NationStates Jolt Archive

Hypothetical: Who (dramatic music) do YOU vote for? POLL COM'n UP!

Neither - I'd rather vote a woman into the office this time around.

Neither - I'd rather vote a woman into the office this time around.
Ouch...

I'd go with Hillary, for the simple reason that I agree with her politics much more than I agree with Condi's.

Ideally I'd love to vote for a third-party woman, but given the reality of the Two-Party Monopoly in the US political system, I'd take Hillary as the lesser of two evils against Condy the NeoCon Oil Whore Bush Apologist.

lets just put it simple

if Hillary Clinton becomes president there will be another civil war

lets just put it simple

if Hillary Clinton becomes president there will be another civil war
...no, no there wouldn't be. Congratulations on showing your ignorance.

As for me, I'd not vote for either. I'd vote for the Libertarian candidate, probably. Be more qualified than either of those bozos...

...no, no there wouldn't be. Congratulations on showing your ignorance.



LMAO

there will be a civil war, the nation will break into atleast 2. it wouldnt be north vs south like so many people would associate.

LMAO

there will be a civil war, the nation will break into atleast 2. it wouldnt be north vs south like so many people would associate.
And where do you get this idea from? Any evidence? Proof? Links to stories about tensions rising? Anything at all?

Condi



not really, knee jerk reaction "anyone but Hillary" and missed the "neither" option, however, I am scared to say niether too, in case that means I have to vote for another person without knowledge of who (like I could be forced to vote for Kerry or something else equally vomit inducing)

Hillary tried to mess with GTA. Anyone who messes with GTA will die. :p

LMAO

there will be a civil war, the nation will break into atleast 2. it wouldnt be north vs south like so many people would associate.

yes, of course, because women as presidents is preposterous as slavery.
and since we've had these seething sectional differences for 100 years, one would assume civil war was imminent. common knowledge really that women have no place having responsibility.

not enough :rolleyes: for me.

Oh, if not N v S, then what? West v NE v SE v Middle America? c'mon, splintering like that is simply not possible. people dont associate with their state like they did prior to the civil war. everyone's so preoccupied with the troops sticker and the flag on their bumper (:D ) that this is a non-issue.

try again. :)

wow, did i eat my wheaties this morning?

And where do you get this idea from? Any evidence? Proof? Links to stories about tensions rising? Anything at all?

you just have to dig your head out of your ass to realize alot of people dont appreciate Hillary. it doesnt take much to realize alot of people really dont want her near the white house.

Condi



not really, knee jerk reaction "anyone but Hillary" and missed the "neither" option, however, I am scared to say niether too, in case that means I have to vote for another person without knowledge of who (like I could be forced to vote for Kerry or something else equally vomit inducing)
Well, Smunkee, that's why you and everyone else should be doing what I plan on doing: starting once the campaign begins, research each and every candidate no matter what their party. That way, you can easily make an informed decision. Easy, yah?

...no, no there wouldn't be. Congratulations on showing your ignorance.

As for me, I'd not vote for either. I'd vote for the Libertarian candidate, probably. Be more qualified than either of those bozos...

Actually he may be right... Centrists, conservatives, and libertarians may rise up. Me being one of those crazy centrists.


I voted neither, because I'd rather see McCain in there.

Neither. I move to British Columbia.

yes, of course, because women as presidents is preposterous as slavery.
and since we've had these seething sectional differences for 100 years, one would assume civil war was imminent.



yes because i put up a strong arguement about it being because she is a woman :rolleyes:

The observation that people are so repelled by Clinton and Kerry by their personal demeanors that they'd willingly give away the United States to a certified silver spoon incompetent and his lackey shows how the average American has a short attention span and no long term perception when it comes to the good of the nation.

The observation that people are so repelled by Clinton and Kerry by their personal demeanors that they'd willingly give away the United States to a certified silver spoon incompetent and his lackey shows how the average American has a short attention span and no long term perception when it comes to the good of the nation.
Sad, isn't it? We live in an age where information is literally at your fingertips, and people are still as ignorant as ever. They still just know the basic information necessary for getting through everyday life in 2006 and that's it.

The observation that people are so repelled by Clinton and Kerry by their personal demeanors that they'd willingly give away the United States to a certified silver spoon incompetent and his lackey shows how the average American has a short attention span and no long term perception when it comes to the good of the nation.

no kidding, it is a good thing kerry didnt win the election, that is who you were talking about wasnt it?

yes because i put up a strong arguement about it being because she is a woman :rolleyes:
ok then why? sorry about the ladies thing, it seemed easiest to nitpick. :D

Ralph Nader.

Well, Smunkee, that's why you and everyone else should be doing what I plan on doing: starting once the campaign begins, research each and every candidate no matter what their party. That way, you can easily make an informed decision. Easy, yah?
hey, I started early (actually I don't remember when I started, years ago I suppose) I know quite enough about Hillary to know that she makes me sick, literally.

I really hope that the democrats come up with someone that I can at least consider, I mean, the last 2 elections, it's been crap on both sides.

Condi because I dislike Hillary.

in the 2008 election, the american public will be confused and not know the difference between the presidential elections and the american idol polls. this will be the start of the Kelly Clarkson reign

hey, I started early (actually I don't remember when I started, years ago I suppose) I know quite enough about Hillary to know that she makes me sick, literally.

I really hope that the democrats come up with someone that I can at least consider, I mean, the last 2 elections, it's been crap on both sides.

hilary seems to grab the spotlight whenever she can. especially her unfounded video game claims.

and both sides put out crap, but then again they are figureheads and more people vote on platforms anywho.

kerry the spineless jellyfish or bush the cymbal banging monkey? :D

i honestly don't know and i can't vote for either of them anyway - but from all the media propaganda they both seem like absolute mentalists so if i could i wouldn't vote for either of them.

you just have to dig your head out of your ass to realize alot of people dont appreciate Hillary. it doesnt take much to realize alot of people really dont want her near the white house.

A lot of people didn't appreciate Bush either and if you consider the "Anybody but Bush" slogan that was so prevalant around the country and a majority of voters wanted Gore instead of Bush, we can assume that a lot of people didn't wan't him anywhere near teh white house either.

And do you remember people throwing eggs and shit at Bushs car after the election?

Where was the civil war then?

Seriously, don't you see how ridiculous it sounds to say that there will be one if Hillary is elected?

I'd rather see her than Condo in the Whitehouse but I'd rather see someone who deserves it get in.

I put Hilary, but after reading the comments i think i'd go with neither. I don't have any information about either of their platforms (stupid ilinformed me), but i can't stand the way Bush sticks to his riggid, simplistic ideology. It's his inability to change with the times, or even to be bipartisan, that turns me off to the conservatives as a whole (that and the guy who said Hitler should have finished the job).

I vote for Hillary. Condy Rice is just Bushs pet minority, shes nothing more than a talking head. No vision, no brains, and no politial clout at all.

As for Hillary, a ver yintellignet, well rounded person, and I agree with her politics. Will she be president? Don't think so.

well done, youve made me see the president in a new light. in all the bitching about him many of us have forgotten that he isnt either of those two. 3 cheers for george! I'd vote for a third party. or move to a better country. If only hil could be more like Bill.

All I really want from a president is more minimum wage and less censorship. its not too much to ask.

well done, youve made me see the president in a new light. in all the bitching about him many of us have forgotten that he isnt either of those two. 3 cheers for george! I'd vote for a third party. or move to a better country. If only hil could be more like Bill.

All I really want from a president is more minimum wage and less censorship. its not too much to ask.

bill was hill

bill was just driven by hill

yes, of course, because women as presidents is preposterous as slavery.
and since we've had these seething sectional differences for 100 years, one would assume civil war was imminent. common knowledge really that women have no place having responsibility.


:rolleyes: Excuse me, but your knuckes are dragging on the ground there, caveboy... You might want to think about joining us here in the 21st century.:upyours:

well done, youve made me see the president in a new light. in all the bitching about him many of us have forgotten that he isnt either of those two. 3 cheers for george! I'd vote for a third party. or move to a better country. If only hil could be more like Bill.

All I really want from a president is more minimum wage and less censorship. its not too much to ask.

I'll agree with less censorship but frankly if we continue to hike minimum wages, teenagers will find it hard to find a job.

:rolleyes: Excuse me, but your knuckes are dragging on the ground there, caveboy... You might want to think about joining us here in the 21st century.:upyours:
Callix, please do learn how to interpret sarcasm before posting insults.

Smunkee: Well, I'm just waiting till I know for sure who's running so I don't waste my time researching people who aren't running. That way, I save time.

:rolleyes: Excuse me, but your knuckes are dragging on the ground there, caveboy... You might want to think about joining us here in the 21st century.:upyours:
Perhaps you've heard of this new thing called "sarcasm"?

Neither. Clinton is an old line Democrat who is fine with socially conservative and economically farther left policies. I have no interest in supporting her. Condi is just as bad, as she's shown how stuck in the mud her head is and that she, like other Neo-cons, is unfit to run America.

I'd have to vote third party.

I'll agree with less censorship but frankly if we continue to hike minimum wages, teenagers will find it hard to find a job.
:confused::wtf:

Neither. Condi's a part of the Bush administration, and Hillary is just...bleh.

Hypothetical: Who (dramatic music) do YOU vote for? POLL COM'n UP!
I wouldn't vote for a woman. Ever. What with their PMS and whatnot, I just don't think they can be trusted with anything but the baby and the kitchen.

Smunkee: Well, I'm just waiting till I know for sure who's running so I don't waste my time researching people who aren't running. That way, I save time.

ah, I am an information junky (that's what my husband says anyway) I like to know all about everything, that way if I ever need to know I already do. LOL

ah, I am an information junky (that's what my husband says anyway) I like to know all about everything, that way if I ever need to know I already do. LOL
Oh, I have the same kind of curiosity. I'm just satisfied with waiting right now.

The Psyker: It has to do with how many employees a company could hire, especially small businesses. That's the problem with minimum wage laws, as they are often a double-edged sword.

It's his inability to change with the times, or even to be bipartisan, that turns me off to the conservatives as a whole (that and the guy who said Hitler should have finished the job).

I believe you're referring to the late comedian Bill Hicks. "Hitler had the right idea, he was just an underachiever!" Not sure what official album it was released on, but it can be found on the fan created album "I'm sorry, folks." in the track "Freebird." Should be able to find it via torrent.

Hope that helps.

I wouldn't vote for a woman. Ever. What with their PMS and whatnot, I just don't think they can be trusted with anything but the baby and the kitchen.
yeah, because those are both low risk, no-brainer jobs. :rolleyes:

My god..

Hilary Clinton vs Condaleeza Rice has to be the WORST POSSIBLE scenario.

Somebody dumb and irresponsible enough to compare the republican party to plantation owners in front of a black audience, versus one of the most two faced, obnoxious faces in politics.

The only candidate worse than Condaleeza Rice is Bill Frist.

There are women who'd make perfectly good presidents. These are not two of them.

I can just imagine it...

Clinton/Rice goes to the Middle East to negotiate talks. In the middle of it... she gets PMS.

No offense to women, but it's just a funny scenario that plays in my mind.



No wonder I'm gay XD.

My god..

Hilary Clinton vs Condaleeza Rice has to be the WORST POSSIBLE scenario.

Somebody dumb and irresponsible enough to compare the republican party to plantation owners in front of a black audience, versus one of the most two faced, obnoxious faces in politics.

The only candidate worse than Condaleeza Rice is Bill Frist.

There are women who'd make perfectly good presidents. These are not two of them.
If Hillary gets the nomination, though, they HAVE to nominate Rice. Oneupmanship(a woman AND black) is standard in politics.

That said, which women do you feel would be decent candidates for the Presidency?

Neither - I'd rather vote a woman into the office this time around.
lol - Nice...


btw, Cony has made it clear that she does not want to run so I don't think she will... But we will have to wait and see.

Oh, I have the same kind of curiosity. I'm just satisfied with waiting right now.

The Psyker: It has to do with how many employees a company could hire, especially small businesses. That's the problem with minimum wage laws, as they are often a double-edged sword.
The wtf was more at the claim of the minimum wage laws being hiked any time recently.

The wtf was more at the claim of the minimum wage laws being hiked any time recently.
Oh. Well, that's true.

Freising: ...I find that comment incredibly offensive.

Oh. Well, that's true.

Freising: ...I find that comment incredibly offensive.

Well, I've been around enough women to figure that out. Sometimes truth can hurt, ya know? But more so that was all a joke.

EDITSU: Okay, just please don't make that kind of joke.

If it were possible to vote for her, I'd go with Madeleine Albright.
(She was born in Prague, so she's not eligible.)

If it were possible to vote for her, I'd go with Madeleine Albright.
(She was born in Prague, so she's not eligible.)
Was she? Huh. Shows what I knew.

EDITSU: Okay, just please don't make that kind of joke.

*shudders at the thought of raging Smunkee*

hey, people without names, no response on hwy a civil war or did i miss something?

Hillary...er...no... Condoleezza Rice YES!

McCain all the way!

Unless somehow we can make a real Mackenzie Allen (from Commander In Chief). I'd vote for her.

Neither. I move to British Columbia.
Surely you mean British Albertawanitoba?

Surely you mean British Albertawanitoba?

Nah, if NS is any indication, British Columbia, Canada has a bunch of hot girls.

If Hillary could garantee (on pain of death) that she wouldn't screw with my constitutional rights as they are now, I MIGHT be interested in voting for her. Given her track record though, she won't be getting my vote.

I'd vote Hillary. Why? Because I don't vote for Republicans. Period.

I'd vote Hillary. Why? Because I don't vote for Republicans. Period.

thats just retarded

but heh, i guess its not saying much if you only vote democrat :upyours:

thats just retarded

but heh, i guess its not saying much if you only vote democrat :upyours:

No, I'm not one of those "I vote for the person, not the party" people. Because the person is a member of the party, and will probably do what the party wants them to do. Democrats only sometimes share my political beliefs, and republicans NEVER do.

Please don't call me a retard, it's rude.

I know quite enough about Hillary to know that she makes me sick, literally. Lucky for you, Hillary supports universal healthcare, so you'd also afford to get well. :)I put Hilary, but after reading the comments i think i'd go with neither.Um, yeah, since there's almost no content in any of the posts before yours other than "OMG Hillary!" or "Ick everybody!" Rather than being swayed by what everyone else says, you might want to look into the candidates and their ideas yourself.

I'll take the liberatarian canidate, thanks.

Hitlery is the worst of the two canidates. Doesn't anyone remember all the bullshit about video games she pulled? That is just the tip of the iceburg.

I'd vote Hillary. Why? Because I don't vote for Republicans. Period.

SO your a straightline party voter eh? You know that is the worst kind of voter?

Condi



not really, knee jerk reaction "anyone but Hillary" and missed the "neither" option, however, I am scared to say niether too, in case that means I have to vote for another person without knowledge of who (like I could be forced to vote for Kerry or something else equally vomit inducing)

Hehe, yeah... isn't Hillary one of the signs of the apocolypse?

I'd have to go with Hillary of this one too.

That's not to say that Condi wouldn't make a great president. She just has quite a few things riding against her.

1. She's black. Instant loss until the year 2157. ((And I'm black so I wasn't being racist.))

2. She doesn't really seem to have any kind of mind of her own and is completely riding off the coat-tails of President Bush.

3. She doesn't seem like the right person for the job. I want a president in the White House that has some kind of mind of their own.

Lucky for you, Hillary supports universal healthcare, so you'd also afford to get well.
Yeah, in 6 months after standing in line until you were on your deathbed, and being taxed out the wazoo to pay for it. Yeah, that's much better.

You say Rice v. Clinton in 2008? Fair enough...it's your opinion...but that's really stretching it. Do you honestly think that the majority of Americans are ready for a woman president, let alone have both candidates be women? While I'm not opposed to the idea, history shows that women get things last. That means that we have a better chance of having a black or latino male president than even a white female...and Condi's a black female...which I'm sorry, takes her out of the race at this point in time. Racism sucks, but to deny its existance is naive.

Now, you assume that the majority of women would vote for a woman. I don't. I think that's a very short-sided view of women voters, saying that they will vote on gender, which isn't even an issue, ahead of all the issues at hand. On top of that are the moral issues at stake taking Bill into account, and a lot of women don't like Hilary staying with Bill after he cheated on her. It makes her seem weak.

I think Hilary will run, and I think she'll lose in the primaries. She may be popular in New York, but Democrats as a whole don't like her that much. She lacks any core values at all. She is as much as a flip-flopper as Kerry was, and her current position on video game censorship pisses even me off, a noted conservative. She is alienating her own party for the sake of trying to set up a campaign, and there's no way in hell republicans would vote for her.

The GOP will not nominate Condi Rice, and I'm not even sure that she will run. Even if she does, she cannot win the primaries. There is no way a black woman can get the nomination in the GOP because, in the minds of many people (southerners...) she is already starting two steps behind everyone else. That and she will be associated with the Bush whitehouse, which would be enough to kill Jesus's political career if he was running.

Black people will not vote for Condi in the huge numbers you may expect. Black people, in general, don't like Condi. She's a sell-out to them because she's a republican and has embraced the "white world" or whatever. Black people vote democrat because they're 1. generally poor, 2. because democrats favor affirmative action and other reverse-racism measures that help the black community, and 3. because year after year black people are told how all the cards are stacked against them, and year after year the democrats promise to right all the wrongs dealt to the black community.

My outcome? I say whomever the Dems elect will get office, unless they nominate Karl Marx (or Hilary...) , because the Republicans have shot themselves in the foot too many times with Bush to be effective. The only Republican who could win would be a moderate (like McCain...) and only against an extreme liberal or a certain woman who I'm already tired of naming.

That being said, I predict that the 2012 election will be the first real one in a while, where both Republicans and Democrats have equal chances. Both sides are lacking an obvious, strong candidate, and as a result the Democrats will win just because they aren't Bush, as Kerry almost did in 04.

you just have to dig your head out of your ass to realize alot of people dont appreciate Hillary. it doesnt take much to realize alot of people really dont want her near the white house.
And that's why you're in the middle of a civil war.



Oh wait, you aren't! Next...

If that happens I vote 3rd party or kill myself.

I definitely think Condi is going to try and run though. If you think about it, noone knew who the fuck she was before 9/11...

If that happens I vote 3rd party or kill myself.

I definitely think Condi is going to try and run though. If you think about it, noone knew who the fuck she was before 9/11...

...actually anyone who wasn't ignorant to who was running their nation knew who she was...

...actually anyone who wasn't ignorant to who was running their nation knew who she was...

ugh, thats not what i meant...

I meant look at all the publicity she got after the whole 9/11 comission thing.

As for being ignorant to who is running their nation, MANY PEOPLE ARE.

Given the choice, I would choose Hillary.

I would not be thrilled to vote for her, but I would. I am greatly disturbed by the politics of Condi Rice, I am even more frightened of her neoconservative views on Foreign Policy. Neoconservatism as a movement is dead, it has been thoroughly invalidated in the course of the Bush Presidency.

Now, repeat after me everybody in the US. John McCain is NOT a moderate. He is a conservative. John McCain is NOT a maverick. He has followed the party line despite being treated horribly by Bush, Rove and their ilk. John McCain is a conservative Republican, do not let the vagaries of elective politics fool you.

There are two possible moderates in the Republican Party who are thinking about 2008. Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, and former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani of NYC.

There are two possible moderates in the Democratic Party who are thinking of running. Former Governor Mark Warner of Virginia, and Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana.

The rest are generally beholden to the base of the parties.

There are two possible moderates in the Republican Party who are thinking about 2008. Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, and former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani of NYC.

Giuliani is dead to me. He is pulling a John McCain. He did fine as mayor of NYC (except for the whole "kick the homeless out of Manhattan to make it look pretty" thing), and he is a particularly liberal Republican. But then he made an ass out of himself at the RNC, and now is saying Rick Santorum, of all people, is a "good leader."

Fuck that guy.

Giuliani is dead to me. He is pulling a John McCain. He did fine as mayor of NYC (except for the whole "kick the homeless out of Manhattan to make it look pretty" thing), and he is a particularly liberal Republican. But then he made an ass out of himself at the RNC, and now is saying Rick Santorum, of all people, is a "good leader."

Fuck that guy.
Hillary! The Reps. are dead becase of Bush and she is up in the female Dem. polls. On the other hand Bush might not step down, pesimistic I know, but with this guy anything goes.

lets just put it simple

if Hillary Clinton becomes president there will be another civil war

All right, time to start blasting the rebel scum out of the universe! I'll be signing up for Storm Trooper academy real quick.

The observation that people are so repelled by Clinton and Kerry by their personal demeanors that they'd willingly give away the United States to a certified silver spoon incompetent and his lackey shows how the average American has a short attention span and no long term perception when it comes to the good of the nation.

Hmmm... You could be right. Kind of pathetic really.

Interesting. Why are people choosing Rice over Clinton? Does it have anything to do with her being black and Clinton being white?

A lot of people didn't appreciate Bush either and if you consider the "Anybody but Bush" slogan that was so prevalant around the country and a majority of voters wanted Gore instead of Bush, we can assume that a lot of people didn't wan't him anywhere near teh white house either.

And do you remember people throwing eggs and shit at Bushs car after the election?

Where was the civil war then?

Seriously, don't you see how ridiculous it sounds to say that there will be one if Hillary is elected?

I'd rather see her than Condo in the Whitehouse but I'd rather see someone who deserves it get in.

Not enough blue-state gun-nuts. Still I'm a gun nut, so come the civil war, I'm gonna go a-huntin'.

Condoleezza

I'm not usually one to take race or sex into account, but in her we'd be killing two equal rights birds with one stone.

And she's a Republican. hehe

HRC would likely try to get universal health care passed, which would increase our taxes and possibly (as much as) double our unemployment rate.

Interesting. Why are people choosing Rice over Clinton? Does it have anything to do with her being black and Clinton being white?


Why do you assume that?

Not enough blue-state gun-nuts. Still I'm a gun nut, so come the civil war, I'm gonna go a-huntin'.

Shhh, be vewwy vewwy quiet. I'm huntin' republicans.

I'll agree with less censorship but frankly if we continue to hike minimum wages, teenagers will find it hard to find a job.

Unemployed teenagers is a small price to pay for a living wage.

I'd vote Hillary. Why? Because I don't vote for Republicans. Period.

I might vote for a Republican, if they put up a candidate for anything who was worth a flying... (forgive me if I hesitate.) The last remotely decent Republican died in Ford Theatre. No, wait. Actually, I would vote for Teddy Roosevelt.

No, I'm not one of those "I vote for the person, not the party" people. Because the person is a member of the party, and will probably do what the party wants them to do. Democrats only sometimes share my political beliefs, and republicans NEVER do.

Please don't call me a retard, it's rude.

What? The finger wasn't? I've been sorely tempted to use that thing several times, but I think it's so lame and crude, it lowers you every time you use it. If I used it too often, I'd find myself voting for Dumbya.

Neither. I move to British Columbia.


It's a great place to live!

Why do you assume that?
Assume what? I was asking what their motivation was for supporting Rice over Hillary and whether it had anything to do with race.
What do you think?

Assume what? I was asking what their motivation was for supporting Rice over Hillary and whether it had anything to do with race.
What do you think?

Actually I think it's Hillary over Rice right now. And I don't think it has anythign to do with race. I bet you that if there were only two options to choose from, that Hillary would be ahead by a much greater number.

Think of the third option as the Green party :p

HRC would likely try to get universal health care passed, which would increase our taxes and possibly (as much as) double our unemployment rate.

I dont think it would make that much of a dent. I pay about $50 a month for my healthcare benefits, thats like nothing. Of course not everyone has a decent paying job, but thats another thing that needs attention, and god forbid a Republican address that issue.

And taxes are kind of important. The gov't doesnt just raise taxes to piss you off. How do you think the Dems fix the huge deficits that Republicans leave? :cool:

I might vote for a Republican, if they put up a candidate for anything who was worth a flying... (forgive me if I hesitate.) The last remotely decent Republican died in Ford Theatre. No, wait. Actually, I would vote for Teddy Roosevelt.

Considering the change in times, its hard to say who the last decent Republican was. As I remember from political history, Republican was the better party; Dems never did shit or failed miserably at it (until FDR). I dont agree with Lincoln being that good of a president, but the last decent Republican was probably Eisenhower. The Republican party died with Nixon's resignation.

What? The finger wasn't? I've been sorely tempted to use that thing several times, but I think it's so lame and crude, it lowers you every time you use it. If I used it too often, I'd find myself voting for Dumbya.

I don't find the finger nearly as insulting, because it's just a silly little smiley.

Actually I think it's Hillary over Rice right now. And I don't think it has anythign to do with race. I bet you that if there were only two options to choose from, that Hillary would be ahead by a much greater number.

Think of the third option as the Green party :p
Well, I know Hillary will win in 08 cause, God told me she would. So if she has God on her side, how can she lose? Unless of course, God isn't necessarily siding with her, just saying she will win.

I dont think it would make that much of a dent. I pay about $50 a month for my healthcare benefits, thats like nothing.

Wow! I pay over $100 a month, and it doesn't even pay off until I've paid at least $3500 out of pocket. Do I hate my parsimonious boss? Why yes, yes I do.

Wow! I pay over $100 a month, and it doesn't even pay off until I've paid at least $3500 out of pocket. Do I hate my parsimonious boss? Why yes, yes I do.

Ouch.

Well, I know Hillary will win in 08 cause, God told me she would. So if she has God on her side, how can she lose? Unless of course, God isn't necessarily siding with her, just saying she will win.

God doesn't back Communists, for all the disrespect God generally gets from Commies.

hehe

I might vote for a Republican, if they put up a candidate for anything who was worth a flying... (forgive me if I hesitate.) The last remotely decent Republican died in Ford Theatre. No, wait. Actually, I would vote for Teddy Roosevelt.

See, that's the thing, I'm not a straight democratic party-ticket voter. I'm a straight anti-republican ticket voter. The democrats may only represent my interests sometomes, but I know that the republicans never will, at least not in the near future.

Sure, if the republicans ran a candidate that was really more like a liberal democrat or a green, yeah, I might vote for her/him. But let's face it, we all know they won't do that. So unless something changes immensely, the republican party is always against my interests.

Anyone but Hitlery

Well, I know Hillary will win in 08 cause, God told me she would. So if she has God on her side, how can she lose? Unless of course, God isn't necessarily siding with her, just saying she will win.


Next time you talk to God, ask if maybe we could have a wise leader with the best interest of all people at heart. Hopefully this person is against corruption and independent of any party.

I dont think it would make that much of a dent. I pay about $50 a month for my healthcare benefits, thats like nothing. Of course not everyone has a decent paying job, but thats another thing that needs attention, and god forbid a Republican address that issue.

And taxes are kind of important. The gov't doesnt just raise taxes to piss you off. How do you think the Dems fix the huge deficits that Republicans leave? :cool:



Considering the change in times, its hard to say who the last decent Republican was. As I remember from political history, Republican was the better party; Dems never did shit or failed miserably at it (until FDR). I dont agree with Lincoln being that good of a president, but the last decent Republican was probably Eisenhower. The Republican party died with Nixon's resignation.

I'll give you Ike. I'd probably vote for him over anybody who's run since 1980. He should have vetoed all that symbolic crap that the congress spit out in 1959 though: adding, "under God," to some Socialist guys poem, declaring May 1 as, "Loyalty Day," declaring May 1 as, "Law Day."

He did recognize the, "military-industrial complex," for the threat to American liberty that it's now showing itself to be.

God doesn't back Communists, for all the disrespect God generally gets from Commies.

hehe

Since when do any Communists have a chance of winning in '08? If you're trying to say that Hillary is a Communist... I'm afraid you're out of touch with reality, she is much too conservative to even be remotely Communist.

Anyone but Hitlery
Nader?

Anyone but Hitlery

Clever and so well supported. Okay, I almost used that damn finger-thing! I'll go for more of a Christian approach. :fluffle: Fluffle thy enema!

Anyone but Hitlery

A Godwin from a Kahanist. Go figure.

Since when do any Communists have a chance of winning in '08? If you're trying to say that Hillary is a Communist... I'm afraid you're out of touch with reality, she is much too conservative to even be remotely Communist.
no you are mistaken. It's not that she's too conservative, its that she's way way to liberal and socialistic.

no you are mistaken. It's not that she's too conservative, its that she's way way to liberal and socialistic.

For a Democrat, she's definitely conservative. She won't take a strong opposition to the war, she opposes gay marriage, and she's a fiscal moderate/conservative. (Her husband, who has a longer record, was certainly a fiscal conservative.) Unless you believe that a conservative can never, ever raise taxes regardless of how deeply into debt the nation is spiraling.

Basically, her only liberal stances are on health care and abortion, and with abortion, she claims to be "anti-abortion" while believing it should remain legal since criminalizing it just makes it worse.

So basically she is a Moderate, but conservative for a Democrat.

I'm almost tempted to do a Primaries 2008 thread to see if Hillary even leads in NS's Dem population.

Speculation:

Sometime soon, Cheney resigns due to "health reasons", McCain becomes new VP. In a year and maybe a half, before the election campaign really starts, Bush steps down to "spend more time with his family", McCain becomes president. McCain starts to run things a little different from Bush and, after a lot of people gave him credit for trying to make things better, he is elected, beating probable Dem candidate John Edwards easily. Meanwhile, George Prescott Bush will start his political career, waiting to take over after McCain...

For a Democrat, she's definitely conservative. She won't take a strong opposition to the war, she opposes gay marriage, and she's a fiscal moderate/conservative. (Her husband, who has a longer record, was certainly a fiscal conservative.) Unless you believe that a conservative can never, ever raise taxes regardless of how deeply into debt the nation is spiraling.

Basically, her only liberal stances are on health care and abortion, and with abortion, she claims to be "anti-abortion" while believing it should remain legal since criminalizing it just makes it worse.

So basically she is a Moderate, but conservative for a Democrat.
No, no your missing the pointin the weird mindset of the republicans shes a socialist like any one left of right-center.

Interesting. Why are people choosing Rice over Clinton? Does it have anything to do with her being black and Clinton being white?

We're just smart enough to vote Condi over Clinton because Clinton is an idiot.

Unemployed teenagers is a small price to pay for a living wage.

Ahh but if teenagers aren't working, they will be out committing crimes. Do you want to see that happening?

Ahh but if teenagers aren't working, they will be out committing crimes. Do you want to see that happening?

:rolleyes:

I didn't have a job until after I graduated high school, and the only crime I committed was J-walking.

ok well im going on topic...

condi or mccain

democrats blast the president and republicans, except they dont offer any alternative.
they also dont realize the US is at war...seriously. theyre plans to fight the war in iraq arent much different, other than leaving quicker and making the US look weak. =D

:rolleyes:

I didn't have a job until after I graduated high school, and the only crime I committed was J-walking.
You criminal! :eek:

ok well im going on topic...

condi or mccain

democrats blast the president and republicans, except they dont offer any alternative.
they also dont realize the US is at war...seriously. theyre plans to fight the war in iraq arent much different, other than leaving quicker and making the US look weak. =D


The US already looks weak, and stupid as well. The longer it stays in Iraq, the more idiotic it looks.

You criminal! :eek:

J-walking teenagers will be the downfall of western civilization as we know it! What have I done?!

J-walking teenagers will be the downfall of western civilization as we know it! What have I done?!
Are you calling me an evil do-er?! VIVA LA J-walking!!!

I'm almost tempted to do a Primaries 2008 thread to see if Hillary even leads in NS's Dem population.
do it. i doubt she would. it would be interesting to see
a) who is on there
b) who gets votes.

i say, bully!

I'll agree with less censorship but frankly if we continue to hike minimum wages, teenagers will find it hard to find a job.

You act as if we raise the minimum wage every year. The last raise we got to the minimum wage was 1997 under President Clinton to 5.15 per hour. That was 9 years ago. Before that it took 14 years to raise the minimum wage from 3.35 per hour to 4.75 and 5.15 under Clinton.

That is an irresponsible argument from an economic standpoint. If the minimum wage was just for teenagers then you might have a small point. But there are a vast number of hourly jobs that pay minimum wage in this country and lest we forget tipped employees that can be paid less than half of minimum wage due to the tipped worker credit restaurants get.

Let's see if we can follow the bouncing economic ball, hmm?

The ground rules are as follows:

1. The United States is a service economy. We gave away 80+% of our manufacturing sector to foreign interest and those manufacturers that still have HQ's in the US outsource their work to prevent paying the higher prevailing US salary/hourly structure. CFO's call it lowering their overhead.

2. The minimum wage was always intended to be a LIVING WAGE at a median above the poverty line.

3. I will use prevailing economic conditions for the average middle-class worker.

4. A 40 hour work week with no overtime.

US Minimum Wage is 5.15 per hour, this is 206.00 a week before taxes. Always figure 20% is taken out in taxes at the 0 deduction level and 18% at the 1 deduction level. 206.00-41.20=164.80. This is a base monthly income of $659.20.

Average monthly rent is 684.00 per month according to the United States Bureau of the Census. So we are now in negative dollars relative to monthly expenses. Total <$24.80>.

I will continue adding up monthly expenses.

Automobile Insurance= $80.00 per month (this is 939.00 per year the US Cost of Auto insurance. Total <104.80>

Automobile payment= $320.00 (based upon a six year, new car loan with competitive, prime lending rates) Total <$424.80>

Gas for automobile (3.25 per gallon x a 12 gallon gas tank =39.00 per fill-up) twice monthly= $78.00 Total <$502.80>

Power bill= $120.00 per month (this is using the monthly estimated rate plan offered by all major power companies). Total <$622.80>

Phone bill (cellular rate plan/or local service only)= $60.00 per month. Total <$682.80>

Grocery bill (Single person, discount grocer rates) $200.00 per month. Total <$882.80>

Clothing monthly (Based on 500.00 per year) $42.00 per month. Total <$924.80>.

So we are talking about an average monthly expense for a single person of $1608.80 of which we are in the hole <$924.80>.

I am using the most conservative figures available to me.

So you tell me, genius. How can a single person working for minimum wage ever pay the bills? Even if you are driving a used car, you're still in the hole. If you only pay liability insurance (the finance company will automatically repossess your vehicle if you do not carry full coverage, btw), you're still in the hole. You notice I did not include health and life insurance in this scenario.

In order to pay all of these bills you need to make $19,298.40 per year or make about $372.00 per week after taxes.

Who is more likely to raise the minimum wage? The Democrats. Republicans always kick and scream about raising the minimum wage as if it were a hand out to everyone. They say that a truly free market will provide living wages, this is patently untrue.

Corporations will always pay as little as legally possible for an hourly worker. Now most companies do not allow overtime hours and full time employment.

Just how in the grand macroeconomic scheme of things will the free market make this adjustment for workers?

I put Hilary, but after reading the comments i think i'd go with neither. I don't have any information about either of their platforms (stupid ilinformed me), but i can't stand the way Bush sticks to his riggid, simplistic ideology. It's his inability to change with the times, or even to be bipartisan, that turns me off to the conservatives as a whole (that and the guy who said Hitler should have finished the job).

Bush is not a conservative!!!:mad:

He has increased the size of government, favors open borders, would allow foreign nations to control American ports, etc...

Watch for the conservative backlash! It is coming in a big way!!

Bush is not a conservative!!!:mad:

He has increased the size of government, favors open borders, would allow foreign nations to control American ports, etc...

Watch for the conservative backlash! It is coming in a big way!!

I seriously doubt that much of a pendulum swing will occur on the political right. The ball has been pretty much in the conservative's court since LBJ as far as winning the WH goes. Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, Bush except for three terms of two Democrats one for Carter and two for Clinton and certainly neither of them were flaming liberals. When the next Presidential election rolls around it will be 7 four year terms for Republicans to 3 four year terms for Democrats.

In fact, I'm not sure how much further politically right the political pendulum can swing.

I expect the Democrats will pick up one House of Congress in the midterm and the WH in 2008. Not because of a huge swing to the left, but a marginal shift to the left and voter backlash on the Republicans. Let me make it clear that I doubt Mrs. Clinton will get the nomination. If the Dems are smart it will be a guy like Governor Mark Warner.

It's just like Labour is headed for a hard fall. Mr. Blair is marginally more popular than President Bush, but the midterms in the next election will be punishing for Labour. Probably not enough to chase Labour, but enough to where Mr. Brown will find it seriously tough sledding when he inherits the mess Tony Blair leaves. I doubt Mr. Brown will get much of a chance to prove himself by the time the next election cycle is due, and the Tories will have their best chance in years to go back into the leadership and at 40 years of age, Mr. Cameron looks to have a bright future for the Conservatives and he could conceivably lead the Tories back to political relevance again.

Voting for Condie or Hillary is about as attractive as getting anally impaled onto a white hot iron rod.

You act as if we raise the minimum wage every year. The last raise we got to the minimum wage was 1997 under President Clinton to 5.15 per hour. That was 9 years ago. Before that it took 14 years to raise the minimum wage from 3.35 per hour to 4.75 and 5.15 under Clinton.

That is an irresponsible argument from an economic standpoint. If the minimum wage was just for teenagers then you might have a small point. But there are a vast number of hourly jobs that pay minimum wage in this country and lest we forget tipped employees that can be paid less than half of minimum wage due to the tipped worker credit restaurants get.

Let's see if we can follow the bouncing economic ball, hmm?

The ground rules are as follows:

1. The United States is a service economy. We gave away 80+% of our manufacturing sector to foreign interest and those manufacturers that still have HQ's in the US outsource their work to prevent paying the higher prevailing US salary/hourly structure. CFO's call it lowering their overhead.

2. The minimum wage was always intended to be a LIVING WAGE at a median above the poverty line.

3. I will use prevailing economic conditions for the average middle-class worker.

4. A 40 hour work week with no overtime.

US Minimum Wage is 5.15 per hour, this is 206.00 a week before taxes. Always figure 20% is taken out in taxes at the 0 deduction level and 18% at the 1 deduction level. 206.00-41.20=164.80. This is a base monthly income of $659.20.

Average monthly rent is 684.00 per month according to the United States Bureau of the Census. So we are now in negative dollars relative to monthly expenses. Total <$24.80>.

I will continue adding up monthly expenses.

Automobile Insurance= $80.00 per month (this is 939.00 per year the US Cost of Auto insurance. Total <104.80>

Automobile payment= $320.00 (based upon a six year, new car loan with competitive, prime lending rates) Total <$424.80>

Gas for automobile (3.25 per gallon x a 12 gallon gas tank =39.00 per fill-up) twice monthly= $78.00 Total <$502.80>

Power bill= $120.00 per month (this is using the monthly estimated rate plan offered by all major power companies). Total <$622.80>

Phone bill (cellular rate plan/or local service only)= $60.00 per month. Total <$682.80>

Grocery bill (Single person, discount grocer rates) $200.00 per month. Total <$882.80>

Clothing monthly (Based on 500.00 per year) $42.00 per month. Total <$924.80>.

So we are talking about an average monthly expense for a single person of $1608.80 of which we are in the hole <$924.80>.

I am using the most conservative figures available to me.

So you tell me, genius. How can a single person working for minimum wage ever pay the bills? Even if you are driving a used car, you're still in the hole. If you only pay liability insurance (the finance company will automatically repossess your vehicle if you do not carry full coverage, btw), you're still in the hole. You notice I did not include health and life insurance in this scenario.

In order to pay all of these bills you need to make $19,298.40 per year or make about $372.00 per week after taxes.

Who is more likely to raise the minimum wage? The Democrats. Republicans always kick and scream about raising the minimum wage as if it were a hand out to everyone. They say that a truly free market will provide living wages, this is patently untrue.

Corporations will always pay as little as legally possible for an hourly worker. Now most companies do not allow overtime hours and full time employment.

Just how in the grand macroeconomic scheme of things will the free market make this adjustment for workers?

Not only does Communal Property claims to be a bigger military expert than Colin Powell, he also believes Supply Side Economics will truly improve the lot of the working class.