Is It Time for the Peace Movement to Start Protesting Senator Obama?

124»

Comments

  • dg1979usdg1979us Posts: 568
    Commy wrote:
    You want less than the 45% or so who vote, to vote? What kind of democracy is that?

    You want uninformed people who dont know shit about who they are voting for to vote? The people get the democracy they deserve.

    I want people who arent apathetic and know what they are voting for to vote. If that is only 45% of the country, then yes, I only want 45% of the country to vote. To paraphrase a quote from Gore Vidal, 'Roughly half the country reads a newspaper, and roughly half the country votes. One hopes its the same half'.
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    i love chocolate chip cookies...
  • dg1979us wrote:
    You want uninformed people who dont know shit about who they are voting for to vote? The people get the democracy they deserve.

    I want people who arent apathetic and know what they are voting for to vote. If that is only 45% of the country, then yes, I only want 45% of the country to vote. To paraphrase a quote from Gore Vidal, 'Roughly half the country reads a newspaper, and roughly half the country votes. One hopes its the same half'.

    I agree with this. I'd really rather the bandwagon, know nothing types just stay at home rather than vote for someone they really know nothing about.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • dg1979usdg1979us Posts: 568
    I agree with this. I'd really rather the bandwagon, know nothing types just stay at home rather than vote for someone they really know nothing about.

    It would be beneficial to the less mainstream candidates if the know nothing types sat at home. Most people who vote 3rd party, or for a less mainstream candidate of a major party, know about that candidate. Where as many of the people who know little about the candidates, are more likely to vote for one of the mainstream candidates who get more press.
  • dg1979us wrote:
    It would be beneficial to the less mainstream candidates if the know nothing types sat at home. Most people who vote 3rd party, or for a less mainstream candidate of a major party, know about that candidate. Where as many of the people who know little about the candidates, are more likely to vote for one of the mainstream candidates who get more press.

    At the very least you should know the platform of everyone running. I mean how can you pick if you don't know what you're picking out of? I think that a very good reason to open up the debates so the other guys can be heard for once.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • dg1979usdg1979us Posts: 568
    At the very least you should know the platform of everyone running. I mean how can you pick if you don't know what you're picking out of? I think that a very good reason to open up the debates so the other guys can be heard for once.

    I agree. Or at least throw in the libertarian and green party candidates, and any independent who has a nice amount of support. If you throw in everybody, then I think the debates would be meaningless simply because no one would have enough time to talk and get their points across. But I would love to see at least one candidate from what I consider real conservatism, and one candidate from I consider real liberalism in the debates. It would certainly show the people what the repubs and dems really are. Which for the most part, are simply corporate candidates saying the things they say, simply because they think it will get them elected.
  • dg1979us wrote:
    I agree. Or at least throw in the libertarian and green party candidates, and any independent who has a nice amount of support. If you throw in everybody, then I think the debates would be meaningless simply because no one would have enough time to talk and get their points across. But I would love to see at least one candidate from what I consider real conservatism, and one candidate from I consider real liberalism in the debates. It would certainly show the people what the repubs and dems really are. Which for the most part, are simply corporate candidates saying the things they say, simply because they think it will get them elected.

    Yep, on board 100% there.

    The Dems and Reps would get creamed going up against people from those parties and they absolutely know that beyond a shadow of a doubt. I would LOVE to see Nader and Obama go head to head in a debate! Or Paul and McCain. Kucinich, Paul and Gravel already got some good punches in the party debates with the extremely limited amount of time they were given. Then they decided to force them out of the debates on down the road. Cowards. Heaven forbid they might be faced with some tough questions or risk their contradictions and inconsistencies being pointed out on national tv for all to see.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • dg1979usdg1979us Posts: 568
    Yep, on board 100% there.

    The Dems and Reps would get creamed going up against people from those parties and they absolutely know that beyond a shadow of a doubt. I would LOVE to see Nader and Obama go head to head in a debate! Or Paul and McCain. Kucinich, Paul and Gravel already got some good punches in the party debates with the extremely limited amount of time they were given. Then they decided to force them out of the debates on down the road. Cowards. Heaven forbid they might be faced with some tough questions or risk their contradictions and inconsistencies being pointed out on national tv for all to see.


    I would love to see Paul, Nader, and John Edwards in the fall debates. I think if Edwards would step out of the democrat party shadow people would really appreciate him. I actually thought he was a real solid candidate, but was just overshadowed by the media asphyxiation with Obama and Hillary. And I think dems would also really appreciate Nader if they paid attention to his message. And I think conservatives would like Paul. Edwards was just overshadowed by the Obama and Hillary hype. Nader is still looked at negatively (unfairly I might add) by a lot of dems because of 2000, and Paul just got hammered by Hannity and Rush and many of the republican media icons that people who would probably like many of his stances, simply wrote him off.
  • my2hands wrote:
    i love chocolate chip cookies...

    .....and milk
    PEARL JAM~Lubbock, TX. 10~18~00
    PEARL JAM~San Antonio, TX. 4~5~03
    INCUBUS~Houston, TX. 1~19~07
    INCUBUS~Denver, CO. 2~8~07
    Lollapalooza~Chicago, IL. 8~5~07
    INCUBUS~Austin, TX. 9~3~07
    Bonnaroo~Manchester, TN 6~14~08
  • El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    .....and milk

    i hope it's organic, puss-free milk :D
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
Sign In or Register to comment.