Conquer Club

Well, I am just kind of curious about the reasons why you voted for Obama. I know that a lot of people just voted for Obama because they were pissed at the Bush administration, but besides that for a reason...what policies of Obama's is it that you really like and would like to see the country implement?

The ballot was confusing...

GabonX wrote:The ballot was confusing...

So you pretended Obama was a Paladin and McCain was a crusty old Zombie and you played Dungeon and Dragons to see who would win and that's who you voted for?

Because he was black.

DaGip wrote:

GabonX wrote:The ballot was confusing...

So you pretended Obama was a Paladin and McCain was a crusty old Zombie and you played Dungeon and Dragons to see who would win and that's who you voted for?

Wait, why would you need to pretend McCain was a crusty old zombie?

Snorri1234 wrote:

DaGip wrote:

GabonX wrote:The ballot was confusing...

So you pretended Obama was a Paladin and McCain was a crusty old Zombie and you played Dungeon and Dragons to see who would win and that's who you voted for?

Wait, why would you need to pretend McCain was a crusty old zombie?

You are so right...

Snorri1234 wrote:Because he was black.

I knew it!

Snorri1234 wrote:Because he was black.

QFT

Frigidus wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:Because he was black.

QFT

Pretty much...

John Edwards is pretty much the white version of Obama, an inexperienced yet well spoken former lawyer turned Senator of the Democratic party, and we all know how far he got. He had a full term in the senate and he couldn't get any steam which leads me to believe that people were voting for Clinton and Obama over him largely on the basis of race and gender.

GabonX wrote:

Frigidus wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:Because he was black.

QFT

Pretty much...

John Edwards is pretty much the white version of Obama, an inexperienced yet well spoken former lawyer turned Senator of the Democratic party, and we all know how far he got. He had a full term in the senate and he couldn't get any steam which leads me to believe that people were voting for Clinton and Obama over him solely on the basis of race and gender.

I think it was more of a lack of charisma and media attention. He would've been a decent candidate if it weren't for the others being far more interresting. I mean, who wouldn't see the potential for high ratings in Clinton or Obama? They got all the attention because of what they were and not so much who they were.

Really, I would say that it wasn't so much that voters themselves decided to vote for a black dude or a woman, but that media on both sides and other newssources focused so much on them it had to be between them. They were both so fucking good for anyone who wanted to make money. I don't think BES is right in saying people voted for Obama because he was black, but I would agree with him that he got all the attention and focus because he was black which lead him to receive the most votes. If he weren't black people wouldn't have thought "hey, this guy is charismatic, good looking and young and he's got my vote" so much because the media and politics wouldn't have focused on him so much.

Hell, all of Obama's sheer marketability contributed to him taking the win. Young, charismatic, good looking, democrat, advocating change and hope and whatnot, having a pretty sexy wife and two adorable little kids (seriously, McCain should've had either his own young kids or grandkids walk with him at times to make it more even) and basically not the blackest person people know. Shit, regardless of his beliefs he still would've won. If he were a republican he still would've gotten a lot of votes because he is so fucking appealing. If he was white he still would've gotten countless of votes because he is so fucking appealing. You have to look beyond the fact that he's black and recognise the sheer awesomeness of him. A lot of people don't know much about politics (or biology) but they do recognise charisma, and Obama has tons of charisma.

I mean, this guy has a golden smile. He likes all the hip things teenagers love. He loves Kanye West (white people fucking love Kanye West). He is the single best idea for a president. His policies and accomplishments don't matter. This is the fucking epitome of charisma. He's a better version of bill clinton! It does not matter what he does, because the public (especially those not in the USA) fucking adores him. He can lay his charisma like a mushroomcloud laying motherfucker motherfucker.


Still, I would've probably voted for Nader or Kuchhicnih. (Whatever his name is.)

I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.

But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!

It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.

PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.

But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!

It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.

Oh yes that too.


Along with Obama's sheer awesomeness for people who want ratings, there is also the problem of the opposition. The opposition was shit, really shit. McCain would have been decent enough if he wasn't foiled by the republican marketing machine (who nowadays only seem to appeal to rednecks) but Palin was one of the worst choices for a VP one could make. A fundamentalist christian would have worked, but a fundamentalist christian as fucking stupid as Palin was doomed to fail. Her introduction led to an increase in the McCain numbers, but all her stupid mistakes and stupid non-mistakes ensured that the republican side had no chance. That whole "hillary supporters going for McCain" thing got severly hit after Palin proved that she was a complete idiot.

I mean, it was evident that the US would go for a democrat this time, but the way the republicans handled this election was just so awfull they couldn't lose by anything but a landslide. I think they were doing this deliberately and will get an actual moderate republican who is well-liked next election to draw all the votes away. Karl Rove and his associates would never have let this happen if it wasn't for some other motive. I think they realised that they were going to lose this election no matter what, and so they talked McCain into doing some of the worst possible shit. McCain had nothing to lose as he wasn't going to run next election anyway, and Palin was not enough of a serious contender to really get a shot.


I think the republicans will use Obama's term to ruin any bill the democrats want to give them a really good shot at the next election.

PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.

But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!

It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.

It doesn't bother you that he is all about gigantic government and heavy taxes? I prefer someone in favor of a leaner government.

black elk speaks wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.

But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!

It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.

It doesn't bother you that he is all about gigantic government and heavy taxes? I prefer someone in favor of a leaner government.

I am not anti government.

We had a time of no government. It was the time when Vanderbilt, Rockafeller, etc. got very, very rich ... and most other people were very poor. I prefer the 1950's, when a man go work hard for 40-50 hours a week, come home and, if he kept his nose clean, he'd have a decent house, be able to send his kids to college and even have a pension to fall back upon.

I also rather like having national parks (museums), Forests (play/harvest areas) and clean water to drink, air to breath. Not to far north of here is a place called Love Canal... not to mention a place far less famous just down my street (where every employee ended up dying of cancer). Regulations helped ensure that we won't have that exact thing again.

I also think our highway system works better than our rail system. The first is public. The second is private. Granted, there have been a few notable failures in recent years ... but compare that to the many failures rail has experienced due to poor maintenance, etc.

And, yes, I feel schools are fundamental to a democracy. Education is key to everything. It is far to important to be subject to whims of profits and the voice of whomever happens to have the money at the time.

BUT, as for that "leaner government" part. No one has done more to erode the basic freedoms of the American citizen than George W. Bush.

A big part of why we are IN this mess is the whole move to deregulate the banking system. The banks got into something they did not understand ... and now WE have to pick up the tab, because they were allowed to ignore safeguards regarding minimum deposits and holdings previously in place.

And, the worst part about it is we had been essentially down this road before .. or a very similar one. .. back with the S & L collapse.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.

But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!

It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.

It doesn't bother you that he is all about gigantic government and heavy taxes? I prefer someone in favor of a leaner government.

I am not anti government.

We had a time of no government. It was the time when Vanderbilt, Rockafeller, etc. got very, very rich ... and most other people were very poor. I prefer the 1950's, when a man go work hard for 40-50 hours a week, come home and, if he kept his nose clean, he'd have a decent house, be able to send his kids to college and even have a pension to fall back upon.

I also rather like having national parks (museums), Forests (play/harvest areas) and clean water to drink, air to breath. Not to far north of here is a place called Love Canal... not to mention a place far less famous just down my street (where every employee ended up dying of cancer). Regulations helped ensure that we won't have that exact thing again.

I also think our highway system works better than our rail system. The first is public. The second is private. Granted, there have been a few notable failures in recent years ... but compare that to the many failures rail has experienced due to poor maintenance, etc.

And, yes, I feel schools are fundamental to a democracy. Education is key to everything. It is far to important to be subject to whims of profits and the voice of whomever happens to have the money at the time.

BUT, as for that "leaner government" part. No one has done more to erode the basic freedoms of the American citizen than George W. Bush.

A big part of why we are IN this mess is the whole move to deregulate the banking system. The banks got into something they did not understand ... and now WE have to pick up the tab, because they were allowed to ignore safeguards regarding minimum deposits and holdings previously in place.

And, the worst part about it is we had been essentially down this road before .. or a very similar one. .. back with the S & L collapse.

Its funny that you mention the deregulation thing... I heard today that it was actually Clinton that started that deregulation of the banking system on his way out. You also have to keep in mind that it has been democrats that have been largely in power over the senate and house recently. They are all bad and they are all in favor of larger government. Its too big already.

YOU GUYS ARE MISSING MY TWO LENHGTY POSTS! okay, they're mostly for Gabon, but still.

PLAYER57832 wrote:I like Obama's economic and tax policies better than McCain's.

But there is also no way I would EVER see someone who truly thinks the Earth is only 6000 years old, who looks forward to the "end times", as president of the United States. I am a scientist!

It worries me that she is in charge of Alaska.

Since you are a scientist, then it should interest you that Palin is not the only one in this country (or the world for that matter) that believes in the End of Days and that the AntiChrist now walks among us. Behold:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7vh5LJjJhc

black elk speaks wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:
BUT, as for that "leaner government" part. No one has done more to erode the basic freedoms of the American citizen than George W. Bush.

A big part of why we are IN this mess is the whole move to deregulate the banking system. The banks got into something they did not understand ... and now WE have to pick up the tab, because they were allowed to ignore safeguards regarding minimum deposits and holdings previously in place.

And, the worst part about it is we had been essentially down this road before .. or a very similar one. .. back with the S & L collapse.

Its funny that you mention the deregulation thing... I heard today that it was actually Clinton that started that deregulation of the banking system on his way out. You also have to keep in mind that it has been democrats that have been largely in power over the senate and house recently. They are all bad and they are all in favor of larger government. Its too big already.

Back it up to Reagan .. nay Nixon. ... nay ...

It is a constant battle ... at least in public. The REAL battle is over control of the presidency.

It is not a matter of government being big or small. It must be effective. Effectiveness means that government takes care of infrastructure, and protects the rights of the individual.

We need government because not all of us are rich or powerful. Without government, you have anarchy until someone big enough and strong enough to take over comes in ... and then you have a dictatorship.

Freedom is not the opposit of government. Freedom is here because we have a decent (not perfect) government.

Why did I vote for Obama?



I didn't.

PLAYER57832 wrote:Back it up to Reagan .. nay Nixon. ... nay ...

It is a constant battle ... at least in public. The REAL battle is over control of the presidency.

It is not a matter of government being big or small. It must be effective. Effectiveness means that government takes care of infrastructure, and protects the rights of the individual.

We need government because not all of us are rich or powerful. Without government, you have anarchy until someone big enough and strong enough to take over comes in ... and then you have a dictatorship.

Freedom is not the opposit of government. Freedom is here because we have a decent (not perfect) government.

precisely what the constitution says. But the way that the government (which is really just the power mongers at the top anymore) sucks power and responsibility up from the people, its only a matter of time before our government collapses like the Soviet Union did. Only a matter of time.

black elk speaks wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Back it up to Reagan .. nay Nixon. ... nay ...

It is a constant battle ... at least in public. The REAL battle is over control of the presidency.

It is not a matter of government being big or small. It must be effective. Effectiveness means that government takes care of infrastructure, and protects the rights of the individual.

We need government because not all of us are rich or powerful. Without government, you have anarchy until someone big enough and strong enough to take over comes in ... and then you have a dictatorship.

Freedom is not the opposit of government. Freedom is here because we have a decent (not perfect) government.

precisely what the constitution says. But the way that the government (which is really just the power mongers at the top anymore) sucks power and responsibility up from the people, its only a matter of time before our government collapses like the Soviet Union did. Only a matter of time.

Nah, the USA-government is far more effective at it because they leave people with the impression that they are free. Small government won't work, because there is still the problem of the government itself ruling over too many people.

The world is too crowded. Too many big cities which need more control because otherwise they wouldn't work and collapse. If you decimate the world-population, then you have the room for better and fairer societies. Things like a village with councils of elders and shit like that.

Snorri1234 wrote:Nah, the USA-government is far more effective at it because they leave people with the impression that they are free. Small government won't work, because there is still the problem of the government itself ruling over too many people.

The world is too crowded. Too many big cities which need more control because otherwise they wouldn't work and collapse. If you decimate the world-population, then you have the room for better and fairer societies. Things like a village with councils of elders and shit like that.

you have been drinking again.

black elk speaks wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:Nah, the USA-government is far more effective at it because they leave people with the impression that they are free. Small government won't work, because there is still the problem of the government itself ruling over too many people.

The world is too crowded. Too many big cities which need more control because otherwise they wouldn't work and collapse. If you decimate the world-population, then you have the room for better and fairer societies. Things like a village with councils of elders and shit like that.

you have been drinking again.

Yes, but it's still true. The world fuckings sucks. The government is controlling people through television (people in your country watch 4 it four hours a day)and other shit and using fear and anger to guide your thougths. People are tricked into giving away power, people are told they are free when they are really not. It's all just a bunch of fucking lies and people don't understand that.

And it will always be this way because the people who have the power to change it are the people who get the most benefit from keeping the situation exactly like it is.

Snorri1234 wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:Nah, the USA-government is far more effective at it because they leave people with the impression that they are free. Small government won't work, because there is still the problem of the government itself ruling over too many people.

The world is too crowded. Too many big cities which need more control because otherwise they wouldn't work and collapse. If you decimate the world-population, then you have the room for better and fairer societies. Things like a village with councils of elders and shit like that.

you have been drinking again.

Yes, but it's still true. The world fuckings sucks. The government is controlling people through television (people in your country watch 4 it four hours a day)and other shit and using fear and anger to guide your thougths. People are tricked into giving away power, people are told they are free when they are really not. It's all just a bunch of fucking lies and people don't understand that.

And it will always be this way because the people who have the power to change it are the people who get the most benefit from keeping the situation exactly like it is.

maybe in your country. People in this country still have the right to bear arms. We also have the moral obligation to rip our government apart if it is deserving. I think that it is deserving already but that is just me... maybe a few others. Hey... snorri... did you see that? trails...

black elk speaks wrote:
maybe in your country. People in this country still have the right to bear arms. We also have the moral obligation to rip our government apart if it is deserving. I think that it is deserving already but that is just me... maybe a few others. Hey... snorri... did you see that? trails...

Hahaha, bullshit. Your right to bear arms doesn't help. Nearly every newsshow there has a couple of murders or bad things at least to make people afraid of nearly everything and give away their security or rights to the government because they think the government can help them. The government created that feeling, so they basically don't have to deal with the problem because it isn't there. People are so engrossed by television and it shapes their thoughts and emotions like nothing seen before. Fear is one of the most powerfull emotions you can have and it blocks out reason with ease. This is why GW Bush had nearly no problem leading you guys into a war against Iraq by playing on your fears of terrorism and WMD's. He didn't need any evidence. (Did you know people are willing to pay more for flightinsurance against "acts of terrorism resulting in death" than flightinsurance against "all possible causes of death"? Logically, all causes of death includes terrorism and a vast amount of other shit so it would be reasonable to pay more for that, but people are just too fucking scared by the word "terrorism" that their reasoning-skills stop working.)


If anything, your country is far better to manipulate because you all watch tv so much. Thirty-second tv adds for politicians are the best way to win votes. No matter how reasonable your positions are and how much good they do, in the end what matters is that you got money to trick enough people into voting for you. Why do you think nearly all presidential candidates from the two major parties are rich? It isn't because their ideas are better than people with less money, but because they have the money to persuade people into voting for them regardless of whether other people with better ideas. Nader, Barr and Ron Paul would certainly appeal to many people if those people had the ability to use reason to vote. They don't. People voted for Bush because "he was a nice guy who I'd like to have a beer with". People are so mind-conditioned that the really don't use reason to vote anymore.