McCain or Obama

since we cant vote down there, i figured we could vote here.

poll is anonymous.

[mojo]

Gooobama!

[b0ld]

Both sides have good and bad policies. But the most dangerous of both of them is Mccain.

[C_squared]

Barack will most likely be a very popular baby name for years to come.

[Carrie]

I prefer Tina Fey as Palin rather than the real Palin.

=)

[miss.myra]

omg what about mccain guys! who doesn't want to elect a dude with the jowels of a basset hound. could we ever doubt the magic that was behind the 'straight talk express'

:p

[NinjaBoy]

One thing I've found interesting about this election is the huge loss that the republican's are suffering from. Looking from the outside, it's easy to realize fear based and ("us" vs "them") politics aren't effective anymore. Yet the republicans have stuck with them, even as most people openly told them they didn't care. The "Joe the Plumber" fiasco is a prime example of this. From what I could see, the American public didn't connect with this in any way, yet McCain used it as a large talking point during the last debate and for the weeks after.

Hopefully when the dust settles, the republican party will stop trying to pander to a base that no longer exists, and goes back to what it was. Keep in mind that up until the 60's the Republican party and Democratic party weren't really socially liberal or conservative. The liberal and conservative tags were in reference to economic policies...

[mikey]

We should start a poll on when obama's gonna get dropped....

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by Carrie

I prefer Tina Fey as Palin rather than the real Palin.

=)

So awesome. Did you see the Vice Presidential debate sketch??

"I'm concerned about gay marriage and how it could effect that sacred institution.. of forcing the wedding of two unwilling teenagers."

Gold.

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

One thing I've found interesting about this election is the huge loss that the republican's are suffering from. Looking from the outside, it's easy to realize fear based and ("us" vs "them") politics aren't effective anymore. Yet the republicans have stuck with them, even as most people openly told them they didn't care. The "Joe the Plumber" fiasco is a prime example of this. From what I could see, the American public didn't connect with this in any way, yet McCain used it as a large talking point during the last debate and for the weeks after.

I supsect fear based politics and dirty muckraking tricks would still be effective against a less iconic figure than Obama.

Dude is just teflon, is all.

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by mikey

We should start a poll on when obama's gonna get dropped....

The party represented by the elephant isn't as scary to me as this elephant in the room.

[Alex]

regardless if you guys believe Obama will make the better President for the USA, I can't even begin to fathom why you'd want him as President, being a citizen of CANADA.(For the record if I was in the USA I wouldn't be too pleased, as I couldn't justify voting for either ticket)

Obama wants to:
-Re-negotiate NAFTA and has expressed he doesn't really believe in free trade
-Stop buying Canadian oil

Basically if/when(likely) Obama is elected, we can prepare for our economy to get raped up the @$$ twice as hard as when Bill was in power.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by Alex

Obama wants to:
-Re-negotiate NAFTA and has expressed he doesn't really believe in free trade

Not sure how this is a bad thing. NAFTA is notorious for being poorly implemented and one sided for the Americans...

[miss.myra]

well i for one am shocked alex is a mccain supporter.

[Alex]

Glad you read my post. I'd have a very hard time voting for McCain/Palin if I lived in the USA(and I wouldn't vote for Obama, so I'd have a predicament)

My interests however, in this election, are what the ramifications for Canada will be. Obama will rape us, worse than Bill Clinton did.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by Alex

My interests however, in this election, are what the ramifications for Canada will be. Obama will rape us, worse than Bill Clinton did.

Worse then the Bush government did by ignoring multiple NAFTA rulings during the softwood lumber dispute?

Republican economics are much more domestic based then democratic...

And as a side note, trade agreements, and what not are not normally drafted by the executive branch in America...

Also economically a weak us economy actually hurts Canada. I think it would be safe to say that economic policies under bush are far more harmful for Canada then Clinton's were. Also add to the fact the economic cost of the Canadian occupation of Afganistan...

[anewlife]

Obama, obviously.

Why? Compare Obama and McCain when it comes to:

Pro-Life/Pro-Choice, Gun Control, Medical Marijuana, Guantanamo, Climate Debate...

...and you know why I'm all for Obama!

Plus, every vote for McCain is also a vote for Palin - she's clearly unacceptable as a VP!

[Alex]

Ok, regardless of Bush/Gore winning Canada would still have gone to Afghanistan. Afghanistan wasn't a wrong or even debatable move, Iraq was.

It's true that a strong US economy/weak Canadian dollar is good for our economy. You realize a lot of the problems with the US economy right now have to do with the fact the Democrats passed laws when Bill was in power forcing lending companies to give out high risk loans/mortgages?

[C_squared]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

Also add to the fact the economic cost of the Canadian occupation of Afganistan...

^ Chaaa no doubt!

760K annually to send one Canadian troop to Afghanistan. At least if Obama is elected he will pull troops out of Iraq and focus his sights on Afghanistan hopefully levitating our troops there.

[fritz]

^Laws that could have been changed sometime in the last 8 years? Why turn every thread into a juvenile partisan argument for your own amusement?

I think Obama will be a lot more center-leaning than people think. He'll make fewer bad decisions, but not as much 'change' as the campaign would have you believe. Medicare and Education might be the exceptions. Equality through inaction? I would love to be pleasantly surprised. Also interested to see who gets appointed to the Treasury.

Oh wait he hasn't won yet, I forgot!

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by Alex

Ok, regardless of Bush/Gore winning Canada would still have gone to Afghanistan. Afghanistan wasn't a wrong or even debatable move, Iraq was.

The argument is that without the Iraq invasion the American's would actually be actively working in Afghanistan. One that would have ended this conflict much quicker then invading Iraq and leaving Canada to deal with Afghanistan.

It's true that a strong US economy/weak Canadian dollar is good for our economy. You realize a lot of the problems with the US economy right now have to do with the fact the Democrats passed laws when Bill was in power forcing lending companies to give out high risk loans/mortgages?

Your kidding right? I've seen this arguement laid out, and it's pretty painful watch people try to form this into any sort of logical arguement.

First off, how does eight years of increased spending on the military (the money spent in Iraq could have easily covered this crisis), and a steady downturn in the American economics (Look at pre bush debt and the rise of their debt, vs bush's debt), not factor more then this bill.

Second, if there was indeed this bill, that the republicans in their economic wisdom knew would be trouble. How come, when the republican party took majority control of all three branches of American government they didn't overturn this bill, ore re-work the economic plan. In fact Ron Paul gave a speech in 2004 stating that home lending was out of control and that congress needed to take action.

Third, one of the leading factors of the current crisis is the house boom/bust. The house boom did not occur until 2005...

Fourth, another large part was the Securities and exchange commision easing rules on banks in 2004



The growth of a credit based economy mainly occured during Bush's power. The mortgage that are defaulting are mainly ones that have been taken out in the last 10 years.

If this is somehow the Democrats fault (and that's a pretty hard claim to back up), how did the republicans not fix it during the time they controlled all three branches.

[anewlife]

Looks like it's going to be neither Obama nor McCain...

Voting Machines Elect One Of Their Own As President | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

:D

[Alex]

First off you assume that I support everything Republican, I don't. Bush is an idiot, decisions made in the US have been astonishingly idiotic and I've already stated I don't even know if I'd vote if I was in the USA, because I support neither candidate. I've already stated I don't agree with the Iraq war. Of course it strapped the government for cash. I was simply stating another driving factor were these loans and mortgages given out, forcefully so, to people who simply couldn't afford them. The people who agreed to take on mortgages they couldn't afford deserve to be homeless and bankrupt. I don't support a bail out, and think the government should have never stepped in to business.

Also, again I state the Bush admin/republicans have been idiots. They should have scrapped it and they didn't. I seem to remember reading that they actually supported it after it went through.

I don't know how you came to the conclusion that I think the Rep's were innocent in this fiasco? The Democrat's set it in motion, the Republican's made the problem worse.

Neither party(or Candidate imo) is fit to run the U.S.A.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by Alex

You realize a lot of the problems with the US economy right now have to do with the fact the Democrats passed laws when Bill was in power forcing lending companies to give out high risk loans/mortgages?

I believe this is why I stated my argument.

You talked out of your ass, I pointed it out. Stating that "a lot of problems with the US economy" are because of the Democrats bill ten years ago is like saying the reason that JFK was shot was because the Chinese invented gunpowder.

It's a stretch to say the least, especially when you say they "forced" when it's more correct to say "encouraged". The bill made it so first time buyers could qualify.

Could you just admit you were regurgitating something you heard some pundit mention on CNN and we could move on? I don't feel like going through three pages of everyone pointing out you don't know what you were intially talking until you admit it..

[Alex]

Also, Obama will fuck this situation up, seriously.

He's going to increase taxes on the large corporations in a time their profit margins are in the shitter, AND wants to basically unionize the entire nation. I know if I ran a large corporation right now, I'd be frantically running numbers to save profits. We'll probably see hundreds of thousands of Americans laid off and even more work outsourced around the globe.

Source: Washington Post Writer's Group

What will you get with Obama?

Card check, meaning the abolition of the secret ballot in the certification of unions in the workplace. Large men will come to your house at night and ask you to sign a card supporting a union. You will sign.