Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Election 2004  
User currently offlinePPGMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1247 times:

Democrats, Republicans, and Independents duke it out here, there is no need to create hundreds of topics.


At worst, you screw up and die.
30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJkw777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1240 times:

Fighting fire with fire I see?

I read this and thought, not another US Election thread, please...

Anywho,

Laters,

Justin  Wink/being sarcastic


User currently offlinePilot kaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1238 times:

PPGMD,

THANK YOU!!!


User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1233 times:

PPGMD,

If you took your time to do a search you would have found out that we already had an official President election 2004.


User currently offlinePilot kaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1228 times:

QIguy24,

Well it is obvious we need a new one, with all the new topics popping up (constantly)


User currently offlineJkw777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1227 times:

QIguy24,

He posted this so they can all battle it out here as opposed to another 100 threads about it!

Justin  Wink/being sarcastic


User currently offlinePPGMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1217 times:

Re this:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/US/ambulance_terror_040818-1.html

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

If they warn the public it's sparking fear, if they don't warn the public and something happens they are accused with neglect.



At worst, you screw up and die.
User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1216 times:

Kaz and Jkw, I know he did it for a good cause. But why start one more when we already have one? Big grin


http://www.airliners.net/discussions/non_aviation/read.main/611293/


User currently offlineJkw777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1209 times:

Don't you have other things to worry about people?

Cheers,

Justin  Big grin


User currently offlinePPGMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1207 times:

Re this:
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,64602,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1

Someone in my previous thread said that it doesn't represent mainstream democrats, well will the Democrats condemn this attack since it's in their name?



At worst, you screw up and die.
User currently offlineTristarenvy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2265 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 1193 times:

I think it's really time for a very serious and well organized Third Party, in the USA. Give me the better part of each of the two major's. Think along the lines of T. Roosevelt's "Bull Moose" party. Obviously old T.R. was doing something right, 'cause he beat Taft in popular votes, if I'm not mistaken. I liked H. Ross Perot back in 1992, but had he won, Congress and the Senate would have made his probable one term a hell for everybody!

I'm getting rather unhappy w/my party, and there are pieces and parts of the OTHER party I could easily like, and agree with. But I'm not wild on what THEY stand for, anymore than what MY party stands for!



If you don't stand for SOMETHING, you'll fall for ANYTHING.
User currently offlineJasepl From India, joined Jul 2004, 3582 posts, RR: 39
Reply 11, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 1191 times:

It would be hypocritical of me to post here. It would suggest I care.

User currently offlineMrniji From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 1180 times:

I think it's really time for a very serious and well organized Third Party, in the USA.

Even a 'second party' would do it  Wink/being sarcastic

I would like to see a Green Party, similar as in Germany, a real alternative to the existing people in power...


User currently offlinePPGMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 1172 times:

The green party is unlikely to catch on, it's too socialist for the average US voter.

From anti-GOP hack attack
Jetservice:

Yes it's probably illegal, but a well planned DDOS attack his hard to track.

Also it's unlikely that you will see any prosecutions, because they will probably be claimed to be politically motivated. Even though the folks were breaking the law.



At worst, you screw up and die.
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (10 years 1 month 1 week ago) and read 1138 times:

The green party is unlikely to catch on, it's too socialist for the average US voter.

I would agree. What is needed is a party devoted to fiscal responsibility, monetary stability, no direct religious connections (but not anti-religious), and generally conservative values. Call it the Sensible Party. Some might say the Libertarian Party represents these values.

ANY Party whose essential platform is based on dogma (eg. Greens => Environment) is to be avoided like the plague.

Charles


User currently offlineMrniji From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1128 times:

I would agree. What is needed is a party devoted to fiscal responsibility, monetary stability, no direct religious connections (but not anti-religious), and generally conservative values

This does not contradict your statement. A green party could be devoted to fiscal responsibility.. Then, why a third conservative party?? How about an alternative, as change?

ANY Party whose essential platform is based on dogma (eg. Greens => Environment) is to be avoided like the plague.

Exactly.. down with the republicans!!  Big thumbs up You just are not able to understand: a green party does not have to be solely be based on a dogma. look at Germany..

Let the people decide between as many parties as they can without pre-selection..


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1115 times:

Let the people decide between as many parties as they can without pre-selection.

There is no "pre-selection". It is simply the mechanics of the type of democracy practiced in the U.S., which says that the party with the most votes wins... period - as opposed with other types which grant representation according to election results, so that even if you get 5% of the vote (and no majority anywhere), you still get 5% of the legistlature.

The good thing about such a majority-rules system is that it eliminates the extremist parties, or one-issue parties who can only attract a few percent of the population. The only parties who can have an impact are those who can attract at least 40-50% of the vote - for which they MUST be in the mainstream of the national will. Even the Republicans and Democrats are not that far apart on most issues - they both have to have a more-or-less middle-of-the-road stance.

Which is why the Greens or the Communists never could get anywhere in the U.S.. Also, the proportional method increases the role of the political party itself, rather than individuals. Therefore, when you go to vote, you would not vote for a person, but simply a party platform, and once voted in, the party will select who takes office. I don't like that system, as it is too reminiscent of smoky back room political deals. Such a system also favors the creation of an established cadre of politicians who hang around for years and years, swapping posts and creating a soap opera of conniving and backstabbing within and between the parties. Just look at the French government. They really should make that into a reality-TV show. More drama, corruption and nastiness than any other reality show.

Exactly.. down with the republicans!!

Like I said, the Republicans are not extremists. If they were the extreme-right that propaganda make them out to be, how come they have not totally elimininated the welfare state? Shipped all the blacks back to Africa, and the Mexicans back south? How come there is still a "progressive" tax system? How come they haven't passed laws (or amendments) requiring adherance to a particular religion? They have had the majority in the executive and legislative branches to do it, right?

They have not done it because they are not the extremists they are painted out to be. Same with the Democrats. On a scale of 1 (liberal/socialist) and 100 (conservative/capitalist), I would put the Republicans at 52 and the Democrats around 48. The difference is actually quite small.

That said, I do agree that it is a pity that some 3rd parties, like the Libertarians cannot seem to establish themselves. That will only happen if one of the two current dominating parties runs itself out of the middle ground. It has happened before - The Republican and Democratic parties have each not been around since the establishment of the U.S.. They supplanted other parties that found themselves well out of favor at some time. So it is possible.

Charles


User currently offlineMrniji From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1105 times:

Charles,

The good thing about such a majority-rules system is that it eliminates the extremist parties, or one-issue parties who can only attract a few percent of the population

Principally agreed. On the other side, a majority system eschews that parts of the population is accomodated in the system and transfers the 'battle' outside the Parliament.. I personally prefer broad representation

Like I said, the Republicans are not extremists.

I doubt that. The Neo-Republicans look like some

On a scale of 1 (liberal/socialist) and 100 (conservative/capitalist), I would put the Republicans at 52 and the Democrats around 48

I agree that the parties are quite similar in this, however I would put them 98 and 96, respectively. Agreed to your statement with the third party, however I prefer a multi-party system on a state basis (I like the US Federal System) with proportional representation in DC.. Good stuff to discuss about..


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1103 times:

It's too early for an "official" thread.

Wait till after the polygraphers have a field day at the RNC, and then about 3 weeks after that-the beginning of October, THEN we're in the meat and potato's of the election.

Until then, it's too soon


User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1096 times:

When is the RNC??
It would be very interesting to follow and see what the GOP can offer for the next 4 years.


User currently offlinePPGMD From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2453 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1088 times:

I agree that the parties are quite similar in this, however I would put them 98 and 96, respectively. Agreed to your statement with the third party, however I prefer a multi-party system on a state basis (I like the US Federal System) with proportional representation in DC.. Good stuff to discuss about..

That's compared to the system in your country. The idea of conservative and liberal vary from country to country. Here in the US both parties are about in the center. Compared to Europe both parties are slightly to the right, with the Greens near the European center.



At worst, you screw up and die.
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1088 times:

The RNC starts around Sept 6th, I think.

The GOP moved it back for two reasons: 1. So Bush could raise more money before he accepts the nomination, and 2. They wanted to hold it just before the anniversary of 9/11 to A. Highlight Bush as a war president, and B. To try to scare voters once again, as they've done since 9/11, as a tactic to get people to vote for them.

But with Iraq still a mess, and Afghanistan still a mess; with OBL still running around, it may not be quite the backdrop they wanted when they changed the date about 18 months ago.

Bush will get a little bounce, but I don't think it'll be much. I still think this election isn't decided till the week of the vote. It's just too damned close, and most people have made up their minds.

Btw, reading CNN this moring, showing Kerry up by about 5% in Ohio.  Big thumbs up

...still a long way to go though.


User currently offlineQIguy24 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1084 times:

Thanks for the info Alpha.

I just hope that some of the channels over here will show anything from it.
I wonder what they will say about the Iraq war and the war in Afghanistan. And how they will tackle all the new terrorist threats that have started since the war began.
But I'm sure CNN will send something at least.



User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1075 times:

Now, according to CNN, North Carolina, once thought a no-brainer for Mr. Bush, is up for grabs.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&ncid=536&e=16&u=/ap/20040818/ap_on_el_pr/fighting_for_nc

In a close election, a candidate can't afford to have what was a "sure bet" head to the other candidate. Could North Carolina be to George Bush what Tennessee was to Al Gore in 2000?

Interesting to read how the Bush people say this is just taking resources away from Kerry in other states, even though that doesn't seem to be the case.

If Bush would lose even part of the "solid south"-even one state, it could be costly. But if he can hold N.C., and come back in Florida, he has a good chance at a second term.

Just shows how tight this race is.


User currently offlineSlider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6818 posts, RR: 34
Reply 24, posted (10 years 1 month 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1060 times:

I'm with Tristarenvy...it is time for more Americans to vote their conscience and denounce the "lesser of two evils" construct.

It's ridiculous. Both the Democrats and Republicans are on the road to hell...just one's in the slow lane, one's in the express lane. But there's no substantive difference in their overall direction.

Conservatives? Indeed. Is that why Republicans and Bush are spending like drunken sailors and expanding government while in control (marginal) of both Houses?

Liberals? The honest to goodness Democrats have had their party hijacked by a bunch of leftist statist wackos, if not outright Marxists (ala Hillary).

The only way we're going to get this ship turned, end the widespread corruption that politics is about today is by having term limits for Congress and Senate, and people supporting a third party as they see fit and now chickening out when they reach for the lever.


25 Iakobos : Hillary Clinton a marxist ? Can you name one US politician who could qualify as "leftist" in any country outside the North American continent ?
26 PPGMD : Iakobos, As we have said earlier in the thread, our idea of left and right are different than the European idea. Marxist are people that follow his id
27 Post contains images Slider : "From each according to their ability, to each according to his need." - Marx "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
28 Iakobos : PPGMD, I know left and right are subjective but if you take a full width political spectrum in a multi-party country, your Reps would be ranging from
29 Air2gxs : Iakobos, I was in Greece during the elections and watched a bunch of the coverage. you're right. The Nea Democratia (conservatives) seemed a bit left
30 Alpha 1 : One interesting local sidenote from greater Cleveland. The ABC affilliate in Cleveland, WEWS, was reporting that the Cuyahoga County Elections Commisi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Election 2008: H. Clinton Vs. C. Rice? posted Tue Dec 27 2005 16:51:25 by Columba
Election 2004 Final Result posted Wed Nov 3 2004 07:05:43 by N771AN
Official Election 2004 Results posted Wed Nov 3 2004 01:42:04 by N771AN
US Election Results Already Published? posted Tue Nov 2 2004 17:57:12 by L410Turbolet
How Much Did Election 2004 Cost? posted Tue Nov 2 2004 01:01:13 by N771AN
Silly US Election Question: posted Sat Oct 30 2004 21:14:53 by Thom@s
US Election Question posted Tue Oct 5 2004 08:43:26 by L410Turbolet
Vote In The Web Based US Election posted Thu Sep 30 2004 03:53:52 by Leviticus
Election 2004 posted Wed Feb 28 2001 03:35:04 by TWA
Late Breaking US Election News posted Tue Nov 14 2000 13:22:37 by Brissie_lions