Presidential Race 2008

Do you like listening to the news and politics everyday, just because you think it's interesting to know how our government is one step nearer to starting WW3? Discuss those issues here.

Re:

Postby destros_elite on Wed Jun 03, 2009 3:15 pm

Tim Elf wrote:Senator George Allen is the closest thing to someone I could support right now.

I'm hoping someone else will come on the scene soon.

Can't stand any of the Dems (including McCain) and I'm not too fond of most of the Reps.


This post was pretty profound. A month and half after this post, Allen lost his Senate re-election bid to Webb, thus ending his bid for the Republican Presidential Nomination before it actually began. I, too, would have supported him 100% had he run. He probably would have been the nominee and would have had a much better showing against Obama than McCain.
That lead me to Tim's comment about McCain. He referred to him as a Democrat and that is pretty much what he is. We didn't even have a true Republican on the ticket last fall!
I know this is ANCIENT news, but I found it interesting...
TheDoctor: "Restricted access, no unauthorized personnel." Hmmm... [opens lock with sonic screwdriver]
Amy: That's breaking and entering!
TheDoctor: What did I break? Sonicing and entering,totally different[/u]
DoctorWho-The Hungry Earth
User avatar
destros_elite
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:02 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby RevSears on Thu Jun 04, 2009 6:19 am

It's really true though. Conservatives didn't much have a dog in the fight. I've never understood the concept of selling Republicans as Democrat lights, aren't most people just going to go for the real deal and not an imitation! If your unpopular, so be it, at least stick to your core principles. This next election is already on the rise, with folks like Jindel (who got really torn shreds after a speech a couple of months ago) Newt, and more.
http://nerd4thelord.wordpress.com/ A blog about Nerd topics from a Christian perspective.
User avatar
RevSears
 
Posts: 1451
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 1:35 pm
Location: Springboro, OH

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby Matthew on Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:39 am

Here is a interesting email I received concerning the election



INTERESTING FACTS -----NOTICE LINK AND MAP AT BOTTOM

Some unreported stats about the 2008 election

Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2008 Presidential election:

-Number of States won by: Democrats: 20; Republicans: 30

-Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000; Republicans: 2,427,000

-Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million

-Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

image001.jpg
image001.jpg (66.36 KB) Viewed 1966 times


Notice that in the states of Alaska and Oklahoma: All counties were won by McCain/Palin.

The original posting with this information is below this Newsweek article at this link: http://www.newsweek.com/id/163337.
User avatar
Matthew
The Mayor
 
Posts: 2014
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:06 pm
Location: Strawberry Plains, TN

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby destros_elite on Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:55 am

That is REALLY interesting! Matt, can you forward that email to me?
TheDoctor: "Restricted access, no unauthorized personnel." Hmmm... [opens lock with sonic screwdriver]
Amy: That's breaking and entering!
TheDoctor: What did I break? Sonicing and entering,totally different[/u]
DoctorWho-The Hungry Earth
User avatar
destros_elite
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:02 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby Matthew on Thu Jun 04, 2009 1:17 pm

destros_elite wrote:That is REALLY interesting! Matt, can you forward that email to me?


pm me your email addy :D
User avatar
Matthew
The Mayor
 
Posts: 2014
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:06 pm
Location: Strawberry Plains, TN

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby Darko on Fri Jun 05, 2009 2:33 am

You know, to borrow a line from many, many Republicans after the electoral college bit the Democrats in 2000, "Get over it, you lost!"

Double-edged swords...fickle mistresses. I think that's what bothers me most. Commentators who were screaming a few years back about how whether or not you agreed with Bush, it was our duty as Americans to support him and how dare we say anything against him are now the ones yelling that they hope Obama fails and he's not the President of the 'real America' (read: the America that votes how we like...I think John Stewart put it best when Sarah Palin was making noise about the "real America" during the campaign, "Well...I guess all of those soldiers from big cities and liberal voting states who never came home weren't 'real Americans' after all") and how we're living under an oppressive tyrant. And of course, on the other side, the democrats who were protesting Bush and calling him an evil tyrant are now saying that Republicans shouldn't be doing the same. It's all cyclical. Both parties take turns playing the same roles. I think it was Bishop Desmond Tutu who, when asked who he supported in an upcoming American election, said to the questioner, "in the grand scheme of things, the difference between Democrats and Republicans is the difference between Coke and Pepsi."
I support the separation of Church and Hate.
Darko
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:16 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby RevSears on Fri Jun 05, 2009 7:16 am

At one point Darko I kinda of held that view, but the more i've learned the more i see how detrimental the libs plans have been to the U.S. So i think it will have long term effects.

Very intersting points Matthew that was just awesome.

Would you mind forwarding me the e-mail as well?
revsears@gmail.com
http://nerd4thelord.wordpress.com/ A blog about Nerd topics from a Christian perspective.
User avatar
RevSears
 
Posts: 1451
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 1:35 pm
Location: Springboro, OH

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby destros_elite on Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:56 am

Darko wrote: I think it was Bishop Desmond Tutu who, when asked who he supported in an upcoming American election, said to the questioner, "in the grand scheme of things, the difference between Democrats and Republicans is the difference between Coke and Pepsi."


Bishop Desmond Tutu? Really? That says it all. He is about as radical in his views as one can be. We are all entitled to our views, no one denies that. But there is a HUGE difference between Democrats and Republicans. That being said, there are some Democrats who do good and those who don't. There are some Republicans who do good and those who don't.
I think what bothers me the most is how the American people are just chugging the Kool-Aid without even examining and pondering what it means and what the consequences will/could be.
Recently even a Russian wrote about how we are destroying what made America great and prosperous. Hugo Chavez called our President, "Comrade Obama". Things like that speak volumes...
TheDoctor: "Restricted access, no unauthorized personnel." Hmmm... [opens lock with sonic screwdriver]
Amy: That's breaking and entering!
TheDoctor: What did I break? Sonicing and entering,totally different[/u]
DoctorWho-The Hungry Earth
User avatar
destros_elite
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:02 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby Darko on Fri Jun 05, 2009 7:24 pm

destros_elite wrote:
Darko wrote: I think it was Bishop Desmond Tutu who, when asked who he supported in an upcoming American election, said to the questioner, "in the grand scheme of things, the difference between Democrats and Republicans is the difference between Coke and Pepsi."


Bishop Desmond Tutu? Really? That says it all. He is about as radical in his views as one can be. We are all entitled to our views, no one denies that. But there is a HUGE difference between Democrats and Republicans. That being said, there are some Democrats who do good and those who don't. There are some Republicans who do good and those who don't.
I think what bothers me the most is how the American people are just chugging the Kool-Aid without even examining and pondering what it means and what the consequences will/could be.
Recently even a Russian wrote about how we are destroying what made America great and prosperous. Hugo Chavez called our President, "Comrade Obama". Things like that speak volumes...


In the grand scheme of things? No, there isn't a huge difference between Democrats and Republicans, not when you consider that there are many, many countries where your vote will decide whether armed militants will murder you or whether they will murder your neighbors. We got things pretty cushy here...the worst we have to live with is the possibility of some policies being made that we don't agree with, and then in a maximum of eight years, someone new gets a shot at it.

Second, the article you're talking about was written for Pravda. Pravda is like the Weekly World News, but serious and with national backing. In the past, they've reported on things like UFO sightings and Yeti. Also, they're an exceedingly pro-Russia rag, so they pretty much publish anything that will make any American government look bad, as they did many times during the Bush administration.

Now let me address that email, and why I think it's absolute propaganda in its purest form. Data manipulation at its finest.

-Number of States won by: Democrats: 20; Republicans: 30

-Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000; Republicans: 2,427,000


Okay, that's great. But here in America, amount of land does not equal number of people.

-Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million


Really deceptive. Makes it sound like 143 million people voted for McCain. Does not take into account the number of people in those counties who can't vote because of age/legal reasons, number that didn't vote, or the ones who voted for Obama.

Actual numbers: Popular vote, Obama got 69,498,215 , McCain got 59,948,240. And just for record, Obama's 69,498,215 gives him more popular votes than Bush (either time he ran), Clinton (either time he ran), Bush Sr, or even Reagan. So the attempt to make it sound like Obama getting elected isn't the will of the people kinda falls flat

-Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1


Oh, I do love ridiculous logic. "There are more murders in counties that voted for Democrats, so that means the democrats were elected by murderers!" Should we be surprised that Plano, TX has fewer murders than New York, LA, Washington DC or Chicago?

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."


This is what I find most offensive. First off, let's not pretend that there aren't wellfare leeches living in red states (the stereotype of the trailer park dwelling wellfare junkie from the South exists for a reason). Again, hmm, maybe this has to do with the fact that yes, apartments (really glad I'm being dragged into the 'awful' part of America because I can't afford a house) and government housing are more prevalent in larger cities than in Bumblescrew, Oklahoma. Second, this is what caused me to lose all respect for the Republican Party during the last election, this idea of "The Real America" (made up of 'hard working' republican voters) and fake America, made up of Democrats. Sorry, but when you become President, you become President of everyone, even those people who didn't vote for you, so stop trying to slice pieces off of America as 'unworthy.' Poor people have just as much of a say in an election as anyone else. And the implication that everyone in government housing is a lazy sot or a scam artist is super offensive. I worked with a community service organization, and let me tell you, the vast majority of the people on government assistance are there for really good reasons, including, say, injuries sustained in the armed forces defending our country which prevent them from working.

Now about the map. Again, it's obviously there to make it look like most people wanted McCain, but somehow, those shifty Democrats pulled the wool over America's eyes and got Obama elected anyway. But a whole lot of those red zones have about the same population as this messageboard. I'll use my state (Washington State) as an example. Looking at it, it looks like most of Washington wanted McCain and only the west side and a few dots on the east side wanted Obama. Well, here's the problem: Over on the west side? Seattle, Olympia and Tacoma. Those dots on the East? Spokane (me!). And that's not even counting the hundreds of smaller cities in the blue there. In the red? Farm land and waste land. Seriously, central Washington is a desert, and very, very few people who can legally vote (huge migrant worker population) live there. So yes, while we're not spread out, trust me, more people voted for Obama than McCain.

This is the same problem I had with the democrats the last eight years. Democracy isn't just democracy when the guy you voted for wins. Sometimes, you have to accept that your desires are not in line with the desires of the majority of the country (and they don't have those desires because they're poor, stupid, uneducated, ignorant, mind-washed, or murderers).
I support the separation of Church and Hate.
Darko
 
Posts: 305
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:16 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby camper on Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:28 am

Darko wrote:Really deceptive. Makes it sound like 143 million people voted for McCain. Does not take into account the number of people in those counties who can't vote because of age/legal reasons, number that didn't vote, or the ones who voted for Obama.


True...but it also doens't take into account those illegal immigrants who are permitted to vote.

So the attempt to make it sound like Obama getting elected isn't the will of the people kinda falls flat


Very true. He defintely won, there's no question.

-Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1


Oh, I do love ridiculous logic. "There are more murders in counties that voted for Democrats, so that means the democrats were elected by murderers!" Should we be surprised that Plano, TX has fewer murders than New York, LA, Washington DC or Chicago?


A murder rate is a murder rate. If you have 1000 people and there is 1 murder, or 10,000 and 10 murders the rate of murders remains the same. That doesn't imply that he wasn't elected by murderers, but more that the policies in these areas tend to enable the criminal element to be enabled in their behavior. It's meant more to be a slam against how well gun control is working in more liberal areas, which is generally tied to a democratic administration. Don't think the intent was to suggest only murderers and rapists will vote for Obama, however if the Obama administration would result in far better treatement or more potential benefits than the McCain administration would have...you can bet Obama got their votes.


Poor people have just as much of a say in an election as anyone else. And the implication that everyone in government housing is a lazy sot or a scam artist is super offensive. I worked with a community service organization, and let me tell you, the vast majority of the people on government assistance are there for really good reasons, including, say, injuries sustained in the armed forces defending our country which prevent them from working.


I agree completely, but the intent was to show that a government leech will vote for whatever candidate which will enable them to continue their leeching. People vote for whats best for themselves. You like guns, you won't vote for a candidate that wants to take them away. You're pro-choice, same deal.

I tend to ignore most propaganda because it's all propaganda. The fact is the new boss is just like the old one. Dems complained that Bush's stimulus package was a joke and a waste of money, but they don't bat an eye at the trillions being spent now and the rediculous 14 per week 'stimulus' package which costs more per family and gives them less. I also agree with you that republicans and democrats are essentially the same. I also don't like the direction this country is going and has been since Roosevelt...but I believe the republicans will take us there much slower.

dan
camper
 
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:02 pm

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby RevSears on Mon Jun 08, 2009 12:52 pm

I do think the "leech" issue is something that needs to be talked about more. If it continues to grow how can republicans ever win? Not just that why work? why not just be a leech yourself? and those poor working people...! the taxes they would have to pay! No one is going to vote themselves to go to work and it will reach a critical mass were people are just voting themselves money (it may already have) and the country can not survive.
http://nerd4thelord.wordpress.com/ A blog about Nerd topics from a Christian perspective.
User avatar
RevSears
 
Posts: 1451
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 1:35 pm
Location: Springboro, OH

Re: Presidential Race 2008

Postby destros_elite on Mon Jun 08, 2009 1:33 pm

RevSears wrote:I do think the "leech" issue is something that needs to be talked about more. If it continues to grow how can republicans ever win? Not just that why work? why not just be a leech yourself? and those poor working people...! the taxes they would have to pay! No one is going to vote themselves to go to work and it will reach a critical mass were people are just voting themselves money (it may already have) and the country can not survive.


I agree and the country cannot survive if this continues. There is a quote that I love by Ulysses S. Grant:

"Labor disgraces no man. Unfortunately you occasionally find men who disgrace labor."

If people can get money without work, they will continue to do so. The government has become an enabler, especially the current administration. Why should those who do work be overly taxed to support those who WILL NOT work (please note I did not say ARE NOT working)? With all of the money going for the bailouts, our tax money will have to go to cover the interest (let's be real...we will NEVER payoff the principle). So what about the social programs that are in the works? Where will that money come from? If you push for higher taxes it will lessen our already weakend spending power, thus keeping the economy from growing. So then they will try to borrow again and eventually China will stop buying our bonds. So to cut costs, the military will be cut back...BAD MOVE! It is snowball of poor decisions and destruction that will just keep on rolling...

I take comfort in the fact that my Father owns the cattle on a thousand hills (Psalm 50). Everything is His and He takes care of His own. We are utterly and desperately dependant upon Him for everything! Once we realize this and seek Him to provide for us, then we can look at things differently. :D
TheDoctor: "Restricted access, no unauthorized personnel." Hmmm... [opens lock with sonic screwdriver]
Amy: That's breaking and entering!
TheDoctor: What did I break? Sonicing and entering,totally different[/u]
DoctorWho-The Hungry Earth
User avatar
destros_elite
 
Posts: 720
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:02 pm
Location: Virginia

Previous

Return to News & Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron