[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
I see you really hate the republican candidates,too ;)[/quote]
I don’t like McCain either if that’s what you are getting at.
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Agreed. I am stunned there is anyone that supports this guy!
What’s worse is that this egghead, who has never produced or ran anything has a good shot at being our next president.
[/quote]
I think everybody would agree with you Obama does not have John McCain�??s experience. But in my and millions of other peoples opinions Obama has something that has been lacking in the White house for a long time and that is Good Judgment. Bush thinks the way to handle an adversary is to refuse to talk to them. That in it self could have cost America Trillions of Dollars
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Agreed. I am stunned there is anyone that supports this guy![/quote]
Fingers crossed that the college kids supporting him don’t show up in November.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
[…]Living in England, don’t you get to experience the benefits of benign socialism every day? With that in mind, is that what the USA should embrace?[/quote]
Having grown up in a divided Germany with a family divided by the iron curtain I have a pretty good idea of the evils of socialism - and always have to laugh what some US-based posters here think constitutes it.
The UK under new labour has been following US-style capitalism for a long time, and has partly benefitted from it; at the moment though it’s being kicked in the nuts for doing so. So - I can’t answer your question as the basic premise is far off.
As a matter of fact the Tories do just that - that’s why David Cameron is so successful and probably will win the next elections. I’m always sceptical about value or ideology based policies - the Bush government is living testament that this doesn’t work. I’m relieved to read though that Bush isn’t a Republican in your view - because that would reflect badly on the party as a whole.
Hm, ok. Palin represents pretty much what I all that I resent - but she seems clean and it was a hell of a strategic move for McCain to choose her. I would argue that this last stretch of the presidential race will be mostly about winning, rather than about policies.
And I thought it was the DEFRA with the help of gay Martians. Thanks for the clarification. 
Makkun
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
I see you really hate the republican candidates,too
I don’t like McCain either if that’s what you are getting at.
[/quote]
I’m just pulling your chain…I share your sentiments…this is a nerve racking presidential campaign.
Ok, Everyone write me in as your vote for President.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
So long as the two major parties have America gulled into believing that the only way to have an election is to have the process accept no information and no answer but “Which one of these is your choice?” then the situation of two-party-rule will continue indefinitely.
Now, of course, it’s entirely possible to have an election method such as instant-runoff where a voter indicates, for example, that his first choice is Candidate A, his second choice is Candidate B, his third choice is Candidate C, and other candidates, he has no preference on other than they are below these three that he picked.
Then if it turns out, as the votes are counted, that Candidate A isn’t in the top two, but Candidates B and C are, his vote counts as being for Candidate B.
But if let’s say it’s Candidate B that doesn’t prove to be in the top two as the votes are counted, but rather A and C, his vote counts as being for Candidate A.
Oh, but then people wouldn’t fear that voting for a minor party candidate meant that their vote would be wasted. We cannot do without that fear!
So, instead we have a system where if Stalin and Lenin were the two major party candidates, most voters would decide they “had” to vote for one of those two, else their vote would be wasted.
There are local elections where instant-runoff is used but I predict it will never be used in party-dominated major elections, for the above reason. Not because it isn’t better, because it obviously is.[/quote]
Our presidential elections work like this:
You have a first round, where all the parties candidates have a shot.
If one has more than 50%, he wins.
If not, there is a second round where the two strongest contenders are the only two choices.