Which presidential candidate will you vote for?

  On 8/7/2012 at 2:28 AM, lumpenprol said:

the amount of stupidity in this thread is depressing. Complain all you want about the system, but if you don't vote, or make a fake vote out of spite, you're conceding defeat and just being a petty whining bitch. So best not to whine at all, if that really is your choice. Keep your lazy, nihilistic viewpoint to yourself :-)

 

*note: agonizing over whether or not to go with a 3rd party candidate is a legitimate tough choice, imo.

stop being so naive, I'll bitch continuously to your shagrin. plus you don't live in the US why do you even care?

It is extremely stupid to act as if it's a moralistic imperative to vote in the general election.

You've conceded defeat at the outset of having faith in our electoral system

It's funny to me when people act like they care so much about changing things, but yet only really speak out or care every 4 years when their childhood MTV programming of 'rock the vote' trickles down from their memory banks

edit: just for the record, i'm not voting for Romney, probably not voting for anybody. If i can get down to the polls on election day i might do it, but i'm not going to feel guilty for deciding not to. And personally i think it's hilarious and sad that so many people feel compelled out of of some kind of moralistic duty to do it but then DO NOT give a shit (or even worse, sadly defends at every turn a president going against their promises) what happens in between. It's done mostly for a cathartic release, relieve yourself of psychological guilt for a half decade so you can watch reality shows and football until you're told to care again

Yeah, that's why this thread is going on. We're all brainwashed by MTV. And people outside the US are never affected by US election outcomes. Face to palm contact achieved.

  On 8/7/2012 at 6:43 PM, goDel said:

LOL

 

I side with Obama

 

*ducks*

 

http://www.isidewith...esults/43170875

 

I side with Barack Obama on most issues in the 2012 Presidential Election.

I'm at 78% with you. We both support NATO lol.

it's cool, i forgive you for mistaking reality for face-palm-able cynicism

and keep in mind, i'm mainly referring to the people who only decide to take action during a general election and at no other point. If this feels like your only opportunity to 'make a change' or to effect the system you are sorely mistaken.

Lol, thanks for your forgiveness, but I'm not really in the habit of accepting political rhetoric as 'reality.'

really? you had me thinking you were for the entire duration of this thread. Sorry for the confusion

  On 8/7/2012 at 11:00 PM, Awepittance said:

it's cool, i forgive you for mistaking reality for face-palm-able cynicism

 

and keep in mind, i'm mainly referring to the people who only decide to take action during a general election and at no other point. If this feels like your only opportunity to 'make a change' or to effect the system you are sorely mistaken.

This edit clears things up for me a bit. I was thinking you were referring to people in this thread. I am well aware that a general election is not the only time to vote/act/discuss/etc (and I think most people itt are, too)...

  On 8/7/2012 at 11:07 PM, Awepittance said:

really? you had me thinking you were for the entire duration of this thread. Sorry for the confusion

You're very good at turning a useful conversation into attacks on the debaters motives, I'll give you that much.

I think Iain C has done more than enough to defend himself; there is participation beyond the voting booth...shit he shouldn't even have to defend himself on this subject.

  On 8/7/2012 at 10:47 PM, Awepittance said:

  On 8/7/2012 at 2:28 AM, lumpenprol said:

the amount of stupidity in this thread is depressing. Complain all you want about the system, but if you don't vote, or make a fake vote out of spite, you're conceding defeat and just being a petty whining bitch. So best not to whine at all, if that really is your choice. Keep your lazy, nihilistic viewpoint to yourself :-)

 

*note: agonizing over whether or not to go with a 3rd party candidate is a legitimate tough choice, imo.

 

stop being so naive, I'll bitch continuously to your shagrin. plus you don't live in the US why do you even care?

It is extremely stupid to act as if it's a moralistic imperative to vote in the general election.

You've conceded defeat at the outset of having faith in our electoral system

 

 

It's funny to me when people act like they care so much about changing things, but yet only really speak out or care every 4 years when their childhood MTV programming of 'rock the vote' trickles down from their memory banks

 

edit: just for the record, i'm not voting for Romney, probably not voting for anybody. If i can get down to the polls on election day i might do it, but i'm not going to feel guilty for deciding not to. And personally i think it's hilarious and sad that so many people feel compelled out of of some kind of moralistic duty to do it but then DO NOT give a shit (or even worse, sadly defends at every turn a president going against their promises) what happens in between. It's done mostly for a cathartic release, relieve yourself of psychological guilt for a half decade so you can watch reality shows and football until you're told to care again

well, it should also be noted that during most presidential elections, people can also vote for local politicians, which IMHO is the most worthwhile advantage of voting...focus on whats going on in your individual community...you stir up enough trouble and the politicians at that level are far more likely to hear you....i can comfortably say this with experience.

I like how it shows you your influence.

http://www.isidewith...esults/43312115

82% Jill Stein. Was going to vote for her anyway.

Joshua and TheSun said everything I wanted to say and more, as usual.

Lol at this

  Quote

I side the most with Barack Obama, Jimmy McMillan, Mitt Romney, Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, and Ron Paul on economic issues.

  On 8/7/2012 at 11:08 PM, luke viia said:

  On 8/7/2012 at 11:00 PM, Awepittance said:

it's cool, i forgive you for mistaking reality for face-palm-able cynicism

 

and keep in mind, i'm mainly referring to the people who only decide to take action during a general election and at no other point. If this feels like your only opportunity to 'make a change' or to effect the system you are sorely mistaken.

 

This edit clears things up for me a bit. I was thinking you were referring to people in this thread. I am well aware that a general election is not the only time to vote/act/discuss/etc (and I think most people itt are, too)...

 

  On 8/7/2012 at 11:07 PM, Awepittance said:

really? you had me thinking you were for the entire duration of this thread. Sorry for the confusion

 

You're very good at turning a useful conversation into attacks on the debaters motives, I'll give you that much.

if you gave me a simple picard face palm icon i'd be more cordial, At least address some of what i said VS scoffing at it and pretending you were having a 'useful conversation'

  On 8/8/2012 at 1:34 AM, xxx said:

It's hard to get into the political games when I've been seeing things like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1DqBNE0vgE

and reading books like this

It's all kind of a dog-and-pony show while the circus itself is burning

pretty much, the election itself has turned into a form of bread and circuses beyond the overwhelming amount of caveman fun america loves so much.

funny Ron Paul is on there when the dude bailed out for the 2nd time once the general election started. He always hints at a 3rd party run, takes millions of dollars of 'money bombs' and then pussies out. Thanks Ron Paul for proving yourself to be just as shite as any other career politician.

I've had a problem with the Pauls even before this new incident, but Rand Paul just tried to get my sister fired from her job at Russia Today for asking him why he endorsed Mitt Romney.

My new philosophy is that anyone, any media personality or otherwise that carries water for a politician is doing a disservice to everybody including themselves

  On 8/8/2012 at 1:34 AM, xxx said:

It's hard to get into the political games when I've been seeing things like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1DqBNE0vgE

and reading books like this

It's all kind of a dog-and-pony show while the circus itself is burning

if this is the case, it is utterly and completely unsolvable. you cannot seriously expect to turn around a catastrophe of this magnitude over a generation or two. if what they say is true, civil war, famine, etc. are ahead of us.

so if this is the case, who cares if someone votes or not?

I'm gonna vote for Obama.

New interview today with Jill Stein. Please watch!

i miss Cynthia Mckinney, Stein's not bad just doesn't get me very excited

I like what Stein has to say, but I have such severe doubts that a president's administration can actually effect change. It just doesn't seem to be the case that politicians are running this country.

@awepittance: apologies for not responding to you earlier in this page when you asked me to elaborate and not just be a smartass. basically, I was just somewhat offended at your suggestion that people's desire to vote is just "brainwashing" or a "cathartic release" instead of an earnest hope that they can enact change. I definitely agree that JUST voting once every four years is not sufficient for anyone (local elections, people), but I also think most people don't want to be assed into dealing with politics every week or even month; a lot of people (rightfully, I think) assume that we have a government so that they, the civilians, can relax and not worry about politics once the politicians are in place. Not true in reality, but it's not hard to see why lots of people believe (hope) that to be the case!

  On 8/21/2012 at 8:40 PM, luke viia said:

I like what Stein has to say, but I have such severe doubts that a president's administration can actually effect change. It just doesn't seem to be the case that politicians are running this country.

 

I understand what you are saying but I think Obama is a lame duck on a lot of issues. The big thing with the Democratic party is that they do a great job of contrasting themselves with the "terrible evil Republicans" but what you have to pay attention to is what they don't say/do that makes Dems corrupt. So like MSNBC does a good job of attacking Fox News etc... but they don't ever push their "liberal/left/progressive (lol)" agenda... or propose ideas like the Republican/Fox do. And in this day and age the President should be able to speak daily to the American people about things that are important and speak honestly about them. FDR did that shit back in the 30s

I agree, I'd love it if we had a president who engaged the public. What I'm saying is that I don't think the government is really running the show. Corporations / banks / media conglomerates are international entities, and considering that many politicians swiftly move in and out of those sorts of entities, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that the government is a limb on the body of business. Political candidates can be as earnest as they want, and they can vote for good proposals, but when businesses often seem to be above the law, how can we expect change?

Compson is right, both sides are great at shadow boxing. That's pretty much what the current state of politics is. Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney's camp can attack Obama for being a leftist radical socialist anti military liberal continuously when absolutely none of it is true ,in fact Obama leans more to the right than most people are willing to believe

(not a direct reply to your post, robbie)

And how do "checks and balances" work when you've got two shit political parties - parties that vote along lines drawn in the sand and focusing on non-issues like "family values" and "fighting terrorism" - entrenched in every arm of the government? A new executive branch might help, but I don't know. I'm starting to think I'll just vote no confidence.

Yeah its a sad state of affairs. But I think thats why its important to actually stand for something that you can truly say represents your interests... because just saying you'll vote for Obama cause of Romney or not vote at all, it has no impact on other voters in the sense that it sends a hopeless/dire message. You gotta ignore the odds and just be enthusiastic that you will be supporting someone in November who is looking out for your interests. If both parties are controlled and if both have to be in constant contention with each other (one party can't become too popular because then there is no one to blame for the lack of progress and leadership on liberal/progressive policies) then voting for either of the two parties is truly throwing your voice down the toilet.

I agree. The only part I can't say I'm enthusiastic about is your call to be enthusiastic. :P

  On 8/21/2012 at 9:05 PM, Awepittance said:

Compson is right, both sides are great at shadow boxing. That's pretty much what the current state of politics is. Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney's camp can attack Obama for being a leftist radical socialist anti military liberal continuously when absolutely none of it is true ,in fact Obama leans more to the right than most people are willing to believe

that's what im saying...there are innumerable parallels between whats happening now and what was happening in the 1890's...if there was a new rise of truly progressive Democrats or Republicans in government, you would see an outpouring of support from all echelons of society (except for the "controllers" of course).

If a candidate literally said something like "we are going to stop spending money bombing other people and use that money to rebuild what was once a great nation", people would turn out in droves. That's a really hard statement to spin and have it genuinely believed when the majority of the public is suffering and they know exactly why.

The major difference, and here is where I see a silver lining (even though Im still pretty damn cynical), is that the rise of anti-communist sentiment and the wars of the early 20th century pushed the progressive agenda away from the forefront. The problem they have enforcing this agenda today is the fact that we are already completely exhausted by the war machine perpetuated upon the public for the past 90 years. This could be a potentially huge turning point.

The cynical part is thinking we can actually get the point where a cadre of ballsy progressives can penetrate the Iron Curtain that is the two-party, one management organization of government.

In short, we need to create a neo-robotic Teddy Roosevelt, but with his foreign policy augmentation deactivated. And a vice president Robo-LaFollette.