We are royally screwed.

the only presidential candidate doing this for our good and not his own is Ron Paul. Talk about self sacrifice... I don't think a politician has ever taken so many character assassination attempts by the media or called "kook" "nut" "rascist" "Al Queda sympathizer" or "crazy" so many times.... and yet he still fights for us...

There aren't many good, honest politicians left that are doing their job for the right reasons... Politicians like Ron Paul are a dying breed.

 

And I wish less people would confuse Obama for a man like Ron Paul. They are polar opposites.

 

I agree with other posters here; its hard to trust anybody really. I have a feeling whether or not Obama gets elected, there will be riots. If he is elected, I think there's a good chance some hell will be raised... if not, riots will ensue...

 

Same old worn out shit as it always is - hell will be raised no matter what happens. However, I don't think we'll see any kind of violence come of it. Excepting maybe some redneck assasinates Obama. Rednecks are like that...

And MikeE, I couldn't have said it better!

I am seriously considering writing in someone. Maybe Scooby Do?

 

Well I put together worst case scenarios.. and they were all really kinnda funny..

 

I put together those WCS, too, but it scared the hell outta me!

 

you can't write someone in on a diabold machine. Good old fair elections, huh...


If you're going to write any name in, you might as well make it Ron Paul.. at least he stands for something

 

Obama is the real deal. New ideas, and extremely capable of leading this country out of the gutter. Trust in him and you will be rewarded tenfold. Sincerely, an Obama supporter.

 

Nope, Ron Paul has some insane ideas that I can't get into. He won't get my vote. And definitely NEITHER will Obama.

He talks a great talk, and is charismatic, however he has ZERO experience at mostly anything. More room for fuck-ups. Sorry...

 

the difference between a democrat and a republican is the difference between dissappointment and shame. democrats have freequently disappointed me, but none have ever made me as ashaimed of where i live as republicans do blatantly and consistantly.

i mean democrates have made some royal fuck ups too, but man, they don't go arround braging about it like it was something to be proud of. and trying to pretend there's something wrong with anyone who isn't.

and anyway, the only way we're royally screwed is if the bushites declair martial law, postpone the election for ever and throw everyone with half a brain in death camps like hitler did.

greens and even libertarians i can see, but why anyone has ever voted for a republican since 1950, i mean at the federal level, i have never in this life understood.

at the state level there may be and or have been a few decent ones.

not one of them worth a dam in the oval office in my almost sixty years of living.

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

 

I like your point of view. I agree with you and I have nothing to anyone who wants to wave with the flag.
My sf-fantastic idea is to make that 10 points algorythm to save the world and make the computers to rule us all. Computers are not influenced with emotions so their inteligence its clear less from subjective emotional perspective.
1) Make gun marked banned off over the world
2) Close the gun industries - let the employers do the fireworks
3) Explore the safe energy sources like solar power, wind, wave, temperature difference and termonuclear (free from radioactivity) power!!!!
4) Hmmm, oh yes clean those garbages which are flowing in Pacific.
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)

Your suggestions?

Ps.: Even right now exist computers which can predict economic balances and possible ways better than economists and politicans. But actually nobody cares about that as computers don't want to include corrution in the calculation.
The same is with climate changes, scientists (using computers) know from about 10 years or more what to do. But goverments are waking up right now at last. Hopefully not too late.

 

the difference between a democrat and a republican is the difference between dissappointment and shame. democrats have freequently disappointed me, but none have ever made me as ashaimed of where i live as republicans do blatantly and consistantly. i mean democrates have made some royal fuck ups too, but man, they don't go arround braging about it like it was something to be proud of. and trying to pretend there's something wrong with anyone who isn't.

I most emphatically agree. Very well-put.

If the Democratic candidate turns out to be particularly unlikeable, I'll still vote for that candidate. Voting for the lesser evil means defeating the BIG evil. And BIG evil doesn't get much more evil than George and his gang of war profiteers. In normal times, I would say "vote for the candidate that best represents your views even if they aren't likely to win." These aren't normal times.

 

my wife likes to quote a british anarchist who basically said

there is only an inch of difference between the two parties

but it is the inch we live in

that being said i do not vote

[paperless]

 

Indeed; these are not normal times at all. I pretty much agree that in the end, democrats are waaay better than republicans.

 

both parties are equally corrupt. Both are equally evil. Both divide us as Americans and try to turn EVERY DAMN ISSUE into partisan politics. You are making a mistake if you are fooled into believing the domocrooks are less evil. Both parties are destroying America.

Its time for something else. Someone else. No republicans. No democrats. You will not find a president that actually cares for the working man's best interest in either party.


You are a fool to believe that George Bush is the worst it can get. A damn idiot.
You are also a fool to vote for a man because of what party he is in.

 

Having been raised a democrat, I always assumed that they were "better" than Republicans, and in fact, they MAY have been then. Well, it did appear as if the Repubs were more warrior like... But that was thru the eyes of someone very young and not entirely understanding of the whole thing. Now that I'm older and "wiser", I still don't understand, and in fact it's gotten far more confusing. Oh well, what I do understand is that the party thing is just an illusion, an imaginary division to keep folks at each others throats. The only VISIBLE difference is that the Dems have always seemed more wishywashy or soft (easy to control by their handlers?) And the Repubs have been more forcefully evil (when useful to their handlers?) Basically they are all just generalizations very similar to a measurement on a measuring stick...
So, I am looking at the candidates as if there WERE no divisive terms like "republican" and "democrat". Just taking them at face value. And what I see is a three ring circus, a tragic comedy. Is this what we have come to? It's as good as any soap opera theme. And I'm sure the soap opera folks don't even see it for what it is. If we must generalize, then generally speaking, the masses don't go too much farther than external appearances in judging most things. So here is what I see...

I see a guy who was unheard of before suddenly becoming to some like a new messiah. But really he seems to be most interested in the fact that he's a dark skinned guy running for pres (imagine that!), and his issues all seem to just be his own customized extensions of the already existing... He must spend hours posing in the mirror for those eternally "noble" looking photo ops. Notice how so many times it's the "proud" nose up/shoulders back look (just like the warriors in all those popular computer games like Guild Wars). He's a man of color and as such he MUST make a good impression on all the "right" people in order to survive. So he would be easy to control by "handlers". Plus his election would make the country look so GOOD, you know, because it would prove that we are not racists or bigots...

Then there is that ASSERTIVE WOMAN. I know about women. I am one. I know about being "assertive". And I know what happens when women WORK at being assertive. She scares the hell out of me, actually, in a likable sort of way. She seems very, well, presidential, for real, not by practicing in front of a mirror. But I think that is the very thing which will keep her from becoming president. Because women just don't see things quite the same as men. This country has always been run by men in a mans viewpoint. They must see her as a bit of a loose cannon, which means she would be harder to control. Therefore she will most likely be fazed out.

On the "other" side, we have a guy who has military written all over him. His manner, his look, his ideas. Everything screams warrior. Well, I think MOST folks are sick of war and are being repelled, all except for the diehard "be-all-that-you-can-be-join-the-army" crowd. He also screams of "weazle". Picture him not as a politician, but as an actor in a movie. What parts would he be type-cast for do you suppose?

I can safely say I don't know much about Huck. He must not be too interesting or I would. Not enough soap opera, I guess. I looked at a couple of speeches he made, and a few debate clips, but it's leaving me with a bland taste in my mouth. Perhaps he missed his calling? Needs more spice.

And then there is RON. He just LOOKS like a baby doctor. The guy in the Westerns that drives his horse and buggy thru sleet and floods and Indian attacks to deliver babys and save lives. When he talks he doesn't look like he's looking in a mirror. He looks like he's talking TO YOU. He looks in your eyes. He doesn't seem to be putting on airs. Just a whole different kettle of fish. I dunno.... Looks pretty good from where I'm sittin'.