Who will you vote for and why?

[DrWBD]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Nice. Defend socialist rhetoric with a socialist quote.

FDR was a socialist? maybe because he created "social security" and that's got "social" in it - you must be right!
And paying taxes is socialist? Tell that to the CEO of Google, who makes more than any 100 doctors, and is an Obama supporter.

😕 I guess when all else fails, calling your opponents socialists is the accepted path for the Republican lemmings. Unfortunately, judging by the latest polls, it doesn't seem to be working for Senator McCain.

 

[homeboy]

FDR was a socialist? maybe because he created "social security" and that's got "social" in it - you must be right!
And paying taxes is socialist? Tell that to the CEO of Google, who makes more than any 100 doctors, and is an Obama supporter.

😕 I guess when all else fails, calling your opponents socialists is the accepted path for the Republican lemmings. Unfortunately, judging by the latest polls, it doesn't seem to be working for Senator McCain.

That's ok, I can see how you would be confused...the progressive left is often confused when it comes to issues of logic that don't involve moral relativism and crisis politics.

Actually, some would argue he was more of a fascist (the NRA, the blue eagle program, sitting for 4 terms, Father Coughlin, etc...), but that's beyond the depth of your knowledge of the issue, because apparently the only thing you remember about FDR was that he created Social Security and the New Deal...I don't want to confuse you any more. Lemming? Speak for yourself.

And yes, any time someone perpetuates the notion that a fraction of wealthy people should support the masses through government-created or subsidized programs (IE. collectivist mentality), than yes, I'm going to call you a socialist, especially when you freely admit that you're an "idealist".

And unfortunately for Mr Obama, Mr Kerry was also up by 10 points in the 2 weeks preceding the election...really worked well for him.

I'm not particularly railing for McCain...he's not a conservative, or more accurately, a liberal in the classic sense of the word...He's a republican politician. But he's a far cry from the type of statism Obama supports and the collectivist mentality that Obama has.

 

[DC DOC]

Actually, some would argue he was more of a fascist (the NRA, the blue eagle program, sitting for 4 terms, Father Coughlin, etc...), but that's beyond the depth of your knowledge of the issue, because apparently the only thing you remember about FDR was that he created Social Security and the New Deal...I don't want to confuse you any more. Lemming? Speak for yourself.

And some would argue that he was one of the most innovative presidents of the 20th century, and just because "some", namely you, would argue he was a fascist, it does not belittle the creative genius, policies and programs he laid foundation to in order to drag us out of the economic bomb whole created by world war II. Be it fascism, socialism, nationalism or whatever you may think it is, his "idealism" still procured sturdy economic policies, unprecedented increases in employment rates(unemployment decreased from 20% to 1.9% Darby) and was able to balance the national budget during economic crisis. And although father Coughlin once supported the new deal, he quickly became an opponent to Roosevelt. Other than that, Roosevelt only tried to silence his anti-Semitic and fascist (i.e. actual fascism) views that were in accordance with Nazi Germany. The NRA was implemented to stimulate the economy but was never set as law, although it did introduce equality within the labor work forces, i.e. minimum wage, max. hours worked weekly. The Wagner Act soon made up for it's short comings. Your argument appears to be a mere opinion rather than fact.

 

[homeboy]

And some would argue that he was one of the most innovative presidents of the 20th century, and just because "some", namely you, would argue he was a fascist, it does not belittle the creative genius, policies and programs he laid foundation to in order to drag us out of the economic bomb whole created by world war II. Be it fascism, socialism, nationalism or whatever you may think it is, his "idealism" still procured sturdy economic policies, unprecedented increases in employment rates(unemployment decreased from 20% to 1.9% Darby) and was able to balance the national budget during economic crisis. And although father Coughlin once supported the new deal, he quickly became an opponent to Roosevelt. Other than that, Roosevelt only tried to silence his anti-Semitic and fascist (i.e. actual fascism) views that were in accordance with Nazi Germany. The NRA was implemented to stimulate the economy but was never set as law, although it did introduce equality within the labor work forces, i.e. minimum wage, max. hours worked weekly. The Wagner Act soon made up for it's short comings. Your argument appears to be a mere opinion rather than fact.

Procuring supposedly "sturdy economic policies" and increased employment at the cost of accepting fascism / socialism / whatever utopian -ism you want to call it (they're all of the same family), isn't noble justification, it's opportunism. And more importantly, like I said before, it's moral relativism (ie. the situation at hand dictates what is right & wrong, versus eternal truths and the definitive notion of liberty).

Anyway, there is plenty of evidence to support the notion that the New Deal prolonged the depression (just one study http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx ) specifically due to the anti-competition and pro-labor corporatism Roosevelt advocated that produced a MASS artificial inflation of wages and prices. EG. it's pretty hard not to have terrific employment rates if you're giving everyone a job, regardless of the validity, necessity or long-term need for that specific job (many of which are still on the books today.)

Like every leader that comes to power in times of crisis, FDR used the situation at hand to advance his agenda, and his was one of government expansion and statism. That's not opinion, it's fact--whether you agree with the outcome is opinion. I don't, you do, but that doesn't detract from the fact that his policies are about as far from American exceptionalism & individualism as you can get.

 

[homeboy]

Here's an analogy I've heard people use that I think fits the bill:

Say you hire a carpenter, or for that matter a plumber, or even a doctor, to do some work for you (install a carpet, fix your toilet or sew up your lac).

Now let's say you get a bill for $50. You say, "Ok, how 'bout this: I'll give you $45, and I'll donate the other $5 to whomever I see fit."

Now please tell me there's not some severely flawed logic in that argument. Is it any more justifiable if the government is the one doing it?

The egalitarian notion that we work for the greater good is flat out wrong. We work for the individual good and in turn improve the greater good as a consequence. If your individual goals include donating your time and money to a cause you see as benefitting the collective good, that's fine. But implicit to that is the realization that other people do not have the same goals, desires and philosophies, and hence requiring them to work for the collective good negates the concept of liberty and freedom. The opposite has been tried and tried and tried with awful results, and the simple reality that OUR form of socialism is never going to manifest as a tyrannical murderous regime doesn't make our socialism any less wrong.

 

[DC DOC]

Here's an analogy I've heard people use that I think fits the bill:

Say you hire a carpenter, or for that matter a plumber, or even a doctor, to do some work for you (install a carpet, fix your toilet or sew up your lac).

Now let's say you get a bill for $50. You say, "Ok, how 'bout this: I'll give you $45, and I'll donate the other $5 to whomever I see fit."

Now please tell me there's not some severely flawed logic in that argument. Is it any more justifiable if the government is the one doing it?

The egalitarian notion that we work for the greater good is flat out wrong. We work for the individual good and in turn improve the greater good as a consequence. If your individual goals include donating your time and money to a cause you see as benefitting the collective good, that's fine. But implicit to that is the realization that other people do not have the same goals, desires and philosophies, and hence requiring them to work for the collective good negates the concept of liberty and freedom. The opposite has been tried and tried and tried with awful results, and the simple reality that OUR form of socialism is never going to manifest as a tyrannical murderous regime doesn't make our socialism any less wrong.

I understand what you are saying and to a certain extent I agree, but I don't think it is as black and white as you put it. There are different levels of socialism and there is also good and bad that can come from such a system of governance, but the same can be said of what we live in today, a free market based upon capitalism. I have no problem with capitalism itself, but it tends to distribute wealth and power a bit unequally to the people, who may in fact be working very hard to make a living and not getting what they deserve. We have been hearing in the media and watching as the markets have been progressively falling short of expectation due to greed and corruption of Wall Street and many government officials. The point being that the idea of individualism can lead to a democratic failure when the power of the people is unequally distributed, which is what has been occurring over the past "few" years in our current government. Lobbyists buying off officials to get legislation signed, middle class being neglected and overtaxed, failed health care unless you can afford it, etc. The first principle of a democracy is that all members of the society have equal access to power and the second, that all members enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties. I agree that we can't have a complete socialized system of government, but there needs to be a better balance of power. I don't see McCain pushing for that balance.

And your analogy is a bit oversimplified in the way that the "5 dollars" would be distributed. It is not just a random drawing out of a hat full of names. And if you are making over 250,000 a year, "5 dollars" isn't going to kill ya. So maybe you have to wait a little while to buy that boat you have been eying until next year. The greed I tell you will take us all. Besides, you already have been paying taxes most of your life for things far worse than helping a family that is having a hard time affording groceries and health care.

But I understand your frustration, as a resident, you are probably underpaid and overworked.

 

[homeboy]

I understand what you are saying and to a certain extent I agree, but I don't think it is as black and white as you put it. There are different levels of socialism and there is also good and bad that can come from such a system of governance, but the same can be said of what we live in today, a free market based upon capitalism. I have no problem with capitalism itself, but it tends to distribute wealth and power a bit unequally to the people, who may in fact be working very hard to make a living and not getting what they deserve. We have been hearing in the media and watching as the markets have been progressively falling short of expectation due to greed and corruption of Wall Street and many government officials. The point being that the idea of individualism can lead to a democratic failure when the power of the people is unequally distributed, which is what has been occurring over the past "few" years in our current government. Lobbyists buying off officials to get legislation signed, middle class being neglected and overtaxed, failed health care unless you can afford it, etc. The first principle of a democracy is that all members of the society have equal access to power and the second, that all members enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties. I agree that we can't have a complete socialized system of government, but there needs to be a better balance of power. I don't see McCain pushing for that balance.

And your analogy is a bit oversimplified in the way that the "5 dollars" would be distributed. It is not just a random drawing out of a hat full of names. And if you are making over 250,000 a year, "5 dollars" isn't going to kill ya. So maybe you have to wait a little while to buy that boat you have been eying until next year. The greed I tell you will take us all. Besides, you already have been paying taxes most of your life for things far worse than helping a family that is having a hard time affording groceries and health care.

But I understand your frustration, as a resident, you are probably underpaid and overworked.

I too can understand your frustration with the way things are run today, and I'm not in any way suggesting that our system doesn't have serious flaws perpetuated by corrupt politicians and greed. But the notion that more government is going to alleviate problems that stem from govt in the first place disturbs me. You can't artificially create "power for the little guy" buy giving him welfare .

I wholeheartedly agree that all members of a freely democratic republic can enjoy freedoms and liberties, but those freedoms and liberties should not be interpreted as 'RIGHTS' which the government has the responsibility of doling out. The Bill of Rights is an outline limiting the reach of government, not establishing a "fairness" doctrine, or a doctrine of "equality," in which every citizen has equal claim to the products (social and monetary) of capitalism. Society is never going to be, nor has it ever been, equal, and the belief that if we just throw a little more money at our social problems we could level the playing field, is no less of a justification than would be for a complete transformation to a communist society.

There's no magic % of income tax, or education spending, or welfare beyond which we enter socialism, and prior to which we are a thriving capitalistic society. It's not as if we'd only be a socialist society if the government took 100% of our earnings and paid for 100% of our needs...what about 99%? 98%? Are those acceptable numbers? Who is to be the arbiter of fairness? The government?

This is the basis for the quote I posted earlier:

"The past shows unvaryingly that when a people’s freedom disappears, it goes not with a bang, but in silence amid the comfort of being cared for. That is the dire peril in the present trend toward statism. If freedom is not found accompanied by a willingness to resist, and to reject favors, rather than to give up what is intangible but precarious, it will not long be found at all."

 

[hanky1982]

Interesting article from a decmocrat that was found through drudge:


http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/081017light.html




any thoughts?

 

[Steiner]

It's truly mind-boggling the lengths some people here are going to justify voting Republican in this election. Have you folks learned absolutely nothing in the last eight years of having a Republican in office?

That's a very ignorant statement to make. Conservative people vote along the ideals they believe are better for the future of the country. There are plenty of people who are dissatisfied with Bush, but still vote Republican because they agree with that party's views. I'm sure some of the Liberal leaning people on here had parents who voted for Jimmy Carter and are still voting for Democrats today because the Democrat party's views align more with their own. They didn't denounce all Democrats and vote for Reagan the next election.

 

[djnels01]

That's a very ignorant statement to make. Conservative people vote along the ideals they believe are better for the future of the country. There are plenty of people who are dissatisfied with Bush, but still vote Republican because they agree with that party's views. I'm sure some of the Liberal leaning people on here had parents who voted for Jimmy Carter and are still voting for Democrats today because the Democrat party's views align more with their own. They didn't denounce all Democrats and vote for Reagan the next election.

Excellent point. Probably one that hardly anyone considers during political debates such as this. People are absolutely more apt to vote for a party who possess ideals and world views that closely mirror their own, regardless of who's running.

The voters that will truly be swayed one way or the other from election to election are the Independent voters - the undecided ones if you will. Look at the reports on all the latest polls: there's still a significant amount of undecided voters (not hard-line Dems or Reps) and they are the ones that are being targeted heavily in these last couple weeks leading up to the election by both campaigns.

Why is so much money spent on advertising in the weeks leading up to the election? It's not to persuade John Doe the card-carrying liberal to vote for Obama (and vice-versa for the conservatives) - they already know they have his vote locked in. It's to persuade the fence-sitters over to their side to help win an election.

 

[djnels01]

and hanky1982, that was an interesting article. Clearly the Democrats are not innocent at all when it comes to the sub-prime loan mess with Fannie and Freddie. I haven't kept up with all the debates and speeches, but has the Obama campaign been asked about, or addressed, the role that the dems played in this? I'm genuinely curious, I have no idea...

I have my own opinions (as we all do) on which party I support, but nothing makes me more disheartened than lack of accountability and the non-existance of objective reporting in today's media.

 

[Relativity]

I try to stay out of political debates, because arguing about it is roughly equivalent to talking to the wall. But this post begs for commentary:



1. Palin actually does have international experience, successfully negotiating pipeline deals with the Canadian government. Not exactly bringing peace to the Middle east, I admit. But it's still more than Obama has ever done. I agree that no one is ever going to confuse Palin for a Northeastern academic type, but to say she's stupid is a gross overgeneralization. Perhaps you need to quit depending on SNL for your news coverage.

2. In what way is McCain too war happy? And how exactly would he go to war with the entire Middle East?

3. He certainly didn't have a stellar Naval Academy record, by his own admission. But he's been smart enough to serve as a Senator for 24 years, etc. Any honest observer can easily tell you that he's is intelligent, even if you disagree mightily with his policies.

4. The so-called attacks on his Muslim heritage have never been anything more than the ravings of the kook fringe. And FWIW, there were similar rumblings coming from the Democratic base during the primaries. Still want to try and paint a picture of a political party by it's fringe elements? In any case, it's more revealing of you that you'd imply that the Republicans are racists and fearmongers.

In short, your objections to the McCain campaign are not based in a a substantive disagreement with his policies, but rather your impressions about who is dumb and who is not. You should pat yourself on the back for being such an informed voter (your sarcasm detector should be going crazy right now).




1. I agree that Obabma seems intelligent. Harvard Law is certainly nothing to sneeze at. However, it's interesting that Obama still refuses to release his college transcripts. He also was the president of the Harvard Law Review, but interestingly enough, he never contributed any work once he was president. A foreshadow of things to come?

2. Palin also came from a middle class background. It's not exclusive to Obama. In any case, if Obama were so in-tune with the middle class, why does he lie to them about not increasing their taxes? He doesn't support the Bush 2001 tax decreases, and when they expire next year the middle classes taxes will go back up. It's true that he won't raise them himself, but he's misleading the public about what will happen to their taxes during his four years as President.

3. Joe Biden has a lot of experience, yes. And in Joe Biden's view, Barack Obama does not have enough experience to be president. He explicitly said so during the Democratic primary. And he implied such this weekend when he said that the world will test Obama soon, and Barack will "need help".

4. It's highly presumptuous of you to suggest that a single candidate resonates better to a group that contains millions of opinions, has different circumstances, etc. Those people will speak for themselves while voting.

5. I have no problem with a minority being president, so long as they are qualified. For example, I have my eye hopefully on Louisiana's governor Bobby Jindal, a Native American. The prerequisite however, is that they are the best candidate. I have no assurance, to myself at least, that Obama is that person. And I have a huge problem with the idea that the time id due for a minority president. The job of POTUS is way too important to play affirmative action games.

6. I agree (and so does the Constitution) that a religious test for president is a bad idea. Vote for the candidate and the policies, not the religion.

To summarize, if I were to boil down your reasons to vote for Obama it looks like this:

1. You think McCain/Palin are dumb
2. You think Republicans are racists
3. You think Obama is smart
4. You think a minority is due the chance to be president

Looking at your reasons, I would like to remind you that the election is still two weeks away, and you still have time to become an educated voter. Please use the time wisely.

But I dont think republicans are racists.
I am not even going to vote for all democrats.

Personally, I have seen quiet few debates, speeches and interviews of the candidates but yes I also dont have time to dig through all political history reports.
I give you props for being educated but it's clear you are voting strictly on your background.

I have minority friends that are going to vote for Obama no matter what. Just like I have rich friends that will vote for McCain, no matter what.

My 6th sense about how about how educated a person is, is in the way he or she approaches difficult problems. I personally think if a person takes his time and thinks about multiple point of views then conjures up an answer then he is smart. If the result is far better than worse then he is intelligent. Obama does that more often than McCain. That's just my opinion.

And I will get educated in the next two weeks before I vote but for me I want you to place yourself in the shoes of a poor minority for experimental sakes, seriously.
And if you are a minority, place yourself in a white person's shoes.

About experience, McCain has been living longer and had some privileges that Obama wasn't afford it. People consider going to War as the bravest thing in the world, I consider giving up part of your life and wealth to help a poor community just as brave.

Then tell me what your ideas are. Personally, I like to listen more than argue. So pm if you want to chat.

And if palin is not dumb then she sure acts dumb during her recent interviews. Maybe someone can coach her.

I dont care for snl. I think they are a little biased.

 

[Steiner]

Interesting article from a decmocrat that was found through drudge:


http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/081017light.html




any thoughts?

I think if anyone looks deeply at the housing crisis, they will see the roots lie even further back. The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, passed by Jimmy Carter, set the stage. Followed by The Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 sponsored by Henry Gonzalez, a Democratic Congressman from Texas. These laws were interpreted by Janet Reno to allow aggressive enforcement of lending to those who previously did not have the credit and income to qualify. This drove up the quota of loans lent to risky applicants, because the US government would pursue litigation if banks did not comply with Ms. Reno's interpretation of these laws. Add in a little predatory lending towards lower economic class, some uninformed applicants signing sub-prime loans beyond their means, then a load of loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and there you have the start of our housing crisis.

 

[USArmyDoc]

But I dont think republicans are racists.
I am not even going to vote for all democrats.

Personally, I have seen quiet few debates, speeches and interviews of the candidates but yes I also dont have time to dig through all political history reports.
I give you props for being educated but it's clear you are voting strictly on your background.

I have minority friends that are going to vote for Obama no matter what. Just like I have rich friends that will vote for McCain, no matter what.

My 6th sense about how about how educated a person is, is in the way he or she approaches difficult problems. I personally think if a person takes his time and thinks about multiple point of views then conjures up an answer then he is smart. If the result is far better than worse then he is intelligent. Obama does that more often than McCain. That’s just my opinion.

And I will get educated in the next two weeks before I vote but for me I want you to place yourself in the shoes of a poor minority for experimental sakes, seriously.
And if you are a minority, place yourself in a white person’s shoes.

About experience, McCain has been living longer and had some privileges that Obama wasn’t afford it. People consider going to War as the bravest thing in the world, I consider giving up part of your life and wealth to help a poor community just as brave.

Then tell me what your ideas are. Personally, I like to listen more than argue. So pm if you want to chat.

And if palin is not dumb then she sure acts dumb during her recent interviews. Maybe someone can coach her.

I dont care for snl. I think they are a little biased.

You are kidding right? Working in a poor community is just as brave as being beaten day in and day out?!?! I am not saying what Obama did means nothing but to compare the two...its unbelievable!! Equally as brave....😡😡

 

[SJonathan]

I have been largely undecided for a long time now. I've followed the elections and the issues closely since the primaries and consider myself fairly educated about each campaign.

I consider myself a compassionate conservative and agree with McCain's POLICIES 60% of the time and Obama's POLICIES 20% of the time.

That said, I think McCain is kinda sleezy. I'm watching him utilize the same tactics that Bush beat him with in 2004. I don't like him as a person. However, I do respect and appreciate Obama as a person. Even though I don't agree with his policies (especially on healthcare, the economy, abortion), I do think that he's basically a good person that just believes in different politics than I do.

That's where I was stuck - McCain who's policies I agreed with more, or Obama who I think is a better person.

Oddly enough the thing that finally convinced me was a couple of hour-long interviews with their families that I watched. Obama's relationship with his wife was real and genuine. You could feel that his family was important to him. McCain's family was a business venture. He cheated on his first wife, and then left her for a multi-millionaire.

Believe it or not, I believe in families enough that that's how I chose my vote. I'll be voting for Obama.



(Then again, I'm from Utah where my vote isn't going to get him anywhere)

 

[rockdascrubs786]

Exactly!!!! I am voting for McCain. There is something about Obama that just does not sit well with me.

Hmmmmm, something doesn't sit well with you about Obama? So you can't point to specifics, so I'm gonna assume you don't like Obama b/c he is either Black or he is a Muslim....of the two, only one is correct. If you can't tell, you shouldn't vote. Thank God we don't have a direct democratic electoral system.....the idiocy of the masses does not necessitate any semblance of egalitarianism.

 

[rockdascrubs786]

Generally, when people are captured as POWs they are commended for not snitching, but should they be propped up on pedestals of infallibility? McCain keeps ranting about how he was a POW.....dude, you got caught and were in prison, just like many other soldiers. In all honesty, I'd rather have constitutional law professors (both Biden and Obama teach law) and a foreign policy guru (Biden) in power, rather than some old man that can't do the "raise the roof" dance and a VP that contemptousely scoffs at the notion of funding fruit fly research. The choice is clear, OBAMA BIDEN 08.

 

[hanky1982]

Hmmmmm, something doesn't sit well with you about Obama? So you can't point to specifics, so I'm gonna assume you don't like Obama b/c he is either Black or he is a Muslim....of the two, only one is correct. If you can't tell, you shouldn't vote. Thank God we don't have a direct democratic electoral system.....the idiocy of the masses does not necessitate any semblance of egalitarianism.

ironic: an ignorant calling someone ignorant.

 

[bkpa2med]

Generally, when people are captured as POWs they are commended for not snitching, but should they be propped up on pedestals of infallibility? McCain keeps ranting about how he was a POW.....dude, you got caught and were in prison, just like many other soldiers. In all honesty, I'd rather have constitutional law professors (both Biden and Obama teach law) and a foreign policy guru (Biden) in power, rather than some old man that can't do the "raise the roof" dance and a VP that contemptousely scoffs at the notion of funding fruit fly research. The choice is clear, OBAMA BIDEN 08.

Dude, I really hope you're not a voter in a Swing State. Let me know how it goes when all the middle class folks you know lose their job when Obama raises all these taxes. Personally, I'd rather have a job than a $1,000 check.

 

[Aznfarmerboi]

Dude, I really hope you're not a voter in a Swing State. Let me know how it goes when all the middle class folks you know lose their job when Obama raises all these taxes. Personally, I'd rather have a job than a $1,000 check.

As opposed to the Bush administration where people are losing their jobs left and right?

 

[ChiDO]

Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read "Vote Obama, I need the money."

At lunch my server had on an "Obama 08" button.

When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I would be practicing the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need - the homeless guy outside.

I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside. The homeless guy was grateful.

At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though it went to someone who "needed" it.




I wonder if the waiter still likes Obama's plan.

 

[bkpa2med]

As opposed to the Bush administration where people are losing their jobs left and right?

That's the Bush Administration, not McCain's.

 

[wingbowlchamp3]

i'm voting for obama.

San_Juan_Sun...your post is a great illustration of why intelligent debate doesn't exist in this country. you should have kept your commentary to yourself because all you really said was "i don't like when people disagree with me...so i'm going to belittle their opinion by making it seem shallow". that's actually what bush did for 8 years...at least when he wasn't accusing those with a different opinion as being "with the terrorists".

it's nice to see that there's some other good debate on here. "obama is smart" is just one of many reasons why i'm voting for him...not just because his policies will turn this country around...but hopefully because his intellect can create a culture where we can discuss/debate issues...and his democratic affiliation means that the middle class might actually be in on the debate instead of just the oil companies and other big corporations.

 

[homeboy]

i'm voting for obama.

it's nice to see that there's some other good debate on here. "obama is smart" is just one of many reasons why i'm voting for him...not just because his policies will turn this country around...but hopefully because his intellect can create a culture where we can discuss/debate issues...and his democratic affiliation means that the middle class might actually be in on the debate instead of just the oil companies and other big corporations.

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or if you genuinely believe the arrogant garbage you’re peddling…

 

[sexyman]

http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reg_ls_mcbama_vs_america

 

[Lamborghini1315]

Dude, I really hope you're not a voter in a Swing State. Let me know how it goes when all the middle class folks you know lose their job when Obama raises all these taxes. Personally, I'd rather have a job than a $1,000 check.

That makes no sense..you won't get a 1000 check without a job, if you haven't filed your taxes how do you expect to get a tax return? The bigger issue here is the implication that obama is bad for middle class or he's going to tax you..well his plan is very clear about taxing those that make more than 250k. You need to understand that small business go over that limit but individually if your net profit is less than 250 k you will get a tax cut like everyone else and if your profit does break the 250 barrier..you really shouldn't complain! Mccain's plan is another bush tactic of trying to take more money out of your pocket and giving some of that back..he intends to cut spending, and give hug tax cuts to corporate companies. I have news for every mccain supporter..this country is in a huge financial crisis and if anything we need to spend more money to stimulate the economy and also take care of the middle class while you do that. This increase in spending can only be possible with the help of raised taxes on corporate companies, 250+ earners. Obama's tax rates are infact going to revert back to what we had under clintion..and we all know how that turned out, so please pay more attention to facts than empty ideological nonsense.

 

[bkpa2med]

That makes no sense..you won't get a 1000 check without a job, if you haven't filed your taxes how do you expect to get a tax return? The bigger issue here is the implication that obama is bad for middle class or he's going to tax you..well his plan is very clear about taxing those that make more than 250k. You need to understand that small business go over that limit but individually if your net profit is less than 250 k you will get a tax cut like everyone else and if your profit does break the 250 barrier..you really shouldn't complain! Mccain's plan is another bush tactic of trying to take more money out of your pocket and giving some of that back..he intends to cut spending, and give hug tax cuts to corporate companies. I have news for every mccain supporter..this country is in a huge financial crisis and if anything we need to spend more money to stimulate the economy and also take care of the middle class while you do that. This increase in spending can only be possible with the help of raised taxes on corporate companies, 250+ earners. Obama's tax rates are infact going to revert back to what we had under clintion..and we all know how that turned out, so please pay more attention to facts than empty ideological nonsense.

He's giving 95% of americans a tax cut. Even the ones who don't pay any taxes. I don't have anything against Obama -- he's just too left for me. McCain is a bit more moderate.

 

[DannMann99]

That makes no sense..you won't get a 1000 check without a job, if you haven't filed your taxes how do you expect to get a tax return? The bigger issue here is the implication that obama is bad for middle class or he's going to tax you..well his plan is very clear about taxing those that make more than 250k. You need to understand that small business go over that limit but individually if your net profit is less than 250 k you will get a tax cut like everyone else and if your profit does break the 250 barrier..you really shouldn't complain! Mccain's plan is another bush tactic of trying to take more money out of your pocket and giving some of that back..he intends to cut spending, and give hug tax cuts to corporate companies. I have news for every mccain supporter..this country is in a huge financial crisis and if anything we need to spend more money to stimulate the economy and also take care of the middle class while you do that. This increase in spending can only be possible with the help of raised taxes on corporate companies, 250+ earners. Obama's tax rates are infact going to revert back to what we had under clintion..and we all know how that turned out, so please pay more attention to facts than empty ideological nonsense.

1) Lamb, McCain isn't President Bush i'm sorry. If you wanted to bitch about president Bush where were you 4 years ago. (bam)

2) Okay. They're going to revert to an economy which after an initial bump, was heading into recession...

wtf mate.

👎

 

[Lamborghini1315]

1) Lamb, McCain isn't President Bush i'm sorry. If you wanted to bitch about president Bush where were you 4 years ago. (bam)

2) Okay. They're going to revert to an economy which after an initial bump, was heading into recession...

wtf mate.

👎

I don't get your argument...good luck voting for mccain!

 

[beastmaster]

http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reg_ls_mcbama_vs_america

I concur. Both candidates oppose free enterprise.

But hey, ignorant partisan voters deserve ignorant partisan candidates.

McBama '08 !

 

[homeboy]

That makes no sense..you won't get a 1000 check without a job, if you haven't filed your taxes how do you expect to get a tax return? The bigger issue here is the implication that obama is bad for middle class or he's going to tax you..well his plan is very clear about taxing those that make more than 250k. You need to understand that small business go over that limit but individually if your net profit is less than 250 k you will get a tax cut like everyone else and if your profit does break the 250 barrier..you really shouldn't complain! Mccain's plan is another bush tactic of trying to take more money out of your pocket and giving some of that back..he intends to cut spending, and give hug tax cuts to corporate companies. I have news for every mccain supporter..this country is in a huge financial crisis and if anything we need to spend more money to stimulate the economy and also take care of the middle class while you do that. This increase in spending can only be possible with the help of raised taxes on corporate companies, 250+ earners. Obama's tax rates are infact going to revert back to what we had under clintion..and we all know how that turned out, so please pay more attention to facts than empty ideological nonsense.

"…if your profit does break the 250 barrier…you really shouldn't complain!"
And herein lies the entire premise of your argument: it's the government's job to determine who makes what and to be the arbiter of fairness.

Since you point to so-called "facts," I'll point one out to you:
Mr. Obama continually points to the statistic that 90-something % of small businesses (those with <100 employees) makes less than $250k.

Very well. But how many employees do those businesses employ? Mr. Obama included FIRMS in his stat, a convenient thing, considering the majority of those firms include 0-2 employees.

Do the math: the number of small businesses / firms that employ 0-2 employees vastly outnumbers the number of small businesses with >20 employees, but the NUMBER of employees that work for >20 employee-small businesses FAR EXCEEDS the number in the 0-2 person businesses.
THE POINT is that the real creators of small business JOBS&#8212;that ~4-9% of companies with the >$250k employees & owners, the ones with ALL the EMPLOYEES&#8212;are the ones that are going to get hit. And any small business owner that denies he/she passes on the difference to the consumer is full of it: the absolute first thing to compensate for a decreased bottom line is increased product prices. Plain and simple.

http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/smallbus.html

I make $44k as a resident. I could make $44k the rest of my life, and that still wouldn't affect my belief that I'm NOT entitled to assistance, welfare, handouts, whatever you want to call it, from CEOs and the high income earners (even if the CEO of Google wants to give it to me). Does that mean everyone has to subscribe to my life philosophy? No, but the opposite is the fundamental premise for socialism, regardless if it's the nasty Stalinesque form or the "nice" socialism of modern Europe and soon to be our country: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

You're not voting for 1 person. You're voting for an uber progressive liberal & his ilk with the absence of any countering force. Despite how tempting it is, you can't just look at a product and ignore the package it comes in and the instruction manual accompanying it. Then again, if your intent is to bring European social society to this side of the pond, you very well may have it&#8230;just don't take off your rose colored glasses in a few years because you may not like what you see.

 

[Lamborghini1315]

“…if your profit does break the 250 barrier…you really shouldn’t complain!”
And herein lies the entire premise of your argument: it’s the government’s job to determine who makes what and to be the arbiter of fairness.

Since you point to so-called “facts,” I’ll point one out to you:
Mr. Obama continually points to the statistic that 90-something % of small businesses (those with <100 employees) makes less than $250k.

Very well. But how many employees do those businesses employ? Mr. Obama included FIRMS in his stat, a convenient thing, considering the majority of those firms include 0-2 employees.

Do the math: the number of small businesses / firms that employ 0-2 employees vastly outnumbers the number of small businesses with >20 employees, but the NUMBER of employees that work for >20 employee-small businesses FAR EXCEEDS the number in the 0-2 person businesses.
THE POINT is that the real creators of small business JOBS—that ~4-9% of companies with the >$250k employees & owners, the ones with ALL the EMPLOYEES—are the ones that are going to get hit. And any small business owner that denies he/she passes on the difference to the consumer is full of it: the absolute first thing to compensate for a decreased bottom line is increased product prices. Plain and simple.

http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/smallbus.html

I make $44k as a resident. I could make $44k the rest of my life, and that still wouldn’t affect my belief that I’m NOT entitled to assistance, welfare, handouts, whatever you want to call it, from CEOs and the high income earners (even if the CEO of Google wants to give it to me). Does that mean everyone has to subscribe to my life philosophy? No, but the opposite is the fundamental premise for socialism, regardless if it's the nasty Stalinesque form or the "nice" socialism of modern Europe and soon to be our country: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

You’re not voting for 1 person. You’re voting for an uber progressive liberal & his ilk with the absence of any countering force. Despite how tempting it is, you can’t just look at a product and ignore the package it comes in and the instruction manual accompanying it. Then again, if your intent is to bring European social society to this side of the pond, you very well may have it…just don’t take off your rose colored glasses in a few years because you may not like what you see.

oh geez, so mccain's policies which replicate most of president bush's policies will dig us out of this financial crisis, millions of americans will afford a fair health care plan, we will finally have alternative fuel and our dependency on foreign oil is going to end, wallstreet will be able to go about its way of business without govt regulation...well by now if you didn't guess my sarcasm i can't help you. Obama's policies however you define are going to help this country..i don't think i want another president bush in my lifetime. Obama will bring troops home, make healthcare affordable, end our dependency on foreign oil, make education affordable, create more jobs, and let the economy take care of itself with right fiscal policies. In regards to my 250 k tax plan comment if i wasn't clear let me repeat...if you are a CEO of a small business that takes home more than a 250 + check home despite whatever amount of money that was poured into creating your business, you will still be categorized in the 1-10 percent of rich americans that are going to be well off. All the employees at that business who make less than 250 k get a tax break similar to what we get now...again this is the only way to stimulate the economy. Mccain has no idea when it comes to his policies and he is clinging on to carl rowe tactics to win this election so once again republicans can sell an unrealistic dream to Americans, we won't be fooled twice..i rest my case.

 

[homeboy]

All the employees at that business who make less than 250 k get a tax break similar to what we get now...again this is the only way to stimulate the economy. Mccain has no idea when it comes to his policies and he is clinging on to carl rowe tactics to win this election so once again republicans can sell an unrealistic dream to Americans, we won't be fooled twice..i rest my case.

You rest your case? On what, democrat sound bites and ad hominem drivel? Your ability to defend your arguments with talking points is astounding.

I love how you label McCain as selling an "unrealistic dream" then portend that Obama is going to :

... bring troops home, make healthcare affordable, end our dependency on foreign oil, make education affordable, create more jobs, and let the economy take care of itself with right fiscal policies.

Wow.

 

[Lamborghini1315]

You rest your case? On what, democrat sound bites and ad hominem drivel? Your ability to defend your arguments with talking points is astounding.

I love how you label McCain as selling an "unrealistic dream" then portend that Obama is going to :

Wow.

Dude when Mccain selected sarah palin as his running mate it negated all his experience, judgment argument..i am yet to hear about a policy that can help us. Oh by the way i can never imagine someone like sarah palin in the oval office that would just seem like another SNL skit, sorry to burst your bubble but the republican ticket is quite disappointing.

 

[homeboy]

Dude when Mccain selected sarah palin as his running mate it negated all his experience, judgment argument..i am yet to hear about a policy that can help us. Oh by the way i can never imagine someone like sarah palin in the oval office that would just seem like another SNL skit, sorry to burst your bubble but the republican ticket is quite disappointing.

Again, still failing to see an explanation for the irony of your statement:

You said McCain is selling an "unrealistic dream" then you state that Obama is going to "... bring troops home, make healthcare affordable, end our dependency on foreign oil, make education affordable, create more jobs, and let the economy take care of itself with right fiscal policies. "

 

[bkpa2med]

Again, still failing to see an explanation for the irony of your statement:

You said McCain is selling an "unrealistic dream" then you state that Obama is going to "... bring troops home, make healthcare affordable, end our dependency on foreign oil, make education affordable, create more jobs, and let the economy take care of itself with right fiscal policies. "

 

[jbone]

McCain.

1)Because I actually want to make money when I graduate.

2)I don't want to be part of the "sheeple" out there who go with what is popular without knowing the facts about the person. Baah!! 🙄 (talk about annoying)

They both suck but at least I know what to expect from McCain.

 

[Lamborghini1315]

McCain.

1)Because I actually want to make money when I graduate.

2)I don't want to be part of the "sheeple" out there who go with what is popular without knowing the facts about the person. Baah!! 🙄 (talk about annoying)

They both suck but at least I know what to expect from McCain.

wow you have some audacity referring obama supporters as sheeple, esp a mccain supporter..i am not surprised! This is the kinda of phony talk that turns people off...obama's been endorsed by many powerful political figures since you are voting republican you might want to remember the name colin powell, enuff said.

 

[jbone]

wow you have some audacity referring obama supporters as sheeple, esp a mccain supporter..i am not surprised! This is the kinda of phony talk that turns people off...obama's been endorsed by many powerful political figures since you are voting republican you might want to remember the name colin powell, enuff said.

**see rino**
nuff said

btw, see my post above. They both suck. I just won't jump on the bandwagon like some many others have. Don't take it personal, not everyone thinks like you. As much as you'd like to believe that, there are OTHER opinions out there besides your own. In the end, it really doesn't matter. We still live in the greatest country on earth and I'll support whomever wins. Unlike the left...but that's another story. Peace.

 

[e p i c]

Tell that to the CEO of Google, who makes more than any 100 doctors, and is an Obama supporter.

He can afford to be.

 

[TexasTriathlete]

How the hell did these two people win the primaries?

Give me the following tickets:

Republican: Gingrich/Romney
Democrat: Dean/Bentsen

And I'll be interested.

Except that Bentsen is dead. I'd still vote for him over the ******s they've got in there now. I'm just not convinced that a McCain or Obama presidency will really accomplish anything productive. The only problem is that 99% of the people in this country are ******ed, so we end up with these two. Idiot Democrats like Obama because he's "CHANGE!" and idiot Republicans like McCain because they've heard of him.

On one hand, the last time we elected a guy who wasn't experienced enough for the position, we got Bush. On the other hand, McCain appears to be a *****. Neither of these guys interests me enough to try and sift through the bull**** to make an informed decision, so I'm going to sit this one out. Maybe I'll be a radiologist, move to New Zealand, and set up PACS in my den so I can take call.

 

[DannMann99]

I don't know how many of you watch 'It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia' but they have it right:

Dee Reynolds: [discussing high taxes] Why don't you try voting for once?
Mac: And what? Vote for the democrat who's going to blast me in the ass? Or the republican who's going to blast my ass? Either way, politics is all one big ass blasting.

Again im voting for McCain. I agree with the sheeple comment, they all have the same dumb arguements 'he's too old' blah blah blah. When you counter them they just get beligerent.
Obama is a very questionable candidate in my eyes; McCain is a somewhat less questionable candidate.
I would have been more for a ticket which included Romney but you can't win everything.

At the very least If he loses, I won't be that ******* who says he's moving to Canada, or wears a shirt with an Obama face that says 'not my president' or a bumber sticker for that matter.

 

[lilzelda2]

I have a feeling that I won't have to move to Canada anymore

 

[bkpa2med]

Canada is coming to us ...

 

[hanky1982]

Canada is coming to us ...

More like Mexico

 

[jbone]

Canada is coming to us ...

Freakin CLASSIC! LMAO

That being said...I sure do hope to make money someday. After all of these years of getting pwned...I don't want to jump into the 60% tax bracket when I get out of residency. Do you think the hospital can pay me under the table? Oh well, off to surgery.

 

[bravotwozero]

Regardless of one's political leanings, you would at least have to concede that this is unquestionably a historic moment for this country. There were voters today who lived at a time where black americans had to pay a poll tax just to vote.

My $0.02.

 

[bkpa2med]

Regardless of one's political leanings, you would at least have to concede that this is unquestionably a historic moment for this country. There were voters today who lived at a time where black americans had to pay a poll tax just to vote.

My $0.02.

I agree 100% and I'm sure everyone in the country believes that. It's just a bit sad that now is the time we'll get to learn anything about our President. His eloquence has perverted many peoples reality. I'm just waiting to see when he takes our troops out of Iraq [within 16mths], gets every single person in this country covered with the same exact plan congress gives him, cut taxes for "95%" of the people, balance the budget and then and only then ascend once more to our heavenly father.

 

[heysexylady]

I agree 100% and I'm sure everyone in the country believes that. It's just a bit sad that now is the time we'll get to learn anything about our President. His eloquence has perverted many peoples reality. I'm just waiting to see when he takes our troops out of Iraq [within 16mths], gets every single person in this country covered with the same exact plan congress gives him, cut taxes for "95%" of the people, balance the budget and then and only then ascend once more to our heavenly father.

I don't understand how you can support Bush tax cuts for the top 5 percent bracket....but have an issue with Obama cutting tax for 95 percent of the people. Do you seriously think that the trickle down effect works..b/c it hasn't.

You talk about balancing the budget....well if Bush had truly been a fiscal conservative...the U.S. would not be 10 trillion dollars in debt.
Why are we in debt in the first place...b/c I was under the assumption that republicans were fiscally conservative ( a joke in itself). You need to talk to the people in the republican party and ask them why they dropped the ball b/c if they were doing a good job...Obama wouldn't have won.

Simple as that.
What the country have tried for the past 8 years have not worked and honestly it is now time to try another way.

 

[Lamborghini1315]

Well now we all have one thing in common "President elect obama"...that's all that matters, i was happy to see a huge turnout and obama carrying Indiana says a lot about obama and his vision.