Politics
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=48813
Printed Date: December 02 2024 at 17:32
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Politics
Posted By: crimhead
Subject: Politics
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 02:32
|
I was listening to Michael Savage tonight and he brought up the fact that it seems that we spend more than 2 years campaigning to elect a President. Go figure. |
Replies:
Posted By: Passionist
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 03:40
|
Yeah, and the 2 years are only because with so much funding you have the resources to, so why not? No, it doesn't really work. if it did you'd have more than 40% of people voting. I'd never become a citizen of a country that has only 2 parties. That's like spitting Mr. Bernstein in the face. I'd question the whole system. Just to think, that you have one of the biggest countries in the world, and ever so and so years you choose a new presidents who has ultimate power over houndreds of millions of people. One person. That's bound to lead to him getting told what to do by other people. You might wanna try something like Germany or Austria. |
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 03:53
I agree. Coming from a country that has many more parties in its parliament, I've never understood the United States' two party system.
 |
Passionist wrote:Posted By: The Doctor
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 05:41
If there were more than two parties, people might actually have to put in some effort to vote, like read occasionally and stay updated on current events and where all the candidates stand. We like to put things into neat little packages, that are easily digestible and don't require too much work. With a two party system, we can be either democrat or republican and not have to even really think about who we're voting for. Just to be clear though, the US' two-party thing is not really a system. That implies some sort of overall plan. Nowhere in the Constitution or the laws of the US are parties even mentioned. The whole thing developed by default. It would take a serious change in the attitudes of the American people for anything else to work. And we have far too many other important things to do to bother changing our attitudes, not like the Europeans who have lots of free time to read and stuff like that.  ------------- I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you? |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 06:37
|
I voted "need more than 2" ... but actually what's truly needed are independent parties. But that may be impossible ... I don't think that any political party could become as big as the republicans or democrats without sacrificing their independence from religions, industries etc..
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to: 
|
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 13:26
| Ted Kennedy's tumor is big news for the reason that he has been in the senate for so long. Only one member has been in longer than Ted and that's Robert Byrd. I have never understood why we make our President serve a maximum of 2 terms but we allow our senate and congress to have lifetime jobs as long as they bring the pork home to their states and districts. Doesn't seem logical to have lifelong servants of the people while the ones they are serving cannot be guaranteed the same. |
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 14:35
|
I think we need more than 2 parties although I'm not fond of any party and more wouldn't make me a fan either. However, just two only gives the option of less evil vote since no candidate is ever that great anyways. I also think presidents should only be allowed to serve one term. |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 17:27
|
The real hypocrisy is voters (with politicians leading) crying loudly for term limits, only to turn around and re-elect the same City councillor, congressman, Senator over and over again. Or maybe what they really want are term limits on only politicians they don't like. After all, all democracies have a built-in term limiter - it's called voting against the incumbent. ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: IVNORD
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 17:34
|
Posted By: Relayer09
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 18:51
|
There are more than two parties in the United States. Parties like the Libertarian Party and Green party just don't have the financial backing as compared to Democrats and Repulicans but that doesn't mean that can't change. As recently as 1992 there were three viable presidential canidates, George H.W. Bush - Republican, Bill Clinton - Democrat and Ross Perot - Reform Party ( who ended up with nearly 20% of the popular vote). ------------- If you lose your temper, you've lost the arguement. -Proverb |
Posted By: Proletariat
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 19:20
|
The first one and the last one are both completely true, but the last one is a more pressing concern so it gets my vote ------------- who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob |
Posted By: ProgBagel
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 19:28
| They are all the same to me, doesn't matter how many parties. I am waiting to be proven wrong and hope that time comes soon. |
Posted By: Proletariat
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 19:32
Bullsh*t, they arn't lifelong servants, they can be if they get realected. The house of representitives must be realected every two years and the senate must face election every 6. they must do a good job in order to be realected the same way their constituents must work to hold their jobs. ------------- who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob |
Posted By: Relayer09
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 19:39
The same thing could be held true for Presidents as well. If the voters decide a president is doing a good job they should also be allowed to vote for that same President beyond two terms. ------------- If you lose your temper, you've lost the arguement. -Proverb |
Posted By: Mikerinos
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 19:42
They don't necessarily need to do a good job, they just need more votes.  And I'll go with the bandwagon "I'm not crazy for either of the two major parties (social democrat describes my stance well enough), but I'll vote for the democratic party just to help them against the Darth McCain" response ------------- 
|
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 20:08
|
Any country that votes in Judges & Prosecuting Attorneys needs some lessons on judicial knowledge. Any country that has a leader that can avoid answering in person to an opposition needs a press that has teeth, and a process that does not allow said leader to avoid questions they dislike or only choose questions they prefer. The parliamentary system has its' faults, but it does put the government on the spot. Even given that our own Canadian members of parliament are losing the little bit of power they have as the Prime Minister concentrates more & more authority in that office; to the point where we seem to be heading towards a Presidential system. ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: KoS
Date Posted: May 21 2008 at 20:19
I agree with the Doc that most people just rely on what little information the TV or radio news gives them. They don't look any deeper than that. They decide who to vote for, that is if they vote, on very superficial reasons. Obama because he's black, Clinton because she's a woman and McCain for the same reason that got George W elected that "he's protecting us from terrorist" bullsh*t. |
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: May 22 2008 at 00:10
Well those people are clearly crazy. edit:
Agreed. I'm surprised Kucinich is able to get as much support as he does considering his voting record seems quite dissimilar to his spoken politics/policies. |
Posted By: Proletariat
Date Posted: May 22 2008 at 00:24
The differance is that presidents need more checks because they alone head the executive branch. the legislative branch dosn't need term limits on individual members because the head of the legislative branch is not one person, rather it is 535 seperate people divided into two seperate houses. A senator is only 1/100 of the senate and a house rep. is only 1/435 of the house and nither the house or the senate can get anything done without the other. There wouldn't need to be term limits on the executive if we gave up the whole "leader" Idea and instituted a council of hundreds of representitives. But because our founding fathers wanted to be taken seriously by the other countries at the time they felt they needed to install one man to represent the country. After FDR had his four term presidency the republicans got pissed off and pushed for term limits, wich while instituted for stupid reasons do serve as a usefull check on the powers of the president. ------------- who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob |
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: May 22 2008 at 01:32
What he said as well as they tend to keep the fringe parties out of the debates and make it so that they have to get so many signatures to get on the ballot and then if they don't get enough of a percentage during the general election they have to go through the whole process again. I would like to see a debate between 3,4 or 5 parties when it comes to the Presidential elections. If we get debates with McCain/Obama I guaranty you won't see a third party in the debate. |
Posted By: Relayer09
Date Posted: May 22 2008 at 08:38
Personally, if I had a choice of putting a president such as FDR or Ronald Reagan back in office for a third term I would much rather have that option than having to pick from any of the three bozos still in contention in this election. ------------- If you lose your temper, you've lost the arguement. -Proverb |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 22 2008 at 18:38
Yeah, but we'd have to dig them up and I don't think they smell so good no more.  ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: May 22 2008 at 21:59
Reagan would be as smart today as he was when....well.....um. Nevermind.
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 23 2008 at 08:01
|
Hey, didn't you start this thread saying you were listening to Michael Savage? For the love of God, please don't.   Weiner ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: May 23 2008 at 13:20
He's funny. I like how he bashes the other right wing know-it-all's. He has some valid points and yes he is firmly planted in the conservative US ideals of the 50's. But I need balance. I can't believe that any one party or person has all the answers. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 23 2008 at 16:12
OK, it's obvious you haven't had a proper brainwashing.  ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: May 23 2008 at 16:43
I'm not one of those kool-aid drinkers that watches FauxNews or those Didiots that listen to Rush. |
Posted By: Relayer09
Date Posted: May 24 2008 at 20:37
Air America and MSNBC are so much better! Oh wait Air America went bankrupt and I don't think anyone watches MSNBC anymore. Well there's always the Bob & Tom show. ------------- If you lose your temper, you've lost the arguement. -Proverb |
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: May 24 2008 at 21:08
True about Air America but if you believe the numbers MSNBC is holding it's own and beating FauxNews in the important numbers. It appears that Bill O's audience is either dying off or they're growing tired of him. As to Bob & Tom I grew tired of them years ago. Same schtick week after week. |
Posted By: Relayer09
Date Posted: May 24 2008 at 22:06
|
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6517290.html - http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6517290.html
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/05/04/cable-news-ratings-thursday-may-1/3607 - http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/05/04/cable-news-ratings-thursday-may-1/3607
Me thinks thou is mistaken. ------------- If you lose your temper, you've lost the arguement. -Proverb |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 25 2008 at 01:37
 "In a hotel room in Brussels, the chief executives of the world’s top oil companies unrolled a huge map of the Middle East, drew a fat, red line around Iraq and signed their names to it. The map, the red line, the secret signatures.
It explains this war.
It happened on July 31, 1928, but the bill came due now. In 1928, oil company chieftains were faced with
a crisis: falling prices due to rising supplies of oil;
The solution then, as now: stop the flow of oil,
squeeze the market, raise the price.
War is profitable business – if you’re an oil man. But somehow, the public pays the price, at the pump and at the funerals, and the oil companies reap the benefits." Greg Palast  ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 25 2008 at 01:49
 ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: Relayer09
Date Posted: May 25 2008 at 09:46
|
Oil has risen in conjunction with the increased demand of China and India. Supply has gone down because of these two countries increasing demand thus raising prices. My next car is going to be a hydrogen fuel cell and I'll give our friends at OPEC the big middle finger. http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/chevy-equinox-fuel-cell-suv.htm - http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/chevy-equinox-fuel-cell-suv.htm ------------- If you lose your temper, you've lost the arguement. -Proverb |
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: May 25 2008 at 12:22
Isn't hydrogen fuel supposed to be almost as expensive as the current price of regular gasoline? I'd rather get an old diesel car and fuel it with hemp and grease. |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 25 2008 at 13:47
|
From what I've read you are correct. And don't you think these wise guys don't have it their capability to keep it that way?
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: May 25 2008 at 14:12
| I still say grow hemp for fuel like our grandfathers did. Simple solution. |
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: May 25 2008 at 18:04
|
I say we turn over our entire agricultural production to making ethanol, thereby bringing about a revolution, and finally absolute destruction of a civilization that refuses to pay the price for its' insistence on burying its' collective head in the sand when it comes to facing such issues. For God's sake, walk, bike, take public transit, car pool. This seems to be a small (so far) trend in the U.S. . Who knows, if the consumer refuses to consume or cuts back on the use of a (supposedly) overpriced commodity, maybe the price will come down. And if it doesn't well ... you're still paying less, cause you're using it less. ------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case. |
Posted By: Relayer09
Date Posted: May 25 2008 at 23:14
Every new technology is expensive when first hitting the marketplace. Computers, CD players, etc were all expensive at their introduction but now they're relatively cheap because most everyone has one. I don't see planet earth ever having a shortage of hydrogen and if there ever is one we'll all be dead and it won't really matter. Burning hemp and grease still produce emissions and contribute to global warming whereas hydrogen has no such emissions. Now if we can get the oil lobbyists out of the pocket of our politicians we may become self reliant on energy and have a cleaner enviroment someday. ------------- If you lose your temper, you've lost the arguement. -Proverb |