NationStates Jolt Archive

In the Congressional elections of 2006 (my first time voting), I based my voting decisions on my stances in relation to three issues:

1) The need for a new strategy in Iraq
2) The need to curb the trend of expanded executive branch power
3) The need to restore habeas corpus to individuals accused of participating in terrorist activity

Ultimately, I cast my votes along Democratic party lines in hopes of seeing changes made on these three fronts (guess it didn't quite work, but it was better than a continued Republican majority). I think that this approach of isolating the issues one sees as most important is effective in determining which candidates are best tailored to your wants and needs, more so than party affiliation, charisma, or marketing. So, utilizing this approach, what three issues are most important in determining which candidates you will vote for in 2008?


Mine are:

1) The need for major healthcare reform

2) The need to transition out of Iraq

3) The need for bipartisanship

1) Global Warming.

2) Iraq.

3) Debt.

In the Congressional elections of 2006 (my first time voting), I based my voting decisions on my stances in relation to three issues:

1) The need for a new strategy in Iraq
2) The need to curb the trend of expanded executive branch power
3) The need to restore habeas corpus to individuals accused of participating in terrorist activity

Ultimately, I cast my votes along Democratic party lines in hopes of seeing changes made on these three fronts (guess it didn't quite work, but it was better than a continued Republican majority). I think that this approach of isolating the issues one sees as most important is effective in determining which candidates are best tailored to your wants and needs, more so than party affiliation, charisma, or marketing. So, utilizing this approach, what three issues are most important in determining which candidates you will vote for in 2008?


Mine are:

1) The need for major healthcare reform

2) The need to transition out of Iraq

3) The need for bipartisanship

(1) How about Hillary's approach?

(2) Bush's "deferral" to the generals on the ground isn't good enough?

(3) Do you mean not demonizing one half of the populace with egotistical, fact-lacking bullshit through as many media formats as possible?

Just asking.

(1) How about Hillary's approach?

Hillary is awfully warlike; beyond Bush.

I can only base it on who's lies I believe more. Otherwise it's a throw away vote.

But, supposing I genuinely have a choice,

1) The need for a major overhaul of the democratic system.
2) The need to keeping corporations under extremely tight legislative and political control.
3) The need to focus on internal factors before caring about external ones.

Hillary is awfully warlike; beyond Bush.

Regarding healthcare, she's warlike? That's what my question was about.
I'm pretty sure Bush isn't much of a supporter of healthcare, regardless of his lack of military experience.

(1) How about Hillary's approach?

(2) Bush's "deferral" to the generals on the ground isn't good enough?

(3) Do you mean not demonizing one half of the populace with egotistical, fact-lacking bullshit through as many media formats as possible?

Just asking.

1) Yeah, how 'bout it! :D

2) Nope. We need to see a steady transfer of military responsibility to the Iraqis and, more important, an aggressive push for political reconciliation.

3) I mean members of each party compromising and working together to solve the nation's problems.

1) Yeah, how 'bout it! :DLike i was saying, "just asking".
:)

2) Nope. We need to see a steady transfer of military responsibility to the Iraqis and, more important, an aggressive push for political reconciliation.Are you suggesting the country we invaded under the most dubious and fallacious of distinctions should actually be RETURNED to whom it was usurped from? Radical.

3) I mean members of each party compromising and working together to solve the nation's problems.You mean what they were always supposed to do ... instead of the bullshit they've been dealing since the "Contract On" ... whoops, "Contract 'With' America"?

The three factors for me are

1.) Is the candidate non-interventionist concerning foreign policy?

2.) Is the candidate against raising spending?

3.) Will the candidate reduce the powers of the executive?

If the answer is 'no' to any of these, I will not support him.

1) Civil Liberties

2) Environment and Energy Policies(which I believe to be the same issue)

3) Promoting a Mud Wrestling Renaissance. *nod*

Are you suggesting the country we invaded under the most dubious and fallacious of distinctions should actually be RETURNED to whom it was usurped from? Radical.
Well, ya know, we liberals tend to have ebil radical ideas like that one from time to time, all while we burn American flags while drinking the blood of the unborn.
You mean what they were always supposed to do ... instead of the bullshit they've been dealing since the "Contract On" ... whoops, "Contract 'With' America"?
Indeed. Although I'd hardly give most Democrats any credit for working towards compromise.

1) Iraq

2) Debt/Budget/Economy (they're connected).

3) Handing the social conservatives their ass on a silver platter with Rudy Giuliani.

I'm not American, but I'll add my opinion:

Iraq.

Global warming.

Stagnant economy.

1) education (which I couldn't put 3 times because its been done)
2) social welfare
3) rebuilding New Orleans

though things like gay rights, civil liberties and environmentalism also score high I think its time a world superpower show this "Earth" what it thinks of it by creating an impregnable fortress of Mardi Gras!

Here are mine
1) Economy (We are having a bit of trouble there)

2) Foreign Policy (Need I say more?)

3) Illegal Immigration (Something witty)

Mine are

1.Reduction of Government control of the economy.
2.Reduction of Governemnt control in our personal lives(Including the restoration of our rights!)
3.Reduction of Government in general

I'm not voting, but the most important issues in my view are:

1) Repairing America's capabilities in foreign policy (by solving issues like the Iranian nuclear program, the Palestinian state and so on).

2) Repairing the healthcare system.

3) Getting the US actively and constructively involved in global climate policy.

1) A reasoned, realistic, and responsible approach to ending day-to-day direct military involvement in Iraq by a timely withdrawal of forces, in order to properly refocus on actual threats.

2) A commitment to restoring reasoned, realistic diplomacy.

3) Bipartisanship.

1. Foreign Policy. Specifically, curbing America's love to force its will/law on foreign nations.

2. Free Trade. Can you guys actually go a term without tarrifing something?

3. Stephen Harper. Please kidnap him. Please.

1) Civil Liberties
2) Energy policy
3) Taxes

When I say civil liberties I mean all of them, not just free speech and fair trial but guns and privacy and all the others.

There has to be an expansion of nuclear power in America if we're going to have any hope of being energy independent in the near future and with all the coal (which America has tons of) you save you could start liquefaction and provide temporary relief to the consumer at the pump.

And finally, taxes are going to be a very important issue to me. The Dow reached new heights under Bush but growth is slowing and if we're to head into a recession the last thing you want to do is shove a massive tax hike up the ass of every American. I'm not saying that it's okay to cut taxes without slashing budget but a tax hike during a recession would probably just make things worse. That and I hate my money, which I worked hard for, being pissed away by the likes of Amy Klobuchar. I know what she was like as prosecutor in Hennepin and she seems to believe in tyranny by majority so sayeth a recent Strib quote where she expressed discontent at the thought of the senate minority being able to hold up legislation.

1. A long-term policy working towards energy independence.

2. A foreign policy centered around repairing and improving ties with Latin America.

3. A renewed emphasis in Afghanistan once Iraq force levels have been reduced.

3. Stephen Harper. Please kidnap him. Please.WUAHAHAHA..

good one :D

1. Will the Candidate be Conservative on the fiscal front?
2. Will the Candidate be Liberal on the Social Front?
3. Will the Candidate cut back Government size, both physically and power?

WUAHAHAHA..

good one :D
Please.

(1: Pro-Gay Rights.
(2: Pro-Living Wage.
(3: Pro-Universal Healthcare.

a couple of times the Christmas wish list included "Bipartisanship"

??? what is that, and why is that more important than -lets say- Healthcare, education , Justice system reform or trade balance.

Universal healthcare can only be achieved through compulsory expropriation of the insurance companies and all private health assets.

3. Stephen Harper. Please kidnap him. Please.

And please, for the love of God and all that is Holy...

KEEP HIM!

Universal healthcare can only be achieved through compulsory expropriation of the insurance companies and all private health assets.

Baby-steps, Comrade, baby-steps.

And please, for the love of God and all that is Holy...

KEEP HIM!No, you have to. You guys owe us big.

Universal healthcare can only be achieved through compulsory expropriation of the insurance companies and all private health assets.
And that's the difference between us. I may not approve of your political and economic beliefs but I'll tolerate them, let you have your commune, your collective. But you, you can't stand someone like me having private insurance, personal choice, individuality. Take my love, take my land, take me where I cannot stand, I don't care because I'm still free, you can't take the sky from me.

Take my love, take my land, take me where I cannot stand, I don't care because I'm still free, you can't take the sky from me.

They can, however, cancel you after one season.

Bastards

Well, ya know, we liberals tend to have ebil radical ideas like that one from time to time, all while we burn American flags while drinking the blood of the unborn.
Guy like.

Indeed. Although I'd hardly give most Democrats any credit for working towards compromise.
About that would be that one, democracy itself lends to everyones' opinion, which in many circumstances means nothing'll get done anytime soon - and when that particular voice is shuttled out repeatedly and vociferously over 6 years, a certain threshold of tolerance becomes markedly absent in further procedures.
I've noticed, though, that they've only taken a few actions to make me respect them as decision makers of late.

They can, however, cancel you after one season.

Bastards

And they ALSO can put a new movie into the works, perhaps?!?
*depending upon sales of collectors' edition*
*scuttlebutt*

I'm not American but if I was:
1) Non-aggressive foriegn policy (get out of Iraq, or at least a plan and don't fuck things up in Iran)
2) Education (both public and post-secondary)
3) Environment/Climate Change/Energy Efficiency

Although I'd also consider Gay Rights, Universal Health Care and Social Welfare programs important.

1) Get out of Iraq. That'll free up a passel of money.
2) Universal health care.
3) Support for small farms and conversion of dirt, tobacco and PMU farms to biofuel farms, towards the addressing of energy independence.

It's hard to cut it down to three issues, because I, like my Nation on this site, give a lot of attention to Education and the Environment. As much as I support these, we have to have healthy bodies first and keeping those bodies fed will keep them healthy.

Energy, like health care, is basic infrastructure: you need healthy bodies to build the infrastructure and you need energy to aid in that building and to continue to run it once it's built. In the 21st century, food and fuel come from a single source and that is farms. Farms also employ, so there's an added bonus in and of itself.

Give the people healthy bodies, give them energy to pursue, and we can take it from there.

1. Ending the Iraq occupiation, remain and finish the job in Afghanistan.

2.Breaking the powers of "Special Interests" then turning around and raping them for a change.

3.Fix Healthcare. (Not by privatizing it)

(Bonus). Charge anyone who profited from Iraq with High treason, if convicted seize their estimated profits and use it to reverse the debt.
Lock them up in the Rapist section of a Maximum security prison.

And that's the difference between us. I may not approve of your political and economic beliefs but I'll tolerate them, let you have your commune, your collective. But you, you can't stand someone like me having private insurance, personal choice, individuality. Take my love, take my land, take me where I cannot stand, I don't care because I'm still free, you can't take the sky from me.
You would be nothing if it wasn't for the work of countless millions of humans before you, I'll honestly never get the arrogant egocentrism of you individualists, libertarians imho are no different than spoilt teenage idealists who want an intellectual excuse not to use social skills.

...libertarians imho are no different than spoilt teenage idealists who want an intellectual excuse not to use social skills.
You do realise of course that nothing requires fewer social skills than armed revolution and dictatorship, right?

You do realise of course that nothing requires fewer social skills than armed revolution and dictatorship, right?
Wow, now I really do know you thought that up in all of 3 seconds, any evidence for this ridiculous claim?


... I thought not.

Wow, now I really do know you thought that up in all of 3 seconds, any evidence for this ridiculous claim?
Well, you're basically in favour of shooting deviants. I don't really see how there is any course of inter-human action that would require less social interaction than pulling a trigger.

Well, you're basically in favour of shooting deviants. I don't really see how there is any course of inter-human action that would require less social interaction than pulling a trigger.
They're nonpeople.

They're nonpeople.
;)