The Official 2008 Presidential Election Thread

[SK]

Hello friends. My name is SK, and I have a bit of interest in politics. This time of year a day doesn't go by without hearing a headline about Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. So here is a thread where we can post news, opinions, and perhaps even a debate or two (no flaming) concerning the upcoming election for the United States presidency.

Without further adieu, the candidates.

Democratic Party:

The Senator from New York, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton.jpg/160px-Hillary_Rodham_Clinton.jpg
Notables: Attended Wellesley College then Yale. Wife of Bill Clinton.
Rank in Polls (8/13): 1st (36%)

The Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/ObamaBarack.jpg/160px-ObamaBarack.jpg
Notables: Graduate of Columbia and then Harvard Law. He's black.
Rank in Polls (8/13): 2nd (21%)

The Senator from North Carolina, John Edwards
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c2/John_Edwards%2C_official_Senate_photo_portrait.jpg/160px-John_Edwards%2C_official_Senate_photo_portrait.jpg
Notables: Graduate of NC State and UNC Chapel Hill Law. Democratic nominee for Vice President in 2004.
Rank in Polls (8/13): 4th, 3rd in declared candidates (9%)

Other candidates include:
Bill Richardson (3%), Joe Biden (2%), and Dennis Kucinich (1%). Al Gore ranks 3rd in polls (15%) but has stated he is not running for the president.


Republican Party:

Former mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/Rudy_Giuliani.jpg/195px-Rudy_Giuliani.jpg
Notables: Graduate of NYU Law, famous for his handling of 9/11, Roman Catholic.
Rank in Polls (8/13): 1st (28%)

Former Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Romney1.JPG/188px-Romney1.JPG
Notables: Graduate of BYU and Harvard Law and Business, Mormon.
Rank in Polls (8/13): 2nd (15%)

The Senator from Arizona, John McCain
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/John_McCain_official_photo_portrait.JPG/160px-John_McCain_official_photo_portrait.JPG
Notables: Graduate of the United States Naval Academy, POW in Vietnam.
Rank in Polls (8/13): 4th, 3rd among declared candidates (11%)

Other Candidates include:
Fred Thompsan (12%) and Newt Gingrich (7%) both of whom have not officially declared their intention to run, Mike Huckabee (2%) and Ron Paul (2%).

Now you may notice some similarities between the candidates, many of them attended Ivy League (Harvard, Yale) or near Ivy League (NYU, UNC) and the majority of candidates are White Protestants. However, their are some differences from prior elections, the leaders of both parties in the polls have some unusual notables. Most obvious is Clinton being a woman, and Obama being a bi-racial man. However, the Republican Party has a Roman Catholic and a Mormon leading the race for the party's nomination. These characteristics will play big in the upcoming election.

I personally would not vote for any of these candidates, being that I think they're all part of the established American bourgeois class which has been ruling the US since its creation.

Here is an easy, fun test to see where you stand with the candidates (or at least a means to learning a bit more about them and important issues for both parties)

http://www.dehp.net/candidate/index.php

Make sure to post your results and learn about the candidate which ranked highest for you.

Here are my results:
Kucinich 15
Abortion Rights, Assault Weapons Ban, Guantanamo, Wiretapping, Border Fence, Iraq Troop Surge, Iraq Withdrawal, Same-Sex Marriage, Same-Sex Civil Union

Huckabee 11
Death Penalty, ANWR Drilling, Guns - Background Checks, Patriot Act, Iraq War, Same-Sex Constitutional Ban, Universal Healthcare

Gravel 9
Abortion Rights, Guantanamo, Border Fence, Iraq Troop Surge, Iraq Withdrawal, Same-Sex Marriage, Same-Sex Civil Union

Obama 4
Abortion Rights, Assault Weapons Ban, Patriot Act, Guantanamo, Wiretapping, Iran Sanctions, Iraq Troop Surge, Iraq Withdrawal, Same-Sex Civil Union

Clinton 1
Abortion Rights, Death Penalty, Assault Weapons Ban, Patriot Act, Guantanamo, Wiretapping, Iran Sanctions, Iran - Military Action, Iraq Troop Surge, Iraq Withdrawal, Same-Sex Civil Union

McCain 0
Giuliani -2
Edwards -3
Biden -3
Richardson -3
Dodd -4
Cox -5
Hunter -6
Romney -9
Thompson -10
Paul -14
Tancredo -18
Brownback -21

[mage]

less government plz

ron paul ftw

only legit human on the list

[Mut]

After the video Y showed me, Ron Paul is my man.

Also, no offense, but did you really write the OP?

Edited for niceness!

[Carnage]

Care to post the video here?

[Board of Command]

Black dude ftw! Seriously, it's about time America gets a black president.

[Animeniax]

We need a yellow man in the White House before a black guy. Luckily I was born in the US, so I can run if I feel like it.

[Kraco]

Well, since I'm not from the USA I'm not really a valid visitor of this thread, but I just hope your next president will be a more international man than Bush. I don't think he had ever stepped outside of the US before he became your elected leader. A person who has visited various parts of Europe and Asia (and preferably not as a soldier) would be best for the rest of the world, probably.

Also, some people have let me understand Hillary Clinton hates video games. If that's true, it's a very bad sign of illogical prejudices that would hardly be befitting for a president.

[Animeniax]

True, but most presidents hate gays and blacks, which is also very illogical and not befitting a representative of the people. Just think how bad the gay blacks have it (Chasing Amy reference).

[SK]

Mut post the Ron Paul video I don't know too much about him.

And yes Kraco, a president who appreciates video games is definitely a key issue for office.

[masamuneehs]

Well, since I'm not from the USA I'm not really a valid visitor of this thread.

On the contrary, it would be a very good thing if more Americans paid attention to how their domestic politics affected world issues and their reputation on the world stage.

I've been a Democrat for almost all my life (except for volunteering in the Rick Lazio senatorial campaign, which should give you some hints on my opinion about a certain Democratic candidate...) but my favorite out of all of these guys is McCain. He also seemed like one of the better, actually feasible, candidates (Kucinich and Ron Paul are interesting, but it's simply never going to happen), until recently. Now it looks like he won't make it out of the primaries...

I'm also big on Gravel, a big figure during the Vietnam era and a no-nonsense straighttalker. Again, unfortunately, he's a real long shot...

i'm not sure what to make of the 'matching poll' It's a good idea, but i'm suspicious about how they rank which politician is in favor or opposed to what. Voting record? Declared platform?

http://www.2decide.com/table.htm

this is the data table that was used to compile the matching poll. It is quite a bit more interesting than just plugging in your results, as it has some extra options that aren't on the matching poll ('Supports PHased Withdrawal" for Iraq, "Supported Before, Opposes Now" for several issues)

[Ryllharu]

The absolute most important thing you can do is register to vote, and especially with either Democrat or Republican. The election is decided long before we vote in November. You have to vote in the Primaries. There's a huge difference between Gravel and Clinton, Giuliani and Ron Paul. The final race between democrats and republicans can have so much more meaning if we vote in a sensible nominee who not only does research on what they believe in, but can stand by it, and defend it without spitting out the same party rhetoric year after year after year. Meaningful debates, instead of repeating the same shit we see every four years. We're better off with candidates who don't agree with the "party line." It shows they have beliefs of their own, and have made decisions on their own like every American does.

After the Primaries, the media will pick the winner. They already affect the Primaries a great deal, and have selected ones they'd love to see maintain the status quo. The media has been rigging elections for a long time, and it's been getting worse lately. They give "live coverage" of the final election. Whoever coughs up the most cash right at the end, is given a smear campaign for their opponent the night before the election. I would fully support a complete media blackout until the voting booths are closed, but they'll never allow that to happen. Their ratings skyrocket while they "tally" the votes and declare a winner before the polls on the west coast even open. The effect that has on the outcome of the election is huge.

But I digress. I registered as a Republican for the sole purpose of keeping McCain out of office. He turned into a complete party puppet. Thankfully, he's shot himself in the foot by going too far, so now I can focus on keeping Giuliani out of office. I couldn't care less about Mitt Romney, at least he stands by the fact that he changed his mind about an issue.

Come February in my state, I'll be voting for Ron Paul, Internet Darling. He has always stood by his stance on things, many of which I don't agree with, but at least he does his research. FoxNews has repeatedly tried to give him a hard time (http://thespinfactor.com/thetruth/2007/08/05/just-come-home-ron-paul-gives-best-interview-yet-on-fox-news/) in interviews, and he always answers the questions posed completely, without ever spitting out a canned response. He's not the perfect candidate, but at least he checks his facts, and reads each bill before voting on it.

Register with a party. If you're already registered, it takes about 5 minutes to fill out the form again and under two weeks to process. Then you can vote in the Primaries and make your vote really count.

[The Heretic Azazel]

Voting is useless, Ron Paul will never be President, anyone who sticks to their own values instead of what's popular to believe will never be President, it's just always the same bunch of douchebags with different faces running every four years, and umm..

John Edwards still gets 400 dollar haircuts.

[gr3atfull]

If I was american, I would vote for the black guy because he wont be the same old "white man" that you get every four years. It would make a big change.

[SK]

I don't know about voting strictly based on race. I really don't see many differences between Obama and the traditional White Democratic candidate. I think a lot of people need to remember Barack is HALF-black and was raised by his White mother.

I agree voting is very important but I do struggle with it. Inside me I tend to believe voting in an unjust system does nothing to change it, only to take part and perpetuate it. So I highly doubt I will be voting in the upcoming election.

Ron Paul, those videos reminded me and I did know who he was. I do like him and he definitely seems like a candidate who speaks with integrity. However, he's as much a longshot as Gravel. We really do need more Americans getting involved before its narrowed down to 2 candidates for the nominations.

Does anyone else think its a bit corrupt to see usually the candidates with the most money make it farther, meaning they're making the most promises to big business for campaign money.

I hope everyone in this thread has seen Syriana, I know its a movie but I think it is one of the most important and informative films in years...

[Foomanchew24]

No surprise to me I seem to favor Democrats unfortunately I’m not so confident about a Black man or a woman winning the White House Which seems to me like the Democrats are just throwing the election away to the republicans if they go for either of these two.

If I have to see another Republican in the white house I sure as hell hope its not another idiot like President Bush, Americans really showed their lack of intelligence by electing him twice. Also I don’t mind Rudy Giuliani if we have to have another Republican and Mit Romney is ok(Compared to Bush it is hard not to improve) but being a Mormon will eliminate him because Americans are biased, bigoted and ignorant to those they are unfamiliar with.

A pairing of Edwards with Clinton or Obama as VP would be an attractive ticket but they always pick unknowns to be VP because those who don’t get nominated for the President feel they are better than VP material even though they are not.

I will not vote for Clinton and even though I like Obama not enough others do and he has no chance in the current American political arena.

[SK]

I think the Democrats really need Al Gore to get into the running...

[mage]

If I have to see another Republican in the white house I sure as hell hope its not another idiot like President Bush, Americans really showed their lack of intelligence by electing him twice. Also I don’t mind Rudy Giuliani if we have to have another Republican
How do you not mind Giuliani over Bush? There would be 1000x more fear mongering than there is now. Giuliani is possibly the worst person on the list to be elected, and the only reason some dumbass is going to vote for him is because he was the mayor of NY during 9/11.

[Ryllharu]

Yes, they're longshots, but you vote ANYWAY.

"My vote won't matter, I'm just part of a minority."
"Candidates don't care about people like me anyway."
"He doesn't stand a chance of winning."

This kind of attitude is exactly why nothing will ever fucking change. Apathy is killing us. Do you have any idea what the demographics of voters are? They're primarily people 50 and up. Of course the candidates are only going to know about and give a shit about issues of those kinds of people. They know damn well most people under 30 don't vote. America has one of the worst voter turnouts in the the entire world. Corrupted elections with only one candidate get better voter turnout than we do.

Imagine if everyone under 30 (the people that think their votes matter the least) voted for a single candidate. 28.1% of Americans are aged 20 to 34. The majority of voters (aged 45 to 74) is 28.5% of the total population. That's a huge swing. If that actually happened, all candidates would be FORCED into learning issues the younger demographic is more concerned about (censorship, legalization of marijuana, Net Neutrality, piracy, sex ed, not getting screwed by Social Security...oh wait.)

That'd scare the shit out of them. They'd know that one wrong turn would enrage a demographic equal to what they had been used to as the entirety of voters. A single person can never do it alone. A single person isn't something to be afraid of. Millions of angry voters that didn't vote or care before are.

My numbers aren't perfect, several 20-34 year olds vote, many 45-74 year old don't. But the generalization is a sound one. Sources:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html#People
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/QTTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-qr_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U_DP1&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U

[Foomanchew24]

I say I don’t mind Rudy Giuliani because he has to be better than Bush how could he not be? I would much rather have a Democrat in the office that’s competent.

I have voted for every presidential election since I have been able to vote, even though I live in a dominant Republican state. Does my vote count? Not the way the current system works. How popular vote is not the way it is done is beyond all logic because this is the one way that all votes do actually count. Al Gore would have been President and Bush would be out some where getting Sun Stroke (Seems to suffer from this affliction currently).

[Ryllharu]

Moving voting aside (as I've exhausted my arguments), it could very well be that Giuliani will be worse than Bush.

Take a look at his campaign. Overwhelmingly, he's been abusing the fact that he was mayor of NYC on 9/11 for six years. Congrats, he was in a bunker making a few decisions while firefighters and police were dying saving as many people as they could. They are the heroes, not Giuliani. Yes, he did bring a wounded, grieving city back to some semblance of normalacy. However, six years is a long time. Political capital wears out.

Giuliani becoming President is a man coasting into the Oval Office, riding in on the deaths of 3000 people (and counting, thanks to poor medical care given to firefighters and police). Find something new to fluff yourself with. One can't ride on past "successes" forever.

He had an overwhelmingly horrible track record with New Yorkers prior to 9/11. I remember a few Daily Show Headlines from back then. Claims he dropped crime rates, that first began with his predecessor, not Giuliani. He cracked down hard on a lot of minor offenses, which some might consider oppressive (I don't have an real opinion on this one, I'm not and wasn't living in NYC). He cut education funding, frequently and considerably. New York still suffers from the effects of this. Education is one of the most important issues to me, Bush fucked it up with No Child Left Behind, and Giuliani will probably make it worse. Kids are dumb enough already these days. The more education funding, the better. He's not exactly the best friend of Free Speech either.

I won't get into his personal life, since I really don't believe that should be an issue over their political leanings. A lot of liberals use it against him, but who is perfect these days?

[infidel]

I have not registered, which is rather obvious due to my age, however when I do register I will register as a Democrat and will cast my vote for Senator Clinton. My vote is less for her and more as a vote for a Democrat to become the next President, for I fear that the rest of the candidates no longer have a chance. Especially Senator Obama who isolated many of his supports with his promise to invade Pakistan.

The problem with the American voting system is it is very much so a two party system, while smaller parties exist and have grown to larger numbers (e.g. Libertarian Party), parties which have larger followings in other parts of the world have little pull in America. I consider myself a Socialist, which in a country where Socialism is looked down upon becomes a burden. Whereas in European countries, such as France and the Netherlands, Socialists would have a much better chance at getting our methods into place. Mainly Universal Health Care, which America needs desperately.

[mage]

vote for ron paul

he will save us all

[masamuneehs]

Full transcript of Democrats Debate in Iowa (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/story?id=3498294&page=1)

I think these debates are a very good way of seeing how these people actually carry themselves in the public spotlight (ie., how they'll act as politicians). It is of course full of propoganda, smearing and lies, but you have to decide for yourself what and who you're going to believe. Reading/watching these debates always gives me a firmer sense of who I want to support than an internet video or some online matching poll.

A few excepts from the debate I found compelling me for particular people:



we should describe for the American people both in presidential debates, as well as president, what our foreign policy is and what we're going to do. We shouldn't have strategic ambiguity with the American people when it comes to describing how we're going to deal with the most serious national security issues that we face...
And so, this is part of what I think Americans get frustrated about in politics, where we have gamesmanship and we manufacture issues and controversies instead of talking about the serious problem that we have...

I personally think, and I would as president, not talk about hypotheticals in nuclear weapons. I think that's not a healthy thing to do. I think what it does for the president of the United States is it effectively limits your options. And I do not want to limit my options, and I don't want to talk about hypothetical use of nuclear weapons. I would add to that that I think what the president of the United States should actually do, beyond stopping bunker-buster nuclear weapons, which this administration's moving forward with, is what America should do and what I would do as president, is to actually lead an international effort over time to eliminate nuclear weapons from the planet. That's the way to make the planet more secure.


That's very good but, under the last 25 years, this nation has continued to expand its nuclear capability.
I would say that, essentially, they're all wrong on this. They're, sort of, leading up -- the administration is cooking the books, the intelligence on Iran.
And we're playing into this. And I'm very concerned. I would hope the Congress would pass a resolution saying, under no circumstances do you invade Iran.
Stop and think. What have we -- what have they done to us?
They're giving us intelligence, saying that they're destroying our troops. Well, what about our trying to destabilize their government, which we've been doing for the last 25 years?
We destroyed their democracy. And now we're looking at them as an excuse to expand the war, which is the plan the neocons had back in 1997. And so, when Democrats buy into the problem of Iran, they just help Vice President Cheney, who should be committed, with his recent statements...
man, is it just me, or was Edwards kissing Clinton's ass for half that debate? Hilary had a good point on lobbyists, that people decrying lobbyist donations are taking from the people who employ the lobbyists. Also, I can't help but agree with this from Kucinich


Actually, George, this debate is insufficient, because you're really not including all the candidates here... ... and polarize -- you're trying to polarize people out of the race... So let's give the American people a real choice, not a conditioned choice, based on polls...
my man Gravel also had this to say on Iraq, that he believes we should actually bring in Iran and Saudia Arabia and other regional powers into Iraq.


This is American imperialism you're hearing up here. And that hasn't worked and it will never work.
Who are we to tell the Iraqis -- we're trying to make them the fall guy, not our stupid mistakes. Oh, it's the Iraqis won't stand up.
I'll tell you what. Pull everybody out and turn to the Iranians, who helped us defeat the Taliban initially. It was the Iranians. So if we don't bring the Iranians to help us, or the Syrians, or Saudi Arabia, of course it's going to be a disaster.
however, the only Democrat that I agree with on Iraq is Joe Biden, been in foreign relations for years. He knows it won't be easy and that pulling out now is a mistake. Unfortunately, he rejects the idea of partitioning, Richardson's plan... But Richardson is also too keen on pulling out too fast...

Then there was some crap about if the candidates believe in god... fucking a... that's got to be the least important issue you could ask... The question was literally: "do you believe that, through the power of prayer, disasters like Hurrican Katrina or the Minnesota bridge collapse could have been prevented or lessened?" Fucking goddamn retards... again, the only meaningful answer to this stupid question came from Gravel.

[itadakimasu]

how did they put it in southpark...

"you're either voting for a giant douche bag or a turd-sandwich"

i think people that intend to vote for independents like ron paul who i know nothing about.. are really just wasting a vote (not that this matters so much with the electoral college)

anyhow, i'm registered to vote and will be voting in the upcoming presidential election. I hate party polotics and i really dont like any of the candidates but i would vote for a democrat because typically they are less of a total douche than the republicans like gulianni.

I am willing to give mccain a shot but then at the same time i have to realise that even if he is president there are going to be countless faceless goons pulling strings and pushing legislation.

polotics suck. and probably belong in the flame pit because that is where most discussions about anything polotics go.

*inserts meanface.jpg*

[David75]

Well, outsider too.
And like Kraco, I'd prefer a US president to be a little more aware of the world outside the US.
Sadly enough, I do not have much of an idea of the political context of the USA, nor I have of the people view.
I guess that the elders will have the president they like, as it has been stated in this thread before. That's also what happens in France, and we had Sarkozy... which is not the friendly prez the Frogs think he is... well we'll have him for 5 years.

Oh, and for socialism... it's almost dead here, mainly thanks to François Mitterand, a "socialist" president that led france from 1981 to 1995. He slashed most of the social greatness of France, or contributed to destroy the harmony in many systems so that they fail... Now we get the fruits...

So be careful of the prez you elect, cause they can do anything when they have power.

c u

[SK]

Good stuff masa.

Am I the only person who really doesn't see Barack Obama as this "straight talking for the people" candidate? He always seems to be trying delicately to give the people what they want to hear, its why he's so popular (besides obvious reasons). But is it honest? Not really. Its too bad Gravel doesn't have a chance in hell...

BTW, has anyone heard about the fundraiser dinner Oprah is having (maybe had already) for Barack, I remember it costing around $3000 to get in. Obama is just a pawn of the rich upper class, and its sad most people don't know that.

About foreign affairs, I'd much rather have a president focus on domestic issues, and have a solid domestic background than a president who will concentrate on foreign relations. We have enough problems in this country than to be worrying about the rest of the world, I think having a good Secretary of the State and Secretary of Defense is necessary though.
You have to help yourself before you can help others...

[David75]

Good stuff masa.
About foreign affairs, I'd much rather have a president focus on domestic issues, and have a solid domestic background than a president who will concentrate on foreign relations. We have enough problems in this country than to be worrying about the rest of the world, I think having a good Secretary of the State and Secretary of Defense is necessary though.
You have to help yourself before you can help others...
Being a little more aware of the countries outside the US isn't forgetting domestic issues...
And from what you see of the subprime mortgage problem, splashing all over the world and backfiring to the US.... I guess you can understand you just can't remain blind to what happens outside.
To me a prez is all about world relations, other sub prez personel can handle most of the Domestic affairs, the prez being there to give directions.
That's how I see things for any democratic country. I may be wrong though

c u