NationStates Jolt Archive

ya but one of those bozos is gonna win eh?

Can any of these idiots actually win?

Let's take a look at the pool:
Obama: novelty candidate. Honestly can't believe enough swing votes will go for him. I think the only reason he's still in thing is 'cause he's black. Or maybe it's all his experience. Oh, wait...

Clinton: Same deal, plus she looks like she eats babies. And her husband nearly got booted. Not that he deserved it, but that's a different thread.

John Edwards: Didn't he lose in '04, with the guy who looked like a horse? And yet, he's probably the best-looking Democrat.

Kucinich: Looks like some sort of elf. Or maybe a gnome. Plus his name's not in my Firefox spell checker.

Mike Gravel: Huh? Gravel? Like the little stones? Oh, GraVEL. Yeah, only ever heard of him on Colbert and The Daily Show.

Bill Richardson: Who? Wait, I know him! Great candidate, lots of experience... Nice, let's elect.. oh. He's Mexican. Good luck buddy! *DNC HQ erupts in laughter*

Joe Biden: Who the hell is Joe Biden? Oh, he's the guy everyone thought was racist because he complimented Obama! Yeah, not gonna happen.

Chris Dodd: Who are these people?

And now the Republicans:
Fred Thompson: Oh, he was the DA on Law & Order! Kudos to him for giving the spot to McCoy (Though I think his talents were best served as EADA). But yeah, I think an important part of being President is not looking like you're asleep.

Mike Huckabee: Sorry, but President Huckabee just sounds like something out of a comic. Don't like the pastor thing (I'm big on separation of church and state), but knowing this country, that might help him.

John McCain: Way too good for the position to actually make it. If he can win the primary (yeah, right) he's the only Republican I'd vote for. But, like I said, he's to good to go anywhere.

Mitt Romney: The Mormon! Right, sure. He'll make it, because Republicans are so tolerant of Mormons, and know what they are. Besides, a lot of Mormons kind of creep me out (Romney included). I don't know why.

Rudy Giuliani: President of 9/11. Can't make 9/11 a sentence without 9/11 slipping in 9/11. If 9/11 we have a "subway series," I'm moving to 9/11 Canada. Besides, hasn't he 9/11 been divorced like 911 times? I'm sure the 9/11 "values voters" will go for that... 9/11. 9/11

Ron Paul: Don't know enough about him to pass judgment. From Wikipedia, I get that he's got some libertarian views, not good for a Republican candidate. And he supports state choice on abortion, which is good, I guess. But his drug stance will bite him.

Duncan Hunter: I have honestly never heard this name before. I don't think Colbert and Stewart have even made fun of him. Not gonna happen.

So that was nice and lengthy for y'all. Anyone who reads it all the way through gets a cookie.*

Subject to availability. No, I don't have any cookies. And how would you expect me to get them to you anyway? Idiot.

I still demand my cookie!

I still demand my cookie!

Me too!

*sends Ralph Nader to wedgie you into unconsciousness*

Remember when the Americans had good presidents? We need some one like Eisenhower.

I mean, you like Ike, I like Ike, everybody likes Ike, right?

You have accurately seen into the American Psyche. Well done.

And now what. I mean I like Richadson. He really is most qualified. Hillary has no experience. She hasn't done anything for the most part as senator and being first lady counts as doing something since when.

Damn you asterisk. I want my cookie and I'm not an idiot!

Remember when the Americans had good presidents? We need some one like Eisenhower.

I mean, you like Ike, I like Ike, everybody likes Ike, right?Oh, goodness no. I'd prefer someone that didn't hate democracy.

America needs a president that can make the world like America again.

America needs a president that will reverse the assault on the rights of people.

America needs a president who will end the torture of detainees and allow for them to face trial.

America needs a president who will always use diplomacy before force.

America needs a president that will say that the money spent on the War on Drugs would be better spent on healthcare and education.

America needs a president who will actually listen to the people.

Too bad the candidates don't fit this framework.

And that's how the cookie crumbles...

Can any of these idiots actually win?

Let's take a look at the pool:
Obama: novelty candidate. Honestly can't believe enough swing votes will go for him. I think the only reason he's still in thing is 'cause he's black. Or maybe it's all his experience. Oh, wait...

Clinton: Same deal, plus she looks like she eats babies. And her husband nearly got booted. Not that he deserved it, but that's a different thread.

John Edwards: Didn't he lose in '04, with the guy who looked like a horse? And yet, he's probably the best-looking Democrat.

Kucinich: Looks like some sort of elf. Or maybe a gnome. Plus his name's not in my Firefox spell checker.

Mike Gravel: Huh? Gravel? Like the little stones? Oh, GraVEL. Yeah, only ever heard of him on Colbert and The Daily Show.

Bill Richardson: Who? Wait, I know him! Great candidate, lots of experience... Nice, let's elect.. oh. He's Mexican. Good luck buddy! *DNC HQ erupts in laughter*

Joe Biden: Who the hell is Joe Biden? Oh, he's the guy everyone thought was racist because he complimented Obama! Yeah, not gonna happen.

Chris Dodd: Who are these people?

And now the Republicans:
Fred Thompson: Oh, he was the DA on Law & Order! Kudos to him for giving the spot to McCoy (Though I think his talents were best served as EADA). But yeah, I think an important part of being President is not looking like you're asleep.

Mike Huckabee: Sorry, but President Huckabee just sounds like something out of a comic. Don't like the pastor thing (I'm big on separation of church and state), but knowing this country, that might help him.

John McCain: Way too good for the position to actually make it. If he can win the primary (yeah, right) he's the only Republican I'd vote for. But, like I said, he's to good to go anywhere.

Mitt Romney: The Mormon! Right, sure. He'll make it, because Republicans are so tolerant of Mormons, and know what they are. Besides, a lot of Mormons kind of creep me out (Romney included). I don't know why.

Rudy Giuliani: President of 9/11. Can't make 9/11 a sentence without 9/11 slipping in 9/11. If 9/11 we have a "subway series," I'm moving to 9/11 Canada. Besides, hasn't he 9/11 been divorced like 911 times? I'm sure the 9/11 "values voters" will go for that... 9/11. 9/11

Ron Paul: Don't know enough about him to pass judgment. From Wikipedia, I get that he's got some libertarian views, not good for a Republican candidate. And he supports state choice on abortion, which is good, I guess. But his drug stance will bite him.

Duncan Hunter: I have honestly never heard this name before. I don't think Colbert and Stewart have even made fun of him. Not gonna happen.

So that was nice and lengthy for y'all. Anyone who reads it all the way through gets a cookie.*

Subject to availability. No, I don't have any cookies. And how would you expect me to get them to you anyway? Idiot.

08 Elections: Shut up, you infantile morons!

The irony. It burns.

Don't Insult infants!Meanie...If I had to choose(And I mean HAD TO) I would say Ron Paul. He's not in my top 10,000 choices for president but he's better then the others.

I'd vote for Katganistan.

http://www.thattherepaul.com/images/colbert-dinner.gif

Colbert 08

Can any of these idiots actually win?

Let's take a look at the pool:
Obama: novelty candidate. Honestly can't believe enough swing votes will go for him. I think the only reason he's still in thing is 'cause he's black. Or maybe it's all his experience. Oh, wait...

Clinton: Same deal, plus she looks like she eats babies. And her husband nearly got booted. Not that he deserved it, but that's a different thread.

John Edwards: Didn't he lose in '04, with the guy who looked like a horse? And yet, he's probably the best-looking Democrat.

Kucinich: Looks like some sort of elf. Or maybe a gnome. Plus his name's not in my Firefox spell checker.

Mike Gravel: Huh? Gravel? Like the little stones? Oh, GraVEL. Yeah, only ever heard of him on Colbert and The Daily Show.

Bill Richardson: Who? Wait, I know him! Great candidate, lots of experience... Nice, let's elect.. oh. He's Mexican. Good luck buddy! *DNC HQ erupts in laughter*

Joe Biden: Who the hell is Joe Biden? Oh, he's the guy everyone thought was racist because he complimented Obama! Yeah, not gonna happen.

Chris Dodd: Who are these people?

And now the Republicans:
Fred Thompson: Oh, he was the DA on Law & Order! Kudos to him for giving the spot to McCoy (Though I think his talents were best served as EADA). But yeah, I think an important part of being President is not looking like you're asleep.

Mike Huckabee: Sorry, but President Huckabee just sounds like something out of a comic. Don't like the pastor thing (I'm big on separation of church and state), but knowing this country, that might help him.

John McCain: Way too good for the position to actually make it. If he can win the primary (yeah, right) he's the only Republican I'd vote for. But, like I said, he's to good to go anywhere.

Mitt Romney: The Mormon! Right, sure. He'll make it, because Republicans are so tolerant of Mormons, and know what they are. Besides, a lot of Mormons kind of creep me out (Romney included). I don't know why.

Rudy Giuliani: President of 9/11. Can't make 9/11 a sentence without 9/11 slipping in 9/11. If 9/11 we have a "subway series," I'm moving to 9/11 Canada. Besides, hasn't he 9/11 been divorced like 911 times? I'm sure the 9/11 "values voters" will go for that... 9/11. 9/11

Ron Paul: Don't know enough about him to pass judgment. From Wikipedia, I get that he's got some libertarian views, not good for a Republican candidate. And he supports state choice on abortion, which is good, I guess. But his drug stance will bite him.

Duncan Hunter: I have honestly never heard this name before. I don't think Colbert and Stewart have even made fun of him. Not gonna happen.

So that was nice and lengthy for y'all. Anyone who reads it all the way through gets a cookie.*

Subject to availability. No, I don't have any cookies. And how would you expect me to get them to you anyway? Idiot.
:rolleyes: Please, tell me you are too young to vote.

Don't Insult infants!Meanie...If I had to choose(And I mean HAD TO) I would say Ron Paul. He's not in my top 10,000 choices for president but he's better then the others.

You don't need to pick somebody who's actually running. Just choose Bruce Willis. He must at least be in the top 10,000.

I don't get it. Is the OP a joke? Or is it an imitation of the mind of the average voter, a satire? Or is it in earnest? Sorry, I just don't really know what kind of thread this is.

:rolleyes: Please, tell me you are too young to vote.
Yes, I am. And I'm in New York, so even if I could vote, it wouldn't count.

But I was being sarcastic, to an extent, in my OP. I do think some (not all) of those things, but they wouldn't necessarily affect my voting.

By the way, in case anyone's interested (nope), here's what my hypothetical, non-counting would be:
Primaries:
Richardson for D, McCain for R.

Final race:
The democrat, unless it was McCain against Obama, Clinton, Biden, or Dodd. Then I'd have to think about it, and I'd probably go with McCain. But NY nearly always goes blue, so it doesn't really matter.

And now what. I mean I like Richadson. He really is most qualified. Hillary has no experience. She hasn't done anything for the most part as senator and being first lady counts as doing something since when.

Damn you asterisk. I want my cookie and I'm not an idiot!

Richardson was favorite democratic candidate. Unfortunately, his abyssmally low profile immediately condemns him. Hope he runs next election, though.

America needs a president that can make the world like America again.

America needs a president that will reverse the assault on the rights of people.

America needs a president who will end the torture of detainees and allow for them to face trial.

America needs a president who will always use diplomacy before force.

America needs a president that will say that the money spent on the War on Drugs would be better spent on healthcare and education.

America needs a president who will actually listen to the people.

Too bad the candidates don't fit this framework.
But I do!

DAMN MY LACK OF QUALIFICATIONS, MONEY, AND NECESSARY FAME!

But I do!

DAMN MY LACK OF QUALIFICATIONS, MONEY, AND NECESSARY FAME!

I contribute all my spare change to your campaign Kyronea. EVERYONE! PITCH IN!! With all the spare change from everyone on NSG we might make it to our campaign goal of $45!

Obama: ...Or maybe it's all his experience. Oh, wait...
No one who isn't an incumbent does.

Ron Paul: ...And he supports state choice on abortion, which is good, I guess.
No, he doesn't. He favors a federal ban.

But I do!

DAMN MY LACK OF QUALIFICATIONS, MONEY, AND NECESSARY FAME!

You runnin' as a Democrat or a Republican? 'Cause, you see, I always vote a straight party ticket.

Anyway, as I will miss this election by a month, I'm really not paying attention beyond a cursory level. 2010 might be a different matter, but I doubt it, given my normal apathy.

Rudy Giuliani: President of 9/11. Can't make 9/11 a sentence without 9/11 slipping in 9/11. If 9/11 we have a "subway series," I'm moving to 9/11 Canada. Besides, hasn't he 9/11 been divorced like 911 times? I'm sure the 9/11 "values voters" will go for that... 9/11. 9/11
Click......buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz the big disconnect!!

John McCain: Way too good for the position to actually make it. If he can win the primary (yeah, right) he's the only Republican I'd vote for. But, like I said, he's to good to go anywhere.
"too good for the position"?
McCain?

You really need to read up on McCain. The only position he's good at is bending over and letting GWB and Karl Rove do what they like to him, only to hug them later. That man would eat a live puppy if he thought he'd get votes.

That man would eat a live puppy if he thought he'd get votes.

While I agree with your stance I would like to remind you that any politicain would eat a live puppy if they thought that it'd get them votes.

yogi beyondananda (wakeuplaughing.com)
benni hill
leonard peltier
martin web
mikael grahm
fingol o garanglas
zymphrumple op cargh
and the last guy or gal who tried to bum chainge for a beer off of me,
whoever the hell they may have been.

=^^=
.../\...

I see that waffles and syrup are currently in second place in this poll, which - after a Republican caucus that saw first and second taken by a creationist and a Mormon who never met a policy he wasn't willing to discard for the sake of electoral expediency - goes some way this morning towards restoring my faith in democracy.

Thank you, NSG.

Yes, I am. And I'm in New York, so even if I could vote, it wouldn't count.

But I was being sarcastic, to an extent, in my OP. I do think some (not all) of those things, but they wouldn't necessarily affect my voting.


If it's any consolation, you come across to me as an unusually coherent and informed American high school (I assume?) student (and I'm at least 20 years older than you). Maybe a teensy bit too snide for your own good given your age, but you seem to be better informed than some American voters I know who are more than twice as old as you are.

I voted for Oscar Wilde, but of course that's an impossible choice for several reasons. First, Oscar Wilde was British and therefore could never become president of the United States. Second, he's dead. Being dead apparently is a mild hindrance if you want to rule a superpower. Third, I'm from the Netherlands. The Dutch are not allowed to vote in US elections.

I voted for Oscar Wilde, but of course that's an impossible choice for several reasons. First, Oscar Wilde was British and therefore could never become president of the United States. Second, he's dead. Being dead apparently is a mild hindrance if you want to rule a superpower. Third, I'm from the Netherlands. The Dutch are not allowed to vote in US elections.

4th he was a renowned homosexual(you now how some Americans feel about that), 5th, I'm pretty sure he was also an atheist,(you now how some Americans feel about that), and finally I'm British I'm also not allowed to vote in a US election.:D

I voted for Oscar Wilde, but of course that's an impossible choice for several reasons. First, Oscar Wilde was British and therefore could never become president of the United States. Second, he's dead. Being dead apparently is a mild hindrance if you want to rule a superpower. Third, I'm from the Netherlands. The Dutch are not allowed to vote in US elections.

Never stopped Brezhnev...

But I do!

DAMN MY LACK OF QUALIFICATIONS, MONEY, AND NECESSARY FAME!

You could go on a drug binge, own a team for a while, then run for mayor and jump straight to the top. :) Making sure you bring along a team of spin doctors and loyalists who will lie and rig the election for you. ;) Just kidding.

I contribute all my spare change to your campaign Kyronea. EVERYONE! PITCH IN!! With all the spare change from everyone on NSG we might make it to our campaign goal of $45!

Damnit, I gave my spare change to my husband to go buy snacks last night...

Does no one in the USofA Care about policy any more? Is it finally just a big popularity contest?

(poster accepts that US Elections may always have been like this)

Does no one in the USofA Care about policy any more?

What policy ? These candidates actually have policies ?
That would be new. Refreshing even. And of course, so uninteresting to the voters that they will have no chance at all.

Ok - that was unfair. But let us be honest: none of these candidates have anything even remotely resembling decent policy.

Obama: novelty candidate. Honestly can't believe enough swing votes will go for him. I think the only reason he's still in thing is 'cause he's black. Or maybe it's all his experience. Oh, wait...

Lack of experience also suggests a lack of corruption from exposure to Washington. What we need is a President with strong character more than a know-it-all attitude, and Obama has it.


Clinton: Same deal, plus she looks like she eats babies. And her husband nearly got booted. Not that he deserved it, but that's a different thread.


She lacks experience AND character, and has had plenty of time to be corrupted. (Don't agree she lacks experience? Someone tell me 1 thing Hillary has actually accomplished herself.)


John Edwards: Didn't he lose in '04, with the guy who looked like a horse? And yet, he's probably the best-looking Democrat.


Edwards' problem is he just doesn't present himself as a strong leader.


Kucinich: Looks like some sort of elf. Or maybe a gnome. Plus his name's not in my Firefox spell checker.


Dunno enough about him.


Mike Gravel: Huh? Gravel? Like the little stones? Oh, GraVEL. Yeah, only ever heard of him on Colbert and The Daily Show.


Or him.


Bill Richardson: Who? Wait, I know him! Great candidate, lots of experience... Nice, let's elect.. oh. He's Mexican. Good luck buddy! *DNC HQ erupts in laughter*


Or him.


Joe Biden: Who the hell is Joe Biden? Oh, he's the guy everyone thought was racist because he complimented Obama! Yeah, not gonna happen.

Chris Dodd: Who are these people?


People who don't matter because it's gonna be one of the first three.


And now the Republicans:
Fred Thompson: Oh, he was the DA on Law & Order! Kudos to him for giving the spot to McCoy (Though I think his talents were best served as EADA). But yeah, I think an important part of being President is not looking like you're asleep.

His problem is he waited too long to get going, and too many Republicans had already chosen their favorite. The only ones supporting Thompson now are the ones who were pushing him to run in the first place.


Mike Huckabee: Sorry, but President Huckabee just sounds like something out of a comic. Don't like the pastor thing (I'm big on separation of church and state), but knowing this country, that might help him.


There's nothing wrong with having a President who is a former preacher. It's not merging church and state. To suggest otherwise is to discriminate by automatically disqualifying anyone who has ever held a church position.


John McCain: Way too good for the position to actually make it. If he can win the primary (yeah, right) he's the only Republican I'd vote for. But, like I said, he's to good to go anywhere.


Maybe. A lot of conservatives are still mad at him over McCain/Feingold


Mitt Romney: The Mormon! Right, sure. He'll make it, because Republicans are so tolerant of Mormons, and know what they are. Besides, a lot of Mormons kind of creep me out (Romney included). I don't know why.


Religious bigotry will hold him back, you're right. I hate to say it because prior to this election I wouldn't have believed it in this day and age.


Rudy Giuliani: President of 9/11. Can't make 9/11 a sentence without 9/11 slipping in 9/11. If 9/11 we have a "subway series," I'm moving to 9/11 Canada. Besides, hasn't he 9/11 been divorced like 911 times? I'm sure the 9/11 "values voters" will go for that... 9/11. 9/11


I think he could do a great job but you're right, he's using 9/11 almost to the exclusion of all else.


Ron Paul: Don't know enough about him to pass judgment. From Wikipedia, I get that he's got some libertarian views, not good for a Republican candidate. And he supports state choice on abortion, which is good, I guess. But his drug stance will bite him.


He's not really going for the Presidency. He's trying to get his message out and this is the means by which to do it.


Duncan Hunter: I have honestly never heard this name before. I don't think Colbert and Stewart have even made fun of him. Not gonna happen.


Dunno much about him.

There's nothing wrong with having a President who is a former preacher. It's not merging church and state. To suggest otherwise is to discriminate by automatically disqualifying anyone who has ever held a church position.

Unless of course the candidate has made it abundantly clear he wishes to rule the USA with a Christian hand.

America needs a president that can make the world like America again.

America needs a president that will reverse the assault on the rights of people.

America needs a president who will end the torture of detainees and allow for them to face trial.

America needs a president who will always use diplomacy before force.

America needs a president that will say that the money spent on the War on Drugs would be better spent on healthcare and education.

America needs a president who will actually listen to the people.

Too bad the candidates don't fit this framework.

Atma would do all of those!

Atma would also flee to Canada if he had so much as 5% support, however. Sorry.

Unless of course the candidate has made it abundantly clear he wishes to rule the USA with a Christian hand.

People seem to forget one thing: The President doesn't 'rule' the USA.

In terms of legal power, the Executive branch really doen't have that much of an impact. It doesn't create law. It can only influence law through the veto power and select Supreme Court justices which have to be approved by Congress anyway.

So what if a President means to apply Christian values to decision-making? Everybody has a source for their beliefs whether it be Christianity, some other religion, or some non-religious set of values. To suggest that somehow a President can turn the U.S. into a theocracy is paranoid.

Yeah, every single one of the US candidates is really pretty much unelectable. Ah well.

If it's any consolation, you come across to me as an unusually coherent and informed American high school (I assume?) student (and I'm at least 20 years older than you). Maybe a teensy bit too snide for your own good given your age, but you seem to be better informed than some American voters I know who are more than twice as old as you are.
I go to a private school upstate. Snide is what we do.:p

(on Obama)
Lack of experience also suggests a lack of corruption from exposure to Washington. What we need is a President with strong character more than a know-it-all attitude, and Obama has it.
Washington isn't the only thing that causes corruption. He was a state Senator before he went to Washington. If you want to see whether or not state senates cause corruption, take a look at NYS senator Joe Bruno. I'm not saying he's corrupt, I'm just saying not being in Washington long doesn't exclude you from being corrupt.

(on Clinton)
She lacks experience AND character, and has had plenty of time to be corrupted. (Don't agree she lacks experience? Someone tell me 1 thing Hillary has actually accomplished herself.)
I have no arguments with that.

(on Huckabee)
There's nothing wrong with having a President who is a former preacher. It's not merging church and state. To suggest otherwise is to discriminate by automatically disqualifying anyone who has ever held a church position.
"A church position" is different from the preacher for multiple churches and the president of the Arkansas Baptist State Convention from 1989 to 1991. I'm not saying that I think he'll institute a national religion or anything. I am saying that it crosses the fine line to have a higher ranking church official as the head of state. It may not have any functional value, but symbolically it does. I realize it sounds ridiculous, but that's the truth, and I think a good portion of the country would agree with me.



People seem to forget one thing: The President doesn't 'rule' the USA.

In terms of legal power, the Executive branch really doen't have that much of an impact. It doesn't create law. It can only influence law through the veto power and select Supreme Court justices which have to be approved by Congress anyway.

So what if a President means to apply Christian values to decision-making? Everybody has a source for their beliefs whether it be Christianity, some other religion, or some non-religious set of values. To suggest that somehow a President can turn the U.S. into a theocracy is paranoid.
You're right, th President doesn't have a lot of legal power. He can veto things, and there's some pull within the party, but that's about it. If Congress and Senate want something done, they can get it done. But, at least with me, it's a symbolic thing. I know the President can't make the country a theocracy, but like I said above, something just doesn't sit right.


Yeah, every single one of the US candidates is really pretty much unelectable. Ah well.
Amazing how unelectable people constantly get elected. But really, it's the electable ones you have to worry about. If you elect a crook, you know you'll have a crook. But if you elect someone who everyone thinks will turn around your completely corrupted state government and maybe get the place back on track, next thing you know you're trying to find a way to cover up that Spitzer bumper sticker on your car.

She lacks experience AND character, and has had plenty of time to be corrupted. (Don't agree she lacks experience? Someone tell me 1 thing Hillary has actually accomplished herself.)


She wrote It Takes A Village (or some other similarly titled rubbish). A book on parenting.

Because we all know that if we want parenting advice, we'd turn to Hilary Clinton...

Washington isn't the only thing that causes corruption. He was a state Senator before he went to Washington. If you want to see whether or not state senates cause corruption, take a look at NYS senator Joe Bruno. I'm not saying he's corrupt, I'm just saying not being in Washington long doesn't exclude you from being corrupt.

He's only been on the Illinois Senate for 2 terms, maybe less, my memory's a bit foggy.