Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Andrew
Is this you? Claim Profile »
7 months ago
in This Is What the 2008 Electoral Map Would Look Like If the Election Were Decided by [Fill in the Blank] on The Washington Independent
Good technique, once you fail to come up with a rebuttal you resort to personal attacks. Show me a point I had no rebuttal for and I will gladly concede or provide for one. It's funny that people attack Rush Limbaugh though. He has done more with a GED than you ever will with a college degree and he has most likely already helped this world FAR more than you ever will.
1 reply
7 months ago
in This Is What the 2008 Electoral Map Would Look Like If the Election Were Decided by [Fill in the Blank] on The Washington Independent
Your post is not really an argument, more a statement of positions. I still feel compelled to comment on it though just to clear things up.
1. Iraq is the main battleground in the war on terror. Osama himself has said this and many of the enemy combatants over there are terrorists. Also, abandoning the Iraqis while they are trying to rebuild their government sends a horrible message to any countries in need.
2. Economy... http://www.heritage.org/Research/taxes/cda08-09...
3. Nothing to say here since you have your mind made up. Just remember that A) there is no scientific consensus on man-made climate change B) The arbiter of temperature in our solar system is the sun, not gasses that make up less than a percent of our atmosphere. Personally I think that the whole movement is just a scare tactic so scientists can get more cash from making up studies and the liberals can cash in on selling people inefficient alternative energies. I mean, the temperature on other planets is going up so I don't see why people expect us to be different.
4. Oil is good. It is highly efficient and decently plentiful. Drilling allows us to keep more of our own money. Personally I'm looking forward to Nuclear and Hydrogen power but we should use what we have. Alternative energy sources are wildly inefficient, there is practically no incentive to switch.
5. People will always hate who is in first place. Also, other countries do not choose the president and if they want to have a specific candidate then they can suck it. I know that doesn't sound like a respectful position but it is SO pretentious for other countries to think they can have a say in who we elect that all I can say to them is suck on my balls. Seriously, I DO NOT CARE. There is practically no country with a legit reason to hate us and many with legit reasons to LOVE us. If Europe hates us so much then they should pay back the Marshall Plan (adjusted for inflation).
6.Fear is necessary. A nation without fear is foolish and vulnerable. Obama didn't play on fears because he wants people to be as irrational and naive as possible.
7. I don't really understand this point. McCain took public funds so he couldn't get direct contributions to my knowledge. Just because he brainwashed enough people to donate to his campaign doesn't make him a good president.
8. Stealing money is not a good policy. Beyond that, the rich already pay the majority of the tax burden. That doesn't sound like equality to me. In this country the pay in jobs go up as the skill level required goes up, and that is as it should be. If you think that people aren't paid enough then make your own company and pay them whatever you want. We already have relative freedom of opportunity, to reward people for not taking the time to learn a trade or profession. And if you think taking money from the people who run the economy will strengthen it then you are not thinking clearly.
Other:
1. Agree
2. Agree
1. Iraq is the main battleground in the war on terror. Osama himself has said this and many of the enemy combatants over there are terrorists. Also, abandoning the Iraqis while they are trying to rebuild their government sends a horrible message to any countries in need.
2. Economy... http://www.heritage.org/Research/taxes/cda08-09...
3. Nothing to say here since you have your mind made up. Just remember that A) there is no scientific consensus on man-made climate change B) The arbiter of temperature in our solar system is the sun, not gasses that make up less than a percent of our atmosphere. Personally I think that the whole movement is just a scare tactic so scientists can get more cash from making up studies and the liberals can cash in on selling people inefficient alternative energies. I mean, the temperature on other planets is going up so I don't see why people expect us to be different.
4. Oil is good. It is highly efficient and decently plentiful. Drilling allows us to keep more of our own money. Personally I'm looking forward to Nuclear and Hydrogen power but we should use what we have. Alternative energy sources are wildly inefficient, there is practically no incentive to switch.
5. People will always hate who is in first place. Also, other countries do not choose the president and if they want to have a specific candidate then they can suck it. I know that doesn't sound like a respectful position but it is SO pretentious for other countries to think they can have a say in who we elect that all I can say to them is suck on my balls. Seriously, I DO NOT CARE. There is practically no country with a legit reason to hate us and many with legit reasons to LOVE us. If Europe hates us so much then they should pay back the Marshall Plan (adjusted for inflation).
6.Fear is necessary. A nation without fear is foolish and vulnerable. Obama didn't play on fears because he wants people to be as irrational and naive as possible.
7. I don't really understand this point. McCain took public funds so he couldn't get direct contributions to my knowledge. Just because he brainwashed enough people to donate to his campaign doesn't make him a good president.
8. Stealing money is not a good policy. Beyond that, the rich already pay the majority of the tax burden. That doesn't sound like equality to me. In this country the pay in jobs go up as the skill level required goes up, and that is as it should be. If you think that people aren't paid enough then make your own company and pay them whatever you want. We already have relative freedom of opportunity, to reward people for not taking the time to learn a trade or profession. And if you think taking money from the people who run the economy will strengthen it then you are not thinking clearly.
Other:
1. Agree
2. Agree
2 replies
Rudy
You know at first Andrew I thought you were a mindless conservative drone, I really did. You have shown me however, that you are a crazy conservative nut. You know your facts, kind of, but you pull that crazy right wing BS. You don't concede to to points you have no rebuttal to and you use sketchy logic among other things. I guess in the end I don't really care to much when it's apparent you clearly have an agenda here. But good job, I'm sure you would make comedian Rush Limbaugh proud.
Jared
1. It doesn't matter what Iraq is NOW, the fact is that the American public was lied to about Iraq. If Osama bin Laden was in Iraq, we should have been told that. Not "Saddam is going to kill us all if we don't get him now!" I'm not really arguing on Iraq though, we need to fix the mess we made ASAP and I don't think you will find any sane person who wants to stay there a day longer than we need to. McCain's "100 years of war in Iraq" gaffe really dissuaded me from voting for him. The only thing that war generates is the guarantee that our children will grow up to see the same kind of violence.
2. Even your source claims that the plans are not comparable. Besides the fact that they are BOTH beneficial for the economy, they conveniently ignore the effects of their plans in the long run. Obama's progressive plan is aimed at creating more jobs, and getting people off the streets. McCain's is focused solely on numbers- with his plan, it doesn't matter who is making the money, as long as it is still flowing.
3. Your ignorance on this subject is astounding. There has been a scientific consensus on the subject for years. The controversy surrounding global warming and the environmental crisis is not a scientific one. Your second point (B) is laughable. The Sun isn't the only arbiter of temperature, are you aware of how much energy humans produce? The problem isn't that the temperature is raising, it's how much the temperature is raising by, and the fact that there is no reason to believe it will ever fluctuate with the infrastructure that we have in place. Please do some more research before making baseless, blatantly false claims like this one. Someone who doesn't know better may think you are actually serious.
4. Oil is extremely useful, nobody could argue against that. However, it causes a ton of problems, most notably forcing us to maintain diplomacy with countries that harbor terrorists and commit horrible civil rights violations (Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Iran etc).
I would like a source that can seriously claim that Hydrogen power/other alternative energy sources are as inefficient as you claim. The reasons for inefficiency are because of limited technology- which is being revamped by the day and can easily be in place within the next decade. Keep in mind that these sources are both 100% renewable, completely safe, beneficial to the environment and can only be improved upon. I would say that those are several pretty strong incentives to switch, and that was after only about 1.5 seconds of thinking of reasons to switch from oil.
Also, speaking of inefficient, the plans for American offshore drilling are so horrible that I can't believe that you'd suggest them here. Let me quote a SOURCE (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008...
"It would take at least a decade for oil companies to obtain permits, procure equipment, and do the exploration necessary to get the oil out of the ground, most industry analysts say. And even then, they add, the amount of new oil produced would probably be too small to significantly affect world oil prices."
So basically, with the Republican offshore drilling program, we get to waste taxpayer money AND irreparably destroy the environment! How could we argue against that?
5. "People hate us because we're the best" "People hate us because of our freedoms" etc are some of the most blatantly ignorant lines I've ever heard. People don't hate us because we're free, they hate us because our armies travel the world destroying things, interfering with politics around the globe, we destabilize entire regions of the world and then we force our culture down their throats. Please, refer to the huge amounts of support that the Iraqi shoe-thrower has gotten for more information here. Needless to say, if this is what you really believe then you need to open your eyes.
6. Fear is not necessary at all. How could you even suggest such a ridiculous concept? Do you think the founding fathers drafted the Constitution because they were scared? You don't seem to understand the difference between "fear" and "vigilance". Obama didn't play on fears because his campaign managers were smart enough to realize that people were getting sick of Rovian politics, using fear to promote candidates that were obviously unqualified got old to the American people. Fear is divisive, it is only used when one group wants to exercise control over another. Vigilance, on the other hand, unites us all.
7. Have you ever stopped to think that people who disagree with you may not have been "brainwashed", but might just see a different side of the problem? Your ignorance shines even more brightly here. His point is that McCain wasn't open about his campaign, with 35% of his funds from "undisclosed" persons. Whether or not he was doing something shady doesn't matter, it just makes you wonder why he chose to hide such an important part of his campaign. Americans are finally starting to get tired of being kept in the dark. If you want to be elected, you should have to answer to the voters. It's a simple issue of ethics. This problem was magnified when Mrs. Palin decided to spend campaign money on $150,000 of expensive clothing, which is more than most American families will make off of 3 years of salary.
8. It's not "stealing money". Obama's plan is to slightly increase taxes that ALREADY EXIST, and only for the smallest amount of people. If that is really what you believe, then you can accuse EVERY president of "stealing money" from people, and you can equally accuse McCain of wanting to steal from people. Please stop being so ignorant when making claims. You bring up several good points but they are so clouded with misinformation and bias that it is really difficult to take you seriously.
Other:
1. I also agree that space exploration needs more funding, however given our current situation I think that there are more important issues to take care of.
2. I also am a 100% advocate of the right to bear arms, I agree.
I know that this reply is a little late, but I just stumbled upon this article today. I don't care if anyone replies, of if you, Andrew, ever sees it. I just wanted to vent and I saw this ignorant, misinformed post and I wanted to right some wrongs :)
2. Even your source claims that the plans are not comparable. Besides the fact that they are BOTH beneficial for the economy, they conveniently ignore the effects of their plans in the long run. Obama's progressive plan is aimed at creating more jobs, and getting people off the streets. McCain's is focused solely on numbers- with his plan, it doesn't matter who is making the money, as long as it is still flowing.
3. Your ignorance on this subject is astounding. There has been a scientific consensus on the subject for years. The controversy surrounding global warming and the environmental crisis is not a scientific one. Your second point (B) is laughable. The Sun isn't the only arbiter of temperature, are you aware of how much energy humans produce? The problem isn't that the temperature is raising, it's how much the temperature is raising by, and the fact that there is no reason to believe it will ever fluctuate with the infrastructure that we have in place. Please do some more research before making baseless, blatantly false claims like this one. Someone who doesn't know better may think you are actually serious.
4. Oil is extremely useful, nobody could argue against that. However, it causes a ton of problems, most notably forcing us to maintain diplomacy with countries that harbor terrorists and commit horrible civil rights violations (Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Iran etc).
I would like a source that can seriously claim that Hydrogen power/other alternative energy sources are as inefficient as you claim. The reasons for inefficiency are because of limited technology- which is being revamped by the day and can easily be in place within the next decade. Keep in mind that these sources are both 100% renewable, completely safe, beneficial to the environment and can only be improved upon. I would say that those are several pretty strong incentives to switch, and that was after only about 1.5 seconds of thinking of reasons to switch from oil.
Also, speaking of inefficient, the plans for American offshore drilling are so horrible that I can't believe that you'd suggest them here. Let me quote a SOURCE (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008...
"It would take at least a decade for oil companies to obtain permits, procure equipment, and do the exploration necessary to get the oil out of the ground, most industry analysts say. And even then, they add, the amount of new oil produced would probably be too small to significantly affect world oil prices."
So basically, with the Republican offshore drilling program, we get to waste taxpayer money AND irreparably destroy the environment! How could we argue against that?
5. "People hate us because we're the best" "People hate us because of our freedoms" etc are some of the most blatantly ignorant lines I've ever heard. People don't hate us because we're free, they hate us because our armies travel the world destroying things, interfering with politics around the globe, we destabilize entire regions of the world and then we force our culture down their throats. Please, refer to the huge amounts of support that the Iraqi shoe-thrower has gotten for more information here. Needless to say, if this is what you really believe then you need to open your eyes.
6. Fear is not necessary at all. How could you even suggest such a ridiculous concept? Do you think the founding fathers drafted the Constitution because they were scared? You don't seem to understand the difference between "fear" and "vigilance". Obama didn't play on fears because his campaign managers were smart enough to realize that people were getting sick of Rovian politics, using fear to promote candidates that were obviously unqualified got old to the American people. Fear is divisive, it is only used when one group wants to exercise control over another. Vigilance, on the other hand, unites us all.
7. Have you ever stopped to think that people who disagree with you may not have been "brainwashed", but might just see a different side of the problem? Your ignorance shines even more brightly here. His point is that McCain wasn't open about his campaign, with 35% of his funds from "undisclosed" persons. Whether or not he was doing something shady doesn't matter, it just makes you wonder why he chose to hide such an important part of his campaign. Americans are finally starting to get tired of being kept in the dark. If you want to be elected, you should have to answer to the voters. It's a simple issue of ethics. This problem was magnified when Mrs. Palin decided to spend campaign money on $150,000 of expensive clothing, which is more than most American families will make off of 3 years of salary.
8. It's not "stealing money". Obama's plan is to slightly increase taxes that ALREADY EXIST, and only for the smallest amount of people. If that is really what you believe, then you can accuse EVERY president of "stealing money" from people, and you can equally accuse McCain of wanting to steal from people. Please stop being so ignorant when making claims. You bring up several good points but they are so clouded with misinformation and bias that it is really difficult to take you seriously.
Other:
1. I also agree that space exploration needs more funding, however given our current situation I think that there are more important issues to take care of.
2. I also am a 100% advocate of the right to bear arms, I agree.
I know that this reply is a little late, but I just stumbled upon this article today. I don't care if anyone replies, of if you, Andrew, ever sees it. I just wanted to vent and I saw this ignorant, misinformed post and I wanted to right some wrongs :)
7 months ago
in This Is What the 2008 Electoral Map Would Look Like If the Election Were Decided by [Fill in the Blank] on The Washington Independent
I'll respond to every paragraph in order.
First, you seem to think that the President is the arbiter of our economy. He is not. Look at Clinton's Presidency, he had a big economic boon when he did practically nothing for the economy. He received a boom because of the internet boom. The economy and Presidency are not as intertwined as people think. The main reason for the current economic downturn is the mortgage problem that was forced by Democrats, the spike in oil we had that hurt many many companies, and the reduction in the value in the dollar. Also, if Bush had stayed with the conservative base it would have reduced the effects of these 3 things but he strayed. Change, however, is not a positive thing in itself. The subjectivity of change comes in whether it helps or hurts. Obama's change means reduction in military strength, slowing growth, and increasing size of government. We need none of these things.
Second, People saw "Hope" with Hitler too. Don't fall into the trap. "Hope" is not a political policy. "Hope" does not run a country. The problem is that "Hope" is just a broad phrase used to describe a thoughtless emotional reaction to simple rhetoric. I can be hopeful that stealing money from people who have earned it and giving it to people who haven't necessarily earned it but that doesn't mean a thing. He is a fad because people like his novelty: simple rhetoric, affluent black male (more people voting for him because of his race rather than against him), high media coverage, internet phenomenon. He has all the hallmarks of someone who people follow because they think it's hip.
Third. Hmmm, 55/43 for white voters and 95/4 for black voters... which one is more lopsided? Putting (or not putting) a President in office because of his skin color is wrong. More so, it is silly to say we needed a black president to show that our Country is the land of opportunity, people already know that.
Lastly, wisdom is something that comes from experience. Experience is something the youth (and Obama ;) ) don't have. Then again, you can throw away anything I say cause I'm 19 anyhow.
First, you seem to think that the President is the arbiter of our economy. He is not. Look at Clinton's Presidency, he had a big economic boon when he did practically nothing for the economy. He received a boom because of the internet boom. The economy and Presidency are not as intertwined as people think. The main reason for the current economic downturn is the mortgage problem that was forced by Democrats, the spike in oil we had that hurt many many companies, and the reduction in the value in the dollar. Also, if Bush had stayed with the conservative base it would have reduced the effects of these 3 things but he strayed. Change, however, is not a positive thing in itself. The subjectivity of change comes in whether it helps or hurts. Obama's change means reduction in military strength, slowing growth, and increasing size of government. We need none of these things.
Second, People saw "Hope" with Hitler too. Don't fall into the trap. "Hope" is not a political policy. "Hope" does not run a country. The problem is that "Hope" is just a broad phrase used to describe a thoughtless emotional reaction to simple rhetoric. I can be hopeful that stealing money from people who have earned it and giving it to people who haven't necessarily earned it but that doesn't mean a thing. He is a fad because people like his novelty: simple rhetoric, affluent black male (more people voting for him because of his race rather than against him), high media coverage, internet phenomenon. He has all the hallmarks of someone who people follow because they think it's hip.
Third. Hmmm, 55/43 for white voters and 95/4 for black voters... which one is more lopsided? Putting (or not putting) a President in office because of his skin color is wrong. More so, it is silly to say we needed a black president to show that our Country is the land of opportunity, people already know that.
Lastly, wisdom is something that comes from experience. Experience is something the youth (and Obama ;) ) don't have. Then again, you can throw away anything I say cause I'm 19 anyhow.
1 reply
Andrew
Edit: "I can be hopeful that stealing money from people who have earned it and giving it to people who haven't necessarily earned it but that doesn't mean a thing."
I haven't slept in a while, I need to rewrite this sentence
I can be hopeful that stealing money from the people who employ the workers of America and giving that money to other people will help the economy but my "Hope" is worthless since logic would say that taking money from my boss would lead him to pay me less anyhow or fire me.
I haven't slept in a while, I need to rewrite this sentence
I can be hopeful that stealing money from the people who employ the workers of America and giving that money to other people will help the economy but my "Hope" is worthless since logic would say that taking money from my boss would lead him to pay me less anyhow or fire me.
7 months ago
in This Is What the 2008 Electoral Map Would Look Like If the Election Were Decided by [Fill in the Blank] on The Washington Independent
I didn't set up any education system. I can't think of any person who did. It's teachers and the media that brainwash our children as they grow up. Beyond that, show me where McCain lied during the debates and I can show you where Obama lied. That's what politicians do.
You don't seem to understand that conservatives care as much if not more about the poor than liberals. We, however, are not willing to steal other people's money to give to the poor. Conservatives favor charitable donation over stealing money that doesn't belong to you from other people. I can't see someone who votes liberal really saying they care about the poor cause it's not like THEY are giving any money to the poor, just the rich people.
Why would people "forget" about abortions? If someone was going around shooting people in the head every hour unchecked I wouldn't say "forget that murderer who we refuse to imprison". No caring human being is going to "forget" about the unjust murder of countless children.
Also, I haven't seen any comprehensive plan by Obama to improve inequality in the schooling system while the Republican platform supports the highly efficient voucher system.
In the end, the only people who can be considered selfish in this election are the ones who voted for Obama because they are banking that the rich will pay for the poor and they themselves (the voter) will have to pay nothing and maybe even make more. Not to mention that McCain's plan has shown that it would increase growth by twice the amount of Obama's plan in practically all sectors.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/cda08-09...
show all 3 replies
You don't seem to understand that conservatives care as much if not more about the poor than liberals. We, however, are not willing to steal other people's money to give to the poor. Conservatives favor charitable donation over stealing money that doesn't belong to you from other people. I can't see someone who votes liberal really saying they care about the poor cause it's not like THEY are giving any money to the poor, just the rich people.
Why would people "forget" about abortions? If someone was going around shooting people in the head every hour unchecked I wouldn't say "forget that murderer who we refuse to imprison". No caring human being is going to "forget" about the unjust murder of countless children.
Also, I haven't seen any comprehensive plan by Obama to improve inequality in the schooling system while the Republican platform supports the highly efficient voucher system.
In the end, the only people who can be considered selfish in this election are the ones who voted for Obama because they are banking that the rich will pay for the poor and they themselves (the voter) will have to pay nothing and maybe even make more. Not to mention that McCain's plan has shown that it would increase growth by twice the amount of Obama's plan in practically all sectors.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/cda08-09...
3 replies
uwstout
yea i was kind of referring to you as in the living old. Obviously your views are deeply embedded in your head and anyone with that corrupt of a point of view can turn any comment on any person. I care about the poor, I just don't want to know about them, I'm a douche. I care about the earth, i just want to drill more oil, I'm a douche. Ive got 50 rooms in my house I haven't entered in years, but I'm to douchey to pay taxes. Instead I'll use my money to lobby the president so he can set up a loophole to commemorate the dinosaurs, so I can pay less in taxes. I have one room in my house without a 50" flat screen, what if guests come? I can't be paying taxes I'm a douche. I don't even know why I'm typing anymore cause I'm sure you'll just claim things you don't really believe in like a total douche Republican. Im sure if I shot you in the head no one would care as long as your parents douche views on politics died along with you. McCain's plan is going to make more money, or wait his plan is to freeze all spending, well maybe that would make more money, I'm not really sure. Lets cut spending on education, fucking brilliant. I'm sure the Japanese won't pull to much further ahead than us in schooling. I mean i have better things to do, like eat unborn fetus'.
Jared
Well, the issues with the voucher system is that they cause huge class divisions. Poor people can not get as good an education as rich people under the system, and that only makes it that much harder for them to get a job later on and pay for their children's vouchers. It's not so much about making the poor poorer as it is about making the rich richer. Basically, under that kind of system you would have to have money already to make more money (which is obviously unfair to most people).
And again, you demonstrate that you have no knowledge of how taxation actually works. It's not like "rich people, find some hobos and give them money or else you go to jail". Rich people are giving money to EVERYBODY, including themselves, to pay for services that EVERYBODY, including themselves, takes advantage of. Social Security, medicare, roads, schools, etc. The list goes on. How is it fair to force someone making $10,000 a year to foot society's bill, people who are so poor that they have to choose between paying taxes and eating, when Joe the CEO is making $300 million for driving the economy into the ground would have no issues putting in his share? Your ideology doesn't make sense morally or economically.
And again, you demonstrate that you have no knowledge of how taxation actually works. It's not like "rich people, find some hobos and give them money or else you go to jail". Rich people are giving money to EVERYBODY, including themselves, to pay for services that EVERYBODY, including themselves, takes advantage of. Social Security, medicare, roads, schools, etc. The list goes on. How is it fair to force someone making $10,000 a year to foot society's bill, people who are so poor that they have to choose between paying taxes and eating, when Joe the CEO is making $300 million for driving the economy into the ground would have no issues putting in his share? Your ideology doesn't make sense morally or economically.
7 months ago
in This Is What the 2008 Electoral Map Would Look Like If the Election Were Decided by [Fill in the Blank] on The Washington Independent
Lets see... how to refute this... hmmm... here it goes
They grew up in a time when segregation was still practiced and was a big part of the DEMOCRATIC party. Now, to be fair, the southern democratic party was socially conservative at that time and does not align fully with the current Democratic party but the point still stands; the Republican party HAS NEVER BEEN FOR SEGREGATION. So to say that old people are overwhelmingly segregationist is a stretch, so say that is why they vote Republican is BEYOND ridiculous.
Now, about the youth. The young generally vote Democratic because they are less wise, many are uninformed, and ALL of them have been subject to the biased media and school systems (the young are notorious for being easy to brainwash). Beyond that, a college degree does little to make you knowledgeable about politics or political ideas (knowing how to derive functions or write a sentence without grammatical errors does not help you know whether or not abortion is wrong). As people age they move more to the right, it's history.
About the whole "1/3 of Southern Whites voted for Obama". Ever heard of the "Red South"? The South usually votes majority Republican, you are not revealing anything new. If you actually look at exit polls then you will see that people who said race was a factor in their vote placed their vote for Obama the majority of the time (53% to 45%). This shows that his skin color HELPED him more than hurt him so if anything then the country is more racist against whites than blacks. I'd be more worried about prejudice against the elderly (as you might have shown yourself) since nearly twice as many people said that was a factor in their vote and 66% of those voted for Obama.
If you wish to generalize by geography then should we say the North and West are all brainwashed hippie elitists. I know that's not true however, since there were some votes for McCain in both the North AND the West ;)
Seriously though, in the end the Democratic platform has more mentions of race than a KKK mission statement. The Republican platform (as far as I've seen so far) is devoid of any mention of race, and that is as it should be. The government should not see skin color at all. I find the Democratic platform to be offensive in their inclusion of race in their policies and the Republican platform is by far the least racist of the two.
Regardless of all of this, I thank you for using good sentence structure and grammar in your argument and actually including statistics to try and support your argument. I respect your opinion except for the last paragraph.
show all 4 replies
They grew up in a time when segregation was still practiced and was a big part of the DEMOCRATIC party. Now, to be fair, the southern democratic party was socially conservative at that time and does not align fully with the current Democratic party but the point still stands; the Republican party HAS NEVER BEEN FOR SEGREGATION. So to say that old people are overwhelmingly segregationist is a stretch, so say that is why they vote Republican is BEYOND ridiculous.
Now, about the youth. The young generally vote Democratic because they are less wise, many are uninformed, and ALL of them have been subject to the biased media and school systems (the young are notorious for being easy to brainwash). Beyond that, a college degree does little to make you knowledgeable about politics or political ideas (knowing how to derive functions or write a sentence without grammatical errors does not help you know whether or not abortion is wrong). As people age they move more to the right, it's history.
About the whole "1/3 of Southern Whites voted for Obama". Ever heard of the "Red South"? The South usually votes majority Republican, you are not revealing anything new. If you actually look at exit polls then you will see that people who said race was a factor in their vote placed their vote for Obama the majority of the time (53% to 45%). This shows that his skin color HELPED him more than hurt him so if anything then the country is more racist against whites than blacks. I'd be more worried about prejudice against the elderly (as you might have shown yourself) since nearly twice as many people said that was a factor in their vote and 66% of those voted for Obama.
If you wish to generalize by geography then should we say the North and West are all brainwashed hippie elitists. I know that's not true however, since there were some votes for McCain in both the North AND the West ;)
Seriously though, in the end the Democratic platform has more mentions of race than a KKK mission statement. The Republican platform (as far as I've seen so far) is devoid of any mention of race, and that is as it should be. The government should not see skin color at all. I find the Democratic platform to be offensive in their inclusion of race in their policies and the Republican platform is by far the least racist of the two.
Regardless of all of this, I thank you for using good sentence structure and grammar in your argument and actually including statistics to try and support your argument. I respect your opinion except for the last paragraph.
4 replies
Momma
I think I'm gonna start an Andrew fan club. :)
Andrew
Oh yea, forgot, all exit poll statistics I used were pulled from the CNN website. http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/...
7 months ago
in This Is What the 2008 Electoral Map Would Look Like If the Election Were Decided by [Fill in the Blank] on The Washington Independent
At least they weren't as bad as D.C. Remember how they reelected that mayor who was caught with hookers and coke?
2 replies
Jared
I would rather have a President that loved hookers than a President that doesn't know Africa is a continent (like Mrs. Palin).
Russ
Interesting that you would equate private scandals with scandals of public office (in the case of Stevens) or scandals of vast ignorance (in the case of Palin). I would prefer a candidate who had an imperfect private life but had an ability to govern.
7 months ago
in This Is What the 2008 Electoral Map Would Look Like If the Election Were Decided by [Fill in the Blank] on The Washington Independent
No surprise, Republican states vote Republican. Show me the day New York or California turns red. Their messiah has come and I wish he had pulled a Moses and just led all the Liberals to Canada instead of corrupting the American ideals.
1 reply
Littl3Gr33n
Just hang on: reason approaches. The old Red South has lost Virginia, North Carolina and Florida.
7 months ago
in This Is What the 2008 Electoral Map Would Look Like If the Election Were Decided by [Fill in the Blank] on The Washington Independent
Politics has little to do with intelligence. Politics has to do with logic and common sense mixed with opinion, not how many facts you know. The elderly do vote conservative for MAAANY reasons, including the ones that you listed that I pretty much said already (they don't like things to change aka fear and comfortability) also because of morals and religion and such.
Regardless, there is wisdom and intelligence. The elderly have wisdom, the college graduates have intelligence. I'd say wisdom leads to better political and social decisions than intelligence though purely because wisdom implies you actually understand how things work and intelligence implies you've read how things should work.
Regardless, there is wisdom and intelligence. The elderly have wisdom, the college graduates have intelligence. I'd say wisdom leads to better political and social decisions than intelligence though purely because wisdom implies you actually understand how things work and intelligence implies you've read how things should work.
2 replies
7 months ago
in This Is What the 2008 Electoral Map Would Look Like If the Election Were Decided by [Fill in the Blank] on The Washington Independent
Race should NEVER be an issue in government. The government should never see a difference in people skin color and should never legislate along those lines. To say it upholds democratic principles to vote for someone only because of the color of their skin is outrageous. Instead of having a candidate who misleads the public with simple Robin Hood rhetoric who gets voted in because he'll be a novelty candidate we should have someone who wins because they have genuinely good ideas.
Americans should not care what other countries think of us. We should not be voting for people to appease a bunch of Europeans.
Americans should not care what other countries think of us. We should not be voting for people to appease a bunch of Europeans.
1 reply
penfold
Andrew:
"Americans should not care what other countries think of us. We should not be voting for people to appease a bunch of Europeans."
Actually you should, International trade has been the basis of your economy, which is now under serious strain. America after WWII defined itself in terms of an international mandate. To ignore the rest of the world is very dangerous. Take it from a Brit, in 50years we went from the most powerful country in the world with an Empire, larger than any in history before or since, to having to ration bread. If the US wants to maintain its place in a global economy during a time of recession and the shifting of capital and finical markets to the east, it will need the support of its allies. Incidentally as a citizen of a country that has supported yours with the blood of our troops, and stood up to be counted with you against overwhelming international opinion, I am somewhat offended by your derogatory comments.
Do you actually have an argument regarding race or is it limited to "Americans should not care what other countries think of us. We should not be voting for people to appease a bunch of Europeans". I am all for debate, and realise that there will be many valid points of view here, but blanket proclamations with no argument is a mark of idiocy.
"Americans should not care what other countries think of us. We should not be voting for people to appease a bunch of Europeans."
Actually you should, International trade has been the basis of your economy, which is now under serious strain. America after WWII defined itself in terms of an international mandate. To ignore the rest of the world is very dangerous. Take it from a Brit, in 50years we went from the most powerful country in the world with an Empire, larger than any in history before or since, to having to ration bread. If the US wants to maintain its place in a global economy during a time of recession and the shifting of capital and finical markets to the east, it will need the support of its allies. Incidentally as a citizen of a country that has supported yours with the blood of our troops, and stood up to be counted with you against overwhelming international opinion, I am somewhat offended by your derogatory comments.
Do you actually have an argument regarding race or is it limited to "Americans should not care what other countries think of us. We should not be voting for people to appease a bunch of Europeans". I am all for debate, and realise that there will be many valid points of view here, but blanket proclamations with no argument is a mark of idiocy.
And yeah, why should someone attack Rush Limbaugh? He's just a racist homophobic drug addict that happens to have a couple million listeners....it's not like he's making a negative influence on a huge portion of our population or anything. If that's not helping the world, I don't know WHAT is.