2008 US Election

Discussion in 'Soap Box' started by suicide_ideation, Jun 4, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. I watched the debates. I am very interested in american politics. I know this isn't a politics website. So I don't know if this belongs here. But I wanted to know your thoughts on what you think so far, which candidate and party you like.

    I am not an American, so I will not be voting. In an ideal world I'd vote for Dennis Kucinich or Ralph Nader (if I were an American), but since they're not gonna win I'm putting my hopes on John Edwards, who's third behind Obama and Hillary.

    I like Obama, also. I'm hoping Hillary won't get the nomination.

    On the republican side I don't like anyone. I hope Giuliani doesn't get the nomination.
  2. meh__

    meh__ Well-Known Member

    i watched it too and im also not an american but if i could vote i'd probably go for obama
  3. ACRon

    ACRon Well-Known Member

    ......................................american politics


    .....................................me.... :unsure:

    american politics kind of flies above my head, does this make me a dirty communist? :dunno:
  4. Esmeralda

    Esmeralda Well-Known Member

    Not sure...I don't really like any of them. I'm kind of a unique case because I am a registered Republican, and against abortion (unlike most Democrats)...but I am also against the Death penalty (unlike most Republicans). I'm basically pro-life all the way around. The war is has turned into a debacle, but we can't just leave the Iraqis in a lurch either...need to do more research on the candidates before making a decision. Maybe I'll vote libertarian :) Doesn't really matter anyway...the state I live in always goes Republican.
  5. Giuliani is your man then. Everyone seems to be going Libertarian.

    Let me remind you that Libertarians are usually pro-abortion, pro-death penalty, and for gay marriages.

    I am politically just the opposite of Libertarianism, and that's why their growing popularity scares me. I'm a totalitarian-socialist.

    Libertarians, to me, take the bad side from each of the main parties.

    The selfishness AKA capitalism from Republicans. And the immorality from Democrats, aka abortion, etc.

    Peanut, do you think it's fair to raise taxes from the wealthiest, so all can have free healthcare?
  6. Esmeralda

    Esmeralda Well-Known Member

    On abortion and the death penalty, I disagree with Libertarians, but on gay marriage, I don't really care. Marriage to me is a religious union, so a civil ceremony really doesn't concern me, and gay marriage is not acceptable in my church.

    Regarding some other things though (decriminalization of certain drugs, for example), I lean toward Libertarianism.

    Now should the wealthy pay the bulk of the taxes? I'd really like to see a 10% flat tax for everyone. I think that's fair all the way around. I am around the middle class and we pay about 30% income tax. I think that's way too much. But I also know that the people considered "wealthy" in this country (people who have a 350 thousand-dollar house, etc.) are often just as strapped as the middle-class. They just have more, but they still have 2 mortgages and 3 kids to send to college, so I think arbitrarily raising the taxes on these people would be hasty. These people are often just as cash-poor as the rest. The inheritance tax is also unfair. It's a double tax on money earned. I think a flat tax is fair and a better expenditure of money. The IRS needs to go away.
  7. Syd

    Syd Guest

    There was already a thread on this here, but whatever.

    - I'm pro-choice for abortion
    - I oppose the death penalty
    - I support gay marriages
    - I'm for tuition-free college, and major increases in educational funding
    - I support decriminalization of marijuana
    - I would like to see universal health care
    - Very supportive of environmental protection

    I could go on, but basically I'm on par with Dennis Kucinich on most social issues.

    However, I have my own agenda when it comes to the specifics of educational reform and other long-term societal changes I would like to see taking place. I also have a unique view on gun control, as I would rather see more gun education and programs available rather than enforcing stricter gun laws. The way I see it, criminals always will have access to guns. Putting stricter gun control laws in place is limiting responsible citizens from protecting themselves with firearms, while criminals are in possession of all sorts of dangerous illegal weaponry. Contrary to popular belief, police can't prevent crime from occurring in many cases. That's where self-defense training, education, and access to defensive firearms can save lives and prevent criminal damage.

    On other issues (including foreign affairs, economic issues, and war) I may have different opinions than Kucinich or any other candidates. Even though I have a very liberal stance on most social issues, I recognize the importance of centrism in politics. I would be willing to support a moderate who is concerned more with finding middle-ground and encouraging progression than an extreme politician who is stubbornly pursuing only his/ her party's concrete views.

    I'm becoming more interested in moderatism, though with liberal leanings. I'm still unsure who I'm going to vote for, though I would like to vote, as it's about setting a good example for others. I won't vote unless I'm quite confident in my selection though. I believe more people should vote, but only if they're highly informed about the ideologies of the candidates, and only if they're in good agreement with the campaign they're supporting. If someone is unsure, then I don't feel they should be pressured to vote. I'm all for greater voter participation, but only if it's responsible voting.
  8. Esmeralda

    Esmeralda Well-Known Member

    Hey Syd...I agree with you on many points...gun control being one. With SERIOUS gun control, you are merely depriving the law-abiding citizens from procuring guns. On the other hand, I find it unlikely that the government will start storming our homes and that we would have to defend ourselves against this attack. If the government decides to take control, unfortunately, they will. They have the means.

    What I have a problem with is that I do not understand how you can be opposed to the death penalty and FOR abortion. Babies are innocent. Criminals are not. I am pro-life accross the board...no abortion, no death penalty, no assisted suicide. This seems the most consistent to me.

    I am a woman, so I understand that some women want "the right to choose", but I think that the fact that we have adoption and (in the US) the "Baby Moses Law" that abortion is simply immoral. Feti (definitely after 6 weeks)can feel pain, they have a heartbeat, fingerprints, etc. When the womb is injected with a substance that will kill the fetus, the fetus actually flees and contorts in pain. How is this O.K.? And do not even get me started on late-term abortions...which essentially involve cutting the brainstem of a viable fetus (one that can live outside the womb with no external support), vaccuuming out the brain and then delivering the body. There is NO reason that this would ever be safer for the mother. She is still vaginally delivering the baby in this case.

    This said, anyone can be forgiven for such an act, if they wish...I just think this is wrong, and I simply cannot understand why someone would believe this to be a simple medical procedure. I'm not trying to be militant, but I feel strongly about this, and I just do not understand the opposite P.O.V.
  9. Syd

    Syd Guest

    Alright, I'll have to explain the specifics of my reasoning here, as simply labeling myself as pro-choice or anti-death penalty isn't going to be enough for me (or likely anyone) to truly define ourselves. There are specific cases where my opinion differs greatly, so I'm actually somewhere in the middle on these issues.

    I'm against the death penalty for the same reasons many are. Destroying human life serves no real purpose here. I'd like to see criminals put to work in prisons, encouraged to read/ write, and be studied by criminologists. I developed this opinion while learning about Psychology years ago. Killing criminals does nothing to prevent new criminals from surfacing in a society. Scientific study of criminals benefits Psychology, allowing scientists to develop new ways of improving social environments and preventing young people from becoming criminals before it happens, improving parenting and education, etc.. instead of just imprisoning offenders and sentencing them to death - a worthless, never-ending cycle.

    However, I may support the death penalty if a criminal consents to it, and chooses to die. I'm still not sure about that, but that's one possibility of the death penalty I might consider. Another possibility is if a criminal becomes physically & mentally incapable of being productive in physical labor, writing, research, etc. In cases of severe health problems or handicaps, death is sometimes the best alternative.

    So I'm against the death penalty in almost all cases except for probably the above exceptions.

    Now, I'll try to cover a few of my thoughts on abortion here. I'm pro-choice for several important reasons.

    There are many cases where I believe abortion is acceptable, if the mother chooses to do so early on.

    - If a mother is a minor, or if parents, money, proper environment isn't available
    - If a female was raped, impregnated against her will
    - If there are health risks involved for the mother and/ or baby

    What about in cases where the mother is an adult, healthy, and a good environment is available for the child?

    It is still the mother's choice. I believe child-birth is such a traumatic experience in one's life (both physically & emotionally) that the female should have complete control over her decisions. A friend of mine, Ashley, had a baby about 6 years ago, but she was too irresponsible and financially incapable of providing for the child. Her family would not support her because she ran away from them years earlier, went against her parent's wishes, and there were many other conflicts between her and her family.

    The baby was given up for adoption, but Ashley became severely depressed after being separated from the child she had grown so attached to. The heartbreak of having to give up the baby was too much, and it led her to suicide in early 2002. She was 17 years old when she died.

    Not only is giving up a baby for adoption traumatic for the mother, the baby may not always receive the best care or childhood environment. There's no guarantee that the adopting parents will raise a baby responsibly. Still, if babies aren't given up for adoption in some cases, it can be even worse. The young mothers who choose to take on the responsibilities of parenting themselves often struggle to provide enough time and money for the baby. There is not always a father figure there, and the mothers don't always have family and friends to help. This results in neglect, children growing up in such poor and unhealthy family environments are prone to developing psychological problems, and suffering from personality problems for the rest of their lives.

    Here's my "middle ground" proposal though.

    If better parenting programs can be established, and it can be carefully determined that only truly qualified parents are selected in adoption processes, then I will consider opposing abortion. Cases where abortion is not allowed should include all of the following criteria though.

    - mother is an adult (18 or older)
    - doctor personally certifies that mother is healthy enough
    - responsible adoption plans are available
    - free therapy should be paid for and provided for the mother

    I'm sick of hearing about negligible people having unprotected sex, the guy takes off as soon as he hears the woman is pregnant, and then an irresponsible mother is left to try to raise a baby on her own. It's sick, and it's the reason why there are so many poor children, so much crime, and unhealthy social environments. People love to fuck, but they don't understand the responsibility that comes with it. It's not just the children who suffer, ever wonder why there's so much crime in poor neighborhoods, or why so many criminals raised themselves as children? It's all related. Without proper parenting, children are more prone to developing into criminals or suffering from a multitude of mental health problems later in life. It hurts all of society.

    It's sad that abortion is the best alternative in some cases, but it's more sad when you see the kinds of lives these children lead when they grow up without proper parents.
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2007
  10. LetItGo

    LetItGo Staff Alumni

    I dont know much about American politics...but id like to see Obama do well, I saw an extended interview with him....he came across really well to me, and id prefer it if the democrats had the balance of power....
  11. Syd wrote he'd be against executing murderers who can work and read/write, etc. But he'd support it for a murderer who can't read/write, and is not able to work. I don't get this.
  12. Syd

    Syd Guest

    It's because criminals can still contribute to society while in prison. They can express themselves through writing and art, can contribute physical labor in the prison facility itself, and can be studied by scientists if they're cohesive and can communicate.

    That's why I'm against the death penalty. I feel that even death-row criminals have a purpose to fulfill, just as anyone else in society does. Learning about the individual lives and minds of criminals helps us understand how to prevent further cases from occurring in our society in the future.

    I'm not supporting the death penalty for criminals simply who can't read/ write and are disabled. If they're cohesive enough to talk and scientists can study them, they have a purpose in science. Criminals who need constant assistance just to function due to developing severe health problems may be more of a burden than a benefit to anyone. I don't really support the death penalty in any situation, but if a prisoner wishes death and is clearly suffering from severe health problems - or if a prisoner is incapable of functioning mentally/ physically without assistance (can't consent to death) and their family requests for them to be given death sentence.. I wouldn't oppose those actions in such scenarios, though I'm not encouraging death at all.

    So I'm against the death penalty, though I'm neutral on those rare circumstances.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.