Answer honestly......Do you vote strictly by party or do you actually look at the candidates?
Is there somebody on your opposing party that you would entertain as a possible President?
It seems for me, the last few years it is harder to find a candidate that represents my core of beliefs....the closest person now for me, and though he is not running would be Joe Lieberman....I find that I admire his integrity and his stance he has taken on the war...I do not agree with his economic and social issues...but, I do respect him, and could support him....
what are your thoughts??
I look at the candidates, but at least on a national level (senators, presidents, etc.) they all seem to so blindly follow a party line that there isnt much difference in them.
At the local level, its refreshing to see candidates who arent afraid to stray from the prescribed platform.
Quote from: Gryphon on August 24, 2007, 11:45:59 AM
I look at the candidates, but at least on a national level (senators, presidents, etc.) they all seem to so blindly follow a party line that there isnt much difference in them.
At the local level, its refreshing to see candidates who arent afraid to stray from the prescribed platform.
I agree. For example, I voted for Arnold Schwarzenegger because of his stance on certain issues, environmental, stem cell research, etc. Those issues are endorsed by him, but not the Republican party. I respected the fact that he followed his best judgment and didn't tow the party line.
I agree about the Presidential candidates, but I would (and have) voted for a candidate in a party other than the one I belong to. I have to say that NONE of the Republican candidates excite me, at all, for 2008.
This is kind of off topic, but I just admitted who I voted for. I can recall someone telling me that's a faux pas. Has anyone else heard that? If so, why shouldn't we?
I never heard of that before..piya..
and I think Arnold is a great example of someone not bowing to the Party, but standing on the issues that are important to him, and what he made his campaign for....
and I wished I could say that there was SOMEONE on the democrat side for the 08 election that I could get a little excited about...but I don't see it....
Depends on the race and the candidate. I've probably voted for more Republicans than Democrats in local races over the past couple of cycles. (At least in races where partisanship is allowed. Most municipalities are (wisely) going to non-partisan races.)
But, as politicians (on both sides) move up the ladder, they become more obsessed with pleasing the base with meaningless rhetoric and sloganeering -- not on issues that really matter to people.
While I find both parties irreparably corrupt, I cannot understand for the life of me why anyone from the working classes (middle and below...and believe me, no matter what you think, you aren't a member of the upper class) would vote for any Repug (especially for national representation). The Democraps may be as corrupt as the Repugs, but at least their corruption leans more towards favoring the working classes.
Quote from: Y on August 24, 2007, 08:08:55 PM
While I find both parties irreparably corrupt, I cannot understand for the life of me why anyone from the working classes (middle and below...and believe me, no matter what you think, you aren't a member of the upper class) would vote for any Repug (especially for national representation). The Democraps may be as corrupt as the Repugs, but at least their corruption leans more towards favoring the working classes.
That is absolutely the dumbest, stupidest, piece crap that you have ever, ever, ever spewed on here.... :bsflag: :poop:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 24, 2007, 08:44:26 PM
That is absolutely the dumbest, stupidest, piece crap that you have ever, ever, ever spewed on here....
...and I'll be more than interested to listen to any cogent rebuttal you may have to offer...so get busy! :wink:
I'm referring to the Democraps may be as corrupt as the Repugs, but at least their corruption leans more towards favoring the working classes....that one made me shoot mt. dew outta my nostrils.... :yes:
Quote from: Henry Hawk on August 24, 2007, 10:24:12 PM
I'm referring to the Democraps may be as corrupt as the Repugs, but at least their corruption leans more towards favoring the working classes....that one made me shoot mt. dew outta my nostrils.... :yes:
Fact not fiction, do I need to run down a litany of such?
Or maybe you like to provide some evidence that it is the Repugs who favor the working class, 'eh?
Quote from: Y on August 24, 2007, 08:08:55 PM
While I find both parties irreparably corrupt, I cannot understand for the life of me why anyone from the working classes (middle and below...and believe me, no matter what you think, you aren't a member of the upper class) would vote for any Repug (especially for national representation). The Democraps may be as corrupt as the Repugs, but at least their corruption leans more towards favoring the working classes.
All the dems know are give away programs and they are giving the money of the working class by taxing them out of existence. Go back and look at the tax scale before Bush's tax cut and compare it with the tax scale now. I believe you will find you are paying less. I believe you will also find that the income at which you had to pay tax's before was lower so some lower income people had to pay tax's under the former administration and aren't now. Now someone who didn't pay in tax's, lower income won't see a difference but that's the point, they paid none in the first place so theirs wouldn't change.
To me the dems are all about tax and spend.....To me thats not leaning toward the working class.
I suggest you go compare actual tax rates and come back with the results.
Historically the Dems use a progressive tax system which raises the rates on those who benefit the most under our economic system.
The Reps have been using 'VooDoo Economics', or the 'trickle-down' sytem of taxation which lowers the rates on those who benefit the most under our economic system...claiming that money will 'trickle-down' to the working classes. You be the judge and let us know if 'trickle-down' works. Are you better off now than before, all things being equal?
Yes....
Well then let's hear it, and see how you can directly relate it to the Repug's 'trickle-down' tax policies.
This should be interesting... :wink:
I don't intend to put my financial status on the forum. Lets just suffice it to say I have more disposable income and am not having to pay tax's at the end of the year now and my source of income is continuing to improve.
Quote from: me on August 25, 2007, 12:43:54 PM
I don't intend to put my financial status on the forum. Lets just suffice it to say I have more disposable income and am not having to pay tax's at the end of the year now and my source of income is continuing to improve.
No one asked you, or anyone, to make your financial status public.
What I want to hear is exactly how you attribute that specifically as a result of the Repugs 'trickle-down' tax policies.
I don't think you can, and I also think you'll greatly surprise yourself if you try... :wink:
Business has more money to invest, they hire more people, build more factories, more people are working and can buy products, businesses sell more, business grows, hire more people who have money to spend. Since more people are working and buying more tax's are collected, both income and sales.
Tax business more and they have less money to invest, people are laid off, can't buy products, businesses close, more people on welfare, less tax's collect (welfare recipients don't pay tax's), tax's are raised on lower and middle income people to cover the extra cost of the people who are now on welfare.
Thats a condensed version if you still don't get it let me know.