Vote Democrat to save America?

[Domino]

Ah, but only one of them can snatch flies from the air with his tongue!

[GHook93]

Quote by: Milton Bradley I didn't say anything about ignoring the Constitution, I said undermining, and you are correct that both of the big, well established parties are partners in crime when it comes to ignoring, or undermining the Constitution. Nope, it's about integrity, and I have too much to select the other options available. I'd vote Kermit the Frog from the Muppets before I voted Democrat, or Republican.

Milt, I would consider voting Libertarian if they had a viable chance of winning the whitehouse. As it is right now they don't even have a viable change of winning a State. Most, including mean, do not know who the Libertarian candidate is nor will they know it either

[Anmon]

Just put of curiosity, how long to the election anyway?

[GHook93]

Quote by: Anmon Just put of curiosity, how long to the election anyway?

November!

[Anmon]

You sound happy about that?

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: GHook93 Milt, I would consider voting Libertarian if they had a viable chance of winning the whitehouse. As it is right now they don't even have a viable change of winning a State. Most, including mean, do not know who the Libertarian candidate is nor will they know it either

Well, then in my opinion, you really don't have a valid reason to bitch about anything.



Since the two parties are relly one, and you want to continue to support them, enjoy what is coming your way.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Well, then in my opinion, you really don't have a valid reason to bitch about anything.

As a fiscal conservative I actually don't think McCain is that poor of an alternative! If you remember back my 1st choice was Romney and I am a huge supporter of the fair tax (so I won't have minded Huckabee).

Since the two parties are relly one, and you want to continue to support them, enjoy what is coming your way.

LOL that is so far from the truth. You have this idea that the Libertarian party can't have their morals corrupted. Yet the most visible, identifiable and arguably successful libertarian, Ron Paul, turned out of be a wasteful pig! Pork barrel spending goes against everything the libertarian party and fiscal conservatives stand for!

[GHook93]

Quote by: Anmon You sound happy about that?

I am not a fan of bush (unless its attached to a woman, man I am a funny guy) and I am cherishing the day he is out of office. Although I am not a fan of either Clinton or Obama, I prefer even one of them over the Giant Bush!

[Anmon]

Quote by: GHook93 I am not a fan of bush (unless its attached to a woman, man I am a funny guy) and I am cherishing the day he is out of office. Although I am not a fan of either Clinton or Obama, I prefer even one of them over the Giant Bush!

Aw c'mon you will miss dubya wont you? I think hes quite a charmer to be honest.
And agreed on the bush comment drool
Also what do you think of McCain's chances, I think hes a bit passed it all now, maybe ten years ago.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Anmon Aw c'mon you will miss dubya wont you? I think hes quite a charmer to be honest. And agreed on the bush comment drool Also what do you think of McCain's chances, I think hes a bit passed it all now, maybe ten years ago.

Bush is a perfect reason not the vote for Democrats, his rise in taxes, increase in spending, waging preemptive war and generally increasing the size of the government are token traits of the Democratic Socialist Party.

George Bush = Democrat!

I think McCain has a great chance, especially if he picks Condi Rice as his VP. Reasons:
(1) Who are the conservative crapping, they are voting for the Republican party. Obama and Clinton represent an increase in socialism and they could potentially pick 3 supreme court justices meaning Homosexual marriage (which I am for) could be Federally protected reality. Same with abortion. Way too much at stake to toss there vote away on the Democrats out of spite or for a 3rd party.
(2) McCain will win the Latino vote meaning he has a great chance at taking CA. He is well respected in within the Latino community and they liked the fact that he proposed the so-called "amnesty bill."
(3) He will get the Jewish vote. Although the Jews are number in 6-8 million nationwide, they represent a large portion of a few Democratic important States. Specially NY, NJ and FL. Jews will probably vote for Clinton, but they might be skeptical of Obama.
(4) McCain will get a large chunk of the independent vote. Face the independent vote won him the nomination
(5) He will get some of the Democratic vote. Many democrats that are more to the middle like him.
(6) If he choose Condi Rice, which I think he will, then he will get some black vote, which would otherwise nearly 100% vote Democratic (especially if/when its Obama).

The war will hurt him no doubt. The war is definitely a plus (I hating stating it that way) for the Democrats. But a lot can happen come November.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: GHook93 Bush is a perfect reason not the vote for Democrats, his rise in taxes, increase in spending, waging preemptive war and generally increasing the size of the government are token traits of the Democratic Socialist Party. George Bush = Democrat! I think McCain has a great chance, especially if he picks Condi Rice as his VP. Reasons: (1) Who are the conservative crapping, they are voting for the Republican party. Obama and Clinton represent an increase in socialism and they could potentially pick 3 supreme court justices meaning Homosexual marriage (which I am for) could be Federally protected reality. Same with abortion. Way too much at stake to toss there vote away on the Democrats out of spite or for a 3rd party. (2) McCain will win the Latino vote meaning he has a great chance at taking CA. He is well respected in within the Latino community and they liked the fact that he proposed the so-called "amnesty bill." (3) He will get the Jewish vote. Although the Jews are number in 6-8 million nationwide, they represent a large portion of a few Democratic important States. Specially NY, NJ and FL. Jews will probably vote for Clinton, but they might be skeptical of Obama. (4) McCain will get a large chunk of the independent vote. Face the independent vote won him the nomination (5) He will get some of the Democratic vote. Many democrats that are more to the middle like him. (6) If he choose Condi Rice, which I think he will, then he will get some black vote, which would otherwise nearly 100% vote Democratic (especially if/when its Obama). The war will hurt him no doubt. The war is definitely a plus (I hating stating it that way) for the Democrats. But a lot can happen come November.

I do not know who made up those stats for you but I do not agree.

1. I know for sure Clinton would not and I doubt if Obama is going to appoint a judge to the Supreme Court just so that gay people can get married. That is so silly. However I think they might try to appoint one that views the consitution as advocating equality for everyone. But more importantly, a judge who is fully qualified for the job. You should not confuse social justice with socialism. All the "socialism crap" is just a flash back to the 1950s era when Reagan attacked Hollywood for being part of some sort of socialistic conspiracy, that is an old-hat theory and we have moved on from that out-of-date mentality in Amreica, today is today not yesterday.

2. You are wrong because I live here in So California and the Mexican-American community is going to remain a democratic stronghold, the Major of L.A is a Democrat and he is of Mexican decent. The other Spanish people we sent to washington are also Democratic. Over-all the spanish community do not think that Blacks are much interested in their struggles for equality and respect (the two communities are having an on-going gang war right now) but they support Hillary Clinton in a strong way. If Obama wins then some degree of discrimination can play a role in favor of McCain.

3. McCain could get some Jewish votes if those people are Republican, especially with his "independant" side kick - Joe. But Hillary is winning that sector and just did so in Penn primary, among Jewish voters who are Democratic - most of them are hard core Democrats. Hillary still has their favor in her current miss-trust of Iran.

4. Wrong. Most of the Independant voters wanted Ron Paul and not McCain. McCain won only because Republicans had no other choice because they needed someone who could appear to be a little different the President Bush. So the can pretend to offer a change.

5. The middle democrats will vote for a moderate progressive like Hillary Clinton, not some radical right winger who wants to keep us in some military mode of conducting international policy making.

6. Good, picking Rice would reinforce the fact the McCain will carry on the same-o kind of Bushism which has nearly distroyed America in so many ways. She is not another Martin King Jr like Obama is, so that would not sway African Americans to vote for McCain or his token lady.

McCain is just another rusty old boat that is about to sink into the seas of historical babble.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Technosoul I do not know who made up those stats for you but I do not agree. 1. I know for sure Clinton would not and I doubt if Obama is going to appoint a judge to the Supreme Court just so that gay people can get married. That is so silly. However I think they might try to appoint one that views the consitution as advocating equality for everyone. But more importantly, a judge who is fully qualified for the job.

They will appoint liberal judges. The issue of a gay divorce being invalid (eventhough it was legit in the State it took place in) beginning consider invalid against public policy at divorce time is bound to hit the supreme court. Then the Supreme Court will have to decide whether gay marriage is against public policy an considered an invalid marriage outside of the State the marriage took place in.

You should not confuse social justice with socialism. All the "socialism crap" is just a flash back to the 1950s era when Reagan attacked Hollywood for being part of some sort of socialistic conspiracy, that is an old-hat theory and we have moved on from that out-of-date mentality in Amreica, today is today not yesterday.

Nor am I. I see the growing of government, social programs, welfare and tax increase as socialism.

2. You are wrong because I live here in So California and the Mexican-American community is going to remain a democratic stronghold, the Major of L.A is a Democrat and he is of Mexican decent. The other Spanish people we sent to washington are also Democratic. Over-all the spanish community do not think that Blacks are much interested in their struggles for equality and respect (the two communities are having an on-going gang war right now) but they support Hillary Clinton in a strong way. If Obama wins then some degree of discrimination can play a role in favor of McCain.

The Latinos will still vote Democratic, I wasn't disputing that. Latinos are huge receipts of welfare, state provided healthcare and a good chunk are at the bottom tax level, so increase in taxes mean nothing to them. However, McCain will get more Latino votes then other Republican candidate and that was what I was trying to state. Also never under-estimate the CA Latino hatred for the black man.

3. McCain could get some Jewish votes if those people are Republican, especially with his "independant" side kick - Joe. But Hillary is winning that sector and just did so in Penn primary, among Jewish voters who are Democratic - most of them are hard core Democrats. Hillary still has their favor in her current miss-trust of Iran.

Unfortunately that is a true statement, most Jews are blind Democrats. With PA over and Clinton not making a real dent into Obama's lead, Obama looks like he is the candidate. The Jewish voters in NJ, NY and FL will be hestiate of him. I predict they go with McCain. Obviously I fall outside of that since I prefer fiscal conservatism and responsibility over socialism.

4. Wrong. Most of the Independant voters wanted Ron Paul and not McCain. McCain won only because Republicans had no other choice because they needed someone who could appear to be a little different the President Bush. So the can pretend to offer a change.

LOL, WHAT? Ron Paul was a non-factor he barely got any vote regard of the hoopla. The news credited his win in NH and FL to the independent votes. It is well known that he has a favorable standing with the independents.

5. The middle democrats will vote for a moderate progressive like Hillary Clinton, not some radical right winger who wants to keep us in some military mode of conducting international policy making.

McCain is seen as a more left leaning Republican. He will still some more moderate Democrats.

6. Good, picking Rice would reinforce the fact the McCain will carry on the same-o kind of Bushism which has nearly distroyed America in so many ways.

Please! That is a typical unsubstantiated leftist attack.

She is not another Martin King Jr like Obama is, so that would not sway African Americans to vote for McCain or his token lady.

Obama has a lot to prove to be in half of what MLK was. MLK was arguably the best American in US history. Putting Obama in the same phrase at this point in disingenious. Obama has done nothing to warrant it.

McCain is just another rusty old boat that is about to sink into the seas of historical babble.

Read up a little, before you make arrogant attacks on the man. The right-wing talk radio hates him because of his going against the party. McCain will decrease taxes and spending 10 fold, that hasn't been the trend for Democrats or Republicans since Reagan!

[Technosoul]

Quote by: GHook93 They will appoint liberal judges. The issue of a gay divorce being invalid (eventhough it was legit in the State it took place in) beginning consider invalid against public policy at divorce time is bound to hit the supreme court. Then the Supreme Court will have to decide whether gay marriage is against public policy an considered an invalid marriage outside of the State the marriage took place in. Nor am I. I see the growing of government, social programs, welfare and tax increase as socialism. The Latinos will still vote Democratic, I wasn't disputing that. Latinos are huge receipts of welfare, state provided healthcare and a good chunk are at the bottom tax level, so increase in taxes mean nothing to them. However, McCain will get more Latino votes then other Republican candidate and that was what I was trying to state. Also never under-estimate the CA Latino hatred for the black man. Unfortunately that is a true statement, most Jews are blind Democrats. With PA over and Clinton not making a real dent into Obama's lead, Obama looks like he is the candidate. The Jewish voters in NJ, NY and FL will be hestiate of him. I predict they go with McCain. Obviously I fall outside of that since I prefer fiscal conservatism and responsibility over socialism. LOL, WHAT? Ron Paul was a non-factor he barely got any vote regard of the hoopla. The news credited his win in NH and FL to the independent votes. It is well known that he has a favorable standing with the independents. McCain is seen as a more left leaning Republican. He will still some more moderate Democrats. Please! That is a typical unsubstantiated leftist attack. Obama has a lot to prove to be in half of what MLK was. MLK was arguably the best American in US history. Putting Obama in the same phrase at this point in disingenious. Obama has done nothing to warrant it. Read up a little, before you make arrogant attacks on the man. The right-wing talk radio hates him because of his going against the party. McCain will decrease taxes and spending 10 fold, that hasn't been the trend for Democrats or Republicans since Reagan!

That is okay, a liberal judge would be fair but would remain within the limits of the Consitution. So no big deal. A conservative judge would not be as fair because they are not into equal rights but prefer religious domination. The lower courts would no doubt be able to deal with a simple divorse case.

Spending too much to maintain military control over all the other countries is not viewed by you as socialism none the less it is costing much more then any of the domestic needs in our society. The Democrats would downsize that expendature, they would make the rich people pay their fair share of taxes (not a raise in taxes but the removal of unjust deductions) and they have a solid plan to create many new domestic jobs that will not be outsourced and which are not governmental jobs. They will spearhead a program to get the run-away costs of healthcare and energy back into balance with the wages of the average and low income citizens. And effect a better way to mangage our current systems of education. Those are all good things no matter what kind of name tag you wish to hang on it.

I agree with your opinon about the Mexican-American vote, but in the Southwestern USA they hold many of the good and average paying jobs and most of our businesses out here are geared to attract that group because they maintain good credit and pay their bills. They are the hard working section of our communities and that is why they are advancing and why the African Americans resent them which resulted in conflicts between the two races. That voting block is hugh. But they are made up of a diversity of opinons and a number of them do favor the Republican objectives, especially because the Pope does not like abortions, which McCain is also outspoken about.

Some Jewish people are very wealthy and would side with you viewpoints that favor the freedoms that rich people want and which they do not want poor workers to share. Hillary won the Jewish block in Penn according to exit polls and she has a good network within that community already established. The Democrats were the first party to seclect a Jewish person to be a VP before he double-crossed the party.
But he is an odd-ball and is more interested in the middle-east then he is in the concerns of the Jewish community here in the USA. Making things worse in the middle-east is not really in the best interest of Israel even if their own leadership in Israel is unable to realize that, and that is the missguided goal of the Republicans. Those who favor peace over religion are going to vote Democratic. Obama has too many childhood connections with Islamic teachings to get them excited about his message.

He is a tiny bit more liberal then President Bush who is nearly a dictator but he does not even come close to being in the middle. Although Hillary said she and he were friends and visted many countries together and she feels she can work with him to get things done once she is elected as President. She knows this guy and how he thinks which gives her a big advantage over what Obama knows about him. So far McCain has dodged every attempt made by her to have a debate, McCain feels only at ease debating Obama but he knows better then to take on Hillary Clinton, as he does not want a knock out in the first round.

He might send in some hatchet men to cut the budgets of many programs that the voters want, such as education and emergency health care, but he still supports massive military expendatures and that is eating away at the flesh and bones of our domestic economy, along with the high costs of medicene and energy, which problem he wants to ignore in favor of the total distruction of Iraq and Iran, and do doubt the West Bank. He is making a tour trying to imitate Hillary in order the "feel the pain" of the struggles of the poor people but frankly I do not see him "feeling" anything at all. If he does not like her why is he following in her footsteps - it was clear he is a duck out of water when it came to dancing to the gospel music in that recent news clip. Even Al Gore can dance better then he did. Although his ship will not come in during this election he will not be underestimated by the Hillary camp. He might be an old cat but he was re-elected a lot of times from his state, and what he lacks in good judgement he can make up for in "below the belt" advertising.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Technosoul That is okay, a liberal judge would be fair but would remain within the limits of the Consitution. So no big deal. A conservative judge would not be as fair because they are not into equal rights but prefer religious domination.

Interpretations of the constitutions. I have read many many opinions and I question many opinions both conservative and liberal. If you think they always get it right how do you account for the ruling that found the separate, but equal doctrine (Plessy v. Ferguson)! Liberal judge sway from the constitution more than the conservative judges do!

The lower courts would no doubt be able to deal with a simple divorse case.

Yes, but this won't be a simple divorce case. This would be an appeal to the supreme court voiding a marriage ab initio.

Spending too much to maintain military control over all the other countries is not viewed by you as socialism none the less it is costing much more then any of the domestic needs in our society.

To answer that question no its not its colonialism. But preemptive war making is historically a Democratic aspect. Spanish American, Korean, Vietnam, Kosovo were all stated by Democrats. The Bush tandem are Republicans that buck the trend. I can't really fault Sr for Desert Storm or Jr for Afghanistan (we were attack by elements of Afghanistan and I firmly support that war).

We live in a dangerous world my friend. The libs can pretend we don't and cry up American Government conspiracies all they want, but the fact remains American needs a strong military.

The Democrats would downsize that expendature, they would make the rich people pay their fair share of taxes (not a raise in taxes but the removal of unjust deductions)

LOLOLOLOL, did you just say fair share of taxes! You have to be joking. Rich people already pay 80% of the taxes. They pay their share.

and they have a solid plan to create many new domestic jobs that will not be outsourced and which are not governmental jobs.

What by raising corporate taxes and regulations? That is a sure fire way to increase the exodus overseas. McCain's plan is to cut taxes and spending and ease regulations and that is how jolt the economy. Both taxes and spending increased under Bush, so Bush's failed policies were right in line with the Democrats.

They will spearhead a program to get the run-away costs of healthcare

How? By socializing healthcare. Be careful what you wish for.

and energy back into balance with the wages of the average and low income citizens.

How by magic or by a strict refusal to drill for domestic sources in AK and the Gulf?

And effect a better way to mangage our current systems of education.

LOL, still not one answer. Only empty promises. The only promise the Democrats will fill is raising taxes and wasteful spending 10 fold.

I agree with your opinon about the Mexican-American vote, but in the Southwestern USA they hold many of the good and average paying jobs and most of our businesses out here are geared to attract that group because they maintain good credit and pay their bills.

Que? You have proof of that, because that goes against everything I saw when I went to school in AZ and every employment statistic printed!

They are the hard working section of our communities and that is why they are advancing

Hardworking no doubt, but they are not advancing up the economic scale like you say. If they did they would be smart and vote Republican.

and why the African Americans resent them which resulted in conflicts between the two races.

Blaming the victims? Blacks are getting ethnically cleansed in LA.

That voting block is hugh. But they are made up of a diversity of opinons and a number of them do favor the Republican objectives, especially because the Pope does not like abortions, which McCain is also outspoken about.

They also like McCain because of McCain/Kennedy! The Latinos will vote for McCain in numbers, I will put money on that.

Some Jewish people are very wealthy and would side with you viewpoints that favor the freedoms that rich people want and which they do not want poor workers to share. Hillary won the Jewish block in Penn according to exit polls and she has a good network within that community already established.

Jewish American is one of the most affluent and wealthiest voting blocks per capitia in America and its been that way for a while. Nevertheless that Jewish vote has overwelmingly voted Democratic throughout the 20th century.

The Democrats were the first party to seclect a Jewish person to be a VP before he double-crossed the party.

Jews won't vote for another Jew or a party just because of this.

Those who favor peace over religion are going to vote Democratic.

See people read way too much into the antisemitic rhetoric. I posted a statistic a while back stating that the Jewish American were over-welming against the war from the being. I don't have time to locate it now.

Obama has too many childhood connections with Islamic teachings to get them excited about his message.

LOL, this is a false conspiracy. I don't think Jews were too afraid of this until Wright controversy broke. But he is not a Muslim and I doubt his time in Indonesia had that much of an effect on him.

He is a tiny bit more liberal then President Bush who is nearly a dictator but he does not even come close to being in the middle.

Bush a dictator? Does the left have no honor? He is a poor President that got us into the biggest military blunder in our history, but he is far from a dictator. And taxes and non-military spending increases are liberal (aka Democrated philosophies), both which took place in great numbers during Bush's Presidency.

So far McCain has dodged every attempt made by her to have a debate, McCain feels only at ease debating Obama but he knows better then to take on Hillary Clinton, as he does not want a knock out in the first round.

Que? He hasn't debated either. Interparty debates happen after the primaries.

He might send in some hatchet men to cut the budgets of many programs that the voters want, such as education and emergency health care, but he still supports massive military expendatures and that is eating away at the flesh and bones of our domestic economy, along with the high costs of medicene and energy, which problem he wants to ignore in favor of the total distruction of Iraq and Iran, and do doubt the West Bank.

Where do you get your information from? This is nonsense. All the left does is cry that the only thing that we spend money on is Iraq. The government wastefully spends on a lot of places, but the left is OK with that. All they will do is raise the red herring of military spending instead. McCain has never approved a wasteful pork barrel project and has done a pretty good job as senator in AZ. On the other hand Clinton pork spending is near the top.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: ghook LOLOLOLOL, did you just say fair share of taxes! You have to be joking. Rich people already pay 80% of the taxes. They pay their share.

And yet how much of the wealth do they own. Should we count taxes by percent rather then by amount?

Don't be too quick to write this off.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Winter wind And yet how much of the wealth do they own. Should we count taxes by percent rather then by amount? Don't be too quick to write this off.

It depends how you definite weath. So one who makes $100K, $200K, $500K etc. It is easy to blame the wealthy for all of societies problems. But without the wealthy starting companies there would be no jobs for the rest of us. Look at China with its growing economy is now coming a growing middle class. Look at Dubia, they have one of the largest growing corporate bloc in the world and coincidentally one of the most rapidly growing economies and middle classes in the world also.

However, if you squeeze the top and the corporations, guess what happens, they jump ship! That is what has been happening in America.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: ghook It depends how you definite weath. So one who makes $100K, $200K, $500K etc. It is easy to blame the wealthy for all of societies problems. But without the wealthy starting companies there would be no jobs for the rest of us.

whoa there ghook. I'm not blaming the rich for being rich. In fact, being comparatively well off myself, I'm not blaming the rich for anything. I'm just saying, we should take the taxes from the people we can take the most from and cause the least amount of stress.

However, if you squeeze the top and the corporations, guess what happens, they jump ship! That is what has been happening in America.

This is a much better argument then previous ones.

The realistic argument, the more you tax them, the less compelled they are to stay.

However, I'm not sure this has happened enough to cause a major problem. Could you post some stats from an unbias source so I can study this farther?

[GHook93]

Quote by: Winter wind whoa there ghook. I'm not blaming the rich for being rich. In fact, being comparatively well off myself, I'm not blaming the rich for anything. I'm just saying, we should take the taxes from the people we can take the most from and cause the least amount of stress.

Maybe not blaming but punishing them for "making it."

The realistic argument, the more you tax them, the less compelled they are to stay. However, I'm not sure this has happened enough to cause a major problem. Could you post some stats from an unbias source so I can study this farther?

Corporate taxation does this! And raising taxes on the rich and corporate taxation go hand in hand!

[Winter wind]

Quote by: ghook Maybe not blaming but punishing them for "making it."

I'm rich, and I didn't make it.

But that's neither here nor there. The point was, shouldn't we tax by who can afford it rather then a standard tax for everyone.

Corporate taxation does this! And raising taxes on the rich and corporate taxation go hand in hand!

No, no. I mean numbers showing a correlation between increases in taxes and a rush of cooperations leaving the country. I could understand it better if I had numbers.