Poll

Who would you vote for?

Obama
15 (71.4%)
Mccain
5 (23.8%)
Other
1 (4.8%)

Total Members Voted: 19

Author Topic: Presidental Vote  (Read 4834 times)

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2008, 03:13:06 pm »
That would be interesting. In the areas that they agreed on, they could be the most effective President/VP team we've ever had. In areas that they disagreed on... well, it would still be better than a bucket of warm spit.

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10797
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #16 on: September 25, 2008, 08:06:59 pm »


But I must be patient. I, too, once defended Bush and the Republicans and was in the grasp of profound religious stupidity. I just wonder how many of the little ones here ignore everything J says because they were frightened by the throwing of his weight in the religious threads...the ones who called for an end to the arguing in those threads or singled J out specifically because he seemed to be a caustic, radical minority in violation of the peace of this place. Goodness gracious, that sort of groupthink "stop arguing!!!! we have to be friends; we're a friendly community" crap is what makes jokes out of other forums. Most of my dismissals from other forums (most recently, the Crisis forum) resulted from unabashed, legitimate criticisms of ideas or administrator double standards, and that shall be the atmosphere of the Compendium.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #17 on: September 25, 2008, 09:04:02 pm »
Thanks, ZeaLitY, but I really don't need all the deification you keep giving me. If you think so highly of what I have to say, it would be better if you supported my ideas rather than my reputation.

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10797
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #18 on: September 25, 2008, 09:16:07 pm »
Thanks, ZeaLitY, but I really don't need all the deification you keep giving me. If you think so highly of what I have to say, it would be better if you supported my ideas rather than my reputation.

I only present what has been merited through those ideas, and I spoke of what was recently maligned here (your reputation). I do owe a lot to you, because it sometimes feels like a personal embarrassment I'm somewhat accountable for that people on my forum actually support Sarah Palin, or religion. I miss the old days, when rationalism ruled...
« Last Edit: September 25, 2008, 09:18:42 pm by ZeaLitY »

V_Translanka

  • Interim Global Moderator
  • Arbiter (+8000)
  • *
  • Posts: 8340
  • Destroyer of Worlds
    • View Profile
    • http://www.angelfire.com/weird2/v_translanka/
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #19 on: September 28, 2008, 03:45:44 am »
Good lord, one reason I could actually get behind McCain would be so that we'd get more of that kickass Tina Fey playing Sarah Palin on SNL...^_^

ONSLAUGHT

  • Springtime of Youth
  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1149
  • Crono + Panda = WTF Run!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #20 on: September 28, 2008, 10:31:30 am »
Now THAT is a reason. :lol:
But I still stand by what I said before(I'm like a big rock, it's pretty hard to move me)

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2008, 10:33:24 am »
Good lord, one reason I could actually get behind McCain would be so that we'd get more of that kickass Tina Fey playing Sarah Palin on SNL...^_^

"Forced to choose between Jesus and Tina Fey? That's just not fair."

V_Translanka

  • Interim Global Moderator
  • Arbiter (+8000)
  • *
  • Posts: 8340
  • Destroyer of Worlds
    • View Profile
    • http://www.angelfire.com/weird2/v_translanka/
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2008, 11:02:20 am »
Oh yeah, I've also heard some bad things regarding McCain & his views on internet neutrality...does anyone know anything about that...?

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2008, 11:54:37 am »
McCain voted against Net Neutrality Legislation, while Obama voted for it.

As far as any indications I can find go, it isn't so much that McCain was against the net neutrality but that he was against the government forcing the associated business practices on internet providers. Hardly unsurprising if one believes in general that the government should be as small as possible, though I'd say that he's forgotten that while the government should be as small as possible, it must also be as large as is necessary.

To offer a few articles on the matter for your own independent consideration, here are two that are comparitively pro and anti McCain:

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2008/1013/072.html?feed=rss_news

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/08/13/john_mccain_technology/index.html

Though, you might notice that even in a pro-McCain slant, McCain is still wrong, he just isn't Dead Wrong, while in the anti-McCain slant, McCain isn't just Dead Wrong, he's Undead Wrong.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2008, 11:58:21 am by Thought »

Daniel Krispin

  • Guest
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #24 on: September 30, 2008, 03:50:28 pm »
My opinion in this matter is, of course, rather useless, considering I am neither a US citizen nor have much of an understanding of the issues and politics involved beyond the merest trifiles that have come my way. I am, certainly, more traditionally a Conservative/Republican in outlook than Liberal/Democrat (on most issues, though not all... then again, I have a certain bit of aversion to the concept of representative democracy as it is, but that's another issue entirely.) Anyway, this may be an idiotic reason for taking a stand on this, but...

...merely seeing the way that McCain seems to have picked his running mate, indeed someone who apparently (from what I heard, though I may be mistaken), threatened war with Russia were Russia to go aggressive against Georgia again, I have lost quite a bit of respect for the Republican stand. Though every political party plays its cards so as to win (always has been so, always will be, from the self-glorifying monarchs of deep antiquity to the demagogues of democracy), at least some semblance of care rather than blatant pandering can be achieved. The selection of Palin seems to have been something done not with the slightest thought to the best interests of a country, but a simple and silly attempt to win a few more votes here and there. In my mind at least Obama keeps a certain level of solemnety about himself. Of course, that is hardly the best way to judge someone (after all, he is an excellent orator, as was Hitler), but nonetheless, it almost seems to me as if the Republicans can't be taken all too seriously anymore and, rather, the seriousness is if such a party should now take power. Even if Palin could make a fair Vice President (and, of course, we won't entirely know until we see how she governs in that context), what if McCain dies in office? Why, as much as one must respect all people, and whatever duties they have had to see to, I somehow do not see a hockey mom as being quite the ideal choice for the first female president of the United States. If she were a figure like Margaret Thatcher, well and good. But Palin doesn't seem to have that Elizabethan strength to her.

As such, were I an American, I think my vote would be going to Obama and his Democrats... much, I must add, to the chagrin of some of my friends.

Then again, and I must stress this, both my understanding of the issues of the politics and my regard for the democratic system are both rather low, and as such my opinion is of slight weight. I am considering spoiling my ballot here in the Canadian election simply for the fact that neither party seems to really be dealing with things in the manner that I would consider useful. The Conservatives have more strength and power to act, but their ideas sometimes lack proper foresight; the Liberals have some grand and altruistic ideas, but lack the ability to put them into effect. Caught between those two, I'd have not the first clue which I'd prefer all told. But that's Canadian politics. And anyway, I've always been an opponent of the Democratic system as it is. The rule of the mob and the unknowledgeable is not something I see to be for the better good. To quote 'Men in Black': a person is smart, people are stupid. My vote's always been towards aristocracies and monarchies, as much as those have the chance to end in despotism. I do not think just because the many, the hoi polloi, say it is good, it is so... in fact, oftentimes it may not be so. Should we all have a say in how we are governed? No. There are those trained and empowered to leadership by chance and time. That we should in our ignorance be made to pick between them is a testament to good intentions but bad ends. After all, the election of doctors is not made by the people, nor is the advancement of academics. Leadership in politics is a field and calling just as these things are, and even so it is not something that should be left to the common view... indeed, less than these other things. If we are not to leave the treatment of our diseases, the advancement of our sciences, to popular consensus, why should we be leaving the country to this?

Of course, some common conception of what society desires should be upheld. These things are enshrined in constitutions and what not. Even total rulers should not break constitutions in ideal. But at any rate, something does not sit well with me with the application of democracy. After all, might not democracy be not the freedom of the people but, far more despicable than slavery to the will of a despot, a mere illusion of freedom? After all, we are decieved by the demagogues all the time. Hitler did it, and it was done before him, and done after, and will be done again. Does, maybe, this dear concept of a 'vote' only give to us the false illusion that we decide our own country's destiny? I would say that the people are no more free when the mass rules than when they enslaved to the will of one. At least in the latter they know where their bonds lie. Here now we say 'we are free', yet we are not. Perhaps had we direct democracy... but as it is, we're caught beneath the heel of demagogues. Sometimes... I think the cry of 'freedom' we are so wont to cry in these governments of ours is as hollow as the war some of you Americans think you wage upon abstract 'terror.' You Americans especially... have no more free a democracy than Athens of old did under the command of Perikles. His word was law, just as though he were an autocrat, but because he had possessed the hearts of the people, an Obama or McCain of antiquity. What a tyrant! Because the Tyrants of the old states.... what were they but aristocrats who championed the cause of the people against their fellow aristocrats? They were champions of the people, and as such we may well call some demagogue a tyrant in a very similar manner. But anyway, I'm throwing out general ideas here rather than specific arguments. I must recall one more thing, however.

How much America is as the Athens of old. For they, too, came to dominance after a great war which saw the old world powers overthrown. And they, too, besotted with this extended the reach of their will over others, till they became very much an empire. And then, in time, through further war, they fell from their high position into one again of mediocrity from which they were never to rise. This all over a period of 76 years. Or how of this, the very undemocratic reaction of the North to the states that wished to leave the Union? Did they not have the right to leave if they wished? How very like when Naxos wished to leave the Delian league of Athens! Where then was freedom, in either country that held to some vague ideal of democracy? Athens and America... they are very similar, it seems. And I doubt the effectiveness of democracy in either. But, as with all things, we'll only be able to see in retrospect.

« Last Edit: September 30, 2008, 04:11:50 pm by Daniel Krispin »

KebreI

  • Errare Explorer (+1500)
  • *
  • Posts: 1607
  • A true man never dies, even when he's killed
    • View Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #25 on: September 30, 2008, 04:01:15 pm »
Godwin's Law.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #26 on: September 30, 2008, 05:12:01 pm »
Godwin's Law.

I dunno, it seems a bit of a stretch to label that as Godwin's Law. After all, Daniel only said that Obama is an orator but qualified the statement by stating (and providing an example showing) that oratory skill alone is not enough to merit a vote. He didn't compare Obama to Hitler; he merely identified Hitler as an orator (which is not a comparison but a statement of fact). While the argumentum ad Hitlerum logical fallacy should be avoided, mere mention of Hitler does not mean that the fallacy has been made.

Or did you mean later in the post?

The selection of Palin seems to have been something done not with the slightest thought to the best interests of a country, but a simple and silly attempt to win a few more votes here and there.

While I certainly agree that Palin was not the best choice of running mates (I believe she was chosen primarily to shore up McCain's support among groups that McCain would have been better off not having the support of), it is overly hasty to claim that her selection is so base or simple. Her time as Mayor of Wasilla was fairly successful, and though I dislike that she cut funding to museums and libraries (and I bite my thumb at the fact she even enquired as to the possibility of library censorship, even if she didn't pursue it), her time in that office was productive and beneficial to the citizens of her town. Probably one of her more impressive moves during her time on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission was her resignation over the corruption of her own party. Her time as mayor, however, isn't as stunning (but then again, state governments tend to be harder to move than city governments), and at least so far she isn't doing too hot as a VP candidate. Indeed, it is entirely because of her that some Republicans feel forced to vote for Obama. It would seem that the only real hope is, unfortunately, a rather fantastical and insane one: if everything thus far has been a ruse to allow Palin the chance to take Biden unprepared at the VP debate. That is as unlikely to be reality, though, as it is that Bush will reach a 90% approval rating before he leaves office.

... it almost seems to me as if the Republicans can't be taken all too seriously anymore...

To be fair, it has been hard to take the Republicans seriously ever since they welcomed in Southern Democrats after they had been expelled from their own party. It is a crime against history that Blacks should vote "Democrat" to any significant extent, but the Democrats are the ones who showed that they are trustworthy so things must be as they are. The Republicans have failed time and time again to regain what they lost then, including a degree of seriousness.

The Conservatives have more strength and power to act, but their ideas sometimes lack proper foresight; the Liberals have some grand and altruistic ideas, but lack the ability to put them into effect.
...
Should we all have a say in how we are governed?

I'm curious as to if you've ever read much by G.K. Chesterton? I've been reading his "Orthodoxy" lately and two things he said strike me as possibly being of interest to you:

The first is something along the lines of "Government is like blowing one's nose. Even if a man does it badly, we want him to do it himself." Unfortunately, I can't find the specific passage right now.

The second is "The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected."

Anywho, just something to share.

After all, the election of doctors is not made by the people, nor is the advancement of academics.

Alas, medicine and academics might do well if it was more beholden to the mob, not less. The University has become a place to obscure truth, rather than reveal it, and often the people we trust to heal us when we are most vulnerable are the people who couldn't be bothered to attend their own classes in medical school. Yet even at the best, a Professor and a Doctor are mere servants. Valuable servants, true, but we must remember that they serve the people, the people do not serve them.

What a tyrant! Because the Tyrants of the old states.... what were they but aristocrats who championed the cause of the people against their fellow aristocrats? They were champions of the people, and as such we may well call some demagogue a tyrant in a very similar manner.

Come now, you know better than that. A tyrant was someone who came to power in a non-traditional way, the status wasn't dependent of popular support (it just happened to usually, but not always, coincide).

Or how of this, the very undemocratic reaction of the North to the states that wished to leave the Union? Did they not have the right to leave if they wished?

That is the problem of democracy, actually. In a democracy, one will not always get one's way. But if one leaves merely because one is unwilling to suffer the voice of the majority, the people-group that uses democracy cannot long endure. 40% of the population is lost here, another 30% is lost there, until we are left with two humans, a third having just left, who claim that they are a democracy. So perhaps on one hand it was undemocratic to force the South to stay in the Union, but the very act of leaving the Union under those circumstances was undemocratic in the first place. "My way or the highway" is a phrase that ought not be uttered in a democracy; in that regard it is very restricted. But if a freedom must be restricted, then it is very fine to restrict the freedom to reject democracy. We are hypocrites insofar as we claim that we are absolutely free, but if we merely claim to be the freest (or more free than others)...

Radical_Dreamer

  • Entity
  • Zurvan Surfer (+2500)
  • *
  • Posts: 2778
    • View Profile
    • The Chrono Compendium
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #27 on: October 01, 2008, 02:28:50 pm »
Yet even at the best, a Professor and a Doctor are mere servants. Valuable servants, true, but we must remember that they serve the people, the people do not serve them.

People too often forget that this is the case with elected officials as well. It is tragic that people so readily confound "public servant" with "leader". Those we elect are our least loyal servants, and it's time we started treating them as such.

ZealKnight

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1067
  • Loyal Knight of the Kingdom of Zeal
    • View Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #28 on: October 04, 2008, 11:15:33 pm »
To be honest I don't like either. Obama is going to make me pay for the health care of people who are to lazy to do good in high school so they can't get into a decent college to get a decent job. I work for my money and to pay my health bills, not to pay someone who refuses to try. And McCain wants to stay in war like he gets some sexual pleasure out of it and I refuse to pay for death of people who don't deserve it, especially our troops. But I give it to Obama because McCain will die in office and we don't need Alaska's(one of the most corrupt states) Governor to corrupt the last non-corrupt part of our government.

Thought

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3426
    • View Profile
Re: Presidental Vote
« Reply #29 on: October 05, 2008, 07:30:59 pm »
But I give it to Obama because McCain will die in office and we don't need Alaska's(one of the most corrupt states) Governor to corrupt the last non-corrupt part of our government.

She's going to be the Postmaster General?