Thread: Presidential Debate (US)

At first I was watching.. becoming agravated with both because they seemed to be going no where.. then it happened. I have been undecided through this whole thing but then.. (in my mind) Cheny owned Edwards..

Cheny stayed calm and talked like he knew what his job was and what he needed to do, while Edwards hardly ever talked about HIMSELF. It was always "Kerry wants to" or "WE will". Even when he was asked to comment on himself not talking about Kerry, thats all he did.

The thing that finally got me was the realization that if Kerry got office, and something happened to him, Edwards would be running the nation.. and that made me pee myself.

JaWiB: What I was trying to say (and not saying it well), is that neither bunch of politicos is actually stating what the philosophy of their foreign (or for that matter, domestic, etc) policy will be. Details aside, I'd like to have some idea of what their ideology is in regard to these topics, not just examples of what they would do in specific cases (abstraction of the issue to a degree). One significant benefit of that is that it makes it easier how they will react to unknowns.

xviddivxoggmp3: It is certainly impossible for the average voter to be completely versed on the political information, but there should at least be a greater level of fundamental understanding. While politicians will lie to get into office, it will be easier for a more informed voter to see through it, and for the voter who has thought more abstractly (as I mentioned above), it will be easier to recognize contradictions, and things which are simply wrong in the candidates' platforms. Again, not fool proof, but much better. Did you see the table of data from NES for the 2000 election in that article? Certainly, the particular questions are not very deep (and some are a bit fluff which the article addresses too), but it is scary to think about how fundamentally lacking the electorate was (regardless of whether you agree with the outcome or not).

Cheers

can you write in names for pres elections?
if so I'm voting for super man

ready for the debate tonight?

its as much people dont care as they arn't informed, i mean probably half the people vote the way they do because of pressure from some outer sphere of influence, parents, friends, etc...(i.e. non directly from the candidates platforms, etc... ), the world is far from full of free thinking individuals.

yeah i can hear you all now... and you think your a free thinking individual? do you?

> yeah i can hear you all now... and you think your a free thinking individual? do you?

You're obviously so very unique, totally uninfluenced by other people. no-one, you are a bastion of the truth, and let no man speak ill of you!

PS You sound like one of those kids that wear shirts like "You laugh because I'm different. I laugh because you're all the same"

haha, jokes on you.

you totally missed the sarcasm...

edit: stealth sarcasm.

Beware the ninja sarcasm!!

At any rate, one of the interesting aspects of the study is that, although information of a higher quality has become easier to obtain and education level have risen, voter ignorance remains at about the same level it was at when these studies began (without searching through the document again, I believe it was in the '30s).

We go to the polls tomorrow. Is too close to call with 10 - 15% still undecided.
I think Howard has bought his way back in.

Did Edwards ask Cheney to explain how Iran now has a nuke missile capable of hitting Europe? (given Sadam now had no WMD (acc. CIA) or ties to Al Queda (acc. Rumsfelt) )


>>but how can a voter really know the truth behind the politicians convictions.

My experience tells me that;

All politicians lie, even if the lie is not telling the whole truth.

The politician in office has little real effect on the economy compared to the huge businesses (given the time they have in office and the time the economy takes to respond ect).

The party tells them how to vote anyway. So it does not matter WHO is in office, only which party has a majority.

I think people get into politics for the right reasons but then realise they have no real power (as they are gone next election if the party dumps them).


Therefore the only option is to vote them out. That is vote against the incumbent (sitting) member.

Don't give the bastards a chance to get comfortable (and corrupted).

If it was unusual for a politician to get re-elected they might start putting the local voting community before the party.

Maybe I just judged Edwards wrong.. but do any of you think he knows what he's doing? To me it just seems like he would be a follower and not a leader.

And if you really think about it, it is impossible to know the whole truth about anything the government does. Any of us here can act like we know what these politicians true intentions are, but in the end there is no way to tell.

And I say "government" not to start some kind of conspiracy crap, but to state that they will do whatever is necessary to protect there intrests.

note: I say all that in a very light hearted manner. Just so you wont get the wrong message.

It's certainly not possible to fully or completely know. It is possible to get a sense of which ones are much more likely to represent your interests (or most/many/more than anyone else).