/obama-and-wright.jpg

[TheEschaton]

Let's be perfectly honest.. McCain is closer to being a real Democrat than Obama is.

Well, unless you buy into socialism being the new Democratic Party..

Since when has the Democratic party not been about unions, strong centralized government, and support for welfare programs? Not for the last 80 years, almost. What's so different now?

Is it because he isn't a "Third Way" Democrat like Bill Clinton? Bill Clinton was the exception to the Democratic party, not the rule.

[Sean of the Thread]

That was quite the knowledge bomb, Sean2 dropped. One of those wait-wha? Moments.

Guys don't be too surprised it was the govt's fuck up... again.. go figure. I had it fixed in time for the primary back to republican :P They've been trying to register me as NP or Democrat everytime I move precincts for some fucked up reason.

I voted for Mitt remember.

[Gan]

rofl. Self delusion at its finest. You were no more likely to vote for Obama than rush limbaugh was.

ROFL

Assumption at its finest. Its great that you think you know the mind of someone simply by how you view their posts or participation here on these boards. I hope you dont use this style of intuition in your present line of work - else you wont last very long.

[CrystalTears]

Unless McCain pulls a Huckabee out of his ass, he'll have my vote.

[Gan]

Why would you make that decision before McCain picks his though? He could get someone crazy like Hucklebee...

I'm waiting. I think there's still "HOPE" that McCain fucks up his pick.

If McCain chooses Huckabee then I would have to reconsider my ruling out Obama/Biden. Thats about the worst case scenario for McCain and I'm hopefully optimistic he wont go there.

[Gan]

Is it because he isn't a "Third Way" Democrat like Bill Clinton? Bill Clinton was the exception to the Democratic party, not the rule.

QFT. Bill made a great centrist Republican. ;)

[Clove]

If McCain chooses Huckabee then I would have to reconsider my ruling out Obama/Biden. Thats about the worst case scenario for McCain and I'm hopefully optimistic he wont go there.


Unless McCain pulls a Huckabee out of his ass, he'll have my vote.Ditto. Unless I see an equally or more retarded VP choice from McCain, McCain has my vote at this point.

Registered Independent who votes Republican, Green and Democrat historically.

[Hulkein]

I really hope he doesn't choose Huckabee.

[Parkbandit]

I really hope he doesn't choose Huckabee.

Come on.. think of the entertainment value!

I hope he does.

[Daniel]

ROFL

Assumption at its finest. Its great that you think you know the mind of someone simply by how you view their posts or participation here on these boards. I hope you dont use this style of intuition in your present line of work - else you wont last very long.

Lol. Get real. You act as if anyone on these boards ever bought the notion that you were some type of moderate. If you weren't repudiated by your own party you wouldn't have even attempted to delude yourself into thinking you'd vote for anything else.

I'm glad you're over acting like a jilted lover and embraced the fact that you're a dyed in the wool republican.

[Ashliana]

Tim Kaine would've been the better choice for Obama--he matched him perfectly and with complimentary additions. New on the scene, but with bipartisan history, executive experience and from a traditionally more conservative/swing state.

Instead, we get Biden. A very "established," New England liberal, albeit with lots of foreign relations experience. Meh. I'm still more excited about Obama's campaign, shifting to the center than I am about McCain's, shifting to cater to the nutball-right.

If McCain picks Romney or Huckabee, it's over for me. If he picks someone else, I'll at least consider him.

[Gan]

Lol. Get real. You act as if anyone on these boards ever bought the notion that you were some type of moderate. If you weren't repudiated by your own party you wouldn't have even attempted to delude yourself into thinking you'd vote for anything else.

I'm glad you're over acting like a jilted lover and embraced the fact that you're a dyed in the wool republican.
If you only knew what real was...

I support pro-choice. !=Dyed in the wool Republican.
I support gay-marriage. !=Dyed in the wool Republican.
I do not support the religious right. !=Dyed in the wool Republican.

Here, I'll leave you with one of my many quotes demonstrating that I have been on the fence with regards to whom I wish to vote for. However, if you wish to continue to ignore these words and continue to interpret (wrongly I might add) my other posts where I'm critical of Obama (gee, I wonder why I have been focusing on him - could it be because I need more clarification on where he stands?), feel free to do so. Just dont get mad when I laugh (non-humorously) at your ignorance.

Let me give you a newsflash Einstein - I'm not a straight ticket voter and I definatly dont ascribe to the GOP party line 100%. Yes, I lean GOP on my issues - and have demonstrated reasons why multiple times here. But that does not mean that I have not considered voting for Obama in the recent past.

You know, this brings up an interesting issue and one specifically that I'm going through this election season.

For all intents and purposes I'm more a Republican than a Democrat if one were to adhere to lables. However, I am not a straight ticket voter and I disagree with some of the previous GOP platform issues (and possibly this election season's issues once they're finalized/adopted) while agreeing to some of the platform issues of the DNC.

The issue is voting for the candidate that not necessarily is best for me or my issues but on a larger scale who will be the best candidate/thing for this country at this point in time in history. Do we need a Democrat or a Republican president right now and in the next 4 years... thats my delimma. And this does not only represent our position domestically but now globally, moreseo than ever now that we are in a global information/market age.

This is why I'm undecided. This is why I consider myself an independant - because I refuse to be forced into voting for a party ideal/platform over the bigger picture as best as I can interpret it.

As far as the Ilvane nonsense, she was outed early on because she appeared (to me at least) as racist in her (illogical) reasoning for supporting Hillary and her platform up until and if she would be defeated by Obama - then she would vote for McCain. Thats how I interpreted her posts, her reasonings, and how I posted. I'm really suprised that its come up again - that horse has been beat to death quite a while ago.

If the shit you spew when you do troll here was even remotely funny I might give you the benefit of a doubt. As it stands now - I consider you even more pathetic than Backlash. Mostly because even Backlash recognizes from time to time when he's being an idiot. You, on the other hand, still have to rely on others to point that out for you. ;)

[Daniel]

If you only knew what real was...

I support pro-choice. !=Dyed in the wool Republican.
I support gay-marriage. !=Dyed in the wool Republican.
I do not support the religious right. !=Dyed in the wool Republican.

Here, I'll leave you with one of my many quotes demonstrating that I have been on the fence with regards to whom I wish to vote for. However, if you wish to continue to ignore these words and continue to interpret (wrongly I might add) my other posts where I'm critical of Obama (gee, I wonder why I have been focusing on him - could it be because I need more clarification on where he stands?), feel free to do so. Just dont get mad when I laugh (non-humorously) at your ignorance.

Let me give you a newsflash Einstein - I'm not a straight ticket voter and I definatly dont ascribe to the GOP party line 100%. Yes, I lean GOP on my issues - and have demonstrated reasons why multiple times here. But that does not mean that I have not considered voting for Obama in the recent past.


If the shit you spew when you do troll here was even remotely funny I might give you the benefit of a doubt. As it stands now - I consider you even more pathetic than Backlash. Mostly because even Backlash recognizes from time to time when he's being an idiot. You, on the other hand, still have to rely on others to point that out for you. ;)


Hey. By all means, keep telling yourself that buddy. I'm sure it makes you feel better about yourself.

[Parkbandit]

Hey. By all means, keep telling yourself that buddy. I'm sure it makes you feel better about yourself.

You should call him a racist next.. that might get him!

[Ashliana]

::facepalm::

[Gan]

Hey. By all means, keep telling yourself that buddy. I'm sure it makes you feel better about yourself.

Great response. Too bad it completely fails to validate your claim. You can keep thinking that I'm deluding myself all you want. The words I'm on record for saying demonstrate quite the opposite. But hey, if that gives you an excuse to continue to hump my leg for attention - then more power to you.

:clap:

[BigWorm]

Great response. Too bad it completely fails to validate your claim. You can keep thinking that I'm deluding myself all you want. The words I'm on record for saying demonstrate quite the opposite. But hey, if that gives you an excuse to continue to hump my leg for attention - then more power to you.

:clap:

I didn't think for even a fraction of a second that you would ever end up voting for Obama.

[Daniel]

Great response. Too bad it completely fails to validate your claim. You can keep thinking that I'm deluding myself all you want. The words I'm on record for saying demonstrate quite the opposite. But hey, if that gives you an excuse to continue to hump my leg for attention - then more power to you.

:clap:

Yea. Absolutely, your word is enough to mitigate my claims that you are full of shit.

That makes a whole lot of sense.

[CrystalTears]

I didn't think for even a fraction of a second that you would ever end up voting for Obama.
I did. Then again I too was deciding between the two.

[Gan]

I didn't think for even a fraction of a second that you would ever end up voting for Obama.
That does not suprise me since you and I rarely if ever agree on anything political.


Yea. Absolutely, your word is enough to mitigate my claims that you are full of shit.

That makes a whole lot of sense.
Yes, because you know me so well personally that you dont have to use any knowledge garnered on these boards to make your famously incorrect deduction. Gosh, I didnt see that one coming... /sarcasm

[Gan]

I did. Then again I too was deciding between the two.

Careful. They'll call you a cheerleader again.

:rah:

[CrystalTears]

I've been called worse. :D

[Daniel]

That does not suprise me since you and I rarely if ever agree on anything political.


Yes, because you know me so well personally that you dont have to use any knowledge garnered on these boards to make your famously incorrect deduction. Gosh, I didnt see that one coming... /sarcasm

Famously incorrect?

Okay. Whether or not you believe your own bullshit is inconsequential to me. Just don't be surprised when I break out the roflcopter anytime you try to pass it off to anyone else.

[Gan]

I've been called worse. :D

Oi vey

[Gan]

Famously incorrect?

Okay. Whether or not you believe your own bullshit is inconsequential to me. Just don't be surprised when I break out the roflcopter anytime you try to pass it off to anyone else.

Which you have failed horribly at. Good job. Life is rough as a troll huh?
Thought I'd feed you back one of your own lines.

I'm not here to try to impress nor persuade you. So what you do is really beyond my ability to care other than the fun I have in proving you incorrect. Thanks for the hours of entertainment. :yes:

[Daniel]

rofl @ you thinking you've proven anything.

[Gan]

rofl @ you thinking you've proven anything.

ROFL @ you thinking I havnt.

ROFL @ you thinking you have proven anything.

See, I can do that too.

Feel free to put your money where your mouth is and offer up some proof of your claim.

[Daniel]

I haven't claimed to have proven anything. I've stated that I believe you were\are full of shit about having any propensity to vote for Obama. That position has been backed up by several people in this thread and in PM's.

Either way, only you know for sure what you were going to do. If you want to be all defensive and butt hurt about it, feel free. It only makes it funnier for me.

[Parkbandit]

Either way, only you know for sure what you were going to do.

I guess you just proved yourself incorrect.

Well played.

http://www.uploadthis.co.uk/uploads/Under_ware/lance%20is%20a%20dumbass!.jpg

[Ashliana]

Moving away from the trainwreck this thread has derailed into--like TheE, I'm skeptical to the people saying "registered democrat, voting McCain."

What are the democratic ideals that somehow John McCain embodies, more than Obama?

Civil liberties? Nope. Support for the middle-class? Nope. Support for personal autonomy--abortion rights, gay marriage? Definitely not. He's flip-flopped repeatedly on abortion, and has supported direct constitutional (at the state level) bans on gay marriage. Energy policy? Better than he used to be, thanks to flipping, but still much more of a backseat approach.

If anything, for a "registered democrat," Biden was a good choice. I still would've prefered Kaine, but to each his own. McCain, while immeasurably better than Bush, voting for him--especially if/when he picks someone like Huckabee or Romney as his #2, is still a poor choice in comparison.

[Bobmuhthol]

I'm pretty sure you can't be wrong about being a registered Democrat.

[Ashliana]

The point is that Obama pretty accurately reflects the stated goals of the Democratic party. So, if you're a registered Democrat, what issue exactly do you have with Obama, that would drive you to McCain, a candidate that pretty much has directly opposite positions of the Democratic platform?

[TheEschaton]

I'm pretty sure you can be an idiot, though, in registering for a political party which doesn't reflect your actual beliefs.

[Bobmuhthol]

Obama is excessively (socially) liberal for me. It definitely doesn't help that Joe Biden is as well.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrat_Coalition

^ Obama is very absent from the list of Senate members. Yet John Edwards, who I would vote for over McCain, is very much a member.

Now McCain just has to pick up Lieberman as his running mate.

[Khariz]

I'm pretty sure you can be an idiot, though, in registering for a political party which doesn't reflect your actual beliefs.

Yep! Hell, I am such an idiot. I've just never bothered to change my registration. I'm registered republican, but...eh...should swap to Libertarian, I just don't feel like making the effort.

[Daniel]

I guess you just proved yourself incorrect.



You're on a roll today.

Good show.

[Gan]

I haven't claimed to have proven anything. I've stated that I believe you were\are full of shit about having any propensity to vote for Obama. That position has been backed up by several people in this thread and in PM's.

Either way, only you know for sure what you were going to do. If you want to be all defensive and butt hurt about it, feel free. It only makes it funnier for me.

LOL

I guess you're still butthurt over me calling you an Obamamaniac.

PS. Validation from those who disagree with me politically really doesnt count. ;) And LOL at you receiving PM's of people who disagree, I'll just say consider the source from those. LOL indeed.

[BigWorm]

The possibility of Gan voting for Obama was about the same as that of TheE voting for McCain.

[Sean]

I generally respect Gan's opinion despite not agreeing with his political viewpoint on some issues. I do considering him fairly socially progressive while leaning to the right fiscally.

That being said based on the threads he's started and his responses to other peoples commentary on Obama I never believed Obama was really in the running for his vote.

[Parkbandit]

You're on a roll today.

Good show.

Hey now, right back at you. I've only found two posts by you that are factually incorrect and stupid. That's well below your average.

Maybe there's "Hope" you can "Change"?

I doubt it.. maybe you're just off your game.

http://www.themadhat.com/images/thumbsup.jpg

[TheEschaton]

You know why they're called the "New Democrats"? Because they're not traditional Democrats by any means. Joe Lieberman has given up almost every single traditional Democrat position he held.

-TheE-

[crb]

I'll give you a million silvers if you can come up with one issue, backed by his voting record as well as his rhetoric, on which McCain supports the libertarian position.
More or less every economic policy, and most social ones.

In general, the only two ways the republican party platform differs from the libertarian party is abortion, gay marriage, and half on foreign policy.

Democrats differ on

affirmative action
various equal rights legislation (ada etc)
taxes
trade
regulation
government spending
unions
education
healthcare
etc etc

[crb]

Since when has the Democratic party not been about unions, strong centralized government, and support for welfare programs? Not for the last 80 years, almost. What's so different now?

Is it because he isn't a "Third Way" Democrat like Bill Clinton? Bill Clinton was the exception to the Democratic party, not the rule.
Bill Clinton served 2 terms.

Maybe the democratic party should take that as a sign, this is a center-right nation, and governing from the far left isn't attractive. Even Obama, if he didn't have charisma, would be falling flat on his face purely based on his platform.

[Ashliana]

More or less every economic policy, and most social ones.

In general, the only two ways the republican party platform differs from the libertarian party is abortion, gay marriage, and half on foreign policy.

Democrats differ on

affirmative action
various equal rights legislation (ada etc)
taxes
trade
regulation
government spending
unions
education
healthcare
etc etc

Maybe in your fantasy land. In case you hadn't noticed, the Republicans are pro-spend, anti-tax. In other words, pro-enormous deficit. They support government invasion of your private life in the name of security, and support pro-limited rights legislation--very much against a libertarian mindset.

[crb]

Civil liberties? Nope. Support for the middle-class?

Who doesn't support the middle class?

Does anyone run on a platform of fucking over the middle class?

Its like abortion, everyone is pro-life or pro-choice, it is for or against abortion that you differentiates you, no one hates life or hates choice. They're just euphemisms.

No one out there says "lets raise taxes on the middle class." Well... democrats do sometimes, so often tax increases are to said be "for the wealthy only" but they end up being on the middle class. But really, no one campaigns on such a thing.

Because republicans favor a government that does not waste taxpayer dollars and because republicans favor tax, trade, and economic policy that put GDP growth ahead of wealth redistribution does not make them enemies of the middle class. A bunch of middle class autoworkers in red states throughout the South have jobs because of pro business policies in their states while a blue state like Michigan here has the nation's highest unemployment because of antibusiness policies.

Being pro business or pro economic growth isn't being anti-middle class.

[Gan]

The possibility of Gan voting for Obama was about the same as that of TheE voting for McCain.
Again, thats not a shocker coming from someone who agrees with my political position very little if at all. Its a matter of perception. Your perception of my politics, issues, and candidates I favor.


I generally respect Gan's opinion despite not agreeing with his political viewpoint on some issues. I do considering him fairly socially progressive while leaning to the right fiscally.

That being said based on the threads he's started and his responses to other peoples commentary on Obama I never believed Obama was really in the running for his vote.
The first part is accurate.
The last paragraph just illustrates how little we actually can guess, perceive, or interpret how people really feel, especially when the only thing we have to go off of is a one dimensional perception of that individual based on their activity here on the PC (or in game). I've been guilty of that with TheE, Ilvane, and in calling Daniel an obamamaniac. That being said - when they 'say' outright that they are or are not voting for someone then I would suffice to say that up until that point it was just conjecture. At that point they have clearly stated their intentions. Attempting to 'guess' their intentions beforehand is simply that - a guess.


When I say I'm undecided then I'm just that - undecided.
When I say I'm considering voting for Obama then I'm seriously considering casting my vote for Obama. Regardless of my position on the preceinct RNC committee (I was asked to join, I did not seek that position, nor was my vote traded for that responsibility).
When I say I'm an independant - I'm an independant. Meaning my vote is not spoken for by any party.
And now, in this thread I'm saying that Obama has lost my vote due to his selection of a running mate. I consider Biden only a half a notch better than Hillary - whom I've stated many times would lose my vote in a heartbeat if she were on the DNC ticket.As Clove said to me in a PM. The only thing that would even make me consider voting for the Obama/Biden ticket is if McCain put Huckabee, Hillary or Cynthia McKinney on his ticket. (I added the Huckabee part Clove!).

Regardless what you choose to believe - the only thing you have to go off of, if you dont know me personally, is what I say here.

And in the long run, even that does not really matter much - because we all know the utility of arguing with people over the internet is...

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/images/hehe/fuckedup/arguing_over_internet.jpg

[Ashliana]

Who doesn't support the middle class?

Does anyone run on a platform of fucking over the middle class?

Its like abortion, everyone is pro-life or pro-choice, it is for or against abortion that you differentiates you, no one hates life or hates choice. They're just euphemisms.

No one out there says "lets raise taxes on the middle class." Well... democrats do sometimes, so often tax increases are to said be "for the wealthy only" but they end up being on the middle class. But really, no one campaigns on such a thing.

Because republicans favor a government that does not waste taxpayer dollars and because republicans favor tax, trade, and economic policy that put GDP growth ahead of wealth redistribution does not make them enemies of the middle class. A bunch of middle class autoworkers in red states throughout the South have jobs because of pro business policies in their states while a blue state like Michigan here has the nation's highest unemployment because of antibusiness policies.

Being pro business or pro economic growth isn't being anti-middle class.

Some people are actively anti-choice. They want to restrict the inherent freedom any person has over their own body; they're not just "anti-abortion." There are plenty of ways to reduce abortion without getting the government to restrict a right.

As for the fiscal matters--I'm sorry, but you're speaking of an outdated, no-longer-existing Republican party. Republicans are not the champions of fiscal responsibility--they had control of all 3 branches of government for almost a decade, and have run this country so deep into the red it's going to take ages to break free from, and our GDP growth has slowed to an absolute crawl.

The wealthy share a larger burden of their tax in our current system, than the other two classes. Whether or not that's right or you believe it, reducing the share they pay comparatively increases the share that the middle class is paying. We've had eight years of the so-called "trickle-down" economics of reduced taxes on the wealthy, and as a result of these so-called pro-business policies, including our abandonment of regulation and massive cutbacks in the employees of virtually every official regulatory body, our GDP growth is miniscule.

[Parkbandit]

Maybe in your fantasy land. In case you hadn't noticed, the Republicans are pro-spend, anti-tax. In other words, pro-enormous deficit. They support government invasion of your private life in the name of security, and support pro-limited rights legislation--very much against a libertarian mindset.


Republicans might be, conservatives certainly are not though.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<You know why they're called the "New Democrats"? Because they're not traditional Democrats by any means. Joe Lieberman has given up almost every single traditional Democrat position he held.>>

I guess I should leave the Democratic Party because I support "not traditional Democrats."

[crb]

That's not what I asked, dumbass. Nor is it what I believe. Your objections, secondly, perhaps raise another question: For those who would identify as Democrat (or Republican, I guess), is it more important to have someone who has ideas and values close to yours (which I'm making a perhaps naive assumption is why you registered as you did), or someone with executive experience (something John McCain doesn't have either)? For example, if Obama held all of McCain's ideas, and vice versa, but they had still led the lives they've led, would you vote for the inexperienced yet conservative Republican Obama, or the experienced yet "socialist" liberal McCain? Oh, and I love that you paint the personal attack as a weapon of Obama, a tactic which has been perfected, and performed daily, by the right.

As to Solkern's response: a) What about Obama indicates his unreadiness to lead (edit: in comparison to his counterpart, McCain), and b) Joe Biden has been, if you will, a "typical" Democrat in the Senate for the past THIRTY SIX YEARS - what is it about his selection that bothers you, if you supposedly identify with the Democrat Party?

My feeling is that some people have no idea what the parties stand for, as Obama and Biden are rather straight-from-the-mold Democrat. Maybe less so for Obama, but definitely Biden.

-TheE-
I am not a registered democrat, but I'll answer your question anyways.

Rudy Guiliani, the pro choice, pro gay rights, low taxes, small government, free trade, strong national defense, strong law and order, republican was the candidate that most matched my personal beliefs, but I voted for McCain in the primary (also voted for him in 2000). Because of his character and judgement. I don't agree with all of his positions, but I trust his character and judgement and I am tired of partisanship in government and he has worked across the aisle for compromise more than any other politician I know. His campaign ads saying he puts country ahead of party resonate with me, because I've always believed that of him going back to when I voted for him in 2000.

The dude is frank and honest and sometime that gets him into trouble, but at least he is real. I'm so sick of politicians who have a black and white view of the world. For instance right now, by and large democrats are saying Obama can do no wrong (not democratic voters, party officials and elected people), anything he does or says is brilliant, because they don't want to seem weak. McCain has people saying that of him as well, of course, but McCain, himself, has never been that guy. Which is why he was, up until 18 months ago, the Democrat's favorite Republican, because he would attack his own party and Bush.

If Obama is elected I don't think he will govern with any integrity his first term, I think, much in like he has been doing nothing that isn't politically motivated since 2002, he will continue to focus on doing what is best for him, and his party, in the 2010 and 2012 elections, rather than on doing what is best for the country.

John McCain wouldn't, he would always put the country first (hence why so many in the GOP don't like him). Last summer he supported the surge when it was extremely unpopular, saying he would rather lose an election than the war, and he almost did lose the election then, his campaign imploded. But, that showed integrity, and courage.

Barack Obama, on the otherhand, is so attached to his ideals that he picked a running mate that is almost a carbon copy of his opponent. He wants to change washington, says John McCains experience is a weakness, then picks someone who has been in there just as long, who also happens to have voted for the Iraq war? Take that, FISA, etc, Barack is a chameleon, and I don't want someone so malleable as president.

Sure, McCain does his share of pandering, but not on such core issues, and he isn't afraid to say when he changes his mind, or admit his mistakes. We had a president who failed to admit his mistakes, he was George Bush, and he waited until 2006 to change strategy in Iraq. Obama throughout the entire campaign has been reluctant to admit to any mistakes other than Tony Rezko. He dragged his feet on wright to a ridiculous degree, every foreign policy gaffe he made he commited to it like a method actor, going all the way once it was out of his mouth. Even on the surge, he sat there with Katie Couric saying "The additional troops fought bravely and violence is down." but refused to get nailed down to saying "the surge worked" he slipped around having to say the word "surge" like a masterful politician (which he is) as he didn't want to have to admit his mistake in opposing it.

So, despite the fact that McCain doesn't 100% match me policy wise, I vote for him because of his character and his commitment to our country.

I would even vote for him if he chose Huckabee... and just cross my fingers that he doesn't die while in office. If the Huckster had one the primary though, I would be voting Barr I think, and I may have even considered Hillary.

[Gan]

As for the fiscal matters--I'm sorry, but you're speaking of an outdated, no-longer-existing Republican party. Republicans are not the champions of fiscal responsibility--they had control of all 3 branches of government for almost a decade, and have run this country so deep into the red it's going to take ages to break free from, and our GDP growth has slowed to an absolute crawl.

The same thing was said about the debt Regan and Bush Sr. left us in. And look what was managed in a span of 10 years.

Other than that, I agree that the GOP has not followed any model of fiscal responsibility in a long long time. There was a purpose for that though, although I have doubts as to the ends effectively justifying the means.

[Daniel]

LOL

I guess you're still butthurt over me calling you an Obamamaniac.

PS. Validation from those who disagree with me politically really doesnt count. ;) And LOL at you receiving PM's of people who disagree, I'll just say consider the source from those. LOL indeed.

Lol @ the ridiculousness of saying in jest that democrats wouldn't ever believe that I'd vote democrat because I don't have democratic political values.

[Daniel]

Hey now, right back at you. I've only found two posts by you that are factually incorrect and stupid. That's well below your average.

Maybe there's "Hope" you can "Change"?

I doubt it.. maybe you're just off your game.

http://www.themadhat.com/images/thumbsup.jpg

The bubble of self delusional that you live in is astounding.

[crb]

Some people are actively anti-choice. They want to restrict the inherent freedom any person has over their own body; they're not just "anti-abortion." There are plenty of ways to reduce abortion without getting the government to restrict a right.

As for the fiscal matters--I'm sorry, but you're speaking of an outdated, no-longer-existing Republican party. Republicans are not the champions of fiscal responsibility--they had control of all 3 branches of government for almost a decade, and have run this country so deep into the red it's going to take ages to break free from, and our GDP growth has slowed to an absolute crawl.

The wealthy share a larger burden of their tax in our current system, than the other two classes. Whether or not that's right or you believe it, reducing the share they pay comparatively increases the share that the middle class is paying. We've had eight years of the so-called "trickle-down" economics of reduced taxes on the wealthy, and as a result of these so-called pro-business policies, including our abandonment of regulation and massive cutbacks in the employees of virtually every official regulatory body, our GDP growth is miniscule.
Actually no, are you going to blame Bush for subprime borrowers buying more home than they can afford? That is the fuck up with our GDP right now.

If you go back further though, looking at the first 7 years of Bush, factoring in 9/11, we'd had really good GDP growth, somewhere in 2003 or 2004 we had the highest growth in a quarter in 20 years.


Our GDP growth has been pretty good overall through Bush's term, and blaming Bush for the current problem is like blaming Clinton for the dot com meltdown. Really, neither president had anything to do with it.



Whether or not that's right or you believe it, reducing the share they pay comparatively increases the share that the middle class is paying

Which Bush never did, by the way, the share the wealthy pay is higher now. But don't like facts stop you.

And in anycase, that comparison also doesn't factor in government spending, if you cut spending, everyone can pay less.

Oh, and by the way, when looking at things like record deficits etc you need to look at them as percentage of GDP, not in absolute dollar amounts not indexed to inflation.

But ya... we have not had a lot of fiscal restraint in Washington in the last 8 years... only a few voices, such as Coburn & McCain, have been raised in opposition to the rampant spending.

[Daniel]

Coburn is a complete joke.

[BigWorm]

Coburn is a complete joke.

I don't know what could make you feel that way.


The gay community has infiltrated the very centers of power in every area across this country, and they wield extreme power... That agenda is the greatest threat to our freedom that we face today. Why do you think we see the rationalization for abortion and multiple sexual partners? That's a gay agenda.

Just think if they actually got a laser!

[Ashliana]

Actually no, are you going to blame Bush for subprime borrowers buying more home than they can afford? That is the fuck up with our GDP right now.

If you go back further though, looking at the first 7 years of Bush, factoring in 9/11, we'd had really good GDP growth, somewhere in 2003 or 2004 we had the highest growth in a quarter in 20 years.


Our GDP growth has been pretty good overall through Bush's term, and blaming Bush for the current problem is like blaming Clinton for the dot com meltdown. Really, neither president had anything to do with it.



Which Bush never did, by the way, the share the wealthy pay is higher now. But don't like facts stop you.

And in anycase, that comparison also doesn't factor in government spending, if you cut spending, everyone can pay less.

Oh, and by the way, when looking at things like record deficits etc you need to look at them as percentage of GDP, not in absolute dollar amounts not indexed to inflation.

But ya... we have not had a lot of fiscal restraint in Washington in the last 8 years... only a few voices, such as Coburn & McCain, have been raised in opposition to the rampant spending.

I'm going to blame Bush, yes, and the Republican-controlled Congress, for not ordering more regulation of the financial markets which created the subprime mess. It's not just the people borrowing.

These are financial institutions whose entire business model is based around their ability to predict risk vs. reward. They failed--miserably--and should've been allowed to dissolve. Socialized risk for corporate profit, as we have now after bailing out Freddie and Frannie, makes very little sense.

Looking at the national debt as a measure of GDP is only one ways of measuring the debt; we're still at record, absolute levels with an ever-increasing deficit that the Republicans created and neither side has done anything to correct.

[Parkbandit]

I'm going to blame Bush, yes, and the Republican-controlled Congress, for not ordering more regulation of the financial markets which created the subprime mess. It's not just the people borrowing.

These are financial institutions whose entire business model is based around their ability to predict risk vs. reward. They failed--miserably--and should've been allowed to dissolve. Socialized risk for corporate profit, as we have now after bailing out Freddie and Frannie, makes very little sense.

Looking at the national debt as a measure of GDP is only one ways of measuring the debt; we're still at record, absolute levels with an ever-increasing deficit that the Republicans created and neither side has done anything to correct.


So you do blame Clinton for the .com fiasco? And the lax regulations that allowed companies like Enron and MCI to collapse?

[Ashliana]

Except that during Clinton's time, the legislature was still dominated by the Republicans?

[Parkbandit]

Except that during Clinton's time, the legislature was still dominated by the Republicans?


:rofl:

How convenient for you and your transparent bias.

[Ashliana]

I know! Reality is such a convenient disguise for lies, PB! You should try making use of it. :O

[Parkbandit]

I know! Reality is such a convenient disguise for lies, PB! You should try making use of it. :O

JUST so I understand you correctly...

Bush (and the pre-2006 Congress) is responsible for the Mortgage bailout / Bear Sterns collapse.

Only the Republican controlled Congress is responsible for the .com meltdown and the Enron / MCI collapse.

Is that what you are stating?

What reality is it you are using this time anyway?

[crb]

I'm going to blame Bush, yes, and the Republican-controlled Congress, for not ordering more regulation of the financial markets which created the subprime mess. It's not just the people borrowing.

These are financial institutions whose entire business model is based around their ability to predict risk vs. reward. They failed--miserably--and should've been allowed to dissolve. Socialized risk for corporate profit, as we have now after bailing out Freddie and Frannie, makes very little sense.

Looking at the national debt as a measure of GDP is only one ways of measuring the debt; we're still at record, absolute levels with an ever-increasing deficit that the Republicans created and neither side has done anything to correct.
So you don't then blame the clinton administration for encouraging banks to start lending to subprime borrowers (since many of them are minorities, it was justified with the "equality" lobby) as the seed of the problem? It is bush's fault for not seeing the errors in these clinton policies and fixing them? Fuck Bush, it isn't like nothing happened that was distracting, right?

I'm sorry, you can't make Bush the scapegoat for everything you dislike.

[Daniel]

So you don't then blame the clinton administration for encouraging banks to start lending to subprime borrowers (since many of them are minorities, it was justified with the "equality" lobby) as the seed of the problem? It is bush's fault for not seeing the errors in these clinton policies and fixing them? Fuck Bush, it isn't like nothing happened that was distracting, right?

I'm sorry, you can't make Bush the scapegoat for everything you dislike.

Wait..

Are you saying that minorities are at the heart of the subprime mortgage problem?

[Parkbandit]

Wait..

Are you saying that minorities are at the heart of the subprime mortgage problem?


I think what he is saying is that the Clinton Administration encouraged banks to relax their loan qualifications in order to make them more attainable by people with less than perfect credit, some of which were minorities and that it was billed as an equality measure, ensuring it would pass.

Personally, I think the heart of the problem are people who signed adjustable loans that they knew they would never be able to afford once the adjustable kicked in.

[Apathy]

I don't think its fair to put anything as the heart of the slide we're in. Buyers got stupid, lenders got stupid, and lawmakers made it easier for both of them to be stupid, which was pretty stupid on their part too.

A massive pool of collective stupidity from all sides lead us to this crap.

[Gan]

I don't think its fair to put anything as the heart of the slide we're in. Buyers got stupid, lenders got stupid, and lawmakers made it easier for both of them to be stupid, which was pretty stupid on their part too.

A massive pool of collective stupidity from all sides lead us to this crap.

:)

Agreed

[Hulkein]

The possibility of Gan voting for Obama was about the same as that of TheE voting for McCain.

That's a load of bullshit.

[TheEschaton]

Well, I seriously considered voting for McCain, but I've now made up my mind, and I think I'm gonna go with Barack Obama.

It took a lot of time and thought, but I finally decided Obama's lack of douchebaggery was more important than McCain's experience, none of which was executive in nature, despite crb's attempts to paint it as such.

Edit: Sign up here.

-TheE-

[BigWorm]

Well, I seriously considered voting for McCain, but I've now made up my mind, and I think I'm gonna go with Barack Obama.

It took a lot of time and thought, but I finally decided Obama's lack of douchebaggery was more important than McCain's experience, none of which was executive in nature, despite crb's attempts to paint it as such.

Edit: Sign up here.

-TheE-

Seriously Gan this is what you sound like.

[Daniel]

lol. That was funny

[Snapp]

:rofl:

[Warriorbird]

Pretty much summed it up.

[Gan]

Seriously Gan this is what you sound like.

LOL
point to you.

[Stanley Burrell]

There it is.

Of course there is plenty behind my decision but why bother here.

McCain people sign on this thread.

/enjoy

Hey Sean:

Since you aren't a pussy about current/former/returning GemStone members on a message board knowing details of your personal life (which, if this board strikes fear in your fluffy heart, happens to be the sum of all roast beef) what were some of the personal reasons behind your decision to vote for McCain, Sean? They shouln't be as embarrassing to leave undisclosed as wheelchair fetishes.

Just wondering, etc.

[Sean of the Thread]

If you haven't noticed I've abstained from most political threads this year. If I find the motivation Stainly I'll post what my decision as based on. However having a pro-life VP (among other VP issues) may leave me with some more thinking now.

Not that I like Obama's VP either.

Just saying.

[4a6c1]

BUMP

I just realized our old political threads are killer funny. We are starting this all again so here's a bump to remind us how stupid we all get during election time!

Did any of you McCain people think he would turn out to be such a terrible bigot as he proved to be during the DADT hearings??

:dance:

[Asha]

:( miss Snapp!

[Warriorbird]

BUMP

I just realized our old political threads are killer funny. We are starting this all again so here's a bump to remind us how stupid we all get during election time!

Did any of you McCain people think he would turn out to be such a terrible bigot as he proved to be during the DADT hearings??

:dance:

I wonder if we'll be different than 2004 and 2008.

[Drunken Durfin]

Dear Libertarians voting for McCain,

You are Republicans.

If you really are a Libertarian, then vote for the LIBERTARIAN candidate. Until the party starts getting a really good chunk of the voter base, even if they don't win, they will not be taken seriously by the populace at large.

One of the major things wrong with our system today is that it is, essentially, a two-party system. Either/Or has been a major contributing factor to the BS legislation we have today. There needs to be a THIRD voice in the conversation.

[Apathy]

What happened to Sean2?

[WRoss]

Voted Republican and melted.

[HJFudge]

The funniest part of this thread was all the comments on "I'll only reconsider Obama if McCain picks an even stupider running mate than Biden"

It was like some sort of dark prophecy

[TheEschaton]

Guys, didn't you hear? Obama got Osama, there's no discussion... :/

[~Rocktar~]

BUMP

I just realized our old political threads are killer funny. We are starting this all again so here's a bump to remind us how stupid we all get during election time!

Did any of you McCain people think he would turn out to be such a terrible bigot as he proved to be during the DADT hearings??

:dance:

He is an old white Republican, what would you expect? I voted on economics and I am pretty sure that he would not have blown more in 20 months than Bush did in 8 years.

[ClydeR]

Has McCain ruled out running again in 2012?

[Cephalopod]

Has McCain ruled out running again in 2012?

Pretty sure actuarial science did that for him.

[Bobmuhthol]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gif I've chosen. McCain. ... (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?p=786550#post786550) 05-08-2011 11:35 AM Could you even vote for this election? And how did your John Edwards choice work out?

Yes. I voted for Bob Barr. You got me: my choice of a primary candidate who lost really soured my life. I'm a total fuckup because I didn't support the guy who won and sucked at being President.

[~Rocktar~]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gif I've chosen. McCain. ... (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?p=786550#post786550) I've chosen. McCain. ... 05-10-2011 09:27 AM Oh, you're right. Obama is responsible for the drop-off in tax revenue from the economic collapse that happened on Bush's watch. Right! Must be nice living in that fantasy world of yours.



"AWWWW, boo hoooo, it's all that evil Bush's fault, boo hooooooo, whaaaaaaaaaa!"

Fucking grow up, the "it's all Bush's fault" crybaby shit is old and tired. A similar stock market crash happened in 1988, there was a large downturn in housing sales and a sharp rise in foreclosures and we didn't suddenly have a economic collapse, trillions of bailout money handed out hand over fist, illegal bankruptcy interference to support election backers, an attempt at public take over of 1/6th of the economy and rampant spending to out debt in 20 months what the previous 8 years of administration and 2 wars did. Of course we didn't have a Socialist President, a Democrat Socialist Congress and Mark to Market laws at that time either.

Most people seeing a drop in income (tax revenue) look to reduce their bills (expenditures). Not Obama, Pelosi and others, nooooooo, they went hog fucking wild and out spent the whole rest of the fucking world. By the end of his first term, Obama will have accumulated more debt than in the entire history of the United States combined. How can any semi-rational or even somewhat lucid person ever justify this kind of spending? With tax hikes in key areas that serve to throttle economic activity and growth such as energy and health care, how can anyone justify such stupidity? Spend more, choke the economy from recovery, drive inflation and stifle job creation all in the name of a Socialist agenda trying to match the European fantasy land ideal, yeah, that's Bush's fault.

Bush isn't responsible for Obama's dumb-ass Socialist policies.