RF Generation Message Board

Anyone see the Obama speech last night?

Wow!  :o  He really threw down the gauntlet on McCain. We'll see how McCain responds.

If Obama keeps up his momentum, he could win in a landslide in November.

I really liked the speech too. Did you here about McCain's running mate? A woman from Alaska!

Either way, there will be some history making, whoever gets into office.

Excellent speech by Obama. 

I haven't seen his speach, sadly, it was in the middle of the night here. :(

Even though I'm not an american, I hope Obama wins the election. After 8 years of Bush and war in Iraq, there's need for a change. No need for the same.

I don't get what people see in Mccain anyway, this guy is so old already, he's 10 years older than Bush now is!

I'm pretty sure he will win a landslide.  I don't like either of the candidates, I think that obama is inexperienced and fake, and mccain isn't a real conservative. 

I'd say Ron paul all the way, he's the only candidate that was for complete freedom, but he isn't running anymore.

It's the presidential election. Nobody wins in a landslide.

Since I don't follow US politics or know their election platforms I can't speak on that regard. But anyone who could survive 5 1/2 years of torture and beatings would make one helluva tough opponent across the negotiating table.

You're right. His army history will certainly appeal to a part of the American voters.

All I was saying is he's pretty old to become president now. Certainly when you look at the ages of the previous presidents, aswell as Obama's age. That's all ;)

Agreed.

Well you asked what people saw in him, I'm sure being a war hero is a big part of his appeal. Besides, he's not much older than Reagan was when he took office or Bush Sr. when he left it.

Yeah, you're right. I guess I'm "too" used of the presidents being younger. For me, the ideal age for a president is around 50-55.

Don't worry though, I'm not trying to make him look bad, just stating my opinion on the subject ;)

He seems to be doing a good job of that all on his own. :slick:

 :laugh:

Choosing Sarah Palin as running mate was a big mistake I think. He might aswell choose Claudia Schiffer, same thing.

What "couple" looks strongest to you? Obama-Biden or Mccain-Palin? I think that's pretty clear.

Not really, most people know who Claudia Schiffer is!!

I was pretty disappointed in the Biden selection.  How do you run on a platform of "Change" and then pick someone who has been part of the problem for 35 years as a running-mate.  I understand the political reasons for picking him, it just seems to deviate from his message so far.  Oh well I guess the Status Quo will be intact for 4 more years.

I understand what you're saying but (comparing to Palin) atleast Biden is a real politician. And who knows, maybe this guy is fed up with the same problems and actually wants change. It could be, right?

A really, really funny song about Sarah Palin - Sarah Palin lookalike included! :P

You might want to consider skipping the first minute, he starts with an over-the-top rant aimed at Mccain. The song follows after that, enjoy! :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b64vYxdLceQ

Please don't take this too seriously, I didn't made the video and I don't want to say something with it ;)

If you are at all conservative for the love of God don't vote for Obama because you think he represents "change." Of course, if you lean to the left well...God help you see the err of your ways.

Obama's politics are so far left it isn't funny. He is an absolute socialist and with 3-4 Supreme Court seats going to be up for grabs in the next 4-8 years I'll be damned if I vote for him because he's young and looks different. His running mate seals it, all you can expect is more of the same bullshit they've been screwing our country up with since F.D.R. God bless the great man.

If Obama is elected I am buying a gun THAT day--he'll be fucking with our right to protect ourselves before you know it. Likewise you can expect tax hikes, more expensive gas, and a general ignorance towards the rights of the individual as "we" attempt to move our country towards Obama's "change."

He ain't that left.

Besides, he wants change; he wants more nuclear power plants to make the US independant from Middle Eastern oil. If that would succeed, expect the US military to leave the area because the only reason they're there is to control the oil anyway (oh yea, "terrorists" too) making the world a safer place once again. Now if that isn't change, I don't know what is.

"relief, recovery and reform"  :)

That's a good thing. There's so much violence in your country because everyone owns guns.
If you can't grab to a gun in the heat of an arguement, it's less likely people will die....never thought about that ;)

And I know what you're saying: "gangsters will always have guns, legal or not". That's true, the problem is everyone has guns there and can find them much too easily when they don't.
I myself have never seen a gun in real life (except maybe a police officer's one) and can't think of anyone I know that has a gun.

Weapons don't protect you...they make life more dangerous for you. Think about that.

I'm sorry but that's an ill-informed assumption. It's easy to blame the guns for everyone's problems, that way you don't have to deal with the real issues that cause violence. Consider that the U.K. has some of the toughest gun laws in the world and consider these figures:



No, stupidity makes life more dangerous. By that rationale cars, butter knives and baseball bats are more dangerous because there are a lot more kids with bats, bad drivers and clumsy fools hurting themselves than people shooting each other. But it doesn't make as glamorous a news story as a gun killing spree though does it?

A weapon is what my government paid me to carry to protect my country when I became a man. A gun is a tool or piece of sporting equipment that I've occasionally hunted with and enjoyed shooting sports with since I was 9 or 10 years old. Never confuse the two or assume that a firearm is the root of all evil, statistics, history and common sense paint the real picture.

I apologize if this was off-topic or a rant, but the use of the word weapon is both ignorant and shows bias against a portion of the population for their views and beliefs. That bias is what's destroying one of my favorite hobbies and passions that is more important than even gaming because if every gun is a "weapon", then responsible gun owners such as myself are cornered into defending our hobby from misinformed so called democrats who believe in free will as long as it's "their" will. I wade through enough red tape to just own these without people assuming I'm a murderer because I like to go clay shooting on the weekend.

I don't think it was off topic. I happen to agree with you 100%. Guns are a means of defending, and can be a social experience as well. I have gone shooting before, and it was nothing short of amazing.

Now, for Obama being far left. What the f**k. The end.

Almost 99% of politicians are in the TOP RIGHT quadrant of the political spectrum. They may float around a bit in that square, but you CAN'T call someone FAR LEFT that isn't even CLOSE to the left square. Hell, Ron Paul is more "Extreme" than most of the politicians out there. Obama is not far left, and McCain isn't even that FAR RIGHT. So with all of this political bullshit, I say to hell with it. They both have their own sets of thinking and ways of handling the same issues. End of Story.

Exactly, disarming innocent people does not protect innocent people. During the 20th century government genocide killed 170,000,000 people. Yet not one gun control proposal would disarm government troops rather than their civilian victims. Maybe the founding fathers were a bunch of gun nuts, but it seems to me that Colonial America was able to break the yoke of the British because they had the arms to support a war. A government should never be able to control its people if its people desire to be uncontrollable.

"... God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

- Thomas Jefferson, Nov. 13, 1787, letter to William S. Smith, see Jefferson On Democracy, 20 (S. Padover
ed. 1939).



You are exactly the problem with politics in this country. You look at these men from some base plateau but never know what you're talking about. Explain to me how Obama's politics are not bordering on fascism, if not utter stupidity. Have you read his energy policy?

Do so:

http://obama.3cdn.net/0035b25f3b7e0a7fe3_w0kdmvrq8.pdf

He plans to tax oil companies and give the money to the poor. *cough* socialism *cough* What will this bring? Oil companies will have no incentive to increase the supply of oil, prices will rise higher than ever and there will be gas shortages. And all that money that was given to the poor? It will be used up to pay for the more expensive fuel. Not to mention all those other points in the policy that will show us, the middle class, taxed up the wazoo--just ask yourself where the money is coming from for that 25 billion dollar highway bill. The policy is quite literally inane. He says all of this flashy stuff to pander to his supporters and yet it's nonsense that, if enacted, could see this country lying in ruins.

The problem with that logic is we don't use oil to generate power here, coal and hydro sure. It transportation that uses all the oil.


That's ok, if guns are somehow banned they'll just turn (some) law abiding citizens into criminals too.

Your rant isn't off-topic, it makes perfect sense to me :)

I can imagine sport hunters feeling attacked when badly spoken about guns in general, for that I'm sorry. I'm 100% fine with sane people who have passed a hunters exam of some sorts to posses guns.

However, I do believe that any gun is a potential lethal weapon (except water guns); even those meant for hunting (if it can kill an animal, it'll probably be able to do the same to a human, right?)

That's completely true, however please see the difference between objects that are meant to cause destruction/kill and those that don't. I know that there's more deaths caused by car accidents than shootouts but those car accidents usually don't happen on purpose while pulling the trigger of a gun is (except when it's by accident) a very conscious action.

When stupidity rules with guns nearby the outcome can be much worse than when they aren't. And because the US government is so loose about who can buy a gun, there's alot of stupid people around who posses one. That's all I wanted to say, ok? :)


Anyway, I'll drop the subject now because at the time of writing my last post I wasn't fully realising I'm not speaking to a European audience but a (mostly) North American one which holds very different beliefs about the whole guns subject than me. I'm sorry to all of you who I might have offended.

Leon, I have already said to hell with democracy is earlier posts (I think...). The way our government is set up has almost ALWAYS bordered so called Fascism or what ever. I do know Obama's policy, and I know McCain's too. They both suck, end of story. I say vote Tom Day as a write-in. He is my grandmother's neighbor and has some of the most amazing ideas ever. If you don't want Obama OR McCain, vote TOM DAY for PRESIDENT!!!

Pardon me for interrupting, but can you really be "what's wrong with politics" if you aren't even old enough to vote?

Just an observation.

I think he was aiming at Logical's way of thinking about politics in general rather than whether he can vote or not.

Do you realize that you've posted 700 times in less than 2 months? That's sort of a shocking amount...

Yes, I've realised. I don't think that's a bad thing, an active forum draws in people while an inactive one makes people look for other grounds.

700 posts might be alot here but is commonplace on other boards. I think people like Tynstar and Izret will certainly have done their share of posting back when they were still active.

Besides, it's not like I post single-word posts or smiley-posts all the time. It'll go down anyway once school starts for me (the 22nd) ;)

Hey, we encourage an active community. I personally am happy that we actually have more than one active European member on the site.

I don't think you offended anyone. I feel the same way every time I post something pro gun on a board that's got an international membership. It can come down to something as simple as if you've never had them you'll never miss them attitude.

I just realized that my post might have sounded a little malicious. I'm sorry about that!

Why is Obama supposedly going to win in a landslide? That makes no sense if you look at any of the recent poll numbers.

And it was an unbelievably strategic move having McCain choose Palin as VP. Why? Because she is a woman. Stupid people will vote for him simply because Palin is a woman. A hot woman. Just like how Obama will have stupid people vote for him because he is African American.

But here's my personal political view point.

Obama--> super insane liberal to the point of near socialism.
John McCain--> John McClane

Obvious choice here.

Holy ****, if there was a commercial for McCain that said vote McCain and showed this picture that'd be the single most badass thing ever. Look how freaking badass McCain is! He looks like a freaking movie star...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:John_McCain_interview_on_April_24,_1974.jpg

Taken only a month or so after his long visit with Charlie, he still looks haunted and ragged in that picture.

Oh and honestly I'm not really fully supportive of McCain; I'd prefer if he won due to Obama's far left disposition. Then again if Obama won I wouldn't really mind either. I'd just prefer if Obama didn't win.

To start, I am registered with no party affiliation.

Watched the debate:

Total debate time: 90 minutes

Time Biden took control:  83 minutes
Time Palin uttered something that almost made some semblance of sense:  2 minutes


In all honesty, if Palin ends up in the White House, I will strongly consider starting to look for jobs in Canada.

Biden was prepared, well-versed, experienced and clearly answered the questions that were being asked.
Palin was shaky, dodged answering questions, talked like a common person, but didn't say anything useful.



I hope people are able to see past the whole "Protector of Joe 6-Pack" bit.  I don't want my vice president (possibly president at some point)  to be an unexperienced Joe Nobody.  I want someone in the White House that has real know-how and experience.

And, if I hear the word "Maverick" one more time before the election, I will scream.

maverick!!

Funny guy....

(screaming ensues...)




To be fair to Palin, could Bidin have just once maybe opened his eyes and looked at the camera?

Barack Obama and Sarah Palin have held public office for nearly the same amount of time, only Palin has actually been the leader of a whole state whereas Obama has been a senator. So it looks to me like Palin has more validity to be PRESIDENT than Obama, only that she is not going to be PRESIDENT unless some calamity occurs.

Neither one is fit to run the country in my opinion, but at least one is only the backup.

As far as the debate goes I would call it a draw, which I would never have done prior to it. Biden should have been able to smash Palin into a goo but the inane policies of Obama drug him down and all he did was poke and jab at Bush the whole time. Palin kept her composure, smiled a lot, and managed to set the tone for Biden. I was impressed, she's had some practice since that God awful Couric interview.

To answer your comment that was removed, I am no communist or socialist.....I just don't feel the need to follow a party strictly.

On to the topic at hand....

Well, even though their time in office was similar, Barack's time was far more impressive.  Wasilla, Alaska, town where Palin was mayor only has ~5,550 citizens, and, even if every single citizen was 18 and voted, that is only 5,500 supporters.  Barack was in the Illinois State Senate during this same time period.  Number of people he represented....far more than 5,500 (he received ~46,000 votes to get that position.) 

To compare their recent gigs:

2006 Palin (Governor) - 114,697 votes (48%)
2004 Obama (Senate)  - 3,597,456 votes (70%)
sources: www.elections.alaska.gov & www.elections.illinois.gov

So, if you do some calculations comparing population served to years in office, Barack blows Palin out of the water.....they are not even on the same level. 

Barack and McCain rather than Barack and Palin are on the same level.....both senators.  Sure McCain has been there longer ( I won't argue his experience ), but they are on equal levels position wise. 

Not one of these candidates is fit to lead the country, but at least with Barack et al, we would have 2 fairly qualified candidates.  McCain and Palin, I'd say we'd have 1.5 qualified candidates.


On to the debate.....

I would call it a resounding Biden win, but to each his own.  Biden chose not to smash Palin because he was a gentlemen that did not feel the need to get rude and insulting against his opponent that he obviously has a much higher amount of world knowledge over.  Would Biden look better being courteous or making snide remarks.....I think he made the smart choice.  Also, I would say he took far more jabs at McCain than he did at Bush, but I don't have an exact count to support that. 

Palin seemed nervous, shaky, stuttered and lost her wording way to much, made numerous linguistic and grammatical errors.  Quick question....what political qualifications does Palin's ability to smile provide her?  She seemed very practiced, to the point of sounding scripted and unable to come up with her own thoughts and answers.  I want to hear what Palin thinks, not what McCain's writers think.

Finally, I take insult in the term "Protector of Joe 6-pack".  Why does Palin feel the need to reduce all voters to poor, stupid drunks who stop by the Quickie Mart every day, buy a six pack, drink till drunk, and pass out?

Hehe, sorry about the communist thing, I removed it on second thought.

Population served is one thing, duties to that population are another. So Obama serves more people, but as a senator, not THE leader. His duties are different, he does not oversee the management of his state to the same degree that a governor does. Palin has, to say it stupidly: been the president of Alaska. Obama has been one of two senators representing Illinois, hence had different, although I am sure honorable, duties.

Again, though, neither one has near enough experience.

Upon pondering the debate it was simply inane dribble like always. Hardly any policies were discussed and all it seemed to be was a jab-fest. The winner of it is going to be whoever we personally want it to be I suppose.

Good points.  I suppose this argument would go on forever if we continued it. 

My opinion is Senator of an important, highly populous state is more important than a state that I personally feel the US could have done without, but to each his own.

Tuesday's debate should be interesting however (sarcasim.....it will probably just be a repeat of last Fridays...)

I understand (and agree) with both your points but I'd just like to add that, in the end, you have to look at the persons themselves to see whether they might be capable to be president, not just what the highest position is they have held.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is governer of an "important, highly populous state" (using tholly's words)  but does that immediately make him a good president?

Yea, but how can you beat the Governator!  Just having that nickname should make you more than qualified to be president (baring the fact that he was not US born...)

LOL :D

But all jokes aside: If you'd seriously think Arnold Schwarzenegger is qualified to be president, then I don't see why one shouldn't say the same about Obama.

I'll tell you what, we'll take Alaska off your hands and give her a good home.


Sure you can do without it? ;)

She does fit in very nicely with Canada's geography, doesn't she?  Almost like she is attached.


I would prefer if the US didn't need her.  I am an advocate of reducing our dependence on oil, period, not just foreign oil.  If I worked closer to home, I would buy a bike immediately.  I try to reduce waste where possible, turn off items when not in use, walk to local destinations, and recycle. 

I wish the US were not the energy hog that is is (we produce, alone as a country, over 30% of all CO2 emissions.)

Just thought this might go along nicely with the current discussion:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....



* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."

* Grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers,  a quintessential American story.

* If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

* Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor,  spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of  13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.

* If your total resume is: local weather girl,  4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650, 000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're no t a real Christian.

* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.

* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of soc iety.

* If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you're very responsible.


* If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.

* If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude",  with at least one DWI conviction and no colle ge education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.
Also…..
 
 
For those who still can't grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are
constantly looking for some easy-to-under stand examples of it, perhaps
this list will help.

White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol
Palin and every one is quick to insist that your life and that of your
family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or
your parents, because "every family has challenges," even as black and
Latino families with similar "challenges" are regularly typified as
irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

White privilege is when you can call yourself a "fuckin' redneck," like
Bristol Palin's boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with
you, you'll "kick their fuckin' ass," and talk about how you like to "sh
oot sh it" for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy
(and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.

White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six
years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then
returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and
no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a
person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and
probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative
action.

White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller
than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about
the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan,
makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don't all piss on
themselves with laughter, while being a black U.S. Senator, two-term state
Senator, and con stitut ional law scholar, means you're "untested."

White privilege is being able to say that you support the words "under
God" in the pledge of allegiance because "if it was good enough for the
founding fathers, it's good enough for me," and not be immediately
disqualified from holding office - since, after all, the pledge was
written in the late 1800s and the "under God" part wasn't added until the
1950s - while believing that reading accused criminals and terrorists
their rights (because, ya know, the Constitution, which you used to teach
at a prestigious law school requires it), is a dangerous and silly idea
only supported by mushy liberals.

White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people
immediately scared of you.

White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an
extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union,
and whose motto was "Alaska first," and no one quest ions y our patriotism
or that of your family, while if you're black and your spouse merely fails
to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first
day of school, people immediately think she's being disrespectful.

White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the
work they do - like, among other things, fight for the right of women to
vote, or for civil rights, or the 8- hour workday, or an end to child
labor - and people think you're being pithy and tough, but if you merely
question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with
no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college - you're
somehow being mean, or even sexist.

White privilege is being able to convince white women who don't even agree
with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate
anyway, because all of a sudden your presence on the ticket has inspired
confidence in these same whit e wome n, and made them give your party a
"second look."

White privilege is being able to fire people who didn't support your
political campaigns and not be accused of abusing your power or being a
typical politician who engages in favoritism, while being black and merely
knowing some folks from the old-line political machines in Chicago means
you must be corrupt.

White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose
pasto rs say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize Georg
e W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian
nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological
principles into government , and who bring in speakers who say the
conflict in the Middle East is God's punishment on Jews for rejecting
Jesus, and every one can still think you're just a good church-going
Christian, but if you're black and friends with a black pastor who has
noted (as have Colin Powell and the U.S. Department of Defense) that
terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who
talks about the history of racism and its effect on black people, you're
an extremist who probably hates America.

White privilege is not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is when asked by a
reporter, and then people get angry at the reporter for asking you such a
"trick question," while being black and merely refusing to give one-word
answers to the queries of Bill O'Reilly means you're dodging the question,
or trying to seem overly intellectual and nuanced.

White privilege is being able to claim your experience as a POW has
anything at all to do with your fitness for president, while being black
and experiencing racism is, as Sarah Palin has referred to it a "light"
burden.

And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow
someo ne to become president when he has voted with Georg e W. Bush 90
percent of th e time , even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are
losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly
isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren't sure about
that whole "change" thing. Ya know, it's just too vague and ill-defined,
unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and
certain.






Tim Wise is among the most prominent anti-racist writers and activists in
the U.S., and has been called, "One of the most brilliant, articulate and
courageous critics of white privilege in the nation," by best-selling
author and professor Michael Eric Dyson, of Georgetown University. Wise
has spoken in 48 states, and on over 400 college campuses, including
Harvard, Stanford, and the Law Schools at Yale and Columbia, and has
spoken to community groups around the nation. Wise has provided
anti-racism training to teachers nationwide, and has trained physicians
and medical industry professionals on how to combat racial inequities in
health care. He has also trained corporate, government, entertainment,
military and law enforcement officials on methods for dismantling racism
in their institutions, and has served as a consultant for plaintiff's
attorneys in federal discrimination cases in New York and Washin gton
State.

Pfew, I gave up reading about halfway through the text-part. There were some interesting comparisons. I think people should not forget that Palin is Mccain's running mate, not running for president herself. So the "achievements" of Obama and Mccain should be compared, not those of Obama and Palin. ;)

Yesterday I saw on CNN that Palin did some mud-slinging towards Obama in a speech. I find that rather low and hope that the US voters will see through those lame statements of the past.

But more importantly: It'd be best if a staff member moved all of the last posts about the election to a new topic in Idle Chatter or maybe to the US Election Question (http://www.rfgeneration.com/forum/index.php?topic=7989.0) topic that already exists.

EDIT: Thanks Tan :)

Yea, I would love to see some sort of comparison like that between both Obama and McCain as well as Palin to Biden.

So who's watching the debate tonight?

Yup, I am. Should be interesting with both candidates decisions to use smear tactics against each other.  I'm curious to see how McCain will try to get the focus back on an Obama vs McCain election instead of the Obama vs Palin election it has become.

I'll probably put it on while I write a paper, although I don't know why.

Maybe because you're subconsciously interested in what they have to say.

I'll be watching.

Since I missed the 1st one and my other plans fell through for tonight, I'll definitely plan on tuning in.

Why are elections such a farce?

Because 1/2 of the election involves Republicans.

Nice one

[img width=700 height=460]https://webspace.utexas.edu/warnerwt/picard-facepalm.jpg[/img]

And the other half is democrats. I blame political parties in general for most problems. Too many people voting "party" rather than "issues".

And too many people vote "faces" rather than "issues", too. :-\

I hate when people vote faces or party. Who cares what skin color or gender a person is, as long as they can do a good job.

What I hate even more though are the people I knew in undergrad that would not form their own opinion on a candidate, but rather just vote the same as their parents.

After watching and listening months of ads, I've come to the conclusion near McCain or Obama should be President. They just keep saying how the other is evil and will ruin the country even more, so why is either of them running?
I particularly love these two slogans: "Obama - Change we can't afford" and "McCain - We can't afford more of the same". So, either way we're fucked?

It's true, but if you have half a brain you should acknowledge the fact that Obama is a frightening socialist that started campaigning for President after just ~150 days in public office, that right there is enough to make me vote McCain. McCain seems to be doing all he can to make me hate him, but I will drag him across the fucking finish line as long as it means this out-of-nowhere socialist and frankly Hitleresque character does not reach an office he does not deserve.

Wow, that was the most incorrect thing I have ever read.

Obama was an Illinois Senator from 1/8/97 to 11/4/04.
Obama was / is a US Senator from 1/4/05 to present.

Also, he knows US law better than most people in the world.  He was trained at Columbia and Harvard (I could never get in to either, and you probably couldn't either.)  He taught constitution law in Chicago for 12 years.

His presidential candidacy began in 2/07, more than 2 years after his most recent public office.

I would say 1997 to 2007 is a little longer than 150 days.

Also, comparing someone to Hitler is terrible.  I don't think even McCain would do that.....  Personally, I hope no one in the world today can be compared to Hitler, arguably the worst person ever born.

A bit of socialism doesn't hurt you know. It obviously shouldn't be taken to extremes (=communism) but I'm glad there's people fighting for the rights of the poor.

But I guess you're one of those people who don't care that 70% of US citizens live in third-world conditions. Which leads to more violence, drugs, etc...


Ad-note: That is the #1 reason I wouldn't want to live in the US. It's such a devided country. There's almost no middle class. There's peaks of extreme wealth & technology (Silicon Valley, Manhatten, etc...) with individuals that are extremely rich, but if you go 20km further you're suddenly in a third world country. No thanks.

I was a fair bit drunk last night, but I know I read that he stated a wish to run for president just half a year after reaching the U.S. senate.

Being a teacher or an Illinois senator (one of sixty of them) doesn't really show to me that someone has the capacity to lead a nation.

I said "Hitleresque" not comparing his politics to Hitler, but in comparing his sudden rise to power, his militant underground connections, and the stupidity of our youth in eating him up. Living next to and constantly being on a college campus I see Obama's face all day. He's everywhere, pointing off over yonder at change or something, it's weird! They've moved from indoctrination to flat out propaganda.



All I can think to do at your Ad-note is babble incredulous obscenities. What in the hell do they teach over there? There is not a single fucking spec of this country that can be compared to a third-world country. I don't know where the hell you came up with that idea, but it's utterly inane.

Our "ghettos" are full of people that have more commodities than I do. I work at a grocery store and constantly see people come in paying for their groceries with food stamps while they talk on their I-phones or Blackberries. I live right next to a bad part of town, and it's not that bad. 95% of the poor people have televisions, 50% of the poor people have cars, 0% starves. How is that even remotely 3rd world?

45% of Americans are lower to upper middle class. Only 12% of the population is considered poor, and this means you make less than $18,000 a year.

You make The United States sound like South Africa. Are you reading statistics from the '30s?

Good work, Leon.

70% in third-world conditions? Honestly? Have you looked around lately? Why you'd even cite a statistic like that is beyond me.

EDIT: You can't look around from where you are, I guess. Next time you come here, try and find a place that even remotely resembles a third-world country. You won't.

Does that mean 43% of Americans are considered rich? I don't believe that at all.

Maybe using the words "third world" are too extreme, for that I apologise.

What I mean is that the gap between the rich and poor is very large in your country. And by being extremely anti-socialist like yourself will only make that gap bigger. It's the "If you're in shit, it's your problem."-attitude. I find that very selfish and a typical way in which the rich try to keep the wealth for their own. Mild socialism is a good thing. I don't think you'd like it if by some bad luck you'd end up in poverty and have no place to go.

And you should know that "poor" people will rather have a fancy phone but no money in the bank. Or debts to pay of, even.
It's not because someone has a TV, PC and a phone that they're rich or even middle class. If you're living from paycheck to paycheck with no savings, that's what I'd describe as "poor".

Here, there's less poor but less rich too. Weath is devided more evenly.


PS: To be clear: I'm not anti-American or anti-you at all. I'm not saying the US is a "bad" country, all I'm saying is that that's a side of the country I don't like.

Also, it's not because we're talking about the US now that the US is the only country in that situation. There's a lot of countries like that, in fact. Don't think I'm trying to make this into a US vs. The World thing or something because I'm more mature than that.

This is why I tend to keep my politics to myself. >_< People get angry and/or offended.

So...about the election... ;)

...is everyone (U.S. members) going to at least vote on Nov.4?

Yep, and I ain't even old enough.  8)

yep, i'm gonna vote.

I hate voting apathy. Being able to vote is a privelage, not a God-given right that should be taken for granted. I believe the last general elections here had a turnout of around 60% of people able to vote actually going to a polling station. How can you call that a democracy, when almost less than a majority actually voted? It's usually the people who don't vote who complain loudest about the state the country is in and how they don't like the government.

If you don't like any of them, make a "None" vote by spoiling the ballot - checking every box, scribbling across it, drawing a big willy, whatever. At least you wouldn't be throwing your vote away.

Once I get going about it, voting apathy is genuinely one of the things I feel strongest about. >:(

I agree completely. Complaining about politics yet not doing the small effort of standing in line a bit to vote is an outrage. And if you're unable (for whatever reason) to go and vote; let someone else vote for you. People shouldn't be so careless about it.

I remember hearing on CNN that there are more people excited about the US elections than ever before; and that more people will vote. I'm not sure if that true, but I hope it is because having everyone interested in politics is a good thing. :)

Just because I'm curious: will your vote be legal if you're underaged?

In the words of Southpark, why should I vote between a douchebag and a turd sandwich? Neither canidate really offers alot that I like and it's not like my vote would have a say in my state, which is so historically republican that I'd put money on this election and the next one voting republican.

Newsflash - we use the electorial system and unless your state is projected to be a swing state, there's little chance that your vote actually matters. Lets say for a moment that I did vote for Obama, something I wouldn't do as I'd vote McCain before Obama. But let's pretend I would. So yay, I may have added 1% in my district to Obama. Now, lets say 48% of the district voted for Obama, and 51% for McCain. Guess where my vote just went? Out the window. Popular vote doesn't matter.

For reference, though, I'm writing in Thompson.

That's another very interesting thing. The winner really does take it all.

In Belgium, every party gets to keep their votes and they get "elected" once they have 5% or more votes. Obviously that leads to a system with many parties and a lot of compromising. It definitely makes it harder to govern. I honestly couldn't tell which system is best, both have their benefits.

If you don't want to vote for either of them, spoil your ballot like I said. It counts as a vote for no-one. At least it will show you don't like them.

Also, perhaps the reason your state is historically Republican is because the Democrats all think "It will be Republican anyway, so I won't vote".

Statistics can say an awful lot. In our last General Elections, Labour lost a lot of votes but stayed in power. They took the loss of votes as a kick in the backside. They didn't really change, but still, it showed them they're less popular.

Just because the group you voted for didn't get into power, doesn't mean your vote was wasted. If no one voted at all for one side because they all thought their votes would be wasted it would give a very unbalanced view of the general population's political stance.


No idea who Thompson is, by the way.

That's the same as not voting, the only difference is that one requires me to put effort in wasting my vote.

Or because my state has a majority republican populace. It'd be like me saying "The reason why California is a democrat state is because all the republicans aren't voting there!" when in actuality it'd be because democrats outnumber republicans by a great deal.  Good argument though, I can definetly see the logic behind it, unfortunetly, that's not how it works. Look at the 2004 election where more people had voted than in recent elections. States that are historically republican stayed historically republican and vice versa as far as I can tell. It's the swing states that matter most.

I was kidding, and no, it wouldn't count. :P 8)

It's NOT, though. It goes into statistics and says a lot more than people who can't be arsed to spend a few minutes going to a polling station just to tick a box. As I said, it counts as a vote for no-one. Sitting at home complaining on the internet about the government doesn't tell anyone important about your disproval of both parties. They don't throw spoilt ballots in the bin to be immediately recycled into toilet paper before they count them.


If it was the Eurovision Song Contest you weren't voting for, I wouldn't care. The Eurovision doesn't matter to anything. The day after, everyone goes back to their normal lives. But when it's a case of how the country is run, or in the case of America, how the World is run, I have extreme disdain for people who can't be bothered.


I don't care who people vote for or not, as long as they exercise the privelage that so many people fought hard to defend. A SPOILT BALLOT IS NOT A WASTED VOTE.

Not voting goes into statistics as well and says just as much. It says that no canidate had ANY sort of appeal. If only 10% of the country voted because the other 90% refused to due to bad canidates, I'm pretty sure that statistic would be entered and it'd affect things. When you spoil the ballet, you're not saying what you want so it affects things in the same way as not voting. The big deal, as far as I can tell is some sort of idea that you HAVE to vote, which is bumkiss. If I don't see a canidate I remotely support, I just won't vote because not voting is just as powerful a statement sometimes as supporting your favorite canidate.

A spoilt ballet IS a wasted ballet because you're not using it to do anything. It accomplishes the same thing and affects data just as much as not voting.

All votes count. PERIOD!

And not voting means you're CHOOSING not to be counted. No more no less.

Oh really? Please tell me what writing "Giant Penis for President" counts for, please.

You know, phoenix's post would've been a nice moment to end that arguement/discussion yet you decided to bring it up, again.

They have their opinion, you have yours. Try to let things go after a while, especially on an internet forum.

obama

What phoenix said didn't end anything it simply reaffirmed his own views, and in a rather strong manner. There's no reason for someone not to respond to a strongly worded opinion if they think differently.

Besides, an internet forum is the perfect place to never let anything go, ever.

Really you're no better by adding this comment that I feel I have to respond to. Hell I'm no better for responding, but so flows the intarweb, and may it never end.  :D

I guess you do have a point. But it's exactly because an internet forum is the perfect place to never let anything go that people should learn to let go. I used to visit a forum where every single difference of opinion ended up in a flame-covered discussion that lasted for pages on end. I really wouldn't like to see RFG fall into that trap because it's a very unpleasant place to be.

I usually won't interfere in others' discussions but there has been a whole page of James and Walt already going like this [Simplified Version]:


James: Making a none vote counts.
Walt: It's the same as not voting at all.
James: No it isn't.
Walt: Yes it is.
James: No it isn't.
Walt: Yes it is.
...

I just didn't think it was worth starting that over again, but now with phoenix instead of James.

Here's my opinion on not voting vs. spoiling your ballot.
By not voting you may think you're sending the message of "I'm not voting because none of these candidates are any good" but what you're really sending is "I'm too lazy to get out and vote".
By spoiling your vote, again you think you're sending the message of "I'm not voting because none of these candidates are any good" but what your ballot may be interpreted as is, that you're retarded and aren't mentally/physically able to vote properly.

So really, what you need to do is go out and vote for the things you do care about. It's not like this election is only about McCain vs. Obama. There are plenty of other offices up for election as well as issues, vote for the ones you want, leave the others blank.

To elaborate a little on my prior posting, if you want to vote...fine. If you don't, then that's also your call. And if you want to "spoil" your ballot, that's your choice as well. It's a free country.

And "Spoiled" ballot or not, it still gets counted. When it was Bush vs Gore, I didn't like either one of them so I wrote in Jesse Ventura (too bad he didn't win ;)). But I did take the rest of the ballot seriously for the local elected offices and the proposals that could impact my community and/or taxes.

I'm of the opinion that even though statistics may show that the opposing candidate to whom I'm intending to vote for may have a "lead in the polls", that in and of itself won't stop me from casting my vote. I prefer to be counted, win or lose, rather than having no say at all in the process and let my life be decided by the results of the votes of others.

Just my $.02.


 

Just a week to go.

And it's about time too.

To those of us outside the states anyway, we're getting sick of the coverage.

I thought this was pretty funny: http://www.palinaspresident.us/

I wish all campaigning stopped a week prior to an election.  This would enable the undecides to make up there mind.  For those who already know who there voting for it would be a nice break.  I'm sick of the last minute finger pointing, name calling, and new policy BS.

Lol

"Jaw the chair", "Jaw a six-pack" :D

My dad brought up a good point the other day about Obama. Why is he considered black? Sure he has dark skin, but his mother was white and he was raised without hiss father in Kansas with his white grandparents, so wouldn't that make him white more than anything?

I'm not trying to get into race issues with this, I'm just wondering why they call him black. Really, they shouldn't call him any particular race, just another guy running for President, same as McCain.

If he was white he would not be running.

What? Back that up, and then I shall show interest.

LOL

Obama was on campus tonight. Went over and saw the crowd. Kind of a meh turnout, only half the stadium was filled.

He's of mixed race, no doubt about it. But because he's half black, the media promotes it due to the historical perspective of never having a black candidate running for President before for a major party.

I agree that they "shouldn't" call him one race or another, but the media has their own agenda and our society still has a ways to go to evolve past matters of skin color. Maybe the next black candidate will be treated more neutrally.

Are you daft? He totally won the primary because he's black. Tell me that if Obama looked like John Edwards he would have gotten  85% of the black vote. If Obama were white, those votes would have gone straight to Hilary. I mean, Hilary won the popular vote anyways but you know, Democrats can't trust their own public.

[img width=400 height=313]http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/stefanardo/post_turtle.jpg[/img]

While I definately don't agree with some of your previous post in this topic. I do understand where you are coming from on this post.

Hilary was better suited to run for the dem. ( in my opinion ).  It bothers me that b/c he has dark skin, alot of the african american public will vote for him.  He's just as "white" as he is "black".   I'm not saying he's not a good canidate. I just feel Hilary would probably have been better suited.

I am not a Dem. or Rep. , I am not really to fond of either canidate.  But of the two we have to choose from. I am soooooooo on the fence.   I want to believe that Obama is for change in our country. But I just don't know.

P.S.    Is it just me or is life getting a little easier now that gas prices have been cut almost in half.   Personally for me, keep the oil prices down.  And food, supplies, services, will follow suit.    Maybe my trash company will finally take the fuel surcharge off of my bill.

:)

I agree with you on the fact that he wouldn't have gotten this far if he was white and seeing how close the race between him and Hilary was she probably would've won if he wasn't black. But I'd like to add that that isn't the only reason.

He also got as far as he is now because Obama stands for change. Maybe others have said they will change things too but it's harder to believe old school politicians like McCain or Hillary when they talk about "change" since they've been in the old system for so long already. Whether or not he'll actually change things is an entirely different thing; but atleast he's the most believable person when it comes to the subject "change".

A third reason why he got this far (and will probably become president too) is the economical crisis. That bought him a lot of white votes that would otherwise go to a white guy. People will let their racist believes go more easily when their money is on the line.

Just to let you know: I'd rather have Hillary as the democratic candidate and president as well, sadly that's not the way things turned out to be.
But if I had to choose between Obama and Mccain (aka Bush #2), Obama gets my support.

I too would prefer Hilary over Obama for the simple fact that Bill would be in the White House and I think he would run the country through Hilary.


The prices will go back up after the election, it's just a matter of how much they go back up, hopefully they'll stay at around $3 at the most.
And if they do stay down, don't expect the prices that got raised because of high gas prices to go down for at least several months. Suppliers are loving all the extra income they're getting right now, because they're basically getting paid for driving around on $4 gas when it costs them $2. So they're going to keep their high prices for as long as they can.

Don't underestimate Hilary herself, she isn't just Bill's puppet.

However I see what you mean and think it would've been good to get the Clinton duo back in action.

I'm sure Hilary would do as good of a job as Obama or McCain. But she would always have a good source of experience by her side which would give them a huge advantage. It would kind of like having two presidents.

It's too bad Hilary couldn't have had Bill as her VP, that would have been even better.

He would be the first "man" of the US, though. I'm sure he'd have a great amount of power even in that position.

Elect Obama and they go way up. His plan to flat-out take money from Oil Companies will lead to the companies cutting production. Have fun spending that "tax-cut" he gave you on $5 gallons of gas.

^There's no gaurentee that the price of oil will change that dramatically just because the election is over. The economy itself is causing consumers to cut back. Therefore, they try to minimize fuel costs as much as possible. And it's working to the point that we're under $2.20/gallon. Demand drops...market price drops...price at the pump drops.

We'll see how savvy the next administration is when it comes to domestic and foreign energy policy.

I'm pretty damned certain that Obama has employed Santa Clause. I left to go to Spanish at 1:40, there was an Obama pamphlet on our door that I took down and threw in the trash. I came back from Spanish just now at 2:30 AND THERE WAS ANOTHER FUCKING PAMPHLET.

LOL, Santa is everywhere, so he probably is being employed.  Hmm...

Time for my opionion before the election actually happens.

*drumroll*

I like 'em both. :P
McCain is a Left leaning republican, and Obama is a Left Leaning Leftist, and BOTH have good ideas. I dunno... This election is still kind of a tossup.

Bob Barr has my vote.

It's those damned DAAPERS

A left-leaning leftist? Sounds like socialism...OH IT IS. I simply can't believe it came to McCain. It's the last stand against socialism in this country and we've got a senile old man and a soccer mom guarding the Alamo.

*SIGH*

I don't know the hell is wrong with you people that think bigger government is for the better. If you can tell me one good thing that the government does well I'll give you a fucking medal.

1 more day!!

And Obama's granny died.

Probably snuffed her to evoke emotion amongst the old people.

Attend to their own selfish personal agendas with remarkable efficiency all in the name of the greater good of the nation.

I prefer silver vs gold please.  :nod:

I said "GOOD" thing. ;)

That IS a good thing. Everyone seems to place blame on the government for all of their petty day to day problems instead of owning up some responsibility for them. If the government was "just" in the eyes of the ignorant who can't see past their own nose let alone the big picture, the world would explode from sheer repressed anguish alone!

Being the whipping boy for everything from gas prices & roads to acne & hemorrhoids is an important job. They spend years and millions in campaigning so you'll blame them for every slight you experience in life. If they have broad backs and sturdy legs to support everyone's grief, they'll be re-elected a second time. That's a tough cross to bear no?  :slick:

I'm confused. Is the election today or tommorow?

Today. Right at this moment. The polls close at 8 PM tonight in every time zone. We should hopefully know who the president is late tonight or early tomorrow...barring any situations that may arise.

Okay that's good to hear. I'll probably hear the news when I wake up tommorow. :)

Again, hopefully. There may be contests and arguments over the results (see the 2000 election) or it may be over tonight (see the 2004 election), it all depends on how close it is and if one of the candidates wants to be a jerk about losing on a narrow margin. However, I don't think it's going to be close. Obama is probably going to win.

Another thing, Sirgin, I don't know if you know this or not, but the newly elected president won't start working until January 20, when he gets inaugurated. So, we have another three months of Bush after this.

Yeah, I knew about that but I thought it was January 1. Has it always been the 20th? Seems like such a random date to me...

I heard there was problems with the electronic voting as of 8:30 this morning. Ohio is offering the choice of paper ballots or electronic voting, which I think is just asking for problems.
I think this election will be very similar to the one in 2000.

Did my part today. I was expecting the precinct to be a zoo. I walked in, registered, voted, and was on my way in less than 10 minutes.

Good work, St. Paul.

There's going to be sooooooo much fraud talk if this is even remotely close.

Oh, you better believe it. I'll bet money on the fact that it will be close, too.

So, who thinks their will be a massive riot in Chicago tonight if Obama loses? One million people are projected to attend the celebration in Grant Park. That's a lot of rioters if he loses.

What are you on about? Is this a serious threat or are you just being racist?

I have a little more faith in this country than that--although maybe I shouldn't. Maybe I should go smash some storefronts if McCain loses :P

Yes.... because all Democrats are black.... you read a wee bit too far into that.

Duh. How else was he supposed to take that?! ;)

Polls are closed in Kentucky and.....hmmm I fogot the name. I think it was Indiana (something with an "I" for sure, maybe Illinois)

Mccain was leading with over 60% in Kentucky (but only 1% of the votes counted, I think) and Obama was leading with 55% in Indiana. Obviously those numbers can still change.


Pfft, stupid time zones, I wish I didn't have to go to bed so I could follow the election results. But it's already 1:00PM so I'm off to bed. :(

It's called Indianer. :laugh:

NOTE: Just kidding Indiana, you're just a tad bit more than farm country. Not much more, but you know, there is Indy and Gary! WHOO!

Sigh, McCain are fail.

All hail our new master. I'm going to go buy a gun tomorrow.

Heh... Yeah, this isn't going to be a close election at all...

I'll go ahead and say it (and regret it...), but GO OBAMA!

I thought Ohio was going to be close... but damn.

I think California could turn McCain around, but it could also give Obama a victory lead. ??? Who knows?

I'm pretty happy right now. :D

I have a gut feeling Cali will go Democratic, like it has for the past forever.

AND!!!

 :shrug: :shrug:
















 ??? ??? ???

 :o :o :o


 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)


 ::)
 :P :P
 :P :P :P
 :D :D :D :D :D
 :laugh:
 :nod:
 ;D :D ;D :D :) ;) ;) :D ;D :D ;D 8) 8) 8) :P :P :P :P

 :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod: :nod:



OBAMA IS THE NEW PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!!!

Yippie!

Poop

The Obama victory party in Chicago is breathtaking.

I thought that wasn't announced until tommorow.

???

It isn't actually 'announced' until January 10th or so, when the electoral collage votes. The prediction is that Obama will win by at least 100 electoral votes. You can go here -> http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/president/ , to see what the standings are right now, as the poll results filter in.

Wow, what a speech. Also, I'll be dead tomorrow at work.

Obama is black and the McRib is back...

Congrats America, you've made a smart move.

For once.

We'll see.

Don't forget I told you so.

Congratulations, Obama!!! :D


And it wasn't a close race at all, rather a landslide victory for Obama. 349 electoral votes vs. 163.

Ohio and Pennsylvania are off my travel list. The lack of my miniscule travel dollars will make them pay for voting the way they did! >:( I hope he puts off any of his leftist crap for a while. I really hope he is more left center as president. Thank goodness the "He's not my president" bumper sticker makers can stay in business. :laugh:

I'll reserve what I'd really like to say to this and just put...

Yeah! We can all be one happy "One (New) World Order" and let the world tell us what to do.  :vomit:

Oh and can I be first in line for the re-education camps? Please?!?

Don't be so scared. Now it's your turn to experience what most of us centrists/left-leaning people had to go through for the last 8 years. Obama will not turn America into a socialist state, that won't happen. Stop being so paranoid.

I really hope he can do what he says. I'm not paranoid now, but wait until year two or three when the go after guns (again) without a sunset this time.

^Gun control is far down the priority list at this time.

But if the economy is turned around within the next 2 or 3 years, I don't care if he goes after gun control or not.

Gun control was the one reason I didn't want to vote for Obama, but then I realized he's got a lot more to worry about than that and he won't have time to do anything about it for quite some time. And frankly, if I don't have a job or a place to live, buying a new gun really isn't on my priority list.
And he'll probably be assassinated before he gets around to gun control anyway.

Everyone has their issues and for me it the right to own guns. It will not be gun control, it'll be total gun banning or taxation so high no regular person can afford it. I hope he fixes the economy too, but I want my guns.  ;)

If something does happen to him, Biden is equal to or worse on guns.

Both Obama and Biden aren't socialists, despite what you say. They're left-centered protectionists at best.

You guys really never had to deal with socialism in your life, huh? I think you'd commit suicide if you'd live here. ;)

You know what's sad about that statement, we live in a country where I could see that happening.

Hey, I had a clear shot on him last Sunday and I didn't take it; have faith.