American Elections

[ILLYRIAN]

Can some-one please explain what they are doing.
That Clintun and Boama spend millions of dollars to get a few hundred votes, why?
Seems to me like a big waste of money.

 

[Washburne]

Can some-one please explain what they are doing.
That Clintun and Boama spend millions of dollars to get a few hundred votes, why?
Seems to me like a big waste of money.

Well I´m not american so I guess someone else would have much more knowledge then me. But isn´t it really tight between them? And since the one of them who wins have a real chance of being president in the end. They just need to beat John Mccain, easier said than done of course. But still every wote counts.

But as an outsider it´s pretty amazing just how much money are spent on campaigns, taking in concideration all candidates from the start.

 

[Kean]

Well considering President of the United states is one of the highest,if not the highest position of office a person can obtain I would say spending the money is worth it. Unlike most elections the American elections literally starts building steam years before the actual vote. It's a huge country where a candidate has to visit every state and woo a hell of a lot of people. That doesn't come cheap.

As far as beating Mc Cain goes I think Obama is the only onewho could do it. He's a man of the people where as Clinton is the Ice Queen.

It's tight but it Obama has over 100 more secured delegates than Clinton, and more significantly he has more superdelegates than Clinton.

Personally I think not only will he be the Democratic candidate but come January we will be watching President Barack Obama be sworn in.

 

[white avenger]

The problem with the Obama/Clinton election is that Hilary can NOT win the nomination with the number of votes she will control if she won every state election between now and the Convention. All that she is doing is spending millions of dollars to gain enough support to gain herself a huge number of concessions when Obama is selected to be the Democratic candidate (and we can't rule an Obama/Clinton ticket, despite what both of them have said.). Unfortunately, she may have effectively split the Party, since, according to a lot of news commentators, a lot of Clinton supporters have said that if she ISN'T on the ticket, they will vote for McCain.

In the meantime, while they are butting heads and insulting each other, the Republicans are pretty much coasting through their primaries, spending very little money on their campaigns, because he has no competition.

If Clinton and Obama hold to what they have publicly said again and again, neither one will run on the same ticket with the other, even though Obama selecting Hillart as his Vice President would do everything but hend them the election on a silver platter.

 

[Kean]

Can anyone really see Clinton playing second fiddle to Obama? I don't think her ego would allow it. I do, however, think an Obama/Edwards combination would be fantastic.

 

[alexa]

Clinton supporter over here 😉 Her ego isn't any bigger then any other politician in my view anyway, and she has the experience to get stuff done. That being said, the only thing I have against Obama is that he doesn't explain his policies and has the least amount of senate experience... besides that I think he'd be cool.
And I agree with Illyrian that these elections to have elections are a giant waste of money. The process where elected mp's choose their party leader seems much more sensible, money saving, and still democratic.
Jeez I'm just full of politics today 😛

 

[Joyce Summers]

Like Alexa, I'm a Clinton supporter. But it's more through a 'Lesser of the two evils' mentality. Actually that seems to be the choice theory I go with for any vote. It's sad really.
But I just don't trust Obama, he gives me the heebie jeebies and I can't explain why. I just, if I had to choose out of the two, Clinton gives me less heebie jeebie vibes so...

Plus, like Alexa said, I don't think her ego is any bigger than any other politician (Though she did have Tina Turner's Simply the Best playing when she was meeting people at one point. Anyone else thing that was hilarious yet scarily odd?). All politicians are egotistical....people. And she does have the experience behind her.

I think Obama is trying to go for the racial "minority" vote really while Clinton is trying to get the woman's vote and apparently I'm one of those women whose gotten just a little sucked in. But honestly, I wish there was another choice that appealed to me more. But I have yet to come across a politician that makes me smile and nod at everything they say and that I can honestly back up with 'I full support this candidate'.

If she ever did make it to Presidency though, she'd be the first woman president which makes me go 'whoo' but also 'Ooh' because Margaret Thatcher was the first woman Prime Minister and that didn't go too well did it? To put it lightly that is.

But yes, I do agree a ridiculous amount of money is spent on campaigning. It's why really only the rich can run at all, which kinda defies the whole 'Anyone can run for President' things. Because okay, theoretically anyone can, but in reality it's only the people who already have money and power that can do it. Again with the sadness.

Side Politician Note: There is one thing in government that has the ability to make me smile. I can say my state governor is The Terminator. 😉

 

[Kean]

I was originally all for Clinton, Bill had done alot for Ireland, especially in the North and I even met him when he came to Limerick ten years ago. I know that doesn't really mean anything to the Americans who actually get to vote but from my perspective was alot. However over the course of the primaries a few things have put me off her. One wasn't exactly her fault but a prominant feminist in Ireland came out and said although she loved Obama and really believed in his brand of politics she said that Clinton should win simply because it was 'the girls turn'. I found that appaling, that this intelligent, educated women would use someones sex as valid reason for a person to be President just sickened me. Also I don't like the dirty dealings that the Clintons initiated and I really had no patience for her saying she played a hand in drawing up the Good Friday Agreement! That is just ludicrous! Just because your husband is a pilot doesn't mean you can fly a plane.

 

[white avenger]

When it gets down to it, 90% of all of the professional politicians are the same: self serving, egotistical, and either too stupid or too lazy to work for a living, but they all know for a certainty that they know more about how we should lead our lives than we ever could. They tell the voters just what they want to hear and then promptly forget all of their promises (except to the special interest groups, of course) just as soon as they take their oath of office. They claim to be "for the working people," and "for the little man," but strangely come out of office, when they're finally defeated or retire, as millionaires and are either given huge amounts of money for traveling all over the country making speeches about how they helped the American public and what's wrong with the current administration (but only if it's the opposing party, of course).


(And, by the way, Miss K, what makes you think that Hilary wasn't the real pilot for the 8 years Bill was in office? She wore the pants suit in the family even back then,)

 

[palabravampiress]

Well, I for one an unable to get behind Clinton's health plan. Making anything mandatory to the extent that you would be willing to garnish free citizens' wages in order to force them to pay for it is downright unAmerican, if you ask me. That said, I still think she'd be a better president than Obama. I agree with Alexa; Obama's inability to articulate his policies in detail and his relative lack of senate experience worry me. He's a relative newbie trying to get the everyman vote. Bush did that, and look what happened. Obama has charm and charisma and I'll even admit that he's attractive. He's got a JFK vibe going on, but that's not what I'm looking for in a president. I honestly think that, of the two, Clinton will be more capable of performing the duties of the president, but she is held back by a lot of unfair bias concerning her personal life. I think Obama will blunder about like Bush has (although maybe not as badly, given that Bush is a tough act to beat). I think he should have run as VP on Clinton's ticket and then taken that experience into a future election. As is, I think he jumped the gun on experience and that worries me.

As far as the money goes, I couldn't care less how much money the candidates spend. Their money is either their own or donated and is also highly scrutinized and regulated. It's not as if candidates levy taxes while campaigning in order to prolong their campaigns or anything. As far as I'm concerned, the money is theirs to waste. I think Clinton should run for as long as she wants to run. A joint ticket would be unbeatable; I'd hate to see pride stop either of them from taking the VP slot. Even so, if Clinton wanted to run as an independent or on a third party ticket, then I would support that. There are no rules saying we are only permitted two candidates. If a candidate has the cash and the conviction to keep an election going even after failing to get an official party nomination, then so be it.

We shouldn't be voting solely along two very similar party lines, anyway; we should be voting for the individual candidate who can get the job done. Having more than just two options come November is a good thing. It gives the people more choice in the matter, not just two large and largely corrupt parties. Heck, if two candidates run on similar (but not identical) platforms, it might actually make it a race that's more than voting for the lesser of two evils or swing issues (like abortion). I actually think it would be refreshing to see a candidate run until November unbacked by either major party. All this talk of delegates and super delegates makes me wince (as does the electoral college, by the way). In a close race like this, the candidate's viability should be determined by the voting populace, not by party insiders. As far as the voting citizenry goes, the race is still too darn close to call.

 

[Blondie Bear]

I hate all of our choices. But of all of them, I dislike Obama the most. Like someone above me mentioned (and I'm too lazy to scroll to find out who it was), he gives me the heebie-jeebies. But I know why he does so; it's his poor choice of advisers, his racism, and the fact that terrorist groups are supporting him. I'm terrified of what will happen if this man takes office.

 

[Aethra]

I was unable to vote in the primaries, which were January here, and so I haven't paid that much attention to everyone's views. Once it's down to the final two, I'll start learning. But as of now, McCain scares me.

 

[Kean]

Hey Blondie could you give me some examples? I won't get his book anytime soon and you've caught my attention!

 

[Blondie Bear]

Kean: I'm digging stuff up; give me a bit. (Just didn't want you to think I was ignoring you if it takes me awhile.)

Edit:

Here's a few links, and I am aware that some of them are very politically charged, but skip over that and just read the excerpts. Because, obviously, people who favor Obama aren't going to reprint the more controversial bits, so I've had to borrow them from people who don't.

Israpundit s Hate Speech
AnnCoulter.com - Archived Article: DREAMS FROM MY FATHER, LAME EXCUSES FROM MY GRANDFATHER
AnnCoulter.com - Archived Article: OBAMA'S DIMESTORE 'MEIN KAMPF'
The Campaign Spot on National Review Online

And then there's this:
YouTube - Jeremiah Wright

I hope that helps.

 

[Kean]

Thanks Blondie, I'll get reading them now. I'm already familiar with the Reverend but then again I think everyone is by now.

 

[ILLYRIAN]

Aren't Clinton and Obama 'official' party people? Is all the money their own? I know some of it comes from family and friends. Does the party help them financially? if so where does that money come from? Tax?
And another thing the politicians always maintain that they are deeply religious. When they get judged I hope the person judging them can overlook them lying to people, being the cause of people dying and suffering.
Why can't these delegates and superdelegates just post in their votes?

At the present it seems that only the rich can afford to try to be president, I hope that view is completely and utterly wrong, because that isn't democratic it's bordering on dictatorship.

 

[Tueuse de Vampires]

I still hope Hillary Clinton wins, which is probably unrealistic, and also I seem to be the only one who thinks she should win. Well at least that's the impression I got reading everyone's posts.

 

[Blondie Bear]

Aren't Clinton and Obama 'official' party people? Is all the money their own? I know some of it comes from family and friends. Does the party help them financially? if so where does that money come from? Tax?

They get it from private donations, their own savings, special interest groups, etc. And as someone already mentioned, it takes BILLIONS of dollars to run for President.

At the present it seems that only the rich can afford to try to be president, I hope that view is completely and utterly wrong, because that isn't democratic it's bordering on dictatorship.

Unfortunately, it's not completely and utterly wrong. It's sadly true. Many otherwise decent candidates have had to drop out because they couldn't keep up with the big ones money-wise. If you don't have the backing of the corporations and special interest groups, you CANNOT run for President. Or, I guess you could run, but you won't get very far and you DEFINITELY won't win. This is why our system has become so inbred that nothing works anymore and its about to collapse under its own weight.

 

[ILLYRIAN]

What!, it'll collapse!, that does explain why some people are buying shares in food groups, always the first sign of a recession.

 

[ckg927]

Personally,I'm going for Obama.

After having put up for the last 7 or so years with "cowboy diplomacy" as quasi-official U.S. policy,I honestly think it would be refreshing to have a President who will actually LISTEN to other countries,and try to induce them to do the right thing-threatening only when absolutely necessary and backed up with solid facts,instead of BS. (Some on the right say "If you talk to your enemies,you're coddling them and appeasing them." That's BS! Just because you talk to someone you can't stand doesn't mean you approve of what they do.)

Having Hillary mention,more than once,that if Israel was threatened that she'd turn Iran into boiling glass(thanks to our wonderful supply of nuclear weapons)is one of the reasons why I can't support her. (For starters,she violates one of the key rules of having these weapons: You cannot announce your intentions to use them beforehand. It's only supposed to be a weapon of last resort.)

Not to mention that Hillary has run an absolutely ATROCIOUS campaign.