The Presidential Whatever

no, no, no. Bush all the way, he has the rich dad.

JoeMont001@aol.com www.polarisoft.n3.net

Democrats suck. Notice that whenever we COULD have a tax cut, what do they do? Oh yeah, the vote against it. Or, more recently, in the case of the marriage tax, Clinton VETOES IT!!! I mean, can you ask any more to lose your votes?

If you code it, they will come...

Commander M
(a.k.a. Crazy Yank)
http://commanderm.8m.com
cmndrm@commanderm.8m.com

quote:

---

Lets put some politics in this Lounge!
Personally, im a pure democrat, So Al Gore all the way!
Bush= bad

Konrad
{!!!!!!!!!BLAH!!!!!!!!!}

---

#1 - Was this post not put here just to draw flames? Your biased view will certainly be countered with just-as-strong counterarguments, and only discention will rise.

#2 - You can be democrat, but why pure democrat? I mean, oftentimes, the republican is the better man, so why would you vote in a certain direction because of what you think you are? That make no sense.








Later,
Later

*****************
Is the infinite number of numbers between zero and one any less than the infinite number of numbers between zero and infinity?
*****************

The democrats will elect a monkey if it was on the ballot.

Bah! They''re all gay!

-Chris Bennett ("Insanity" of Dwarfsoft)

Check our site:
http://www.crosswinds.net/~dwarfsoft/
Check out our NPC AI Mailing List :
http://www.egroups.com/group/NPCAI/
made due to popular demand here at GDNet :)

Would a tax cut at this point *be any more idiotic*?!?!? Our national debt is still there, it hasn''t magically gone away. A surplus in the budget is good, so use it to pay off the debt.

I doubt anybody on this board is financially in a good enough position where they would prefer government aiding big business over the common man. Trickle-down economics was tried once, and it failed horribly. Thank you Ronald Reagan, we owe the debt to you.

Al Gore will win.. that''s for sure. I can say this with confidence because Bush can''t speak impromptu whatsoever.
He''ll get killed in a debate.

---
Michael Tanczos

I think Clinton can thank Reagan for the economic situation (or that he inherited Greenspan from Bush ).

I''ve seen it where if you give the consumer more purchasing power they''ll buy more stuff. It''d help the economy along it''s way to becoming more sure-footed than it is now.

Let''s face it, Gore''s personality is as dead as wood, and he tries so hard to make people believe it isn''t that it becomes very funny. So that brings up the question, "Who would you [Democrats] rather see in Gore''s place?" I guess the rest of us lowlifes can answer to if they wanted

joeG

I dont think Gore is as dry as you think. He''s actually a really funny guy.. he''s been on Leno a few times. =) Unfortunately one can get a dead wood stigma when you actually *get things accomplished* instead of spend all your time telling everyone how great you are.. I would say that is the major downfall of Gore.. he needs to be more of a "speak for 20 minutes and say nothing, do nothing outside of speaking" politician like Bush.

As a Democrat, I''m 100% behind Gore.

---
Michael Tanczos

Everyone should be Independant. Most issues have the best answers in the middle. Politicians only go for what gets them more money. In fact, most people are in the middle when they take a test to see if they are conservative or liberal. In other words, the ones who are on the left or right are not normal people .

How can a surplus in the budget be good? That means the gov''t is taxing us more than they need to be!

Personally I think the chances of Gore getting elected are rather slim. Especially if Clinton keeps trying to make this election about himself rather than Gore.

And Later is exactly correct, why be "pure" anything? I tend to lean towards the right, but on some issues i take the democrat''s point of view. Branding a ''D'' onto your ass and saying, "Democrat all the way, we can do no wrong", and blindly following everything is pretty foolish in my opinion.

surplus bad? that''s what i would tend to believe, but after i took macroeconomics last semester you can really see the upside and downside to both raising and lowering taxes in this situation.
because if you lower taxes, you have to decrease gov''t spending, which might cut out lots of things we benefit from.
i''m a democrat, but i didn''t vote clinton, so i''m not just a "vote for the monkey" kind of guy. i do think that gore is the right man for the job, however.



crazy166
some people think i'm crazy, some people know i am

Sorry people if you get offended but...
...both of your candidates act like,eh...,clowns.

I mean,ballons?People dancing?Candidates dancing?

Not just in these elections but in most of them the last 20 years.

And you want me to believe that they are the real rulers of the planet and not the multinationals?
Well excuse me if i go for the multinationals...

Voodoo4

P.S.
Ok,don''t flame me.
I mean that''s what i see...

quote:

---

Everyone should be Independant. Most issues have the best answers in the middle. Politicians only go for what gets them more money. In fact, most people are in the middle when they take a test to see if they are conservative or liberal. In other words, the ones who are on the left or right are not normal people .

---

I''m almost in agreement with that, but what about issues that do have a clear cut "better-for-the-people" answers? Do we compromise on this, because of (once again, ) what we have settled ourselves in to be? I say that everone should be a "Neutral",swaying toward what is best always, but then again, that''s a matter of opinion, so it''d just be one more friggin party! Is there no harmony?! Just my two cents, and TAFN, so-

Later,
Later

*****************
Is the infinite number of numbers between zero and one any less than the infinite number of numbers between zero and infinity?
*****************

I don''t even know why I''m wasting my time posting this, but you liberal monkeys piss me off!
Democrats think that you are incapable of spending your money "properly". They want more gov. programs to control more aspects of your life. Government programs don''t work nearly as well as private businesses. If all things government were privatized tomorrow, you wouldn''t pay half the taxes you do now. Innefficient gov. programs are a huge drag on the progress of the country.
How can "game programmers" rack their brains finding new ways to make programs fast and efficient, and then vote for someone who wants to invest your tax money in a giant crap machine(i.e. NOT fast or efficient gov. programs).
This is NOT Clintons economy, he is nothing, he did nothing.
Gore didn''t invent the internet either, I''m suprised you liberals didn''t catch that(HE ACTUALLY SAID THAT!!!).

I can''t even blab on any further, it''s rediculous, how can you not see through the b.s.

Un-freaking-beleivable, I thought you guys where *smart*.


When life hands you lemons, throw them at God's head.

Personnally, I agree with everything that Ralph Nader stands for publicly (I hear he''s an asshole in real life though), and I would probably vote for him too, if it weren''t for Bush.

Bush is a liar, an idiot, anti-free-speech, and on top of all that, he supports ''Reaganomics''. As Micheal has already said, Reaganomics (the trickle down effect) failed horribly and our country is in deep financial trouble because of that. Not to mention Reagan''s fanatical ideas that we actually need enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world five hundred times over. As if once wasn''t enough... give me a break. Yes, I will admit that the weapons industry is usually a boon to the countries economy, but in the long run, it just isnt worth it.

Because W. Bush has such a tremendous following (latest Time polls show he''s ahead... but its too far to tell), Im actually afraid to vote 3rd party, in case Bush actually wins. Im not a Gore fan at all, but its gotten to a point where im willing to ''throw my vote away'' just to prevent bush from winning.

Do we really want an idiot like that in office? (NOTE: I''ve provided no proof that he''s an idiot, because im lazy... but i can drag some proof up if people really don''t believe me)

its sad, isn''t it? To be forced to vote for the lesser of two evils.

===============================================
If there is a witness to my little life,
To my tiny throes and struggles,
He sees a fool;
And it is not fine for gods to menace fools.

oh, by the way, all you people who keep complaining about the democrats not cutting taxes...

Who do you think paves your road?
Who do you think pays the fire departments?
Who do you think pays for the police?
etc, etc

Granted, the government is notorious for squandering funds, but at least the Democrats actually do something useful with the tax money. (Medicare, Social Security, etc, etc.)

The Republicans are all for cutting taxes, rich people''s taxes.

===============================================
If there is a witness to my little life,
To my tiny throes and struggles,
He sees a fool;
And it is not fine for gods to menace fools.

quote:

---

This is NOT Clintons economy, he is nothing, he did nothing.
-asmLOCK

---

If you really look at it, though... the reason why the economy is doing so well right now is because Clinton did everything he could to not touch the economy. As a president, this is a lot easier said than done. His hands-off approach helped the economy do well, on its own. (But don't look for me to be praising Clinton... I really don't think he did a good job, on the whole, in office... I just want to point out that sometimes, doing nothing is doing something)

Now, I'm not going to voice my opinion on whether Gore or Bush would be the better candidate... I don't really like either of them much... I'm going to vote for Harry Browne, a Libertarian. There are admittedly a few things that I'm in disagreement with when it comes to his stance, but for the most part, I agree with him more than either Gore or Bush.

Unfortunately, a lot of people think it's black and white... Democrat and Republican... (this is even reflected in the posts so far on this message board)... so I feel like either Gore or Bush will win out anyway.

This doesn't stop me from promoting the Libertarian for this year's election, though... (I'm registered Independant... I don't like taking one side or the other, because as it's already been mentioned in this thread, things aren't always black and white) I encourage anyone who is wavering between the current Democrat and Republican candidates, or anyone who is considering not voting because they don't like either of the fore-running candidates (this was me for a while), to at least check out some of the other candidates and their stance.


"I know not what weapons World War III will be fought with, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones"
- Albert Einstein

Edited by - void* on August 6, 2000 9:23:02 PM

Does anybody see the sense in building up our military even more than it is now, when we aren''t at war with anyone? The military as it is now tends to use global conflicts as a testing ground for new weapons. Multi-million dollar missiles blowing up targets of probably far lesser value.. it''s kind of insane.

---
Michael Tanczos

Lieberman (sp ?) for Gore''s vice president anyone?