NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm doing a survey for one of my classes.

This is for American's only.

I need a straigh forward YES or NO. Thanks!

I said Conservatives - I meant REPUBLICANS. Sorry!

maybe you should try it again with
democrats the party of the poor
REPUBLICANS the party of the rich

good luck with it

itsn ot that the republicans are rich and democrats poor, its that the republicans favor the rich and democrats favor inane equality for all heavy on counter equality

maybe you should try it again with
democrats the party of the poor
REPUBLICANS the party of the rich

good luck with it
Woops, my bad. Yes, Republicans is what I meant. :-(

As a non-American, I didn't vote, but it appears that both Dems and Reps are parties of the rich. The only candidate in this election that represents the poor is Ralph Nader.

The parties are only in it for themselves. Rich or pore, they don’t care so long as they get into power.

As a non-American, I didn't vote, but it appears that both Dems and Reps are parties of the rich. The only candidate in this election that represents the poor is Ralph Nader.
No, Nader represents Nader.

Who cares about the poor? Let them die on the street or better yet, they can spend the rest of their pathetic worthless lives cleaning up the crums from the floor under my dinner table.

Both two parties are controlled by corporate interests. One just doesn't feel the need to lie about it.

Bush, Kerry, and Nader are multi-millionaires.

Bush says that he's for the poor, but he's set them up to pay higher sales taxes and has spent tens of millions of government dollars and TV ads telling poor people that they're supposed to get married. Bush isn't so much for the rich as he is against the poor

As a non-American, I didn't vote, but it appears that both Dems and Reps are parties of the rich.

indeed. though democrats style themselves as the party of the poor and middle class, and do tend to have the support of poor people in urban areas (the poor people out in the country are too busy hating them over social issues to care that they get royally screwed economically by the republican party's ideology).

Well, I'm glad to see I'm not the one who'd vote NO... Thanks for your help everyone!

btw, all 3 canidates suck... But, I'd rather have Kerry in office than Bush...
But really, I feel we need a juris naturalist...

They're both rich. They want to control the poor--just using different methods. The Dems are doing the "buddy-buddy" thing, and the Republicans are just trying to control them buy buying off the poor people's bosses.

Democrats favor a raised income tax. That only hurts the poor, Bill Gates could quit making money right now, and he wouldn't notice.
Anyway, at best Democrats treat the poor (and minorites) like sheep. "Just vote for us and we'll keep those big mean Rich People away. We won't expect you to do anything because your to stupid anyway."

Obviously, any American political candidate that manages to get any recognition at all is not poor...the question is whether they're patrons of the poor or not. When it comes down to that, both parties have marks against them. At least Edwards&Kerry know what it's like to be poor, whereas Bush&Cheney have absolutely no clue. What is yet to be seen is if Kerry&Edwards will act on what they know of poverty. From what they say, it sounds like they will...but who knows if they'll follow through...or if Congress will let them?

Who cares about the poor? Let them die on the street or better yet, they can spend the rest of their pathetic worthless lives cleaning up the crums from the floor under my dinner table.


I do hope that this post was made with Irony. Because if it's not, it is complete and utter rubbish.