General Forum
Clinton basically done for.... 32 replies
So now who are you going to vote for?
Obama like I was originally going to.
Well, I'm Canadian, but if I was American, I would vote for Barack Obama.
Just because he's black. >:)
lol... funny stuff.
it seems as if people have it engraved and etched in their heads that Democrats and republicans are the only choices.
it seems as if people have it engraved and etched in their heads that Democrats and republicans are the only choices.
[Added at 05/08/2008 06:14:49 by Nataku]
Obamo needs to take it to da hood yo.
Nataku, you better update your siggy, age of consent is now 16 in Canada.
And I vote for Clinton
And I vote for Clinton
never voted rep or dem in my life!!!.....why start?.
if Gravel gets the LP nomination then maybe I'll just vote for myself lol
Al, you don't vote, period.
For me, i hope Ron Paul will win.
For me, i hope Ron Paul will win.
Oh if only Ron Paul could win.
Alex - Are you sure, because it was changed to 14 not too long ago...
woohoo, seems there are ppl here who don;t vote.
good stuff.
good stuff.
[Added at 05/08/2008 12:47:22 by Nataku]
Alex it;s still 14 in Manitoba... MUHAHAHAHAHA!
SS, changed from what age to 14? o.O
I'm going to put Korgy as a write in candidate!
the US hasnt had a decent president since the assasination of JFK! we are done for! =/
we are in such a crazy situation right now, i really dont see us recovery for at least a decade. Great Depression 2 is coming!
JFK was a horrible president. He almost started WW3, like five times!
Im voting GOP. F all you baby killers.
Wasnt Bill Clinton actually doing a good job?
hmm.
Clinton the sax man eh.
Clinton the sax man eh.
Bill Clinton did a great job economically, he had a balanced budget, he set us up with a system that could have had all of our national debt payed off, and had he been able to stay president until 2010, we wouldnt be having the recession we are in, and in fact, would probably have the best economy of any countries right now.
However, he was a huge pussy- any time we took any kind of terroist act, he either ignored it, or ran away.
US embassy gets attacked, pull out.
WTC gets bombed by a truck..dont go after the people responsible.
To be honest, had clinton taken a tougher stance on terrorism, we wouldnt have had a few airplanes hi-jacked and slammed into WTC and the pentagon.
We've yet to have a president come in, at least in my lifetime (im fairly young btw), and do an outstanding job all around.
Personally i would have loved to see Ron Paul on the billet for republicans and obama for the democrats, i really didnt get the chance to find much about Ron Paul, but what i knew i liked, with how it stands right now ill most likely go Obama.
And yes, there are more options then Democrats and Republicans, but when it comes to the presidental race, its not a popular vote anyways, seriously, our votes dont matter as much as people seem to think they do. We have a 2 party system, and it hinders us greatly.
However, he was a huge pussy- any time we took any kind of terroist act, he either ignored it, or ran away.
US embassy gets attacked, pull out.
WTC gets bombed by a truck..dont go after the people responsible.
To be honest, had clinton taken a tougher stance on terrorism, we wouldnt have had a few airplanes hi-jacked and slammed into WTC and the pentagon.
We've yet to have a president come in, at least in my lifetime (im fairly young btw), and do an outstanding job all around.
Personally i would have loved to see Ron Paul on the billet for republicans and obama for the democrats, i really didnt get the chance to find much about Ron Paul, but what i knew i liked, with how it stands right now ill most likely go Obama.
And yes, there are more options then Democrats and Republicans, but when it comes to the presidental race, its not a popular vote anyways, seriously, our votes dont matter as much as people seem to think they do. We have a 2 party system, and it hinders us greatly.
Anguish, I disagree with this statement:
"Bill Clinton did a great job economically, he had a balanced budget, he set us up with a system that could have had all of our national debt payed off, and had he been able to stay president until 2010, we wouldn't be having the recession we are in, and in fact, would probably have the best economy of any countries right now."
The economy is not controlled by the government. In fact the Fed Chairman has a larger role than the president. That aside the economy was on a downward trend during the final year of his presidency and Bush unfortunately inherited it. Clinton also was ineffective in his use of the SEC allowing companies such as Enron and WorldCom to operate corruptly for years without a proper system of checks.
As for president, I'll probably vote for McCain, though he is far too left for me on key issues such as immigration. I might even go third party this year.
"Bill Clinton did a great job economically, he had a balanced budget, he set us up with a system that could have had all of our national debt payed off, and had he been able to stay president until 2010, we wouldn't be having the recession we are in, and in fact, would probably have the best economy of any countries right now."
The economy is not controlled by the government. In fact the Fed Chairman has a larger role than the president. That aside the economy was on a downward trend during the final year of his presidency and Bush unfortunately inherited it. Clinton also was ineffective in his use of the SEC allowing companies such as Enron and WorldCom to operate corruptly for years without a proper system of checks.
As for president, I'll probably vote for McCain, though he is far too left for me on key issues such as immigration. I might even go third party this year.
ANGUISH... Rou paul for president... like wtf
o.o
o.o
usually i vote indep
There's a term that most Americans aren't aware of, or even how it works.
Economic Lag - It basically states that a president can't affect the economy during their tenure as president, even if they wanted to. Clinton got a great review of his "performance with the economy" because George Bush Sr. actually did an amazing job in setting up a lot of ideas to be put into effect for the future. Bush Sr set up the giant wave and Clinton got to sit back, unzip, and ride it.
He literally did nothing for this country, other than nearly get impeached, sell secrets to China, get paid off by corrupt corporations, have an annoying voice, and get fat in the white house. There was nothing memorable that happened during his presidency, sans negative things about his personal life.
~Iron
Economic Lag - It basically states that a president can't affect the economy during their tenure as president, even if they wanted to. Clinton got a great review of his "performance with the economy" because George Bush Sr. actually did an amazing job in setting up a lot of ideas to be put into effect for the future. Bush Sr set up the giant wave and Clinton got to sit back, unzip, and ride it.
He literally did nothing for this country, other than nearly get impeached, sell secrets to China, get paid off by corrupt corporations, have an annoying voice, and get fat in the white house. There was nothing memorable that happened during his presidency, sans negative things about his personal life.
~Iron
_______________________________________
ps, this number is actually negative ^
Show that you love me and the puppies won't die!
Paypal: admin@wworkshop.com
_______________________________________
ps, this number is actually negative ^
Show that you love me and the puppies won't die!
Paypal: admin@wworkshop.com
_______________________________________
IronSinew (Admin) has posted: 610 forum posts
User ID: 8 / Joined: 2002-06-03
User ID: 8 / Joined: 2002-06-03
Don't forget that the budget, while proposed by the Office of The President, is mostly done by the Congress. Once it hits Congress, they could easily fix any issue with the budget. So while everyone might blame Bush, the blame truly lies with the Congress for any unbalanced budgets.
And the boom under Clinton, was not only the effect of a lag, but also a tech sector boom that had value that was not based on anything real. And while that should have been mitigated by SEC and the Fed it was not. Which lead to the recession in 2001. Of course now because of the past Fed policies we are facing a credit crunch.
But again, most of the blame lies with your Congress on those matters. We do have Bush to blame for deplorable foreign policies that has led to our alienation from the world. Not to mention the excruciatingly high price of oil because Bush and the congress have been giving out tax breaks to the big oil companies.
If you want to continue the policies the government has now and perpetuate the stalemate in congress, you should vote for McCain. He will make sure we "stay the course" in Iraq. However, if you want someone who will try something new, Obama is the way to go.
In fact, though I am a registered Republican, I will most likely be voting for Obama. Because I am tired of a policy the shuts out the world and it is time for the pendulum to swing the other way. Not to mention we are going to need some fresh ideas on the whole Social Security and MediCare crisis we are going to face soon.
Hi Pulk.
And the boom under Clinton, was not only the effect of a lag, but also a tech sector boom that had value that was not based on anything real. And while that should have been mitigated by SEC and the Fed it was not. Which lead to the recession in 2001. Of course now because of the past Fed policies we are facing a credit crunch.
But again, most of the blame lies with your Congress on those matters. We do have Bush to blame for deplorable foreign policies that has led to our alienation from the world. Not to mention the excruciatingly high price of oil because Bush and the congress have been giving out tax breaks to the big oil companies.
If you want to continue the policies the government has now and perpetuate the stalemate in congress, you should vote for McCain. He will make sure we "stay the course" in Iraq. However, if you want someone who will try something new, Obama is the way to go.
In fact, though I am a registered Republican, I will most likely be voting for Obama. Because I am tired of a policy the shuts out the world and it is time for the pendulum to swing the other way. Not to mention we are going to need some fresh ideas on the whole Social Security and MediCare crisis we are going to face soon.
Hi Pulk.
Just to rudely intrude in the debate and going back to the brief age of consent in Canada crap....
The Conservatives tried a couple times in the past to raise the age of consent to 16, but was always voted down due to the fact that this would open the door to hundreds of cases where "puppy dog love" between young teens can be considered "rape".
So they reached a compromise. According to wikipedia, a 12 or 13 year old can consent to sex with someone less than 2 years older than he/she is. A 14 or 15 year old can consent to sex with someone less than 5 years older than he/she is. Once you're 16 there's no limit.
I don't know about the whole Manitoba thing being an exception....to my knowledge, it applies to all provinces/territories.
Oh, and if I could vote, I'd vote for Obama. :p I could type a short essay explaning why, but no.
The Conservatives tried a couple times in the past to raise the age of consent to 16, but was always voted down due to the fact that this would open the door to hundreds of cases where "puppy dog love" between young teens can be considered "rape".
So they reached a compromise. According to wikipedia, a 12 or 13 year old can consent to sex with someone less than 2 years older than he/she is. A 14 or 15 year old can consent to sex with someone less than 5 years older than he/she is. Once you're 16 there's no limit.
I don't know about the whole Manitoba thing being an exception....to my knowledge, it applies to all provinces/territories.
Oh, and if I could vote, I'd vote for Obama. :p I could type a short essay explaning why, but no.
[Added at 05/12/2008 01:01:17 by DeltaFlyer13]
Oh, and I hate the Conservative government. :p
DF - That should be looked into, because I don't think it's exactly like that...
[Added at 05/12/2008 04:50:25 by SilverSurfer]
Then again, I may be wrong. o.0
"The economy is not controlled by the government. In fact the Fed Chairman has a larger role than the president. That aside the economy was on a downward trend during the final year of his presidency and Bush unfortunately inherited it. Clinton also was ineffective in his use of the SEC allowing companies such as Enron and WorldCom to operate corruptly for years without a proper system of checks."
The preisdent makes a budget. Approves/denies it and occasionally adds a bit of their own pork to the barrel.
Clinton set us up with a balanced, positive budget. That has a direct effect on our economy. As far as him allowing corrupt corporations, show me a president in the last 50 years who hasnt. We are in a recession, people are going bankrupt and having their houses repoed left and right...but the oil companies report record profit.
In regards to economic lag- Yes, economies have trends, you have up and down cycles, yes clinton was on an up cycle, but he did his best to utilize it to maximum effect, bush put policies in place that hurt our economy, spiraling it down even worse then it should have been.
When it all comes down to it, the biggest reason for our economic problems are the prices of gas. Prices over the Bush's term have gone up what..300%? Gas went from a commodity, to a bill.
Bush and co. line their pockets with money from a natural resource, which should be govt. regulated and controlled.
"He literally did nothing for this country, other than nearly get impeached, sell secrets to China, get paid off by corrupt corporations, have an annoying voice, and get fat in the white house. There was nothing memorable that happened during his presidency, sans negative things about his personal life."
Yeah, sounds like most presidents these days, no matter who you vote for, your voting for a crook.
The preisdent makes a budget. Approves/denies it and occasionally adds a bit of their own pork to the barrel.
Clinton set us up with a balanced, positive budget. That has a direct effect on our economy. As far as him allowing corrupt corporations, show me a president in the last 50 years who hasnt. We are in a recession, people are going bankrupt and having their houses repoed left and right...but the oil companies report record profit.
In regards to economic lag- Yes, economies have trends, you have up and down cycles, yes clinton was on an up cycle, but he did his best to utilize it to maximum effect, bush put policies in place that hurt our economy, spiraling it down even worse then it should have been.
When it all comes down to it, the biggest reason for our economic problems are the prices of gas. Prices over the Bush's term have gone up what..300%? Gas went from a commodity, to a bill.
Bush and co. line their pockets with money from a natural resource, which should be govt. regulated and controlled.
"He literally did nothing for this country, other than nearly get impeached, sell secrets to China, get paid off by corrupt corporations, have an annoying voice, and get fat in the white house. There was nothing memorable that happened during his presidency, sans negative things about his personal life."
Yeah, sounds like most presidents these days, no matter who you vote for, your voting for a crook.
"Yeah, sounds like most presidents these days, no matter who you vote for, your voting for a crook."
Well most people are losing their houses because they don't know how to read. You cannot take out a loan for a house that you can't actually afford and expect the government to bail you out. And the only reason the government is bailing out the larger corporations (ie. Bear Sterns) is because they fail, you have a situation similar to the great depression. But again, if you couldn't afford that house in the first place, you shouldn't have bought it.
Not to mention to many people thought they could use their primary residence as a source of income, and news flash! You can't do that because that involves a level of risk of, well exactly what is happening right now, but hey, good time to own an apartment building or two.
And Clinton budget was perfected by the Republican congress of the time. If the democrats were in control of the congress, we would have had the same out of control spending we have now.
Not to mention to many people thought they could use their primary residence as a source of income, and news flash! You can't do that because that involves a level of risk of, well exactly what is happening right now, but hey, good time to own an apartment building or two.
And Clinton budget was perfected by the Republican congress of the time. If the democrats were in control of the congress, we would have had the same out of control spending we have now.
obama or hucabee =]
*nods*
But we've had a completely repub. controlled govt up until recently, that mixes for a bad scenario when one party dominates it all.
That aside, yeah, theyre all crooks.
And while alot of americans are stupid, you cant use stupidity as a reason for a sudden increase in foreclosures. Most people were doing fine until they started having to spend hunreds of bucks a month on gas.
But we've had a completely repub. controlled govt up until recently, that mixes for a bad scenario when one party dominates it all.
That aside, yeah, theyre all crooks.
And while alot of americans are stupid, you cant use stupidity as a reason for a sudden increase in foreclosures. Most people were doing fine until they started having to spend hunreds of bucks a month on gas.
"Clintons"
not just hilary
:)
not just hilary
:)