|
View Poll Results: If something happened to McCain before the election would you vote for Palin? | |||
Yes. She is qualified enough to be president |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
8 | 11.43% |
Yes. But only because the alternative is Obama |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
6 | 8.57% |
No.I would have voted for McCain but Palin is not qualified for a President |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
3 | 4.29% |
No. But i wouldn't have voted for McCain either |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
52 | 74.29% |
Other |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 | 1.43% |
Who voted?
Voters: 70
You may not vote on this poll |
« Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
![]() |
![]() |
Author | Thread |
Posts: 2080/2297
(16-Sep-2008 at 14:35) ![]() |
McCain is dead already. They're just trying to keep up the facade so they have a chance at the elections.
Also, I would never vote for Palin. I'm fine with religious nutcases, as long as they don't get involved in politics. People who think the earth was created 6000 years ago need to go back to school, not to the White House. Modern world I'm not pleased to meet you |
||
|
|
Palin would be much more dangerous in the White House than McCain. McCain is a reasonably sane person; most of his panderings to the far right are just that, attempts to secure their votes. Palin, though, she's plain mental. She's almost as anti-science as they come. I'd vote Ron Paul before I voted Palin.
My Skype is kapteindynetrekk |
||
|
Posts: 140/209
(16-Sep-2008 at 21:21) ![]() |
I'm glad the "other" option is available.
I don't vote in the presidential elections. I live in a "red state" so I already know that regardless of how I might vote, the electoral candidates for my state are going to all vote republican. (I'm a staunch believer that the electoral college and an archaic, out-dated system that needs to be completely abolished.) "Well played, Roxtin. You are now officially the God of flying under the radar ![]() |
||
|
Posts: 7767/8194
(16-Sep-2008 at 22:10) |
Re: Would you vote for Palin?
I don't vote in the presidential elections. I live in a "red state" so I already know that regardless of how I might vote, the electoral candidates for my state are going to all vote republican.
Quote:
(I'm a staunch believer that the electoral college and an archaic, out-dated system that needs to be completely abolished.)
|
||
|
Posts: 1212/1971
(17-Sep-2008 at 06:26) ![]() |
Quote:
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if she won. Like Obama, she'd add some old fart with gravitas as a running mate. As is they're running 50/50 and the sympathy vote would push her over the top.
Tax collectors are a valid military target - chobham |
||
|
|
It would certainly depend on her running mate. If she got Bobby Jindal or Newt Gingrich or Jeb Bush to run with her I'd be there in a heartbeat ... Of course, of those three only Jindal doesn't carry 'baggage'.
Perhaps we should create a 'if Barack Obama were shot tomorrow, would you vote for Joe Biden' poll ![]() Man is the only animal that blushes, or needs to.-- Mark Twain |
||
|
Posts: 4698/4829
(17-Sep-2008 at 22:52) ![]() |
Re: Would you vote for Palin?
Palin would not beat Obama. She may have the same amount of "experience" and age, but she appears to be incompetent to most, and has extremely conservative views (I refuse to call it right-wing... doing so is an abomination of what the right is supposed to represent).
Speaking of which, if McCain were to die (or switch ticket positions) would Palin be bound by the public funds restriction McCain is handcuffed by? I would think it would only apply to the person who agreed to take federal funds. |
||
|
Posts: 1214/1971
(18-Sep-2008 at 03:37) ![]() |
Quote:
Well, Obama's an extremist leftist and look where he's running. Palin would energize the right wing base in the same way Obama has energized the far left and we'd be right back where we started. Perhaps a little more in Palin's favor since America is a center right nation. At the very least her funding would skyrocket allowing her to better combat Obama's machine.
Reverting tax cuts on the rich is not left-wing. It's not even right wing. It's jsut what ought to be done. The tax-cuts in the first place aren't even ideologically driven, it's just bullshit cronyism. "these rich guys helped us to power, so now we gotta give them money". Economically, Obama is not left wing. The only thing I have seen about his economic policies that is left-wing is more government funding to the health system. This even stops short of nationalising healthcare altogether which is normal. He may be socially left-wing (in the common terminology which is of course bullshit - social freedom is part of libertarianism => right-wing), but that means that only hardcore christian fundamentalists will drop him and support Palin, Miss I-don't-know-what-the-Bush-Doctrine-is. Tax collectors are a valid military target - chobham |
||
|
Posts: 4701/4829
(18-Sep-2008 at 04:36) ![]() |
Re: Would you vote for Palin?
But Obama is not far left. You only say that because he is a Democrat, and talks about "hope" and "change". From this you go "omg idealist" and by extension "omg hardcore socialist".
I could go on, but I think you get the point. Particularly when contrasted to McCain who is the 59th most conservative member of the senate by voting record. (right smack in the middle and actually a little left) Back in the day McCain would have been a main stream democrat, and indeed at one point he even considered switching parties. However, the democrat party has gone off the deep end. So much so that even former Clinton supporters are flocking to McCain in droves: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...SsK5wD938ODG80
Quote:
Reverting tax cuts on the rich is not left-wing. It's not even right wing. It's jsut what ought to be done. The tax-cuts in the first place aren't even ideologically driven, it's just bullshit cronyism. "these rich guys helped us to power, so now we gotta give them money".
The idea behind tax cuts (for everyone) is that it rewards productive behavior. If your time spent working becomes more valuable, you spend more time working. If you are a business owner being able to keep more of your money means you can expand your business faster and make even more money. Obama derides tax cuts for "the rich" but quite frankly when taxes are so progressive that the bottom 50% pay almost no taxes, there's no other way to cut taxes in a meaningful way without cutting taxes for the rich. (Although Bush managed to find a way by "refunding" taxes to the poor even when the poor paid no taxes).
Quote:
Miss I-don't-know-what-the-Bush-Doctrine-is.
|
||
|
Posts: 1215/1971
(18-Sep-2008 at 06:17) ![]() |
Quote:
Like the fact that he was the single most liberal (which to you europeans means leftist) senator by voting record in the senate in 2007.
Quote:
Or that he supports killing even babies who are born alive if their mother doesn't want them.
Quote:
Or that he wants to tax the rich so he can buy votes from the poor.
![]()
Quote:
Or that he said he would raise taxes on the rich even if it didn't raise more government revenues because he thinks it would be "fair".
Quote:
Or that his primary backers are move-on.org and hollywood.
Quote:
Or that he supports a national healthcare plan.
Quote:
Or that his friends include marxist terrorists and black liberation preachers.
That is too easy... I could run for US President, all I would have to do is constantly refer to my opponent as Kommunist Karl ![]()
Quote:
Or that his wife was proud of america for the first time because Obama was ahead in the polls. Or that his wife's writings in undergraduate were radical socialist.
Quote:
Ha! What Cronyism? McCain isn't getting any money from "the rich".
Besides, they were Bush's tax cuts to begin with, and if you try to tell me Bush didn't have a vested interest in doing so I might as well regard anything you ever say as a complete work of fiction.
Quote:
The idea behind tax cuts (for everyone) is that it rewards productive behavior. If your time spent working becomes more valuable, you spend more time working. If you are a business owner being able to keep more of your money means you can expand your business faster and make even more money.
![]() Besides, the US government is up to its nuclear blue-balls in debt. How are tax cuts going to fix that problem? As for the bold part: so the tax cuts are designed so that rich people who sponsor the GOP can get even richer? Dude, I could've told you that. --------------- Obama's policies may not pander to your brand of uber-capitalism, but I'd rather have a hot poker shoved my eye than have my intelligence molested again by you or anybody trying to brand him as a Marxist who poses a colossal threat to the free-market system. He just isn't. No matter whether you identify with him ideologically or not, you simply cannot say that something like national healthcare is going to destroy capitalism. You simply cannot say that taxing rich people actually poses any significant barrier to economic growth, and you simply cannot say that supporting a woman's right to abort has ANYTHING to do with being left-wing. Obama is at worst a social democrat. If you don't know what that means other than having it used on you as some scare-tactic synonym for "Stalinist/Maoist Communism Child Rape", it is basically a belief in Capitalism but only insofar as there is no person who contributes to society without having at least a minimum comfortable standard of living. I understand that you don't believe in this, and that you believe if someone's parents aren't rich enough to send them to business school they should say "you want fries with that?" for a hundred hours a week, and go home to a ramshackle old apartment in the Bronx waiting to be raped and killed, but trying to portray social democracy as anything further than left-of-centre is an unimaginably gross molestation of the political spectrum. Obama is left-of-centre. After 8 years of utter bullshit, he is what America needs and most Americans seem to know it, and fuck knows it would be a nice break for the rest of the poor bastards around the world who are affected by America's crap without even being allowed to vote. If he doesn't win this election I will eat my own face. Tax collectors are a valid military target - chobham |
||
|
Posts: 3379/3861
(18-Sep-2008 at 06:31) ![]() |
Re: Would you vote for Palin?
But Obama is not far left. You only say that because he is a Democrat, and talks about "hope" and "change". From this you go "omg idealist" and by extension "omg hardcore socialist".
http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/
Quote:
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was the most liberal senator in 2007, according to National Journal's 27th annual vote ratings.
The national journal is a well respected publication |
||
|
Posts: 1216/1971
(18-Sep-2008 at 08:09) ![]() |
wow invictus, thanks for bringing up something I already addressed...
I'll elaborate though... first of all, liberalism vs. conservatism is quite possibly the most ill-defined measure of political position ever conceived... apparently believers in the free market are "conservatives", despite the free market being a liberal ideology And apart from "conservatives" being all about economic freedom, they also apparently have to about social theocracy. How the fuck do you justify putting a belief in economic freedom and social totalitarianism on the same side of a political spectrum? Second of all, liberalism is meant to be a term for a right-wing ideology. Ever heard of the Cold War? You know, that war between Communism and democracy? More specifically LIBERAL democracy? The liberal ideology is all about free market capitalism, and free trade between states. It is also about social freedom, and libertarianism, as well as social justice (which, while going slightly against Capitalism, is by no means mutually exclusive with it). So if you think a liberal in the White House is going to start collectivising the nation, take a reality check. Third, I highly question the possibility of "calculating" a voting record and putting a label on ot based on that. In fact, I can't think of a shittier idea. EDIT: Just by looking at how the scores fluctuate between years is indicative of how completely useless this thing is. Fourth, even if he is the most left-wing in the Senate (which isn't the same as being liberal) - that doesn't make him an extremist. Being a right-wing nation, I highly doubt any state in the US would vote in an extreme left-wing politican to the Senate, so just by virtue of the fact that he is in the US Senate, I am close to certain that he is not extreme-left. Fifth:
Quote:
The national journal is a well respected publication
![]() The problem is the "respect" that this publication has has no bearing on a matter that can not be described to have any objectivity. Defining liberalism vs. conservatism, and THEN putting mathematical values on it? Wow... I can't think of anything more subjective. The quality of a publication is a testament to their unbiased reporting of facts, not unbiased reporting of opinions. Tax collectors are a valid military target - chobham Last edited by Spectre19, 18-Sep-2008 at 08:14. |
||
|
(Posted as matinog)
Posts: 843/922 (18-Sep-2008 at 14:54) ![]() |
Quote:
Not really. What makes him far left isn't his moderate rhetoric. It's several factors. Like the fact that he was the single most liberal (which to you europeans means leftist) senator by voting record in the senate in 2007. Or that he supports killing even babies who are born alive if their mother doesn't want them. Or that he wants to tax the rich so he can buy votes from the poor. Or that he said he would raise taxes on the rich even if it didn't raise more government revenues because he thinks it would be "fair". Or that his primary backers are move-on.org and hollywood. Or that he supports a national healthcare plan. Or that his friends include marxist terrorists and black liberation preachers. Or that his wife was proud of america for the first time because Obama was ahead in the polls. Or that his wife's writings in undergraduate were radical socialist.
RIP John Lennon |
||
|
Posts: 16/61
(23-Sep-2008 at 20:53) |
I would never vote for her. She has accomplished little worth putting her in the white house. I don't think she should be running for vp, but honestly McCain's accomplishment list is a lot sadder and disappointing then anyone who supports him will ever admit (although if he wins after a few years the country will turn on him like his successful current republican president
![]() Regardless of if we are right or wrong, history will form its own opinions. If your not willing to die for democracy then you shouldn't be allowed to enjoy it.
|
||
|
Posts: 1807/1958
(13-Oct-2008 at 00:56) ![]() |
No, I sure wouldn't. She doesn't seem qualified, from my limited experience with her from the news and the vice presidential debates.
She also seems like a bit of a loose cannon, in a bad way. Then again, I wouldn't vote for McCain either unless he kept close to the line between republicans and democrats like he was early in the early days of running for president. If he had stayed there I would have been much more interested in him. Of course, Obama/Biden would still be preferable for me, so I suppose it was a good idea of him to go more rightwing to tie up those votes. -- (Hey Hopey!)
Last edited by Lunor, 13-Oct-2008 at 00:57. |
||
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Who do you support for USA President? | Obi2Kenobi | Polls Heaven | 103 | 18-May-2004 02:56 |
Should more people vote for the Green party? | mathmetalmonk | Polls Heaven | 40 | 08-May-2004 02:03 |
Utopia Temple Webby Award - Please Vote For Us! | Brother Green | General Site Discussions | 69 | 01-May-2003 14:14 |
America Is NOT A Democracy | sleepingtao | Respectable General Discussions | 72 | 03-Apr-2003 22:08 |