Obama Biden McCain Palin
Discuss.

I'm voting for Obama because he supports my belief in a bilingual America. And because Gravel dropped out, that cowardly cunt.

I wanted to vote for Colbert but he didn't run :(

Haven't decided yet, dunno if I'm going to even vote as an absentee voter yet.

I think that the US needs the change.

I'm voting Obama.

OH WAIT

I CAN'T

I'M NOT AMERICAN :/

Wow, I didn't know that you were from Iceland >_>

RON PAUL

I'm not american either.

doesn't mean I'm not paying attention.

I'm not American but if I was I would have voted Hillary. She seems the most competent and has the most political experience of the bunch.

VOTE ME I'LL UNITE THE WORLD AND MAKE IT COMMUNIST

Communism has a number of problems I'll not discuss here. Refer to Criticisms of Socialism.

...

>__>


>:l

I want to smack you with a sword. You criticized something, and gave a bias link. People have done this over a thousand times. It's not a sign of knowledge, nor is it of competence. What it shows is that you're easily convinced by something which agrees with you. And then you wait for us to be convinced by the same. Will you have regrets when you find out the only truth?
By the way, EVERY system has a "number of problems".

-->Yep, sided with Rai this time....especially on the bias part.

-->Will not stir the mixture, cause there's already a lot of stuffs to be handled at my side.

There was a blowup about the number of houses John McCain owns. He owns 8. 5 are "Condos", so I guess they really don't count. Included in those 8 are Cindy McCain's houses as well.

I was wondering the same thing about a few other people.
Does anyone know how many houses does:

Al Gore own?
Barack Obama own?
Joe Biden own?
Sarah Palin own?

Anyone know estimated net worth of those people?

You can find it on Wikipedia. It's required that the information be released with regards to federal elections.

McCain - 40.4M
Palin - Not on Wikipedia. Sturm, how do I look this up in public records?
Biden - 59 to 366k
Obama - 1.3M

I have a feeling McCain is richest.
I also have a feeling Biden is hiding something. Annual salary for US Senator is 169k. He's had that job (but at a little lower pay) for 30 yrs. What does he do with the money?

I couldn't find any info on number of houses.

Biden takes care of a sick mother, and commutes to Washington from Delaware every day.
Obama isn't so rich because he and his wife only just recently paid off their student loans.
As for where you find the public records, I don't know.

Sarah Palin is impressing me less and less.
I'm also not impressed with Joe Biden, but at least the basic premise of "He's a Washington insider and knows how to get things done" is true.

They are billing Palin as an energy expert, something she is not.
They said Alaska produces 20% of nation's oil. False. Alaska produces 3.5% of nation's oil. Palin's husband, an oilfield operator, is probably more of an energy expert than she is.

Palin has zero foreign policy experience. Then again, the VP doesn't need foreign policy experience. I really hope the next president picks someone good to head up the state department.

Palin's policy, cleverly named "Drill! Drill! Drill!," is a good one. No reason to leave US oil resources in the ground for no reason.

She is a mom, and really has five kids. I don't know why you vote for her because of that, but to each their own.

I can only assume the location of this drilling is the Alaskan wilderness that they've been trying to open to drilling for years but has thankfully remained protected due to the large amount of endangered animals living in the area? No, that's not a good one if that's it.

Palin is a bitch, the only reason people want to vote for her is that she's a MILF.
-She fired someone when he refused to fire a state trooper that was in a divorce custody battle with her sister.
-She left the town she was mayor of before becoming governor $24 Million more in debt than when she got to it.

These points are, of course, ignoring more controversial issues such as her abortion stance. I shouldn't even have to bring those up when you see that she abuses her power and she bankrupts whatever she's in control of.

Abortion is more controversial but less important. I don't care about her abortion stance (or his). Or Obama's. A lot of people feel strongly about the issue, but that won't do anything to fix the problem. A constitutional amendment needs to be passed to move law on the issue and that will never happen so get used to pro-choice and stop trying to force your beliefs on others. Unless you can get a constitutional amendment. If you can, feel free to force your beliefs on others.

It's funny though. If a candidate when asked "What is your position on abortion" said "It doesn't matter. As president, I won't be able to do anything about the issue" then they would immediately be shot notwithstanding the fact that the statement is more or less true. Obama has said we should do more to make abortion safe, legal, and rare, but I highly doubt you will ever see legislation trying to achieve these goals. Obama has not introduced or supported a bill like this in the past. McCain has an excuse because the legislation he wants is not constitutional.

Despite your claim that abortion is less important than what I said, you devoted an entire post to it and failed to address what I said.

Drilling: People are more important than animals. It's an ethics thing. If you think animals are more important that's fine, but it's not how I feel.
True. Even worse, she initially said she would cooperate with an investigation into the matter but now says she will not cooperate. There is a reason for the change of stance, I'm just not sure what it is.
I didn't know about this. I do know that the Alaska state budget has ballooned during her term in office, but they are still in the black thanks to increased revenues from the soaring price of oil. A true conservative would not have done this - instead they would have grown government at a more modest pace and returned the money to the Alaskan people.

Well, I don't know what that has to do with drilling. People don't need to drill to survive.

And the reason Alaska is in money right now is because Congress approved some four hundred million to build a bridge and Palin decided not to build the bridge, but to definitely keep the money.

On the drilling thing we'll just have to agree to disagree. What you said is correct, but I still think drilling is a good idea.

Did they really still get the $400M? Source please.
Alaska fiscal year 2009 budget is 13.6 billion. 400M is a small amount, about 3% of the budget.

90% of Alaska's money comes from oil taxes. Take a look at the following chart:

When Palin took office, oil was at about $63/bl. Now it's about $98/barrel. It stands to reason that funds available for spending increased by about 50% also... that's why Alaska's in the black.

Palin is in control on the spending side. Revenue has little to do with her actions and everything to do with the price of oil, which no one person is responsible for. With regard to spending, I think Palin is a "spend and don't tax" conservative, as opposed to the real conservatives in the past, who cut taxes and spending simultaneously. It seems irresponsible to continue such policies.

God, reading your posts is like reading the entire Internet. I just get angrier and I don't know why I would do it.

Obama is winning. Note the recent upswing in the chart:

Realclearpolitics.com is non-partisan (I think).
Looks like Obama will win.

Three reasons why that poll does not say Obama will win:
A) Only a certain demographic takes part in political polls.
B) Political polls represent people, and presidents do not win on the popular vote.
C) They are no more than 6% apart.

If I could remember all the stuff from my polisci class I'd have another four reasons. But I can't.
I'm not voting this year. Obama is a douchebag just like McCain. Why does Firefox think Obama is a misspelled word but not McCain?

Because McCain is a goddamn American, you goddamn immigrant.

Which demographic is that?Some polls try to interview "likely voters." Other ones interview "registered voters." The LV polls I think are more accurate. In general, RV polls show democrats farther ahead than LV. You can check the list of polls they use in their chart on realclearpolitics.com. They use both RV and LV polls in their averaging which is a problem. They use mostly LV polls though.
Wait - I answered the wrong question.
% who would vote for [candidate] if the election were held today is a respected barometer of how well a candidate is doing. It is used in many news and polling organizations. Often, it is used together with an electoral map breakdown.
How the heck can I argue with this? I can't. Yes, opinion could move between now and election day which is 3.5 weeks away.
I go to the polls just so I can vote against all the incumbents. By law, the incumbents must be listed as such on the ballot. The challengers need your vote! Fight the man!

The Firefox people are conservatives. It's the only explanation.

Mostly I'm angry because the right wing talk show I listen to in the afternoon driving home from work has devolved into non-stop Obama bashing. You would think he's death incarnate listening to the show. I had to turn it off. It usually has interesting discussion, but I can't stand non-stop personal attacks. I hope the guy alienated many of his listeners. If you want to know, it's Jay Severin - 969wtkk.com The Obama bashing has reached fever pitch on talk radio.

Depends how the poll was done. If it was random sampling on the street, you only get the demographic that is willing to walk, willing to go outside, willing to talk to strangers, and willing to talk to strangers about a private issue such as politics - chances are these people are either extroverted, pro-exercise, lacking a car or good parking, and specific to a certain city (and cities do tend to swing in general). If it was a mail-in then you only get the most motivated of voters, the type that will go beyond voting to even protesting and lobbying, not to mention only of those that you actually sent it to. An online poll attracts mostly avid computer users.

It doesn't matter what voters they interview. America does not elect its president based on the popular vote, so the percentages mean crap.

Because it's fucking delicious.

Because FireFox is racist.

Not like I can vote, but Ralph Nader appeals most to me. He's one of the few politicians who doesn't dramatize everything and he focuses on the average man's interests. I guess I would be throwing my vote away, but hell, I wouldn't have anything better to do than waste time contributing to a hopeless cause.

I VOTE FOR THE STAY PUFT MARSHMALLOW MAN
KEEP THE PEACE YO

not that I can vote, but I wouldn't vote either way.

Did anyone watch the Debate?

Obama kept his cool, which is something you can't say on McCain's part :/

Yet another CONTROVERSIAL STATEMENT!
If you're a democrat you think that; if you're a republican you think the opposite. I heard a right-wing talk show host saying exactly the reverse thing.
This tells me the debate is really a tie.
However, when you look at online polls almost no one (usually around 5%) think it was a tie. Most vote for either candidate. Even "I don't know" gets more votes than "it was a tie."
By the way, on these online polls, Barack has about 10% more than McCain. Which also tells me it's a tie. If it wasn't a tie, the difference would be bigger.

Here's an article discussing "who won the debate."

Barack Obama sat on the lead and didn't say too much interesting. I tend to remember his statement: "100% of your ads are negative." John McCain said during the debate that this isn't true. I didn't bother checking it but I believe it's false too. I think probably over 50% of John McCain ads are negative. The same with Barack Obama.

I like the McCain line: "If you wanted to run against George Bush, you should've run four years ago." Barack had a decent answer to this but McCain wins just by saying the line.

The moderator said that USA education costs the most and has some of the lowest results in the developed world. This was not challenged by either candidate. Amazing. I wonder if it's really true. This shows education is a difficult problem not solved easily. I think vouchers will work. I also think charter schools will work. Just try anything at this point. I think parents are a big part of the picture too.

Intrade has developed financial instruments that track the performance of political candidates. For example, you can write an "Obama" contract. You recieve a premium (varies) for writing this contract and must pay the holder $100 if Obama is the president. You pay nothing if Obama is not the president. You can go long and short these contracts just like option contracts. There is a corresponding McCain contract.

Wow. More stupidity.
Presidential debates are not won. They're sniping grounds for the politically malicious, and mere pandering to the crowds. Anyone paying attention to a debate with an unbiased eye will be sickened by both candidates present, as both candidates present will, or at least both present in the two I watched this year have shown themselves to be douchebags.

The ads I saw from McCain were much worse in dishonest negativity than from Obama.

McCain said that Obama skipped out on troops to play basketball, but he neglected to mention that he was playing basketball with other troops.

Huh.

I didn't hear that :/

The only reason I'm even interested in this American Election is the current state of the US.
Something needs to be done. Someone I talked to on XBox Live yesterday said gas was about 3 dollars now.

I think it's all a hoax. In about another 5 months, it's gonna sky rocket.

Or I'm wrong. The end of George "OIL NAZI" Bush could have something to do with it.

...

Then again Bush does own a LOT OF OIL :/

And what can any president do about that?

No he doesn't. He drove his oil company into the ground a long time ago.

The president can affect oil prices. The president can:
1) Introduce legislation to allow drilling in various places it wasn't before
2) Introduce an oil subsidy bill (or a bill w/ subsidies in it)
3) Invade a foreign nation with oil resources
4) Change federal gas taxes (make them lower) - again this is legislation
5) Release oil from the strategic reserv
Just throwing some stuff out there. I'm not saying any of this is a good idea. #1 and #2 are congressional powers. The president can still introduce legislation. Doing the opposite will make gas prices move in the other direction.

As for the ads - get used to it. Most ads, and most statements in presidential debates leave out the "but" part. For example, both of them voted against troop funding (leaving out the "but" part of course, which if added totally explains why they voted that way).

Hmmm...so you think oil is going to skyrocket...well...speculation on the price of something should happen in another thread. A lot of people like to say the market does better when a [republican/democratic] president is in office. I'm not sure the data shows this. There's so much market data out there and some ambiguity in which timeframes to pick that this statement amounts to lies, damn lies, and statistics. For example, under Bush, the stock market went down initially, then up a whole bunch, and now down. So obviously the market does ??? (read: whatever the heck it wants to) when a republican president is in office.

I vote for NADER.

On a serious note, McCain is just another Bush and if we get Obama, we'll be killed.

So this whole ordeal is a lose-lose situation. If a gun was put to my head and I had to pick, I guess I'd pick Obama, but...

Has nothing to do with the price of oil now. As has been explained by many analysts and reporters (even Stephen Colbert), drilling in new spots won't lower prices for at least another ten years.

And put us further in debt?

Serious suggestions only, please.

And, again, put us further in debt? Besides, those gas taxes (at least in Minnesota) go towards things like public transportation, fixing the roads, rebuilding collapsed bridges, etc.

The up had nothing to do with Bush, it had to do with 9/11. Unless you want to pull a Zeitgeist and claim Bush had something to do with 9/11 (and thus the market).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bbuf90mcAsc&feature=related

You're an idiot to the bone.
Steel is your brain, and yellow is your blood.
We shouldn't "get used" to dishonest politics,
unaware of facts, nor aware of logic.
We should cause pain with much protest.
And not wait for truth's arrival.
I have no regrets. This is the only path.
Until you shut up, I hate you so much.
I thought it had to do with the war. War is usually good for the economy.

And the war had something to do with 9/11.

Oh, I momentarily forgot about the other war there.

P.P.A. for president.

-.-

Obama will win. He's the favorite anyway. Some say he won't win. They're wrong.

It doesn't matter if I go to the polls today. Obama is winning Massachusetts votes no matter what. I'm still going because maybe my vote can make a difference in local races or ballot initiatives.

I voted for Nader.

I hope Obama loses just so I can hit you in the face for this post.