So, I catch your dilemma and do not envy you at the voting day!
And I hope afterwards you will be not to much disappointed about your choice. And remember: a misselection is mostly due to the lacking of the proper possibilities. So, cheer up! Why should you have it better off in America then we in Europe. Finally it's rather the same sauce, that we call democracy.

PS: What is a "dixiecrat? A trivialized democrat?

Ha! I love it! Don't stress about voting in America because ALL the candidates are equally screwed up! Excellent perspective my friend!

Well the "sauce" may be the same color and smell, but it tastes much different like American Coke and European Coke. At least you have the option of voting for a wide variety of candidates. We have only two, who under the skin are exactly the same: wealthy, usually a dirty lawyer, and owned from their little toe to the last hair on their head by special interests. Nah, I'm not bitter in the least bit! Just tired of the same types of people running over and over and over again.

Overall, the Democrats through their little civil war may actually cause a split in the party and possibly create three candidates in 2012. But then again, American's are very apathetic and don't like to do much research when voting. Perhaps I'm just dreaming of a wonderful 3 or more candidate America...

Genau!

This post was last modified: 27.04.2008 20:40 by Z. Beeblebrox.

Bulent Epikur Wrote:

So, I catch your dilemma and do not envy you at the voting day!
And I hope afterwards you will be not to much disappointed about your choice. And remember: a misselection is mostly due to the lacking of the proper possibilities. So, cheer up! Why should you have it better off in America then we in Europe. Finally it's rather the same sauce, that we call democracy.

PS: What is a "dixiecrat? A trivialized democrat?

Ha! I love it! Don't stress about voting in America because ALL the candidates are equally screwed up! Excellent perspective my friend!

Well the "sauce" may be the same color and smell, but it tastes much different like American Coke and European Coke. At least you have the option of voting for a wide variety of candidates. We have only two, who under the skin are exactly the same: wealthy, usually a dirty lawyer, and owned from their little toe to the last hair on their head by special interests. Nah, I'm not bitter in the least bit! Just tired of the same types of people running over and over and over again.

Overall, the Democrats through their little civil war may actually cause a split in the party and possibly create three candidates in 2012. But then again, American's are very apathetic and don't like to do much research when voting. Perhaps I'm just dreaming of a wonderful 3 or more candidate America...

the sad thing is, we have many candidates here in america but everyone is so obsessed with voting for one person because of their party that they dont even pay attention to 3rd party candidates.

Generally, I favor conservative economic policy. But the problem is we haven't had a truly conservative, moderate President, or Congress since maybe Eisenhower in the '50s. Though, I tend to favor more liberal social attitudes, especially in terms of civil rights. However, I tend to favor the Libertarian point of view more than any. So I've been supporting Ron Paul for quite a while, but I'm becoming resigned to his slim chances, as I kind of expected it. The Republican party, for some strange reason, threw all support by McCain, of all people.

I think that Democrats have been picking the wrong candidates for President which is alienating the general populace more and more towards conservatism and even neoconservatism (a la George Bush). For instance, Dennis Kucinich and Bill Richardson would have done far more for Democrats than Clinton or Obama. Neither Clinton nor Obama will know how to respond to serious issues. For example, both Clinton and Obama have both stalled comments on Iraq and pretty generally would feature very little change from the current neoconservative position of staying in until we lose. I was at first very optimistic about Obama until he made a huge flip-flop by saying he would expand the war into Pakistan. That and the very issues in which they have been promising liberal reform they have pretty much turned their backs on, except for the dreaded universal health care proposal. Whereas Dennis Kucinich would have very likely supported a quick withdrawal from Iraq and possibly a reduction of forces occupying Afghanistan. Continuing a war that is drying up all of our revenue, and with no victory to work towards. I mean common sense when fighting a war is that you work towards a certain goal, and try your hardest to obtain that goal for victory, but the past three major wars, Korea, Vietnam, and Return to Iraq and Afghanistan have had no real outline or cause for victory. We just sit in there hoping that the "enemy" will get tired.

The same goes for Republicans. In a sweeping movement after Reagan's office ended, conservatives have been increasingly radical. They support large tax cuts while at the same time spending more money than the government can afford on foreign policy and especially defense budgets. Tax cuts where meant to help the government and the people pay off the national debt and bring more balance to the deficit, but so-called conservative leaders have been strangling both the government and the people of funds. All the while, the Federal Reserve is having to continuously print out more and more dollars to somehow sustain some kind of illusion of prosperity and the value of the dollar drops. Thus, the current recession situation the US is in now. If we don't make a change in both foreign policy and defense spending, we're going to bankrupt ourselves the same way Russia did.

That's just the way I've been viewing our two-party system lately. I might be wrong on some things, but that's the way it seems. Nothing is constitutional anymore.

This post was last modified: 02.05.2008 06:17 by FutureFilmmaker.

exactly, i think most of y'all especialy yourself futurefilmmaker will enjoy listening to michael savage on the radio. ive been listening to him for about a month now and i must say, he speaks the god honest truth. now i may not always agree with everything he says but i dont think anyone does. but it makes you think. check your local radio stations for his nationally syndicated talk show. also check out, http://www.michaelsavage.com

Hmm, so far what I've seen is probably too conservative and some of what he supports still stinks of neoconservativism. Though there are some interesting aspects about him. The fact that he is for animal rights and the environment. However, I don't really like his views against the rights of homosexuals and him being against an immediate withdrawal from Iraq - which would likely help bring us out of the current recession we're in.

yeah those are some of the things where i disagree with him but it at least stimulates your mind and makes you think about everything. he is very conservative but an independent. he dislikes all of the candidates equally.

I'm a moderate conservative on social issues and am also a conservative on fiscal issues. I'm basically a Republican, but don't worry, I hate Bush just as much as the next guy.[/align]

ok presty i think you need to listen to michael savage on the radio. check out his website at http://www.michaelsavage.com hes a conservative independent.

I am democrat. I don't live in USA, but that's the party I like. I am not independent because I am pretty liberal. I think that I don't agree with 99 % of republicans. But some, like McCain are more acceptable. I like his enviromental issues. Though he is conservative, he knows that global warming is very important issue for the future. He is thinking, not just looking in the book. But his thinking is very stupid on the other issues. That's why I am democrat and why I hope Clinton will be vice and Obama prez.