Silkroad Online Forums

and, are you going to watch the republican debate?


I'm just curious.

I might've watched to see what they had planned for us, but I only really care that our current President is out next year. Anything else is bonus.

i saw VH1 make fun of it....ima sucker for best week ever

i know being in America our greatest power is the right to vote but i can't help but thinking lately that the whole voting things is like giving ppl cake....we didn't vote for bush we didn't choose to go to war...alot has actually gotten out of our hands so...whats the point?

I just watched the debate again, my thoughts:

Kucinich is definately the most genuine. But I disagree with his policies.

Edwards has the best stance on social healthcare.

Gravel has the best handle on economics. Generally, best suited to be next president.

Clinton, she has a hidden agenda. Reminds me a lot of George Bush.

Obama, little brother that just wants in. He's not suited for a presidential role.

Richardson, he's clueless.

And, I just don't like Dodd or Biden.



Sadly, the polls prove that most voters know nothing about politics. With two candidates with the weakest platforms being at the top: Obama and Clinton. Women will vote for Clinton, minorities will vote for Obama, the majority just don't care about politics. No matter the outcome, they will complain. Either because the taxes were raised, or because there are no social services. It will bring us to another "Bush" situation, where people will complain without knowing why. It's just the cool thing to do.

Seems your impressions are on par with what I think and I didn't even see the debate. I've been following the race somewhat closely but didn't know there was a debate. T_T
But I was on vac, so I'll use that as an excuse. If you have a link, leterip!

I'm not a US citizen so I don't generally watch this stuff until it actually comes down to the few who are actually doing the debates and stuff right before election.
I think 90% of the people that run are dipshits. But, with the people unable to vote Curious George back into the white house this year, I might pay attention to it.

Nuklear wrote:Seems your impressions are on par with what I think and I didn't even see the debate. I've been following the race somewhat closely but didn't know there was a debate. T_T
But I was on vac, so I'll use that as an excuse. If you have a link, leterip!

http://youtube.com/debates






However, i'm very right wing. The republican debates haven't taken place yet, but if I were american I would probably end up voting republican.

dom wrote:Sadly, the polls prove that most voters know nothing about politics. With two candidates with the weakest platforms being at the top: Obama and Clinton. Women will vote for Clinton, minorities will vote for Obama, the majority just don't care about politics. No matter the outcome, they will complain. Either because the taxes were raised, or because there are no social services. It will bring us to another "Bush" situation, where people will complain without knowing why. It's just the cool thing to do.

Anyone who votes based on race or gender is just plain stupid. -.-

I'm thinking I might vote Republican though, as the Democrats aren't famous for small government. But we'll see.

Kitty wrote:

dom wrote:Sadly, the polls prove that most voters know nothing about politics. With two candidates with the weakest platforms being at the top: Obama and Clinton. Women will vote for Clinton, minorities will vote for Obama, the majority just don't care about politics. No matter the outcome, they will complain. Either because the taxes were raised, or because there are no social services. It will bring us to another "Bush" situation, where people will complain without knowing why. It's just the cool thing to do.

Anyone who votes based on race or gender is just plain stupid. -.-

Stupidity is what makes people zealous. Zealous partisans vote, they vote much more than "intelligent" and rational people.

I've never seen a catholic knock at my door asking me to convert in an attempt to save my soul, or a blue collar truck driver protest for animal rights. That's why we only see radicals being interviewed on CNN, and that's why the rest of the population is generalized by that stereotype.

Oh, the youtube debate. I saw that the day it came out. ^^
Kitty, you mean like how little gov has gotten since Bush has been in office? You can only go down from there I'm afraid.

As you can tell by my sig you know what republican I'll vote for if necessary (cuz I'm more of a liberal). He is the republican version of Kucinich. I don't agree with a lot of his views but I'll be damned if he isn't fit to be president.

I McCain. However, apparently you have to be an american citizen to vote

HAHA!
McCain's a great guy and would make a good president but I am 110% against "the war" so anyone who supports that doesn't get my support.

Nuklear wrote:Kitty, you mean like how little gov has gotten since Bush has been in office? You can only go down from there I'm afraid.

I never said I liked Bush. I think he's been incompetent, and I'm more than glad to see him go.

However, here in MA, government waste is rampant, results of big government. -.-

Kitty wrote:

Nuklear wrote:Kitty, you mean like how little gov has gotten since Bush has been in office? You can only go down from there I'm afraid.

I never said I liked Bush. I think he's been incompetent, and I'm more than glad to see him go.

However, here in MA, government waste is rampant, results of big government. -.-

I never said you did, plus I'm a big supporter of small gov myself. *Inserts Ron Paul ad here*

Nuklear wrote:

Kitty wrote:

Nuklear wrote:Kitty, you mean like how little gov has gotten since Bush has been in office? You can only go down from there I'm afraid.

I never said I liked Bush. I think he's been incompetent, and I'm more than glad to see him go.

However, here in MA, government waste is rampant, results of big government. -.-

I never said you did, plus I'm a big supporter of small gov myself. *Inserts Ron Paul ad here*

I'm labled as a conservative, but I'm much farther to the right. I'm for the monopolization of government and power. I believe that if you take facism, and put in a leader that is sincere and genuinely wants to see his nation succeed, then it will.

Take someone who loves his people, who has the intelligence to make the proper decisions, and does not have a hidden agenda and logically all should be set. But, I guess that is the aim of democracy, that a true leader is chosen.

The problem with dividing power, handing it to the states and the senate/congress, is that it creates obstacles to progressivity. It's a safety net, but one shouldn't be required if presidential candidates are well bred.

dom wrote:...but one shouldn't be required if presidential candidates are well bred.

*slowly nods in agreement*

Ahh I watched it live on the CNN Europe ~~.

It was okay .. SHame in my opinion they avoided every question .. obviously. And the ending .. pff that was pure shit.

Also didn't like the way the presenter had to cutt everyone off cause tv timing couldn't allow it. Pretty amateur.

They only dodged questions some of the time. My main complaint was the time restrictions. Full answers ftw. I also would've liked to see them differentiate themselves more, which only happened with Gravel, Kucinich, and Richardson.

i watched the youtube dem debate.

but i doubt ill watch the repub.

dom wrote:

Nuklear wrote:

Kitty wrote:

Nuklear wrote:Kitty, you mean like how little gov has gotten since Bush has been in office? You can only go down from there I'm afraid.

I never said I liked Bush. I think he's been incompetent, and I'm more than glad to see him go.

However, here in MA, government waste is rampant, results of big government. -.-

I never said you did, plus I'm a big supporter of small gov myself. *Inserts Ron Paul ad here*

I'm labled as a conservative, but I'm much farther to the right. I'm for the monopolization of government and power. I believe that if you take facism, and put in a leader that is sincere and genuinely wants to see his nation succeed, then it will.

Take someone who loves his people, who has the intelligence to make the proper decisions, and does not have a hidden agenda and logically all should be set. But, I guess that is the aim of democracy, that a true leader is chosen.

The problem with dividing power, handing it to the states and the senate/congress, is that it creates obstacles to progressivity. It's a safety net, but one shouldn't be required if presidential candidates are well bred.

I agree on some points, but it looks a bit like you like communism

woutR wrote:

dom wrote:

Nuklear wrote:

Kitty wrote:

Nuklear wrote:Kitty, you mean like how little gov has gotten since Bush has been in office? You can only go down from there I'm afraid.

I never said I liked Bush. I think he's been incompetent, and I'm more than glad to see him go.

However, here in MA, government waste is rampant, results of big government. -.-

I never said you did, plus I'm a big supporter of small gov myself. *Inserts Ron Paul ad here*

I'm labled as a conservative, but I'm much farther to the right. I'm for the monopolization of government and power. I believe that if you take facism, and put in a leader that is sincere and genuinely wants to see his nation succeed, then it will.

Take someone who loves his people, who has the intelligence to make the proper decisions, and does not have a hidden agenda and logically all should be set. But, I guess that is the aim of democracy, that a true leader is chosen.

The problem with dividing power, handing it to the states and the senate/congress, is that it creates obstacles to progressivity. It's a safety net, but one shouldn't be required if presidential candidates are well bred.

I agree on some points, but it looks a bit like you like communism

nee, power in state is what facism and communism have in common. My economical and social views are much more to the right.


example: take Hitler. Before the war, and his persuit of personal ambitions, he was a great leader. Proof? Time Magazine's Man of the year in 1938. He did great things for Germany. Rebuilt the country after a horrible treaty, revived its economy and brought up its social standards. However, in 1939 he had to push to far, the power corrupted him.

lol I dont care who wins, as long as bush is out of the picture. He is a terrible president.

Regardless of your feelings towards our president, most people won't acknowledge the fact that in all honesty they know nothing about our current government.
I don't even pretend to know, thats why I have stayed out of this topic.
Although I must say, that I truly hope another republican is elected.

I wish people would realize how retarded that kind of statement is.

dom wrote:I wish people would realize how retarded that kind of statement is.

referring to who?
darkblazer1 or me?

whatever a debate is about , is so blabla boring to watch and to hear. And they olmost always lie anyway ..

[SD]Xyzzzy wrote:

dom wrote:I wish people would realize how retarded that kind of statement is.

referring to who?
darkblazer1 or me?

darkblazer.

"ZOMg LOl bush is a bushtard LOL his so baad i jus want him out but i dun care whogoes in bcuz i can bitch again LOLOL!Z

it could turn into a clinton thing where everyone was happy and didn't really know why

Yes, and I'm an American.