Obama vs. McCain

cjdoggerYou've gotten a bit loopy lately elk...
And both those candadates suck, with all the people in your country Americans, why don't you have any decent candidates?

Loopy? O.oBecause our country is stricken with the horrible disease of religion.
Candidates have to have 'family values' and all the other bullshit that is force-fed through the mainstream media and the ignorance of the last generation.

Replying to #81

I'll quote where you are loopy below-

elk1007And anyone who isn't going to vote secular deserves to be whipped -_-' nomnomnom.

Nomnomnom is definately loopy

cjdoggerI'll quote where you are loopy below- Nomnomnom is definitely loopy

My comment made me think of Whipped Cream.
Hench the nom.

elk1007 · #81Loopy? O.oBecause our country is stricken with the horrible disease of religion.
Candidates have to have 'family values' and all the other bullshit that is force-fed through the mainstream media and the ignorance of the last generation.

I so agree, people don't want to see what is logically "correct". They only want God to do everything for them. I say, if you want people to speak for yourself, than don't complain when shit fails because you, yourself didn't voice you own opinion.

Replying to #83

I giggled at this one....

cjdoggerYou've gotten a bit loopy lately elk...
And both those candadates suck, with all the people in your country Americans, why don't you have any decent candidates?

But your opinion's not going to matter. Since you're not actually voting.
I;d to pick a "lesser of two evils" rather than be righteous and make a "losing vote" on independents.

It does not matter who you vote for because at the end of the day the ones who decide are the "Electoral college". Even if your candidate wins the popular vote, if the people in the "Electoral college" vote against him, he will lose. If you don't believe me just take a look at what happened in the election of 2000. Bush lost the popular vote but was elected because the "Electoral college" voted for him.

cjdoggerExactly,
can't I be funny?

I don't know, apparently not. T-t-t-torched.

Replying to #86

There's more to it than that; each are important aspects of election. And, for the most part, electoral votes are sectioned to best represent people. Thank God, Obama is leading McCain in electoral votes by a ridiculous amount, so even when people are pulling crap like this (sure, iPhones, grocery store machines, 24/7 ATMs can stay perfectly calibrated, but not official government voting machines) Obama will still be able to be sure of a victory.

darksynyster · #86It does not matter who you vote for because at the end of the day the ones who decide are the "Electoral college". Even if your candidate wins the popular vote, if the people in the "Electoral college" vote against him, he will lose. If you don't believe me just take a look at what happened in the election of 2000. Bush lost the popular vote but was elected because the "Electoral college" voted for him.

If my memory serves me, the electoral college votes always reflect the state popular vote.

Replying to #88

That's a load of crap. How can less than 50 people (depending on your state) reflect the opinion of a whole state? If that was true then why was Bush elected when he lost the popular vote but won the electoral vote? The popular vote has influence I won't deny that, but it does not have the final verdict.

Replying to #89

He won the national popular vote, but not each state popular vote.
The electoral college votes are assigned by population of the state.
What I meant was that the electoral college votes of each state always reflect the votes of the state residents.
I agree that what happened in 2000 was a rare and unnerving outcome.

Replying to #90

I'm more surprised that people didn't really protest it and just went along with it.

Replying to #91

Because it's the way that our electoral system was formed. It's not a terrible system anyways. But I'm sure that you're government is perfect.Edit: Oh, and I'm starting to like this elk guy. You're good in my book, brah.

VoidBecause it's the way that our electoral system was formed. It's not a terrible system anyways. But I'm sure that your government is perfect.

Fixed.I live in the states, I share the same government. There is no such thing as a perfect government. There is only corrupt governments and less corrupt governments.

Replying to #93

1) Oh.
2) Exactly my point.
( 3) Yeah, typos suck. )

darksynyster · #91I'm more surprised that people didn't really protest it and just went along with it.

I think some people actually did. But Al Gore's 'ohlol....w/e' attitude didn't encourage anyone.

Folks,
I just erased a huge block of text that took me an hour to write to say, fuck it. Whoever you vote for, just go out and vote.

Okay,I am voting for John McCain, because Obama is a Socialist, and that is just right next to Communism -- Fuck that shit.Otherwise, if the main battle wasn't between the two main candidates, I would be voting for Ron Paul.If all else fails, I will be moving back to Mexico, where I hold a dual citizenship ;)

Replying to #97

Damn right. Ron Paul was the guy I was going for in the first place. Too bad he's out now though.

Patton · #97Okay,I am voting for John McCain, because Obama is a Socialist, and that is just right next to Communism -- Fuck that shit.Otherwise, if the main battle wasn't between the two main candidates, I would be voting for Ron Paul.If all else fails, I will be moving back to Mexico, where I hold a dual citizenship ;)

You could always just vote for the libertarian party candidate, Bob Barr, instead. I'm a bit of a fan of him, to be honest. I'm almost glad I missed the voting deadline, I'd really have to think hard about voting for Barr or Nader, since it looks like Obama will win anyways. To be fair, leaving the country because you see Obama as socialist isn't really an intelligent move in my opinion (though I won't try to stop you). The socialist argument for Obama has arisen out of the fact that Obama's tax plan cuts taxes for the lower and middle class, while raising them for, well, those who can afford it, while McCain is... uhhmm... furthering the gap between the middle and upper class, really. When you look at the numbers, the statistics, the percentage difference isn't really all that significant, it's just that McCain is moving in the wrong direction. Taxes have -always- worked to "spread the wealth" to those that need it, and to the states who will properly use the money to benefit all. You can't call a slight change or exaggeration in trend communism.

Why don't you vote for Mudkipz instead?