American Politics during the Bush Presidency

[QUOTE=El Alamo]OBAMA SAYS TAKE 'DAY OFF' WORK FOR ELECTION.

This fuckin idiot Obama sounds more and more like Peron.

Whenever Peron was in trouble he urged his supporters to hit the streets I. E. Demonstrate.

Take a day off for the election.

This fuckin idiot Obama is really starting to piss me off[/QUOTE]I work for a major insurance company whose board of directors is a who's who of the Republican Party. Nevertheless, my company is echoing what Obama is saying. The compay encourages its employees to take time off from work with pay to vote. (I and almost everyone else that I know have already voted absentee, but I might slip out to go to the gym.) If we want to take the entire day off to campaign or to drive voters to the polling locations, we can take personal vacation days or our personal time to do so. There's nothing Peronist, socialist, or communist about this. Employees can use their personal vacation days or personal time any way that they want.

Fox-TV news (Faux-TV news) is waving this "take a day off for the election" as a subversion of democracy and capitalism. This only goes to show how desperate the Palin / McCain supporters are getting. Personally, I think it should be a national holiday regardless of who is running for President.

VOTE OBAMA!

[size=-2][b][u]EDITOR'S NOTE[/u]:[/b] [blue]This report was deleted in accordance with the Forum's Zero Tolerance policy regarding reports containing any [u]personal attacks or derogatory comments[/u] directed towards another forum member.

Thanks,

Jackson[/blue][/size]

I'm independent and pro-USA. Meaning I don't have any party affiliations or ideology which ties me to the republicans or to the democrates. I favor policies, actions, and candidates which will make our country strong and benefit it's people. I have been following the campaigns very closely listening and reading a lot trying to seperate facts from fiction. Nowhere in my research have I come across anything which leads me to draw the conclusion SIDNEY has below. What am I missing?

[QUOTE=Sidney]As of November 5, 2008, when President Obama is officially elected into office, our company will instill a few new policies which are in keeping with his new, inspiring issues of change and fairness:

1. All salespeople will be pooling their sales and bonuses into a common pool that will be divided equally between all of you. This will serve to give those of you who are underachieving a "fair shake."

2. All low level workers will be pooling their wages, including overtime, into a common pool, dividing it equally amongst yourselves. This will help those who are "too busy for overtime" to reap the rewards from those who have more spare time and can work extra hours.

3. All top management will now be referred to as "the government." We will not participate in this "pooling" experience because the law doesn't apply to us.

4. The "government" will give eloquent speeches to all employees every week, encouraging it's workers to continue to work hard "for the good of all."

5. The employees will be thrilled with these new policies because it's "good to spread the wealth." Those of you who have underachieved will finally get an opportunity; those of you who have worked hard and had success will feel more "patriotic."

6. The last few people who were hired should clean out their desks. Don't feel bad, though, because President Obama will give you free healthcare, free handouts, free oil for heating your home, free foodstamps, and he'll let you stay in your home for as long as you want even if you can't pay your mortgage. If you appeal directly to our Democratic congress, you might even get a free flatscreen TV and a coupon for free haircuts (shouldn't all Americans be entitled to nice looking hair?

If for any reason you are not happy with the new policies, you may want to rethink your vote on November 4th.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Stowe]The Repubs only have themselves to blame if / when they get the asses kicked. They were more corrupt than any Dem reign, did more damage to the economy / country than any Dem reign. [/QUOTE]While it's true the Pubs have only themselves to blame on any number of levels -- incompetence (Iraq, Katrina) corruption (Abramoff, Stevens) hypocrisy (Craig, Foley) lack of new ideas, etc. -- there is also a little-heralded success story behind the current Dem situation. Namely, Howard Dean.

A couple of years ago there was a little civil war inside the Democratic Party on how to proceed: one faction wanted to focus on the big states and the strong candidates, the other faction (led by Howard Dean) wanted a 50 state strategy. Howard Dean got elected as head of the DNC, and proceeded with the 50 state strategy, and some of the fruits are being seen. John McCain and the RNC are being forced to spend resources in places that Dems had previously stayed away from and left to the Pubs as low-hanging fruit.

The 2006 story:

[url]http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/The_vindication_of_Howard_Deans_crazy_1109.html[/url]

The 2008 story:

[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/27/dean-was-right-50-state-s_n_138229.html[/url]

[QUOTE=Stowe]Now that it appears that McAngryOldGuy and the 'Princess' are going to lose, and possibly by a wide margin (based on the Electoral College) it is interesting to see the Repubs here displaying sour grapes.[/QUOTE]A lot can happen between now and November 4th. Although there are some significant differences in the 2008 polls and the 2000 and 2004 polls, the fact is that in the two previous elections there were some last-minute surprises. I remember going to bed on election eve 2004 thinking that Kerry had made it.

I'm thinking we're going to wake up on November 5th with a young black guy with a funny name slated to be our next President, and huge Democratic sweeps in the House and Senate. But I can't really let myself believe it until I actually see it.

[QUOTE=StrayLight]While it's true the Pubs have only themselves to blame on any number of levels -- incompetence (Iraq, Katrina) corruption (Abramoff, Stevens) hypocrisy (Craig, Foley) lack of new ideas, etc. -- there is also a little-heralded success story behind the current Dem situation. Namely, Howard Dean.

A couple of years ago there was a little civil war inside the Democratic Party on how to proceed: one faction wanted to focus on the big states and the strong candidates, the other faction (led by Howard Dean) wanted a 50 state strategy. Howard Dean got elected as head of the DNC, and proceeded with the 50 state strategy, and some of the fruits are being seen. John McCain and the RNC are being forced to spend resources in places that Dems had previously stayed away from and left to the Pubs as low-hanging fruit.

The 2006 story:

[url]http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/The_vindication_of_Howard_Deans_crazy_1109.html[/url]

The 2008 story:

[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/27/dean-was-right-50-state-s_n_138229.html[/url][/QUOTE]Good point Stray. Dean has come a long way and seems to have found the perfect position for his skills. In contrast to his over the top performance of a few years back, he is a major force in the background now.

[QUOTE=StrayLight]A lot can happen between now and November 4th. Although there are some significant differences in the 2008 polls and the 2000 and 2004 polls, the fact is that in the two previous elections there were some last-minute surprises. I remember going to bed on election eve 2004 thinking that Kerry had made it.

I'm thinking we're going to wake up on November 5th with a young black guy with a funny name slated to be our next President, and huge Democratic sweeps in the House and Senate. But I can't really let myself believe it until I actually see it.[/QUOTE]I think McCain is about to get his grandfather clock cleaned. I saw a recent item indicating that some of the Repub party insiders are trying to get him to campaign more in states where the senate races are close, rather than continue his focus on a presidential race that is doomed. The phrase "miracle needed" is on the lips of Republicans that don't want to be quoted for obvious reasons.

[QUOTE=Doggboy]I think McCain is about to get his grandfather clock cleaned. I saw a recent item indicating that some of the Repub party insiders are trying to get him to campaign more in states where the senate races are close, rather than continue his focus on a presidential race that is doomed. The phrase "miracle needed" is on the lips of republicans that don't want to be quoted for obvious reasons.[/QUOTE]Dogg,

That was David Frum's opinion piece in the Washington Post earlier this week re: shifting resources to the Senate.

[url]http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.28835/pub_detail.asp[/url]

Apparently he is now PNG in the Party for having written it. LOL!

And while I do think, like you, that McCain is going to get his grandfather clock cleaned, I have learned this hard lesson from the past: don't start telling McCain what time it is until that clock of his has stopped running. When I see it on November 5th, I'll believe it.

[QUOTE=Stowe]Having said that, if the Dems get a supermajority in the Senate they will become arrogant and will lose their majority within 4 years. That is why I hope they do not get the supermajority-that will minimize the risk of them losing the majority. It will also prevent them of submitting stupid extreme legislation.[/QUOTE]Actually, I think that they are likely to get a super majority, but that they will lose it at mid-term elections (unless the right seats aren't up for re-election somehow in 2010; I admit to not having looked that far ahead to see how it could shake out)

I think the thing that worries me most is that even two years is plenty of time to submit and approve some stupid extreme legislation and the Democrats are very likely to do so (not that the Republicans wouldn't as well) Including national subsidized health care which I am very much against (another conversation)

I'm not tied to either party. I'm more libertarian (but not quite all the way there) than either of the two major parties. It would scare the crap out of me if ANY party had a super majority (even the Libertarians, which of course will never happen in our lifetimes)

I also think that because of the fear of super majorities in MOST (or maybe just ENOUGH) voter's minds, even if the Democrats don't do something extreme they will not keep that super majority for 4 years.

[QUOTE=El Queso]Actually, I think that they are likely to get a super majority, but that they will lose it at mid-term elections (unless the right seats aren't up for re-election somehow in 2010; I admit to not having looked that far ahead to see how it could shake out)

I think the thing that worries me most is that even two years is plenty of time to submit and approve some stupid extreme legislation and the Democrats are very likely to do so (not that the Republicans wouldn't as well) Including national subsidized health care which I am very much against (another conversation)

I also think that because of the fear of super majorities in MOST (or maybe just ENOUGH) voter's minds, even if the Democrats don't do something extreme they will not keep that super majority for 4 years.[/QUOTE]And I agree 100%, our country is best governed when there is a better balance of power, and without wackadoodle neo-cons but conservatives and liberals FORCED to work together to get anything done.

I think we will be hearing a lot from the Court if the Dems get a super majority. I'm wondering how the conservatives will spin "activists judges" then.

[QUOTE=Gipse]I'm independent and pro-USA. Meaning I don't have any party affiliations or ideology which ties me to the republicans or to the democrates. I favor policies, actions, and candidates which will make our country strong and benefit it's people. I have been following the campaigns very closely listening and reading a lot trying to seperate facts from fiction. Nowhere in my research have I come across anything which leads me to draw the conclusion SIDNEY has below. What am I missing?[/QUOTE]Repubs fabric lies to justify their hatred- like referring to Obama as a socialist (which McAngryOldGuy just admitted today to be untrue) as a communist, as a terrorist.

Their entire platform is based on fear, hatred and fabrication of falsehoods. I believe that their basic 'meanness' is a main reason they may lose and lose big this year because those in the middle are tired of that hatred, those attempts to create divisions rather than attempting to unify.

Suerte.

Stowe

Some people think there is something fishy about the polls. Every polling organization wants to be close to the final result. Right now, that looks like Obama is going to win by about 5%. I think you can bank on those numbers.

I don't think there is anything fishy about those numbers. Obama should win. Our economy is a mess and Bush does not have high approvable ratings. Let's give somebody else a chance. It won't be the end of the world - at least I hope not.

If Obama doesn't win I will be astonished (this does not mean I will vote for Obama. I may not vote, I may vote for McCain, or if Rock Harders comes up with some really good reasons, I may vote for Obama

P.S. I have a huge economic stake in an Obama victory. Maybe I should go with my wallet and vote for Obama.

extra P.S. if the polls on Sunday or Monday start saying it is a dead heat then it probably is a dead heat. Every poll wants to be close to the final result