So who do you like for President? (Obviously, a political thread!)

[tracy]

Thanks for all the responses!
And I will respond to what Derf and Flick commented about education:
Perry has been governor for 10 years here in Texas.  By and large, he has been good for the state overall, and he is especially good at job creation.  This last time around,  education funding was a huge issue, and the teacher's unions wouldn't compromise.  Three were things that could have been done that weren't, and the blame was on both sides.  Perry didn't handle it as well as he could have, but to lay all the blame on him is to ignore the facts.
I teach in a private school.  As I look at our public schools, I see a host of problems and a lot of corruption; things that Teacher's Unions have steadfastly opposed reforming because they would demand greater accountability from educators.  So I can at least understand why many conservatives, Perry included, get very frustrated in dealing with the educational system - especially when the NEA has become such a HUGE cash cow for the opposition.

Overall, however, Perry has been a positive force for Texas, in my opinion, and his greatest strengths lie in areas where the country could use some better leadership right now.  Again, all that being said, at the moment I am sure impressed with Herman Cain.  He seems genuine and refreshing in his approach.

Keep on voting, guys!

I've never understood what one means when they say that a politician "created" jobs. The only way government can create jobs is by expanding the public sector, by expanding the size of government. I am immediately suspect when a politician talks about creating jobs. Just focus on education and infrastructure, and let the businesses create the jobs. It's like Obama, who sounds soooooo convincing and passionate when he says "pass this jobs bill now!" Yeah? What's in it? How does is "create" jobs, might I ask? And honestly, I'm almost in favor of people voting LESS. I respect the voting process, but very few others do. 90% of voters vote with their "feelings," how well they speak, and of course, what the mass media tells them they should feel about the candidate. If that wasn't the case, politics wouldn't such a dirty, negative-campaigning, image game.

If you don't know why you're voting, then DON'T VOTE!

It's funny and yet sad...Perry claims to have such a fine record on creating jobs yet unemployment is still high. One way he tried to create jobs was to shove the Trans Texas Corridor down our throats where they would greatly expand I-35. This would entail using the Eminent Domain our Stupid...Supreme...Court agreed was legal then the jobs of contructing it would go to a firm in Spain. How would seizing property and giving work to Spain help us?

[Leah]

Well, according to The Rolling Stones Magazine, the GOP tried to rig the Electoral College in Pennsylvania, so they don't get my vote for being wusses. Sorry, but that's just childish.

I'll just vote for George Clooney.

[tracy]

I'd vote for Pat Paulson if he were still around.

[Flick James]

Well, according to The Rolling Stones Magazine, the GOP tried to rig the Electoral College in Pennsylvania, so they don't get my vote for being wusses. Sorry, but that's just childish.

I'll just vote for George Clooney.

I'm not saying that rigging elections is acceptable. It's downright reprehensible. It ain't nothin' new, however. They used to rig elections in the old days by having people vote multiple times. People would vote, go and change their appearance, and come back and vote again. Candidates for office sometimes even had thugs go around and force people to vote multiple times, or against their will.

In my opinion, any candidate who is caught rigging or attempting to rig an election should be banned from holding ANY office, I find it that reprehensible. However, modern rigging schemes are nothing compared to the old days.

[tracy]

Well, according to The Rolling Stones Magazine, the GOP tried to rig the Electoral College in Pennsylvania, so they don't get my vote for being wusses. Sorry, but that's just childish.

I'll just vote for George Clooney.

I'm not saying that rigging elections is acceptable. It's downright reprehensible. It ain't nothin' new, however. They used to rig elections in the old days by having people vote multiple times. People would vote, go and change their appearance, and come back and vote again. Candidates for office sometimes even had thugs go around and force people to vote multiple times, or against their will.

In my opinion, any candidate who is caught rigging or attempting to rig an election should be banned from holding ANY office, I find it that reprehensible. However, modern rigging schemes are nothing compared to the old days.

This is one of the reasons I feel that the Electorial Collegs has outlived its usefullness. The president should be elected by direct popular vote...in my humble opinion.

[Leah]

Well, according to The Rolling Stones Magazine, the GOP tried to rig the Electoral College in Pennsylvania, so they don't get my vote for being wusses. Sorry, but that's just childish.

I'll just vote for George Clooney.

I'm not saying that rigging elections is acceptable. It's downright reprehensible. It ain't nothin' new, however. They used to rig elections in the old days by having people vote multiple times. People would vote, go and change their appearance, and come back and vote again. Candidates for office sometimes even had thugs go around and force people to vote multiple times, or against their will.

In my opinion, any candidate who is caught rigging or attempting to rig an election should be banned from holding ANY office, I find it that reprehensible. However, modern rigging schemes are nothing compared to the old days.

This is one of the reasons I feel that the Electorial Collegs has outlived its usefullness. The president should be elected by direct popular vote...in my humble opinion.

DAMN RIGHT!!!!!!!!

[indianasmith]

That would mean that New York, Texas, and California would pretty much choose every President.  I'm a Texan, but I still don't like that idea.  I'm a big believer in Federalism, and the Electoral College was made to reflect that - to give smaller states at least something of a voice beyond their population. 

That being said, if we did not change the electoral system after the boondoggle in 2000, I don't think we ever will.

Also, to be perfectly honest, I do believe there is such a thing as too much democracy. We are, after all, a Republic.  If it were not prone to such vile manipulation by both sides, I would still favor a literacy test for voters.  I mean, do we really want someone who CAN'T EVEN READ to have a voice in choosing the leader of the free world?  The less stupid people go to the polls, the more intelligent the eventual choice becomes.

[Couchtr26]

Not really thinking about it at the moment and so none are really appealing to me. 

[Flick James]

That would mean that New York, Texas, and California would pretty much choose every President.  I'm a Texan, but I still don't like that idea.  I'm a big believer in Federalism, and the Electoral College was made to reflect that - to give smaller states at least something of a voice beyond their population. 

That being said, if we did not change the electoral system after the boondoggle in 2000, I don't think we ever will.

Also, to be perfectly honest, I do believe there is such a thing as too much democracy. We are, after all, a Republic.  If it were not prone to such vile manipulation by both sides, I would still favor a literacy test for voters.  I mean, do we really want someone who CAN'T EVEN READ to have a voice in choosing the leader of the free world?  The less stupid people go to the polls, the more intelligent the eventual choice becomes.

I've had and idea about electoral reform that mirrors some of what you've said. I may have to PM you and see what you think.

Also, I agree about the electoral college, for exactly those reasons.

There is no perfect election process. It doesn't exist. We do what we can to accomodate the democratic process with this rather large population.

[Raffine]

Jon Huntsman seems like a reasonable, intelligent person with a sense of humor.

The guy doesn't stand a chance.

[Leah]

I mean, do we really want someone who CAN'T EVEN READ to have a voice in choosing the leader of the free world?  The less stupid people go to the polls, the more intelligent the eventual choice becomes.

Not many people who are able to vote are literate....

[indianasmith]

Just curious - why do you say that?

[Trevor]

I think Cain is able.

[Raffine]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUxPHJ36u0w


Democrats: "WE ACCEPT IT!"
Republicans: "WE REJECT IT!"

Some things never change...

[Raffine]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q25HjXPlkRE&feature=related

Not surprisingly, the Fleischer's original version is much more cutting edge and gritty.

Watching this 1932 short again it can be seen a slam against the proposed social policies of FDR, i.e. the carpeting over of the bad roads, the treatment of the condemned prisoner, the limo treatment for the incompetent street sweeper, etc. Note the beer mug at the end promising the end of prohibition!

I wonder if this came out before the general election between Hoover and Roosevelt in an attempt to sway Betty Boop fans to reelect Hoover.
Just kidding...