Politics
Ok, who saw the Democratic Debate tonight?
Board List | Topic List | Log In | Help
xp1337 Posted: 4/27/2007 2:03:16 AM UTC | Message Detail | Filter | Author Profile | # 001
Level: 49
Liberal Arts Major
*Jumps on Mike Gravel bandwagon*

XDXD

He was hilarious.
---
Never before in history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hatred for me - and I welcome their hatred. - FDR
Ogordemir99 Posted: 5/25/2007 3:56:58 PM UTC | Message Detail | Filter | Author Profile | # 002
Level: 49
Liberal Arts Major
Wow, this is old.

I didn't watch the entirety of the first Democratic Debate, but I did watch two Republican Debates, the overall lack of interesting events has made me rather indisposed to watching more debates unless somehow I end up on that channel by accident (which would be somewhat difficult considering I don't watch TV except for House, Scrubs, and previously Heroes and American Idol). Anyway, here are my thoughts on the Republicans, or at least the ones I can remember:

HUCKABEE: This fellow doesn't seem to have it all together. He's also somewhat sensationalist - I don't think there's any real "meat" to his political position outside of the standard Religious Right crap. Not somebody I'd put on my dollar bills.

GIULIANI: Another sensationalist. The only way this guy is conservative enough to be a Republican is if you add "believes the executive branch should do stuff" to the list of things that make you conservative.

MIT ROMNEY: Personal bias against Mormons aside, this guy's more or less a liberal. Seriously. I think the only reason he's seeking the Republican nomination is because he's not quite liberal enough to compete with somebody like Clinton (and he's not opposed to the war in Iraq enough to match somebody like Obama) for the Democratic nomination and of course because the Mormons would vote for him more eagerly if he were on the Republican ticket.

TANCREDO: The only thing this guy's got goin' for him is his position on immigration. Unfortunately for him, actually making a move to enforce the borders would pretty much eliminate whatever political capital he might have once he's elected, and Congress would probably screw him every chance they got. This guy promises change, so either he won't deliver or once he delivers he'll be worthless as a political figure. At least he's not absurdly radical.

PAUL: Unlike this guy. The only thing you can really say about Ron Paul is that he won't win the nomination. Libertarians are the kind of scary people who wouldn't hesitate to unravel the entirety of the executive branch if given the opportunity, and as awesome as that would be, government doesn't take to well too destroying itself to the degree Paul would like. Plus, in the last debate he had the, uh, audacity to tell us all that interventionism can have negative consequences when the fanatics finally find out where you live. That bastard.

MCCAIN: This guy's position on torture is well-informed and actually sensible (as opposed to what the rest of the Republican Party believes). The problem with this fellow is that he's like Henry Clay: he's at his best when he's compromising and he sort of sucks when he's not. His only advantages in this race are that he's not as overtly liberal as Giuliani and Mit Romney and that he's not as boring or irrational as everyone else. I'd say he has the best chance of getting the nomination, although heck, at this point I think anyone could get the nomination. If Dave Barry hopped into this race at least a day before the polls open, he'd still have a fighting chance just as long as his name was on the ballot.

I forgot everyone else. They probably sucked, anyway.

Personally, I think I'll cast my vote for Paul (or Dave Barry!) if I vote in the primaries. I don't really care, though - I'll probably end up voting for a third party in the actual election anyway.
___
~ Ogordemir ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Message last edited by Silvas on 5/25/2007 at 11:58:09 AM
xp1337 Posted: 5/25/2007 6:41:32 PM UTC | Message Detail | Filter | Author Profile | # 003
Level: 49
Liberal Arts Major
Mike Gravel v Ron Paul would be the most epic Election ever.

Which is precisely why it won't happen, politics has a rule where it can't get too awesome.
---
Never before in history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hatred for me - and I welcome their hatred. - FDR
Ogordemir99 Posted: 5/26/2007 12:50:13 AM UTC | Message Detail | Filter | Author Profile | # 004
Level: 49
Liberal Arts Major
Yes. I'm picturing an Obama v. McCain race myself. Mainly because of my comments on the Republicans above and because I don't think anybody would vote for Clinton, so I just chose a popular name out of a hat.

Obama himself is kind of lifeless. I watched him once when he was presiding over Senate affairs and boy was I not impressed. >_>
___
~ Ogordemir ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
Eel Posted: 5/26/2007 1:23:37 AM UTC | Message Detail | Filter | Author Profile | # 005
Level: 44
DSB Moderator
It's rare to find a likeable, entertaining politician.
---
"This looks like a job for God."
Ogordemir99 Posted: 5/26/2007 2:30:56 AM UTC | Message Detail | Filter | Author Profile | # 006
Level: 49
Liberal Arts Major
Bush and Clinton are both entertaining. That's sixteen years of political fun for you.
___
~ Ogordemir ~
Buddha promised me Nirvana and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.
"Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people." ~ Oscar Wilde
There are no users currently viewing this topic.
Board List | Topic List

  Original script created by ultimategamer00, © 2002-2014.
Script processed in 0.003186 seconds.
anotherFyre source modified by ns1987 & Ogordemir99.