Polycounter Opinion Poll, cast your vote
polycounter lvl 18
The obvious poll...
Keep it fair only one vote each etc etc
Non US citizens it is not fair to you cast your vote in a US election but so as not to feel too left out take the honnary US citizen poll...
tpe
Keep it fair only one vote each etc etc
Non US citizens it is not fair to you cast your vote in a US election but so as not to feel too left out take the honnary US citizen poll...
tpe
Replies
then again, bush is the moron who doesn't believe in global warming, soooo... ah, well, eight years of bush can't be worse than 11 of maggie frickin thatcher...
GO KERRY GO!
I am not going to legitimate a system that doesn't leave you real options, nor does it allow you to vote on real matters.
Sue me, but I am for 'Direct Democracy', and to kick those lazy parasites out of office
(disclamer: I am not a US citizen, but this is true for the country I live in, and as far as I can tell also for the USA and most of the other countrys on earth)
Oh wait, he's not running? GOD DAMNIT
I am gonna consider myself an uber honorary US citizen ;-)
I just really can't get that the US populous got brainwashed into thinking that this is a good idea. The brightest minds down the ages have characterised this as a bad thing: once new info comes in that changes the situation, you should re-evaluate. Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Plato, and many, many more say so.
I don't get why Kerry never just said "well, the president is at war. Most military leaders around the world consider Sun Tzu required reading, and Sun Tzu in the still-used and relevant 'the art of war' dedicates an entire chapter, called Adaptations, towards the concept that being stubborn and not changing your mind in the face of new facts results in catastrophy. Now Bush is proud of the fact that he does not change his mind, no matter what. And accepted wisdom in these matters, thought up thousands of years ago, states that that is a dumb, foolish and self-destructive attitude. Yet he proclaims it a virtue."
I shoulda wrote a talking point for Kerry for the debates ;P
I voted Kerry. He was an active student in debates and politics during his time at Yale. Bush was a Dumbass. Kerry is very intelligent, and did his time in Vietnam. He doesn't make a choice until the consequences are evaluated and the circumstances are perfect. He doesn't plan to force his beliefs on a nation of diverse cultures and faiths. He can unite.
If the choice were possible, I would vote for Nader. Nader has the facts. But at this point, voting for Nader would take votes away from Kerry, giving Dumbass the upperhand.
This is the only foreign election I really care about since Bush is a substantial threat to everybody else's national security.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah and I also follow it for entertainment
I suppose I would vote for Kerry because I don't think Bush is a very intelligent man and find some of his opinions a bit narrow minded. Besides that I do believe that in some way or the other he did mess with the last elections which is not cool.
I voted Kerry. He was an active student in debates and politics during his time at Yale. Bush was a Dumbass. Kerry is very intelligent
[/ QUOTE ]
Say what you want about Bush (and most of the bad stuff is probably right), but he certainly isn't dumb. He scored higher than Kerry on an IQ test (a few years back), and also studied in Harvard.
I guess he:
1. Just doesn't give a $%&# about correct grammar and stuff like that (kinda understandable, but maybe not that well suited for the President of the USA)
2. It is part of the 'role' he plays to appeal to the 'common' (white) people, outside of the bigger cities.
As for those colleges.. There are 2 ways:
1. Smarts.
2. >Money.<
Not the best source, but the quickest google showed up... I know this could be entirely made up, but seriously Bush just can't be as stupid as some people think he is.
(kerry)
heh, just watch the Washington game Sunday
[/ QUOTE ]
Go PACKERS!!!!
We have vote by mail in Oregon so I've already voted and turned in my ballot. It's such a good system, I can't believe more states haven't adopted it yet. No going to the polls and waiting in line for me.
I chose to write in Dukester for my choice for President this time. I'm gonna keep voting for him until we get a Polycounter in the White House, dammit!
BT
Just got back from early voting.
This time they had touch screen voting instead of CHADZ!
George W. Bush is a tool of the capitalist-pig war-profiteer smoke-filled-room Rockefeller-trust good-ol-boy network that likes to have all the money. His family and friends ARE the US oil business. He doesn't understand what the hell goes on in the Arab world, nor will he ever be able to. He is the figurehead of the administration run by the Project for The New American Century, whose philosophy is very much like Team America, but with humans as the puppets. And not funny. Bush's policy can be summarized as "I'm the President -- SO THERE!"
John Kerry, I don't know. But he lacks all of the above characteristics, so he's fine with me. He's "NOT BUSH".
/jzero
JKMakowka, Be happy with only 2 votes. In the Netherlands we can vote for about 20 partys. The ideas and ideals of a party never get done because the idea won't be used till all partys agree... And mostly there is barely anything left from the orginal idea after months of dileberation. I like the US and UK political system better to be honest
[/ QUOTE ]
You gotta free your mind, man!
I absolutly agree that many parties lead to 'statis', but so do 2 parties (or a combination of parties that act like 2 parties, like in Germany) at approximatly 50% each... and one dominating party isn't really the best idea either.
SOOO, think about it... not matter how many or how few parties there are, there are almost always in the way of problem solving and thier individual 'egos' often leads to fighting over power in matters that have nothing to do with with the power.
I am for abolishing that entire party system alltogether, and voting on actual matters (that is what 'direct democracy' is).
And I think this is very much possible now in the days of instant (mass) communication both ways, but the people right now in charge will do everything to stay in power
But I kinda agree, the masses have been systematicly dumbed down for decades, but that is nothing that couldn't be reversed, given some time.
I seriously can't see a thing about direct democracy that would be worse than it is today, but no system is perfect.
Until Amercia stops opening up its economy to other sources NAFTA, CAFTA and Japan and starts looking out for American Citizens, the average American is going suffer more and more the lower middle class (me) and poor are getting desparate, & Reps. need to hear out voices soon. As long as we continue to funnel millions of dollars to other countries, feed the huge war machine and import out of country products America is going to get more and more strained like and overladened boat in a huge storm at sea.
Sadly I don't see either Bush or Kerry addressing or solving our actual problems now or in the near future.
1 non US vote for Bush, hmnn. Somtimes scott i am sure you do it just to be contrair
tpe
Until Amercia stops opening up its economy to other sources NAFTA, CAFTA and Japan and starts looking out for American Citizens, the average American is going suffer more and more the lower middle class (me) and poor are getting desparate, & Reps. need to hear out voices soon. As long as we continue to funnel millions of dollars to other countries, feed the huge war machine and import out of country products America is going to get more and more strained like and overladened boat in a huge storm at sea.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ether your being sarcastic or you have no idea how global economics works.
Isolationism is one of the worst things you could do to your economy.
I really dont care for globalization because unless it is done evenly we, the poor will get it in the end. Going down to the poverty level on wages, say 5 per hour and then still paying crazy amounts for fuel, heating, subsistence and food and medical is not globalization, it is extortion by the rich people of the world. I just wish wed stop handing out all our hard earned money like we were Uncle Joe at the circus giving candy to kids.
Really other than I agree with certain policies of Bush than Kerry and that Bush is more able to handle the Terrrorists than Kerry, I really cant stomach Bush anymore either.
I say this with the utmost respect, frosty, but that is so much bollocks. There are two and only two reasons other governments fear the US and people turn terrorist: because the US has the largest military in the world and likes to meddle in other countries for it's own benefit exclusively.
Look at Iraq for a great example of this. The common line is "we went in because Iraq was a threat to us/the US". When it came out that not only was Iraq not a threat to the US, the line turned into "we helped save the people and we're rebuilding!". But the fact of the matter is that although Saddam is gone (and ignoring the shitstorm over there for the moment) the Iraqi people are worse off than before: no food, no electricity and the streets are unsafer than ever. And why is this? Partly because the ridicululous, unheard of and counter-to-how-things-are-historically-done move of disbanding the Iraqi police and military instead of using them as a peacekeeping force. But the even greater cause is because the Iraqi's don't have jobs. How do you get a country up and running after it's infrastructure has been totally destroyed? By giving people jobs that rebuild the country. What's happening instead is that damn near all infrastructural work is being outsourced: all that money being 'invested in Iraq' is going to american, indian, russian companies. The oil pipelines aren't even run by the Iraqis anymore...hell, they have so little to do with it anymore that you can say that the pipelines/refineries etc have been annexed.
So you have a country where foreign companies are making all the money and the people who live there aren't getting any. Way to build up the economy.
And what do you think those people are going to think when they see the whole pie being divided and they don't get a piece? Exactly..die of hunger or become 'terrorists' (or freedom/french fighters).
So what has Bush done against these terrorists except declare war on them? Nada except grow more of 'em, which is exasparated by the fact that it was Saddam who hated the fundamentalists and kept them in prison...those same fundamentalists who are most prone to become terrorists. Yeah, Iraq was a smart move in the fight against terror, alright. Not only does he attack someone who is (admittedly in a quite medeival fashion) keeping the terrorist population down, but by throwing his own father and collegues a bone (Carlyle investors, Halliburton) he's breeding even more!
Now read the above and find the irony tying it into your last post: american jobs getting outsourced to india vs. iraqi jobs gettinng outsourced by americans (in their own country, no less...and in quite a differen t way than the fashion some americans beleive puerto ricans or some other ethnic group are 'stealing' theirs [which they can because they /will/ do the dirty jobs for not so much money]).
Anyway, the above shows that a)complete free-trade is not such a good thing...some things need to be protected,because otherwise they can't grow; b)Bush needs to get a clue and listen to his good advisors (another thing which bugs me: if you're so dumb that you need to surround youself with great advisors to get your ideas...how are you competent to choose between them?) and prefferabley get the $h|7 out and c) man, I ramble on way too much after a day's worth of studying