US Elections: It's going to be McCain/Palin, isn't it?

edited January 2009 in Chit chat
Surely the Palin gimmick won't win McCain the election? But it's looking that way :(
Post edited by NickH on
«13456710

Comments

  • edited September 2008
    when do they vote?
  • edited September 2008
    mile wrote: »
    when do they vote?

    November 6th.
  • edited September 2008
    NickH wrote: »
    November 6th.

    ha ha, how ironic.
  • edited September 2008
    mile wrote: »
    when do they vote?
    NickH wrote: »
    November 6th.
    mile wrote: »
    ha ha, how ironic.

    You what?!
  • edited September 2008
    haven't they finished yet? ;)

    how long does it take to have a bloody election :p
  • edited September 2008
    NickH wrote: »
    You what?!

    i meant to say iconic
  • edited September 2008
    NickH wrote: »
    Surely the Palin gimmick won't win McCain the election? But it's looking that way :(

    My god they better win or this country will be fucked with Obama.

    How a guy with zero experience comes from no where to run for president...never managed a company never mind a country....unbelievable...Palin has more experience than obama and shes only running for VICE president.
  • edited September 2008
    beanz wrote: »
    My god they better win or this country will be fucked with Obama.

    How a guy with zero experience comes from no where to run for president...never managed a company never mind a country....unbelievable...Palin has more experience than obama and shes only running for VICE president.

    I'm judging them purely on foreign policy. Under McCain, that will continue onto more invasions and bombings, and USA's global reputation will still be in the toilet. Obama appears to have a more cooperative view on this - although he seems to think Europe will help the USA bail out of Iraq. That's going be to a VERY hard sell at a high price for him.
  • edited September 2008
    beanz wrote: »
    My god they better win or this country will be fucked with Obama.

    How a guy with zero experience comes from no where to run for president...never managed a company never mind a country....unbelievable...Palin has more experience than obama and shes only running for VICE president.

    Only one President had managed a country before, Franklin Roosevelt (and in his first presidency, he hadn't of course). All other presidents have never run a country before, so I don't quite see your point there. Most Presidents haven't run companies, either. Reagan hadn't, nor Jimmy Carter, or JFK - dozens haven't, and indeed most of the Founding Fathers hadn't done either. But of course you're not going to like Obama - after all, you often show very strong republican tendencies :-)

    The President has lots of advisers to help him run the country day-to-day.

    Either McCain or Obama would probably make fine presidents. Palin, though, is a Christian nutjob who believes in creationism - and thus we know the neocons aren't far away who got us into the current mess we're in. I think Obama has a much better running mate. McCain croaking would be even worse than if George H Bush had croaked and ceded the country to that buffoon Dan Quayle.

    On balance I would rather see a younger President - one who will live long enough to reap the consequences of their decisions might think twice before stirring trouble up where they shouldn't.

    As usual, the election will be too close to call.
  • edited September 2008
    i hope obama wins, then gets assasinated. hopefully that will see a return of cornishdave to the forum so he can tell us all how it was really the CIA who did it, cos they are run by the KKK.
  • edited September 2008
    mile wrote: »
    i hope obama wins, then gets assasinated. hopefully that will see a return of cornishdave to the forum so he can tell us all how it was really the CIA who did it, cos they are run by the KKK.

    That was mile, reporting on behalf of MSNBC News...
  • edited September 2008
    NickH wrote: »
    That was mile, reporting on behalf of MSNBC News...

    i'm not going to get too hung up on the election of a foreign leader, i was trying to think of ways the outcome might affect my life. :razz:
  • edited September 2008
    mile wrote: »
    i'm not going to get too hung up on the election of a foreign leader, i was trying to think of ways the outcome might affect my life. :razz:

    If you have friends or family in the armed forces, it affects you. Iraq.

    If you fear terrorist attacks, it also affects you. 7/7.

    If you, your job, or your employer depends on the health of the economy, it affects you too. House market, credit crunch.

    This isn't just *any* foreign leader. This is about the most powerful person on earth.
  • edited September 2008
    NickH wrote: »
    If you have friends or family in the armed forces, it affects you. Iraq.

    If you fear terrorist attacks, it also affects you. 7/7.

    If you, your job, or your employer depends on the health of the economy, it affects you too. House market, credit crunch.

    This isn't just *any* foreign leader. This is about the most powerful person on earth.

    i think you are thinking about this election way too much.
  • edited September 2008
    I would like to think things will be so much better etc but i just doubt it.

    Its like all the labour lot going crazy when they beat the tories, they seemed to do alright for a few years and now look. Everyone loves the tories again, they'll get in (Labour seem so bad right now), do a decent job for a year or two then it'll be downhill again and then Labour will look great.

    Whoever gets in at the white house i cant see a ton being different. Everyone mocks Bush but if the other guy got in (Forget his name) he would have probably acted the same after 9/11.

    They all seem to talk a good game but overall its more of the same.
  • edited September 2008
    mile wrote: »
    i think you are thinking about this election way too much.

    You're right. Let's ignore world politics. It doesn't matter. My bad.
  • edited September 2008
    NickH wrote: »
    You're right. Let's ignore world politics. It doesn't matter. My bad.

    Exactly ! You should worry about the important things in life, like the next YS Rock n roll years video please.

    Dont worry yourself with silly little nonsense going on across the pond. Just know McDonalds/Burger King will remain open whoever the next president is, see no point worrying.
  • edited September 2008
    psj3809 wrote: »
    the next YS Rock n roll years video please.

    Watch this space.

    Or rather, my .sig.
  • edited September 2008
    psj3809 wrote: »
    Its like all the labour lot going crazy when they beat the tories, they seemed to do alright for a few years and now look.

    Two quotes that are appropriate for the current world situation vis-a-vis the UK and USA:

    “Politicians are like diapers. They both need changing regularly and for the same reason.”

    Alliance, n.:
    In international politics, the union of two thieves who have
    their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot
    separately plunder a third.
    -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
  • edited September 2008
    No matter who you vote for, the government always wins.
  • edited September 2008
    NickH wrote: »
    No matter who you vote for, the government always wins.

    Hmm which govenment are you talking about..the puppet govenment or the REAL hidden one (cornishpasty where are you!!).
  • edited September 2008
    Winston wrote: »
    Two quotes that are appropriate for the current world situation vis-a-vis the UK and USA:

    ?Politicians are like diapers. They both need changing regularly and for the same reason.?

    Alliance, n.:
    In international politics, the union of two thieves who have
    their hands so deeply inserted in each other's pocket that they cannot
    separately plunder a third.
    -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

    Ha ha very good !! Very true as well
  • edited September 2008
    Interesting facts regarding the current Presidential candidates


    2008 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE COMPARISON TALKING POINTS

    ISSUE

    Favors new drilling offshore US

    McCain : Yes
    Obama : No

    Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it

    McCain : Yes
    Obama : No


    Served in the US Armed Forces

    McCain : Yes
    Obama : No

    Amount of time served in the US Senate

    McCain : 22 YEARS
    Obama : 173 DAYS

    Will institute a socialized national health care plan

    McCain : No
    Obama : Yes

    Supports abortion throughout the pregnancy

    McCain : No
    Obama : Yes

    Would pull troops out of Iraq immediately

    McCain : No
    Obama : Yes

    Supports gun ownership rights

    McCain : Yes
    Obama : No

    Supports homosexual marriage

    McCain : No
    Obama : Yes

    Proposed programs will mean a huge tax increase

    McCain : No
    Obama : Yes

    Voted against making English the official language

    McCain : No
    Obama : Yes

    Voted to give Social Security benefits to illegals

    McCain : No
    Obama : Yes

    CAPITAL GAINS TAX

    MCCAIN
    0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.

    OBAMA
    28% on profit from ALL home sales. (How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.)

    DIVIDEND TAX

    MCCAIN
    15% (no change)

    OBAMA
    39.6% - (How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.')

    INCOME TAX

    MCCAIN

    (no changes)
    Single making 30K - tax $4,500
    Single making 50K - tax $12,500
    Single making 75K - tax $18,750
    Married making 60K- tax $9,000
    Married making 75K - tax $18,750
    Married making 125K - tax $31,250

    OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
    Single making 30K - tax $8,400
    Single making 50K - tax $14,000
    Single making 75K - tax $23,250
    Married making 60K - tax $16,800
    Married making 75K - tax $21,000
    Married making 125K - tax $38,750
    Under Obama, your taxes could almost double!

    INHERITANCE TAX

    MCCAIN
    - 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)

    OBAMA
    Restore the inheritance tax

    Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will only lose them to these taxes.

    NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA

    New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet. New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already) New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity) New taxes on retirement accounts, and last but not least....New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!


    Facts can be verified at the following web sites:


    http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/election/2008/index.html

    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.taxes.html

    [url]http://elections.foxnews..com/?s=proposed+taxes[/url]

    http://bulletin.aarp.org/yourworld/politics/articles/mccain_obama_offer_different_visions_on_taxes.html

    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/candidates/barack_obama/

    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/candidates/john_mccain/
  • edited September 2008
    beanz wrote: »
    Served in the US Armed Forces

    McCain : Yes
    Obama : No

    This explains quite a lot about US foreign policy - the seeming insistence that having a warrior as a civilian president is a *good* thing.
    Voted against making English the official language

    McCain : No
    Obama : Yes

    ...and I thought the USA was the Land of the Free. Free countries shouldn't need official languages. Especially free countries that were founded by immigration. In fact, it seems extremely ironic that a country founded by immigration should feel it needs official an official language!

    The word "fact" and foxnews does not belong in the same sentence.
  • edited September 2008
    Winston wrote: »
    ...and I thought the USA was the Land of the Free. Free countries shouldn't need official languages. Especially free countries that were founded by immigration. In fact, it seems extremely ironic that a country founded by immigration should feel it needs official an official language!

    I dont know about that one. English is obviously the official language in the UK, its quite difficult for some people to get by if they cant talk any english whatsoever. I wouldnt move to Spain unless i had a basic grasp of the language. Costs companies a fair bit if they have to keep using interpreters all the time.
  • edited September 2008
    Winston wrote: »
    Either McCain or Obama would probably make fine presidents. Palin, though, is a Christian nutjob who believes in creationism - and thus we know the neocons aren't far away who got us into the current mess we're in. I think Obama has a much better running mate. McCain croaking would be even worse than if George H Bush had croaked and ceded the country to that buffoon Dan Quayle.

    I like both Obama and McCain, in their own ways they're exactly what the US needs after the weak, crooked leadership of Bush. The choice of Palin has put me right off McCain, though. She strikes me as a terrible choice for Vice-President and a cynical vote-grabbing ploy. McCain's 72 and if something happens to him then she's clearly not equipped for national leadership. It demonstrates a lack of seriousness on his part and that worries me.

    I'm not worried about the neocons, I think those guys are finished. The neoconservatives' university debating-society brand of politics was always going to fall-apart in the real world and the utter mess they made of post-Saddam Iraq as well as the damage they did to America's crucial network of allies have weakened the USA. They might resurface if America hits another crisis - cranks often do - but I wouldn't worry too much about them over the next five years or so. If McCain gets in there'll be some scaremongering about neoconservative influence but I think scaremongering is all it'll be.

    My main worry about Obama is that he might be all surface. Everyone I've talked to who admires him goes on about his charisma and his youth and never mentions his policies. His weakness in foreign policy is a major worry for me. I worry that, like Bush, he might become a figurehead who allows his advisors to direct policy. He's clearly neither as weak nor as stupid as Bush but it's still a worry.
  • edited September 2008
    Winston wrote: »
    This explains quite a lot about US foreign policy - the seeming insistence that having a warrior as a civilian president is a *good* thing.

    I think calling an ex-soldier a "warrior" is a bit off, as though all ex-servicemen/women are gung-ho hotheads. Many of them aren't. What does distinguish them is that they have experience of a war situation and a realistic grasp of what actually happens. That tends to make them better-equipped to lead in times of war.
    ...and I thought the USA was the Land of the Free. Free countries shouldn't need official languages. Especially free countries that were founded by immigration. In fact, it seems extremely ironic that a country founded by immigration should feel it needs official an official language!

    Making English the "official language" is a just a sop to nativism. It's unlikely to make much practical difference and it's likely that states will simply adopt their own additional "official" languages on an ad-hoc basis if this happens.
  • edited September 2008
    Let's face it - the only way Obama is going to win is if he puts an apostrophe in his surname to appeal to the Irish-American voters
    General Malthadius Zoff
    Magenta icon
  • edited September 2008
    Zoffy wrote: »
    Let's face it - the only way Obama is going to win is if he puts an apostrophe in his surname to appeal to the Irish-American voters

    I'm not sure why you're all so sure McCain's going to win now. He's just appointed his running-mate and so there's a "bounce". It's unlikely to be permanent. A few of the opinion polls also claim Obama is still ahead in the polls. He's one of the strongest candidates (in terms of popularity) the Democrats have put up. It's far from over.
  • edited September 2008
    psj3809 wrote: »
    Whoever gets in at the white house i cant see a ton being different. Everyone mocks Bush but if the other guy got in (Forget his name) he would have probably acted the same after 9/11.

    I've no doubt your correct in terms of the retaliation, but if Al Gore had got in, I believe the world would be a very different place in terms of stuff like the Kyoto Treaty, global warming and general pollution.

    Watch An Inconvenient Truth to see what I mean. A very good documentary.
Sign In or Register to comment.