OT - Politics

[Stryker]

HoustonBrave I 100% agree with you! The problem with the Republican party is that they have been lead by the neo-conservatives and ultra conservative religious right, the extreme element of our country.

----------------
I greatly disagree. I would say that 90% of elected republicans that say they are religious are just paying lip service to get elected. That's why you find so many scandals within the party. These individuals are VERY far from being ultra conservative. If you saw ultra conservatives in washington you would see abortion abolished, no strict gun laws, outlaw of pornography and X rated films, removal of the patriot act, removal of welfare, overall government shrinkage, and higher spending on defense.

In the eyes of an ultra-conservative Bush was a liberal. This is all coming from my experience with religious conservatives.
----------------


As far as Obama goes, I don't think there was any way that a republican could have won this election because of the way the economy has been acting. Over the past 20 years people think of democratic administrations when they think of political leadership in times of great economic condition. I think this was the main factor leading to Obama being elected.

sanfranpete, I do agree that the small business is a HUGE factor in keeping our economy thriving. Unfortunately Obama's tax plan appears to be a detriment to them. IMO if Obama plans to accomplish any of the welfare and economic goals he told everyone then taxes for everyone will go up. Hopefully he will be able to right the economy and get it growing again, but this will take some time to fix and recover from.

My true wish for America is to NOT be a dual party country. For the wide range of people, minorities, religions, etc. that we have in America, having two parties represent them is retarded. We need a good 20 parties. Anymore the two parties keep getting more and more similar, and even know you here "bipartisan" by every politician at almost every public venue. Yes we need to work together to get through some problems, but when the two parties become so similar you can't really tell them apart representation is greatly diminished. However, the likelihood of more major parties is practically 0.

[Beninator]

Here's a little of a stumper..........

After all the stories of people voting early in droves, standing in lines for hours, overloading the voting capabilities in many states, etc...

Wouldn't you have thought that maybe 2 or 3 times as many people voted in this election as ever before??

The truth is that there really were record numbers who came out to vote...BUT......


NOWHERE near as many as I would have though given all those impressive news report about massive numbers that suggested 200% and 300% more people than in past years.


reference....

2004 Presidential Election...
Bush 62.03 million total votes
Kerry 59.03 million total votes
sum..........121 million total votes.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922901.html

2008 Presidential Election
"It looks like 136.6 million Americans will have voted for president this election,
based on 88 percent of the country's precincts tallied and projections for absentee ballots"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27552153/

thus only about 13% more people voted this election than last one...
(136.6/121)

**and they are already taking into account the ones yet to be counted.
BUT they even moved my polling place to a gymnasium that is 10 times larger than the little room it's been in before becasue of expectations of HUGE numbers.

so how does a 13% jump account for such massive numbers reported, such long lines, such descriptions of huge turnout?
Keep in mind, just the numbers given in the press for the massive, huge turnout at "early voting" should have swallowed up all those 13% more voters and left yesterday pretty unscathed.

shouldn't the system as it's always been have been able to handle a 13% jump easily without moving to huge gymnasiums and hiring extra poll attendants and running out of ballots, etc....?

Anyone have an explanation?
My polling place had 20 or so people there before me at 6AM before opening and I have never even had one in past elections, and by the time we all got in and got our ballots, there was a total of probably 40 there (when never more than 3-4 were ever present at that time when I've voted before.)

a partial explanation from cnn.com

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/07/record-turnout/#more-29833

[Beninator]

My true wish for America is to NOT be a dual party country. For the wide range of people, minorities, religions, etc. that we have in America, having two parties represent them is retarded. We need a good 20 parties. Anymore the two parties keep getting more and more similar, and even know you here "bipartisan" by every politician at almost every public venue. Yes we need to work together to get through some problems, but when the two parties become so similar you can't really tell them apart representation is greatly diminished. However, the likelihood of more major parties is practically 0.

This is one of the reasons I asked the question. IMO, if the R's move to the center-right, they run the risk of being similar in many ways to the D's with few exceptions... However, if the R's move to the right, they can differentiate themselves, but their margin of error for an Electoral College victory is narrow as they will loose the west coast and will still probably lose a majority of the east coast. (and myself) States such as Florida, North Carolina, and even Montana are starting to show a change with the population demographic.. --this is of course under current conditions--

[SFP]

I believe if a party ever existed that truly was fiscally responsible, not in the hands of special interest and socially libertarian in bent respecting the wishes of non-government and religious social agenda but not making them part of policy but the out come of their austere objectives policies I would join them in a heart beat.

Example: We can have people who are anti-abortionist and woman Rights movement together because what both have in common is that neither one want a woman to have to make that choice. Now creating programs to educate and prevent unwanted pregnancies should be put in place that can realistically meet these goals. Just saying, "do not have sex" and "here are condoms use them" are polar opposite plans that are not really working. Combine a culture of true education, prevention and a dash of common sense morality may do the trick. IMHO

[d dub]

back to the mvc

It looks like Obama has won Creighton's congressional district and one electoral vote in Nebraska

[BUconnorD]

I'm a big Obama fan...he's pretty legit

I just don't get why McCain became such a "politician" during the race. He is a very level headed, fun guy normally. But as the election went on he turned into an ___-hole...fill in your own blank there.

If he had stuck to what he did best...being himself...he coulda won. And didn't pick a bimbo for a running mate. I don't care what you think of her...if she were pushed into presidency from a tragedy...I would move STRAIT to Canada...no questions asked.

and agreed...McCain was very classy in his recession speech

[Da Coach]

I know what you mean, but I still don't think McCain could have won under the present political and economic circumstances. He was being managed by some people who gave him bad advice. These same McCain people are now trying to make Sarah Palin the reason they lost by knocking her. I don't ever recall any presidential candidate in history who's people did this. I think the Republican party will be much better when it's out of the hands of the McCain people.

[BUconnorD]

I can agree w/ that
As much as I would like to believe the nation votes w/ whose policies make the most sense...i think most vote w/ who they like more...McCain coulda done that if he...for the lack of a better term "stayed the course"

yea, i agree that most of mccains people were pretty nuts...wouldn't have liked him as pres...much happier this way

[Beninator]

I know what you mean, but I still don't think McCain could have won under the present political and economic circumstances. He was being managed by some people who gave him bad advice. These same McCain people are now trying to make Sarah Palin the reason they lost by knocking her. I don't ever recall any presidential candidate in history who's people did this. I think the Republican party will be much better when it's out of the hands of the McCain people.

A couple of points to add here...

agree--The current conditions were certainly an anchor to the Mccain campaign and certainly to most Republicans running for office this year.

The fallout with staff and candidates often falls through the cracks after the election. A lot of times (especially with the loosing party) there are reports of the fallout but most of the interest is with the winning candidate. There was a lot of fallout in the aftermath of the Dole-Kemp campaign as well as the Kerry-Edwards campaign.

[mrcoachdude]

I'm a big Obama fan...he's pretty legit

I just don't get why McCain became such a "politician" during the race. He is a very level headed, fun guy normally. But as the election went on he turned into an ___-hole...fill in your own blank there.

If he had stuck to what he did best...being himself...he coulda won. And didn't pick a bimbo for a running mate. I don't care what you think of her...if she were pushed into presidency from a tragedy...I would move STRAIT to Canada...no questions asked.

and agreed...McCain was very classy in his recession speech

Not into politics much although I did hold an elected position once:

Palin is NOT a bimbo and was mishandled, as was Mccain. What a mountain to climb, given current economy.

You wouldn't move to Canada anymore than I would given Obama's election as Pres.

I did not vote for Obama, but as for me and my house....we will pray for him and that he does a great job and God Bless him....

[tornado]

but isn't Obama considering a bimbo for Secretary of State?

[houstontxbrave]

I pretty certain that Palin isnt a bimbo, but I really feel that McCain made a very poor choice in having her as his running mate. She presented him way to many surprises and in the end his message was lost in her attempt to become the focal point of the campaign, or more specifically her attempt to set her ground for 12.

I honestly feel she is a lighting rod for both those who believe in her and those who completely opposed her ways. She may not have been a "THE" reason for lose by McCain but she certainly did not help him in the way he/the RNP had invisioned.

She is a rock star now, and she now going to do all she can to be the face of RNC. It will be very interesting how she navigates the next 4 years. I personally think she will do all she can to be the candidate for the RNP in 12 but and this is my opinion that run will be like throwing the lambs to the lions. I dont think the full Republican party takes her serious nor would they support her completely for an election.

Now Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jinda is a different story. He is who I expect the Republicans to push into the spot light and challenge Obama.

[houstontxbrave]

but isn't Obama considering a bimbo for Secretary of State?

No. But I am not certain of the definition of a Bimbo. Maybe I missed something but it appears individuals think a bimbo is a female politician? Everyone better becareful Amy Madigan might find that definition offensive and sladerous... even on a message board

For the record neither Palin nor Clinton are Bimbo's. Just strong minded opinionated politicians.. but what politician isnt?

[Chico]

I'm not into politics either, especially on a sports board, but I think Palin was a poor choice for VP because not too many had ever heard of her. She definitely is not a bimbo. Madigan maybe, but not Palin. Even though I like McCain, I think the GOP could have had a stronger candidate. IMO, he should have pushed the Ayers and Wright friendships more than he did. Of course the country has been changing Presidents every 8 years lately, so JM probably wouldn't have won anyway. One thing I find funny out of all this is that the Hollywood left is praising the fact that this election shows that democracy works in this country. But boy are they raising cain because the voters voted down gay marriages. Does democracy work or not, can't have it both ways.

[Beninator]

For the record neither Palin nor Clinton are Bimbo's. Just strong minded opinionated politicians.. but what politician isnt?

thank you