Who do you support for president?

i can vote. what i see happening though is neither hilary or barrack winning

Which, surprisingly (or not), also fits in with many conspiracy theories, as McCain is running his candidacy as if he's running for a continued "Bush policy" - something the American people DO - NOT - WANT as a whole. I haven't looked in a while, I admit, but when I did, Bush's approval ratings were in the thirtieth percentile, 32% I think. That was at least a year ago... and things haven't gotten better, only much worse.

If McCain wins, it would be a miracle, but many conspiracy theorists EXPECT him to win in order to carry out the crooked agenda that the Bush administration has.

-DarkPacMan77-

i actually believe Hillary well win.
here my theory.
Well we know Hillary was present at the bilderbergs group meeting in 2006 in Quebec from inside sources, so this means she has support from the most powerful men in the world, the elite of the elite. So its obvious they want her
So here is my theory.
I say Obama wont get enough votes to become the candidate, so it comes for the democrats to chose who they want, and they will chose Hillary of course.
So Hillary and McCain face off, using this technology and flaws in voting system that you can read about here http://www.technewsworld.com/story/5857 ... 1211400199
The elites well make Hillary win
Thats my theory

[DarkPacMan77]

The candidates all have made promises, but they all have made promises that they can't keep. The president actually has very little power to make big changes in healthcare, housing, veteran care etc. It's all about the congress.

It's vital to elect a president that can use the congress to get things done quickly. However, if the president can do something bad, like maintain Bush policy, then it's best to choose a Democratic candidate, as the congress is virtually split as it is right now.

-DarkPacMan77-

The candidates all have made promises, but they all have made promises that they can't keep. The president actually has very little power to make big changes in healthcare, housing, veteran care etc. It's all about the congress.

It's vital to elect a president that can use the congress to get things done quickly. However, if the president can do something bad, like maintain Bush policy, then it's best to choose a Democratic candidate, as the congress is virtually split as it is right now.

-DarkPacMan77-

well when a president like that gets chosen, they get assassinated like JFK
And to bad it'll never happen, since the electronic voting system is so flawed and easy to hack they can easily change the votes to their favor

The candidates all have made promises, but they all have made promises that they can't keep. The president actually has very little power to make big changes in healthcare, housing, veteran care etc. It's all about the congress.

It's vital to elect a president that can use the congress to get things done quickly. However, if the president can do something bad, like maintain Bush policy, then it's best to choose a Democratic candidate, as the congress is virtually split as it is right now.

-DarkPacMan77-

well when a president like that gets chosen, they get assassinated like JFK
And to bad it'll never happen, since the electronic voting system is so flawed and easy to hack they can easily change the votes to their favor

Farq, did I not just say that yesterday?????

I would like to see a Democratic candidate (i guess Obama since i cant see hilary as president) win the election simply to have a Shift from the Dreadful Bush years... But i wouldn't be dissatisfied to see McCain win either because i know he is probably a better option than Bush. Whoever gets the Election is going to find themselves in a very sticky situation as president for a while, being the current state Bush put the US in.

McCain isn't much of a Republican, the party doesn't really pull for him that much. Hillary won't win, she is way too far behind Obama, and her advisers are leaving her. Even if she did win the Democratic nomination, there is no way that the Obama supporters would vote for her. You know how bad the Democratic party is split this election, people will be stubborn and not vote at all or they will vote for McCain because they don't want the other democratic candidate to win. I see McCain winning.

Yah i agree Advent, most likely i see McCain as the President. MAYBE Obama, but i doubt it.

Yah i agree Advent, most likely i see McCain as the President. MAYBE Obama, but i doubt it.

Yah thats what i thought, until i came up with my theory.
no one agrees with my theory?
i mean the most powerful people in the world want her, i bet she will get it, thats why she wont step down, she knows she will get it

The truth of it is, both parties are so broken and ulcered its hard to tell the politics from a 3rd grade school yard fight. How often do you hear any of the candidates talk about "The Republic" and what they intend to do to ensure that our children and grandchildren will still enjoy the same freedom (or whats left of it) that we do today, they're busier talking about the latest hot button issue in an attempt to take Joe America's Eyes off the ball just long enough for the elites to snatch it away.

Todays political arena scares me. And whether its "change" "universal healthcare" or "supporting our troops", all of these roads lead us down the path. The question then becomes, How much time do we want between now and then.

I value my freedom. I value ALL of my rights, every last one. Most importantly, I value the Republic that the framers envisioned. I vote for the candidate that holds the most of these principles dearest to them. At this moment in history, the person likeliest to defend those principles fits today's conservative mindset, so I guess you could call me a conservative.

For the record, I have a strong dislike for McCain, But I absolutlely CANNOT tolerate a candidate that will openly tell me they will petition congress to undermine the republic by bringing more socialism (read: communism) and by extension less representative government to this fine land, and to try to erode and erase the inalienable rights afforded to me by my creator.

Short answer: I'm voting AGAINST the democratic candidate.

[DarkPacMan77]

A refined socialist agenda, one that looks more closely at the needs of the citizens in the United States, is certainly a better agenda than profiting private military companies and independent bankers, not to mention petroleum and gasoline-related products continuing through the roof... the current agenda has failed.

I mean... it's already bad, and our civil liberties are sacrificed under the Patriot Act-led Republican Agenda and fear-powered media... so why does socialism, of all things, as friendly as it is, sound bad compared to the world we live in, as Americans, today? Barrack Obama also doesn't support the need or want for less representative government, nor does he wish to seek the means to erase and erode our inalienable rights, whether they're from your creator, or not.

Please tell me otherwise, if it is so. It sounds like rampant slander.

-DarkPacMan77-

the current agenda has failed.

The current agenda has totally failed to serve the best interest of the general public and the United States. It is most of our representatives that have also failed to act on behalf of the people.

Consider this:

If the president was fired by the people, Cheney would just step in to take his place.

Well if Cheney is calling all the shots what good would it do to impeach W? Also how can Cheney be impeached for calling all the shots when the constitution states that the Vice President will take over in case the president is no longer capable of leading? It would have to be shown that Cheney is leading and that W is not capable of doing it on his own. Since W signs whatever papers Cheney tells him to that would be very hard to prove.

Also

What would it look like if the President and the Vice President were both impeached at the same time? A coup? That has never happened in the history of America and would be internationally embarrassing. It would be much better for the public to get financially sodomized in the interest of saving grace with the world community.(sarcasm)

If it did happen Condolezza Rice would not only be the first black president she would also beat Hillary in becoming the first woman to do so and pull it of without breaking a sweat! Man I should have realized this sooner! I need to make some calls...

A refined socialist agenda, one that looks more closely at the needs of the citizens in the United States, is certainly a better agenda than profiting private military companies and independent bankers, not to mention petroleum and gasoline-related products continuing through the roof... the current agenda has failed.

I mean... it's already bad, and our civil liberties are sacrificed under the Patriot Act-led Republican Agenda and fear-powered media... so why does socialism, of all things, as friendly as it is, sound bad compared to the world we live in, as Americans, today? Barrack Obama also doesn't support the need or want for less representative government, nor does he wish to seek the means to erase and erode our inalienable rights, whether they're from your creator, or not.

Please tell me otherwise, if it is so. It sounds like rampant slander.

-DarkPacMan77-

Are you sure you understand what socialism truly means? Do enjoy being able to own your own PSP? Do you enjoy being able to own (or the prospect of owning) your own car, house, or property? If you do, then socialism is not for you. Under a Socialist regime, government is involved in virtually every aspect of your life; from your job, to your family, to your own personal hobbies.

Captitalism (in other words a free market) gives you the opportunity to go out and make something of yourself, regardless of social status. I really hope your dad isn't a janitor, because under socialist rule, you would most likely be a janitor.

Now I have one critical question for you. Why the heck would you want to shut the door of opportunity for yourself and let a government run wild be mom for you, especially when it has demonstrated, irrevocably, that it is so ulcered and incapable of managing a socialistic program as simple as social security (which is likely where 90% of your paycheck will be going, come the retirement of the baby boomers, but thats a story for another day)

I DESPISE the idea of government being more involved in my life, and despite popular opinion, America is one of the only refuges from that on the planet. And you're telling me you would rather it be like cuba, or the USSR or China or Checkoslovakia? You're telling me that in order to get what you want, that you're willing to deprive others of their freedom to achieve that end? Please.

For the record, I hate the bush administration in regards to the Patriot Act. Hate it. It is a high crime against the United States and should be treated as such. But believe it or not there are more pressing issues facing this country.

As for your other question, Barrack Hussein Obama and Hilary Rodham Clinton both believe neither you or I have a fundamental right to self defense. They wish to disarm Americans and have both voted repeatedly to pass legislation to do so. Let me ask a question, when all of your rights have been surpressed and you may no longer petition your government for a redress of Grievances, what do you do? George Washington once wrote "A free people ought to be armed, in fact, they should maintain a sufficient supply of arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from those who would abuse them, which would include their own government"

In a choice between a politician who wanted to surpress my 4th amendment rights vs a choice between a person who wanted to surpress my 2nd amendment rights, I would sacrifice the 4th to protect the 2nd, so I still had something to defend my remaining freedom with.

If you want socialism, there are plenty of places elswhere in the world for it. Don't try to force it on me.

Freedom and socialism cannot coexist. This has been proven time and again (case in point: Rome)

Look at the past before you start looking towards the future.

[DarkPacMan77]

I know how Socialism works.
I know how Capitalism works.
I understand just about all of the multifaceted theories as to how Rome fell.
Okay

I know that Obama and Clinton both don't favor guns, but both have stated numerous times that they believe recreational sporting weapons are perfectly acceptable arms for citizens to have.
The arms of our forefathers (the ones they used in the revolution) were the "assault weapons" of today. These are the exact type of arms that they sought to protect and it is for this purpose that the second amendment was written. Since you want me to back up my claims I will refer you to the federalist papers for more information on ths. The second amendment is NOT about sport or hunting or target shooting, it is about giving the people the power to defend against a tyranical government. Your statement here suggests you don't understand this, I am not trying to put words in your mouth, just merely interpreting what you said. If I interpreted you wrong, correct me. Don't threaten me.

I understand everything you are saying. But your arguments are very weak.
Simply saying my arguments are weak doesn't make them weak. Explaining to me why you think they are weak and giving me a chance to provide rebuttal testimony will prove whether my arguments are weak.

None of the candidates, Republican or Democratic, have expressed that they are interested in changing the United States from a Capitalist society, to a Socialist one.
There has been more than one instance of one of Barrack Obama's field campaign offices donning flags that bear the image of Che Gueverra. Furthermore Barack Obama sat in the pew and listened to Wright spout the messages he spouted for 20 Years. You don't go to a church that long if you don't believe in the message that's being delivered. I've listen to what Rev. Wright has to say and its pretty shocking.

The fall of Rome can hardly be blamed on Socialism failing, alone.
True, it was a devaluation of moral standards and values coupled with hedonism on the part of the citizen. They kept voting themselves more and more "gifts" from the treasury until it was bankrupt. They weakend their own economy and reapt what they sowed.

And to top it off, it's a deeply routed Democratic belief that, "the less guns there are, the less violence there will be". Democrats have believed that for decades, centuries even, while Republicans tend to believe that, "as long as I have my gun, I'm safer from other guns". That doesn't mean that Clinton and Obama are going to disarm you and post Gestapo outside your house. You're just failing to understand how Democrats have felt about guns for oh... the past hundred years. You're only regurgitating Democratic beliefs and demonizing the Democratic candidates. I won't allow that kind of unfair and inaccurate filth to be posted in this forum.
You're making this into a more partisan issue than it needs to be. I'm closer aligned to a Libertarian point of view. I would however like to hear how I'm supposed to understand how Democrats have felt about guns for the past century. I have a pretty good idea as I have spent a fair amount of my time understanding the subject.

I also never said that I want to turn America into Cuba, the USSR, China, or "Czechoslovakia"*, so don't you dare put words into my mouth. I said that with how harsh of a policy the current administration has had, and for how many of our civil liberties they've been able to steal right from under our feeble little noses, a more socialist agenda seems like it's far from a "bad idea". There are many great concepts about Socialism and Communism that make them good structures to govern by, it's just that through history, leaders of those places have gone corrupt.
I never said that's what you said. I simply stated you wanted America like these countries. I should have said MORE like, but thats beside the point. The fatal flaw in Socialism and Communism is that you simply cannot trust government to not abuse its authority, ever. When you hand the government more power, it is simply only a matter of time before that power is abused. The heart of man is simply too selfish and corrupt to trust. I believe in individual independence and responsibility. I do my best to prepare my family for disaster and will never ever accept a government handout.

I'm not saying that I want a corrupt socialist America. Hint: It's already corrupt.I've never even HINTED at anything like that. What do you think a tax cut is? What do you think stimulus rebate checks are? Those are socialist fueled aspects of our modern Republican-led government. I've already stated this: Both parties are already brokenSocialist aspects of governing are already existent in our government today and we aren't Cuba, or the USSR, or any other wild accusation you dare stick in my mouth again.I did not say this.

Lastly, don't tell me to look at the past before looking towards the future when you aren't even capable of providing a single detail to back up any of the bizarre claims you make,Tell me what needs more detail and I'll be happy to provide it or let alone how I somehow believe other than I currently believe, or that I don't understand the difference between Socialism and Capitalism.Fair enough

Either provide claims to back up your statements, or don't say anything at all.
If I were to go into detail, my posts would be 10 or 12 pages long. I don't have the time for it. But I willl be happy to provide testimony to back up my claims if you request specific instances

I won't tolerate your slanderous tongue being aimed at me so vigilantly any longer. You're on my nerves and you only have 5 posts. That's not a pretty place to be. Shape up.
Don't threaten me with the hammer of ban just because I made a statement that disagreed with yours. You're the one who accused me of putting words in your mouth. I have accused you of nothing. I merely challenged your critical thinking skills. You brought a debate on yourself when you challenged my positions, I encourage you to finish it. But if you don't want to hear anyone challenge your positions then I guess just swing away!


-DarkPacMan77-

Edit: acebanana messed up, it's late and he thought he was making a new post, not editing dpm's XD So if this post is now screwed up, I am very sorry.

I know how Socialism works.
I know how Capitalism works.
I understand just about all of the multifaceted theories as to how Rome fell.
Okay

I know that Obama and Clinton both don't favor guns, but both have stated numerous times that they believe recreational sporting weapons are perfectly acceptable arms for citizens to have.
The arms of our forefathers (the ones they used in the revolution) were the "assault weapons" of today. These are the exact type of arms that they sought to protect and it is for this purpose that the second amendment was written. Since you want me to back up my claims I will refer you to the federalist papers for more information on ths. The second amendment is NOT about sport or hunting or target shooting, it is about giving the people the power to defend against a tyranical government. Your statement here suggests you don't understand this, I am not trying to put words in your mouth, just merely interpreting what you said. If I interpreted you wrong, correct me. Don't threaten me.

I understand everything you are saying. But your arguments are very weak.
Simply saying my arguments are weak doesn't make them weak. Explaining to me why you think they are weak and giving me a chance to provide rebuttal testimony will prove whether my arguments are weak.

None of the candidates, Republican or Democratic, have expressed that they are interested in changing the United States from a Capitalist society, to a Socialist one.
There has been more than one instance of one of Barrack Obama's field campaign offices donning flags that bear the image of Che Gueverra. Furthermore Barack Obama sat in the pew and listened to Wright spout the messages he spouted for 20 Years. You don't go to a church that long if you don't believe in the message that's being delivered. I've listen to what Rev. Wright has to say and its pretty shocking.

The fall of Rome can hardly be blamed on Socialism failing, alone.
True, it was a devaluation of moral standards and values coupled with hedonism on the part of the citizen. They kept voting themselves more and more "gifts" from the treasury until it was bankrupt. They weakend their own economy and reapt what they sowed.

And to top it off, it's a deeply routed Democratic belief that, "the less guns there are, the less violence there will be". Democrats have believed that for decades, centuries even, while Republicans tend to believe that, "as long as I have my gun, I'm safer from other guns". That doesn't mean that Clinton and Obama are going to disarm you and post Gestapo outside your house. You're just failing to understand how Democrats have felt about guns for oh... the past hundred years. You're only regurgitating Democratic beliefs and demonizing the Democratic candidates. I won't allow that kind of unfair and inaccurate filth to be posted in this forum.
You're making this into a more partisan issue than it needs to be. I'm closer aligned to a Libertarian point of view. I would however like to hear how I'm supposed to understand how Democrats have felt about guns for the past century. I have a pretty good idea as I have spent a fair amount of my time understanding the subject.

I also never said that I want to turn America into Cuba, the USSR, China, or "Czechoslovakia"*, so don't you dare put words into my mouth. I said that with how harsh of a policy the current administration has had, and for how many of our civil liberties they've been able to steal right from under our feeble little noses, a more socialist agenda seems like it's far from a "bad idea". There are many great concepts about Socialism and Communism that make them good structures to govern by, it's just that through history, leaders of those places have gone corrupt.
I never said that's what you said. I simply stated you wanted America like these countries. I should have said MORE like, but thats beside the point. The fatal flaw in Socialism and Communism is that you simply cannot trust government to not abuse its authority, ever. When you hand the government more power, it is simply only a matter of time before that power is abused. The heart of man is simply too selfish and corrupt to trust. I believe in individual independence and responsibility. I do my best to prepare my family for disaster and will never ever accept a government handout.

I'm not saying that I want a corrupt socialist America. Hint: It's already corrupt.I've never even HINTED at anything like that. What do you think a tax cut is? What do you think stimulus rebate checks are? Those are socialist fueled aspects of our modern Republican-led government. I've already stated this: Both parties are already brokenSocialist aspects of governing are already existent in our government today and we aren't Cuba, or the USSR, or any other wild accusation you dare stick in my mouth again.I did not say this.

Lastly, don't tell me to look at the past before looking towards the future when you aren't even capable of providing a single detail to back up any of the bizarre claims you make,Tell me what needs more detail and I'll be happy to provide it or let alone how I somehow believe other than I currently believe, or that I don't understand the difference between Socialism and Capitalism.Fair enough

Either provide claims to back up your statements, or don't say anything at all.
If I were to go into detail, my posts would be 10 or 12 pages long. I don't have the time for it. But I willl be happy to provide testimony to back up my claims if you request specific instances

I won't tolerate your slanderous tongue being aimed at me so vigilantly any longer. You're on my nerves and you only have 5 posts. That's not a pretty place to be. Shape up.
Don't threaten me with the hammer of ban just because I made a statement that disagreed with yours. You're the one who accused me of putting words in your mouth. I have accused you of nothing. I merely challenged your critical thinking skills. You brought a debate on yourself when you challenged my positions, I encourage you to finish it. But if you don't want to hear anyone challenge your positions then I guess just swing away!


-DarkPacMan77-

Don't copy me, Damn it!