Re: 2012 Presidential Election Thread

[Cardinals5]

I have kept quiet on the election, because I am not ready to make a choice when I feel as if we arn't getting the full story. For one, I will not use media outlets to make my choice on will be the best leader, because all the news media is, is a crapload of bias that they use against a canidate. Now my Dad, watches Fox news and I do too. Not for news, but for the clear humor of how bad their coverage is. Face it, News media in 2012, is no more reliable, then the crap you would hear in the girls locker room. So what I am saying to you is, don't base your opinon on what National News reports, because there is always another side to each issue.

For real news, watch The Daily Show and The Colbert Report (even though I haven't watched it in a while).

I know people who actually do that. As long as you realize it's satire, it's okay for the Daily Show/Colbert to be A source, but not THE source.

I'd rank BBC, PBS and in some cases Al-Jazeera as good primary sources, CNN/MSNBC/Fox News (getting all sides and what not) are second tier, and Daily Show/Colbert and news aggregators like Reddit and Digg are probably third tier. Just my opinion on it. I could be wrong since I'm no media expert and maybe my own personal bias makes seeing bias in BBC/PBS harder.

[Kornography]

The true leaders of this country are on Capitol Hill. The House and Senate are the true reason why nothing has been done the past two years because they're too busy whining and unwilling to compromise. Despite this, I can guarantee that over 3/4 of them will be voted back in because people are too busy with their "RABBLE RABBLE OBAMA!" or "RABBLE RABBLE ROMNEY" crap.

Personally though, I'd go for Jill Stein, but if we're thinking realistically (Obama/Romney), I'd vote Obama.

[Mystrsyko]

I'm probably the only person here who has the right to vote and deliberately wont use it. The way I see it, you should vote for the candidate who is best for the country. I don't see any "best" candidates, only "least worst". And honestly, would you really want to put the lesser of two evils in charge if you didn't have to? At least I can say it's not my fault when things continue to be screwed up (and they will, regardless of who wins).

Another main reason I wont vote is because of the state I live in. I live in Illinois, a traditionally democratic state. In fact, they're so democratic, nearly 61% of the votes in 2008 went to Obama (may be some hometown bias there). I see no reason that this wont happen again. If I were to vote for him this year (and I didn't vote at all last year for this same reason), I would not be "making my vote count", I would be piling my vote on top of a mountain of other votes. My vote will be completely worthless, because the vast majority of Illinoisans will vote democrat, and Obama will get the electoral votes for the state. Even if I wanted to vote against him, my one vote is not going to make up for a 20% gap. And if it did come down to a few votes between parties, the Electoral College is going to vote for whoever lobbies the hardest and slips them the most money under the table anyway.

My point being, the voting system is broke, and nobody has the balls, or money, to demand that congress fix it.

Now, to say something about the actual election and candidates this year, I've neatly summed up how I see things. In general (and this is a really, really general statement), the Democrats want to try to help as many people as possible, in whatever way possible. The Republicans, feel you should have the right to do everything your own way, without the government interfering. So basically, you're going to choose between being forced into some degree of success against your will, or having the right to live in poverty without anyone telling you you're doing it wrong.

[antknee]

..or as it is now with us being forced into poverty against our will with ineffectual leadership. Other Presidents have had success in the same situation so the excuse about how one side won't let the other side succeed is a bit of a cop-out.

regarding people that refrain from voting, if you don't vote then you have no right to complain

[Blake Camphausen]

regarding people that refrain from voting, if you don't vote then you have no right to complain

I don't believe this is correct. If I build a table and one leg is shorter then the other three, and you are someone who uses the table, aren't you going to be mad that someone other then yourself made a mistake that affects you? However, who am I to complain one leg is shorter? If I wanted the table to have 4 even legs I should have built a table with 4 even legs.

Basically, when you vote you should take responsibility for what that person does in office, because without your vote they might not have been in that office.

If you don't vote, or vote for the losing candidate, your choice was to do something different, but everyone else went a different way, and then you have to deal with that elected officials mistakes. You then have a right to complain because you wanted something different, you didn't get it and are now negatively affected by it.

[antknee]

you have a right to complain if you took the action to get involved. if you sit idly by and allow the rest of the world to make decisions for you then how can you say that you have a right to complain?

it's like allowing your neighbor to pick a color to paint your house and then complaining about their selection.

there is no acceptable explanation for this argument.

[Cardinals5]

you have a right to complain if you took the action to get involved. if you sit idly by and allow the rest of the world to make decisions for you then how can you say that you have a right to complain?

it's like allowing your neighbor to pick a color to paint your house and then complaining about their selection.

there is no acceptable explanation for this argument.

I can see where he's coming from in certain situations. Imagine being a Republican in New York or California. You know exactly how much your Presidential vote counts, which suffice to say is not at all. Most of the time their vote for Congress doesn't really matter either. Some people may feel like taking any action is useless, so why bother?

Having worked as an election official, I can honestly say that this attitude is incredibly prevalent among people who do vote, so I can only imagine non-voters feel even more strongly about it.

I don't agree with it, but that's how I can explain it.


Sidenote: election official may in fact be the worst job ever.

[crl]

you have a right to complain if you took the action to get involved. if you sit idly by and allow the rest of the world to make decisions for you then how can you say that you have a right to complain?

it's like allowing your neighbor to pick a color to paint your house and then complaining about their selection.

there is no acceptable explanation for this argument.

I can see where he's coming from in certain situations. Imagine being a Republican in New York or California. You know exactly how much your Presidential vote counts, which suffice to say is not at all. Most of the time their vote for Congress doesn't really matter either. Some people may feel like taking any action is useless, so why bother?

Having worked as an election official, I can honestly say that this attitude is incredibly prevalent among people who do vote, so I can only imagine non-voters feel even more strongly about it.

I don't agree with it, but that's how I can explain it.


Sidenote: election official may in fact be the worst job ever.

And on top of that, there's the fact that lobbying has become more prevalent these days. And who are the lobbyists? Big groups with a lot of money to spend, and they'll get the laws, on any level, to swing their way, like in the case of SOPA, which thankfully, while not dead, hasn't come up in a while.

[Sponsored content]