Forums » Off-Topic
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2008/04/clinton_nixon_nixon_clinton.cfm
new stuff about this clinton lady comes up every day. Too bad the mainstream press doesn't do its job and tell everyone about the things she's doing.
new stuff about this clinton lady comes up every day. Too bad the mainstream press doesn't do its job and tell everyone about the things she's doing.
Too bad the mainstream press doesn't do its job and tell everyone about the things Ron Paul is saying...
Ha, I assume you're joking about that whiner Ron Paul. No one cares what he says (except my crazy libertarian friend who wants to vote for him) because he has no chance at the presidency. Hilary Clinton is not competent to be president, Barack Obama is not competent to be president, and McCain has pissed me off since he got all mad that he lost the primaries to Bush, and he has since shown that he is just as liberal as any Democrat. So it's a no-choice election. I just might write-in Stephen Colbert!
Most Republicans are incompetent. Most Democrats are incompetent.
I would even say most Independents are incompetent.
As to who isn't incompetent? Well, lets just say they aren't in this election.
I would even say most Independents are incompetent.
As to who isn't incompetent? Well, lets just say they aren't in this election.
I wish Kucinich got more votes.
/me puts on a flame suit
/me puts on a flame suit
As a very committed Republican, I agree that most republicans we have in D.C. are very incompetent. Not one of them will stand up for anything! Hillary and Obama are destroying the Democrat party, but standing firmly behind McCain is ruining the Republican party, turning it into the Democrat party. I wish Thompson had shown more energy in the beginning, maybe he would have done better. We sure shot ourselves in the foot throwing out Romney.
*snigger* Romney *snigger*
I remember that guy. Thank gods he's out of my state, and may we never invite him in again. He's even more of an idiot than the local politicians.
I remember that guy. Thank gods he's out of my state, and may we never invite him in again. He's even more of an idiot than the local politicians.
No one cares what he says . . . because he has no chance at the presidency.
Yeah. No chance. Nobody is voting for him, so I sure won't. Yeah, he may be saying stuff that's not what these other three incompetent losers are saying, sure. But they have a shot at the presidency, so I guess I have to vote for one of them.
Cf.
VO? That game sucks. I thought about paying after the trial, because it was pretty cool. But I don't like how nobody plays it, there just aren't enough people, so I'm leaving.
Yeah. No chance. Nobody is voting for him, so I sure won't. Yeah, he may be saying stuff that's not what these other three incompetent losers are saying, sure. But they have a shot at the presidency, so I guess I have to vote for one of them.
Cf.
VO? That game sucks. I thought about paying after the trial, because it was pretty cool. But I don't like how nobody plays it, there just aren't enough people, so I'm leaving.
I liked Ron Paul's ideas about fiscal reform, especially not printing money as needed
problem is, the vast majority of americans do not understand such talk, nor do they want to. They want to hear about stupid gas tax holidays, especially when the money is then being taken from "big oil". In reality "big oil" would just raise their prices by 18 cents or so a gallon, probably 20 just out of spite. So instead of being spent by our government (inefficiently of course) to pretend to maintain roads (maybe build a bridge to nowhere) it just goes straight to "big oil's" bottom line.
Americans want to hear about pulling our troops out of Iraq. Personally if it wouldn't negatively effect the US, I'd say, 'fine, go ahead and kill each other, just don't bother us or we will just start blood letting on a massive scale' (example, Tokyo, Dresden). Now however it'd only be about a year after full US withdraw that you'd hear bleeding hearts screaming ' WE GOTTA GO SAVE THEM FROM THEM SELFS'.
Another problem is that people just don't want to hear bad news, denial is normal, problems however rarely solve themselves, but it sure is easy to ignore them if you think they wont blow up till you've got yours.
Theirs a whole lot more I'd like to add, but it's easier for me to go to the corner bar and enjoy what's left of this country.
problem is, the vast majority of americans do not understand such talk, nor do they want to. They want to hear about stupid gas tax holidays, especially when the money is then being taken from "big oil". In reality "big oil" would just raise their prices by 18 cents or so a gallon, probably 20 just out of spite. So instead of being spent by our government (inefficiently of course) to pretend to maintain roads (maybe build a bridge to nowhere) it just goes straight to "big oil's" bottom line.
Americans want to hear about pulling our troops out of Iraq. Personally if it wouldn't negatively effect the US, I'd say, 'fine, go ahead and kill each other, just don't bother us or we will just start blood letting on a massive scale' (example, Tokyo, Dresden). Now however it'd only be about a year after full US withdraw that you'd hear bleeding hearts screaming ' WE GOTTA GO SAVE THEM FROM THEM SELFS'.
Another problem is that people just don't want to hear bad news, denial is normal, problems however rarely solve themselves, but it sure is easy to ignore them if you think they wont blow up till you've got yours.
Theirs a whole lot more I'd like to add, but it's easier for me to go to the corner bar and enjoy what's left of this country.
it's easier for me to go to the corner bar and enjoy what's left of this country
Hear, hear! /me wraps up his night and heads off to find a pub and some Guinness
Hear, hear! /me wraps up his night and heads off to find a pub and some Guinness
You have kind of a good point about "Big Oil." Everyone likes to make it a scapegoat without ever considering "Big Government." The government makes more per gallon of gas than oil companies. They do have record profits in pure dollar amounts, but in percent profit margin, it's smaller than pretty much any other industry, and somewhat complicated. Part of the profit is because of government regulation on exploration, which makes it much cheaper to import than produce locally. It's not about dependence on oil from terrorist nations, either: most of our oil comes from Canadia, then Mexico. If they were allowed to, all that "profit" would go toward research and exploration. Also, there's no such thing as a corporate tax. Every corporate expense, including taxes, is passed on to the consumer and employees. The same goes with tax decreases, they're passed down as well.
Would Ron Paul actually accomplish the things he says? He sounds mostly like a whiny baby to me.
Would Ron Paul actually accomplish the things he says? He sounds mostly like a whiny baby to me.
Explain why he, Ron Paul, is a whiny baby.
>.>
I don't follow.
Anyway, of our choices, Obama seems like the best one to me. Change, blah blah blah. I'd go into details but it's plain as day.
Anyway, of our choices, Obama seems like the best one to me. Change, blah blah blah. I'd go into details but it's plain as day.
Of the three, I find Obama the least desirable: he's not only communalist, which all three are, but he's an idealist. Those bastards are dangerous. Give me Hillary any day, since she's so morally bankrupt as to compromise with even the most conservative of the Right, and so hated as to ensure a Republican victory after four years of Hillary-Hell. If BHO clinches the Dem nom, then I suppose I'll take McCain.
Also, is it just me or does Obama come off as rather Vulcan? There's an eerie resemblance between his speech and affect and that of Tuvok or Spock.
Also, is it just me or does Obama come off as rather Vulcan? There's an eerie resemblance between his speech and affect and that of Tuvok or Spock.
yea he reminds me of tuvok too, and i agree hillary would be so bad the republicans would win the following election ni a record landslide. not that it matters, our government is already useless, most of the private sector will become useless in time. I'm considering becoming useless to them in advance.
LMAO Lecter... Obama playing Tuvok on Star Trek - you nailed it! Hahahahahahahaaaaaaa...
I maintain that McCain will win by default, and will wager 1 million credits to anyone who thinks otherwise and cares to put their ingame credits where their mouth is.
Smittens and Spidey are already on the hook for my bet.
And Thank God, because putting Hillary or Obama in the white house would be a frikking disaster. McCain at least seems to be fiscally responsible. I'm worried that McCain might choose someone like Huckabee as his veep, and then suffer a coronary while in office, catapulting yet another Arkansas idiot into the presidency.
I'm for Ron Paul and his ideas, but 'ol Ron does not have the charisma or balls to pull any of his ideas off. So Ron's out.
I'd have voted for Romney but he's the "plastic simulation" of a president, looked the part but was the Republican equivalent of Bill Clinton - always checking the polls before he said or did anything. So Romney's out.
I'd have voted for Fred Thompson cause he looked good on Law & Order, but in person (as Ann Coulter said), he looks like Gollum. Plus he never has any ideas, and didn't seem to want the job. So Thompson's out.
I might have voted for Giuliani, but the moron didn't do shit until Florida and then lost big. Maybe in 8 years, Rudy.
Lastly, I'd have voted for Kucinich (if he ever got any mainstream support) because that little fucker is JUST crazy enough to make things interesting.
I maintain that McCain will win by default, and will wager 1 million credits to anyone who thinks otherwise and cares to put their ingame credits where their mouth is.
Smittens and Spidey are already on the hook for my bet.
And Thank God, because putting Hillary or Obama in the white house would be a frikking disaster. McCain at least seems to be fiscally responsible. I'm worried that McCain might choose someone like Huckabee as his veep, and then suffer a coronary while in office, catapulting yet another Arkansas idiot into the presidency.
I'm for Ron Paul and his ideas, but 'ol Ron does not have the charisma or balls to pull any of his ideas off. So Ron's out.
I'd have voted for Romney but he's the "plastic simulation" of a president, looked the part but was the Republican equivalent of Bill Clinton - always checking the polls before he said or did anything. So Romney's out.
I'd have voted for Fred Thompson cause he looked good on Law & Order, but in person (as Ann Coulter said), he looks like Gollum. Plus he never has any ideas, and didn't seem to want the job. So Thompson's out.
I might have voted for Giuliani, but the moron didn't do shit until Florida and then lost big. Maybe in 8 years, Rudy.
Lastly, I'd have voted for Kucinich (if he ever got any mainstream support) because that little fucker is JUST crazy enough to make things interesting.
Fucking idiots. And for the record, "Hilary and Obama" are NOT destroying the party. Everything is pointing to him winning and SHE is dragging this out, and SHE is hurting the democrats.
Hey, I almost 100% agree with you, LeberMac. I never made the Obama Tuvok connection, but I see it now (only Obama is very ignorant, and Tuvok knows stuff).
I think McCain will win, too, but I'm worried about that. He is a RINO (Republican in Name Only), and not a conservative by a long shot. It's a no-win election. Hillary would be a disaster. Obama would be a bigger disaster. McCain is proof that there is little difference these days between Republicans and Democrats, which is what has so many conservatives like myself so pissed off. Why do we compromise so much? Liberals don't compromise. McCain (and apparently Bush) has even fallen for all this global warming bullshit, the new home of communism. I don't think he'll be fiscally responsible. I hoped Bush would be, but despite his good progress on taxes he still approved insane insane liberal spending. I think McCain will too.
Speaking of fiscally responsible, that's why Romney was my second choice. He may have been wishy-washy or even a bit liberal on many things, but there was no ultimate candidate for that, and the one thing Romney's record proves is that he is great at managing finances. It would be nice to have that kind of practical business experience in Washington rather than someone who thinks there's endless money in the world and all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
One thing destroying the Republican party is that we're always looking for another Reagan, and we forget that there are three important qualities in a candidate: First, they have to have conservative ideas. This is what I liked about Thompson, and McCain doesn't have this at all. Second, whatever they say, they have to actually be honest and follow through if elected. Bush has this, even if he's not always very conservative, I trusted Thompson and usually Romney, not McCain at all, surely not Hillary or Obama. Third, they have to be electable, meaning they can communicate their ideas and inspire people, and look "Presidential." This is what carried Bill through 8 years, but Hillary doesn't have it with all her shrieking. Obama had it until recently, Romney had it kind of, like you said, McCain doesn't but everyone thinks he does, and this was why Thompson didn't win. I'm not on board with all of Ron Paul's ideas, and while he'd probably try to back them up, he's nothing but a whiny complaining baby, as we saw in the debates. My skin crawls whenever I see him.
I don't think it's fair to compare Romney to Bill Clinton, and I'm not just saying this as a Republican or a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I think it's a good illustration of media bias that Romney wasn't taken seriously until he addressed his religion, but any mention of Jeremiah Wright is apparently inexcusable. I can't even express how frustrating it was to hear so many people say they couldn't vote for Romney because he was Mormon, and even worse how many of my fellow Mormons were going to vote for Romney simply because he was Mormon, regardless of his views. Frightening blindness on both sides.
Ok, so that was a very unorganized rant, but whatever, this is the off-topic forum.
EDIT: Smittens, who are you calling "fucking idiots?" Do you mean people on this forum or candidates? I think you're right, Hillary knows she probably won't beat Obama, and she's setting herself up for 2012. She's waited this long (the whole reason she married Bill was for a shot at the presidency some day), she can wait four more years. The best thing that can happen to her is a McCain win, since an Obama win might well guarantee another eight years of republicans afterward, while a McCain win might mean the opposite.
I think McCain will win, too, but I'm worried about that. He is a RINO (Republican in Name Only), and not a conservative by a long shot. It's a no-win election. Hillary would be a disaster. Obama would be a bigger disaster. McCain is proof that there is little difference these days between Republicans and Democrats, which is what has so many conservatives like myself so pissed off. Why do we compromise so much? Liberals don't compromise. McCain (and apparently Bush) has even fallen for all this global warming bullshit, the new home of communism. I don't think he'll be fiscally responsible. I hoped Bush would be, but despite his good progress on taxes he still approved insane insane liberal spending. I think McCain will too.
Speaking of fiscally responsible, that's why Romney was my second choice. He may have been wishy-washy or even a bit liberal on many things, but there was no ultimate candidate for that, and the one thing Romney's record proves is that he is great at managing finances. It would be nice to have that kind of practical business experience in Washington rather than someone who thinks there's endless money in the world and all problems can be solved by throwing money at them.
One thing destroying the Republican party is that we're always looking for another Reagan, and we forget that there are three important qualities in a candidate: First, they have to have conservative ideas. This is what I liked about Thompson, and McCain doesn't have this at all. Second, whatever they say, they have to actually be honest and follow through if elected. Bush has this, even if he's not always very conservative, I trusted Thompson and usually Romney, not McCain at all, surely not Hillary or Obama. Third, they have to be electable, meaning they can communicate their ideas and inspire people, and look "Presidential." This is what carried Bill through 8 years, but Hillary doesn't have it with all her shrieking. Obama had it until recently, Romney had it kind of, like you said, McCain doesn't but everyone thinks he does, and this was why Thompson didn't win. I'm not on board with all of Ron Paul's ideas, and while he'd probably try to back them up, he's nothing but a whiny complaining baby, as we saw in the debates. My skin crawls whenever I see him.
I don't think it's fair to compare Romney to Bill Clinton, and I'm not just saying this as a Republican or a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I think it's a good illustration of media bias that Romney wasn't taken seriously until he addressed his religion, but any mention of Jeremiah Wright is apparently inexcusable. I can't even express how frustrating it was to hear so many people say they couldn't vote for Romney because he was Mormon, and even worse how many of my fellow Mormons were going to vote for Romney simply because he was Mormon, regardless of his views. Frightening blindness on both sides.
Ok, so that was a very unorganized rant, but whatever, this is the off-topic forum.
EDIT: Smittens, who are you calling "fucking idiots?" Do you mean people on this forum or candidates? I think you're right, Hillary knows she probably won't beat Obama, and she's setting herself up for 2012. She's waited this long (the whole reason she married Bill was for a shot at the presidency some day), she can wait four more years. The best thing that can happen to her is a McCain win, since an Obama win might well guarantee another eight years of republicans afterward, while a McCain win might mean the opposite.
Chaos, what's your ingame name? Also, Obama would be such a great figure for this country, but you think him less honest than the other candidates or even Bush? For someone who seems so well informed, you've been suckered.