So who's everyone supporting for 2008?

A few things - Cheering - you are wrong on Bush beating beatable. The dems put up Dukakis 04 and it was close. Rove is one of the most overrated political operatives of all time, and that's mostly due to Dems irrational hatred of Bush. They give Rove too much credit and take away too much from Bush and his supporters, or those like Miss Kitty who supported him because the alternative sucked. SJ already addressed my point that Dems pander to churches more than the GOP.

Kitty, the problem is too many people vote. Fogging a mirror (hey to Terri Schiavo) doesn't qualify one for making decisions. Unfortunately, as evidenced in this thread, the electorate is more interested in stupid reality shows than they are the future of this country.

One other thing - the power of the Presidency, while still very weighty, is also very overrated. That's by the Founders' design, which we believe (the Founders and I) was inspired by God.

A few things - Cheering - you are wrong on Bush beating beatable. The dems put up Dukakis 04 and it was close. Rove is one of the most overrated political operatives of all time, and that's mostly due to Dems irrational hatred of Bush. They give Rove too much credit and take away too much from Bush and his supporters, or those like Miss Kitty who supported him because the alternative sucked. SJ already addressed my point that Dems pander to churches more than the GOP.

Kitty, the problem is too many people vote. Fogging a mirror (hey to Terri Schiavo) doesn't qualify one for making decisions. Unfortunately, as evidenced in this thread, the electorate is more interested in stupid reality shows than they are the future of this country.

One other thing - the power of the Presidency, while still very weighty, is also very overrated. That's by the Founders' design, which we believe (the Founders and I) was inspired by God.

I didn't say that Bush was unbeatable. (Gore beat him after all) My comment addressed your assigning blame to the Dems for his getting elected this last time by not putting out a better candidate. What put him over the top in votes was the turn out for family values. It wasn't the Dems weak choice but Bush manipulating his base that got the turnout to put him over the top. I know Dems pander to churches, but they don't have influence over the religious right, Bush did. Reread the post.

Furthermore...
Are you kidding? The problem is that too many people vote??? Voter turnout is low considering our population. You brought this thread up as evidence that people are more interested in tv shows than the election. One of the people you are referencing to in this paragraph is Kitty's own sweet daughter, so please tread very carefully. You were able to bait her into this discussion and then draw her into a reality show post. By the way her daughter seems very excited about the upcoming election in her post prior to the one you reference. So I don't think that she is more interested in "stupid reality shows" than the election. She seems to be a very bright girl and able to make a decision while still watching TV. Maybe it comes from being open minded. Give it a try and have a nice day.

Okay, here goes...if you didn't vote, don't complain, but between now and Nov. 2008, register to vote, then start reading about and questioning candidates. If you did vote, thank you. IMHO, it does no good to place blame on those who voted for Bush (me, included)...I did my homework and it was the lessor of two evils in my book. BTW...almost all the politicians I know of tell their audience just what they want to hear and spout "party lines". It's the candidates with the new, fresh ways of looking at things that are not going to make it through the primaries. Don't even get me started on the church/politics thing. Do we really have 16 months before the election?

Okay...tell me where I am wrong. I am all ears.

you are not wrong Ms Kitty. thanks for the good points here. cheering too! love hearing words of wisdom from you both.

Awesome. So who do you think wins Rock of Love? I cannot believe they kicked off Tiffany. She totally made the show.

Is that supposed to be a slam on my intelligence because I don't approve of Senators & Congressmen spending their time stumping for office rather then doing their current jobs? Or because I would rather have FBI and Secret Service agents working on their jobs (antiterrorism, violent crimes etc.) instead of protecting a wide range of candidates years before an election?

By the way her daughter seems very excited about the upcoming election in her post prior to the one you reference. So I don't think that she is more interested in "stupid reality shows" than the election. She seems to be a very bright girl and able to make a decision while still watching TV. Maybe it comes from being open minded. Give it a try and have a nice day.

I would agree that the kitties likely have a smart daughter. That being said, how are any of us supposed to be able to make a wise decision regarding our political leaders, when all we hear and see are lies? Politics is all about winning, no matter the costs. Tomorrow's elected politicians are going to be the people who are most liked by the masses. It is easy for some people to put on a smile and lie through their teeth, and they don't think twice about doing so.

If you want to really learn about the candidates, I would suggest to listen to the press on both sides of the isle (eg -- CNN and Fox News, or Washington Post and the Washington Times). If you limit yourself to only the one-sided news sources, you will not be fully aware of questions you need to be asking.

Well, what you see, isn't always what you get, even when you are looking at voting records. For example, many politicians voted for the "emergency war funding," which looks good for their record (shows that they support the troops), even though they say they are against the war. What they conveniently fail to tell us is that they voted for the "emergency war funding," not because it funded helped supply the troops with goods, but because the bill was filled with pork, which included millions of dollars of expenditures having nothing to do with the war -- money which went to their political causes, "taking care" of the people who put them in office.

What you see isn't always what you get. In fact, rarely do you get what you see, especially when it comes to the crooks in high-ranking elected offices.

SJ - I completely get what you are saying here. I guess I try not to think about the unethical behavior that is just so ingrained in our political system. But, we cannot ignore it and need to be far more aware.

Okay, here goes...if you didn't vote, don't complain, but between now and Nov. 2008, register to vote, then start reading about and questioning candidates. If you did vote, thank you. IMHO, it does no good to place blame on those who voted for Bush (me, included)...I did my homework and it was the lessor of two evils in my book. BTW...almost all the politicians I know of tell their audience just what they want to hear and spout "party lines". It's the candidates with the new, fresh ways of looking at things that are not going to make it through the primaries. Don't even get me started on the church/politics thing. Do we really have 16 months before the election?

Okay...tell me where I am wrong. I am all ears.

Yea, what she said!

I have a question. With the abuse that politicians and the like get on a daily basis on both sides and some of which is deserved, are we surprised that the people running for office are sneaky, conniving, fueled by self-interest, and on and on...

As someone who knows people that have been elected to office and been government employees, I can tell you that I don't think the abuse is worth it to be a civil servant.

I have a question. With the abuse that politicians and the like get on a daily basis on both sides and some of which is deserved, are we surprised that the people running for office are sneaky, conniving, fueled by self-interest, and on and on...

As someone who knows people that have been elected to office and been government employees, I can tell you that I don't think the abuse is worth it to be a civil servant.

This is a very true statement. And just think of all your personal family business that becomes public fodder. How many Americans are squeaky clean, have enough $$$ and sense to run? Close your eyes and what do you see. That's why we get professonal politicians like Edwards (sorry, he is way too slick for me)....go ahead and add a slick Republican candidate in here_____, my mind is fried. Stop me...I am becoming cynical.

This is a very true statement. And just think of all your personal family business that becomes public fodder. How many Americans are squeaky clean, have enough $$$ and sense to run? Close your eyes and what do you see. That's why we get professonal politicians like Edwards (sorry, he is way too slick for me)....go ahead and add a slick Republican candidate in here_____, my mind is fried. Stop me...I am becoming cynical.

Miss Kitty,
Quick question for you: you said you voted for Bush - did you vote twice for him? Or just the first time?
Only reason I ask is that I actually have many Republican friends who voted for Bush first time BUT that did not cast vote for him in 2004 because they believed he violated many precepts of true conservative values (and I applaud them for this!)- curious as to where you were (although you do not have to answer BUt you have to pm me )!!

Completely agree with getting out and voting or shutting up.

I would agree that the kitties likely have a smart daughter. That being said, how are any of us supposed to be able to make a wise decision regarding our political leaders, when all we hear and see are lies? Politics is all about winning, no matter the costs. Tomorrow's elected politicians are going to be the people who are most liked by the masses. It is easy for some people to put on a smile and lie through their teeth, and they don't think twice about doing so.

If you want to really learn about the candidates, I would suggest to listen to the press on both sides of the isle (eg -- CNN and Fox News, or Washington Post and the Washington Times). If you limit yourself to only the one-sided news sources, you will not be fully aware of questions you need to be asking.

I just hate that we are all subjected to interminable months of campaigning. Wish one had 4 months - state your case/opinions succinctly, outline positions and selected programs/initiatives that interest you, talk about those you will be appointing (and hopefully listening to!) in your administration, etc..

As to the media - if one is genuinely curious it is not too difficult to get both sides of a story - so many legitimate sources to cull from.

SJ: PLEASE tell me YOU vote....regardless of how visibly turned off you are by politicians - we need people with your smarts and passion voting!

Miss Kitty,
Quick question for you: you said you voted for Bush - did you vote twice for him? Or just the first time?
Only reason I ask is that I actually have many Republican friends who voted for Bush first time BUT that did not cast vote for him in 2004 because they believed he violated many precepts of true conservative values (and I applaud them for this!)- curious as to where you were (although you do not have to answer BUt you have to pm me )!!

Completely agree with getting out and voting or shutting up.

Miss Chickpea,

I am not sure you can handle the truth.

Miss Kitty,
Quick question for you: you said you voted for Bush - did you vote twice for him? Or just the first time?
Only reason I ask is that I actually have many Republican friends who voted for Bush first time BUT that did not cast vote for him in 2004 because they believed he violated many precepts of true conservative values (and I applaud them for this!)- curious as to where you were (although you do not have to answer BUt you have to pm me )!!

Completely agree with getting out and voting or shutting up.

That's what I did once for Bush, once for my wife as a write-in because I have never missed an election, but at the same time refused to choose the lesser of two evils..

Miss Chickpea,

I am not sure you can handle the truth.

From you??? Sure I can but I have my answer! I still like you!!

I actually have many Republican friends who voted for Bush first time BUT that did not cast vote for him in 2004 because they believed he violated many precepts of true conservative values

If they didn't think Bush was right enough for the job, did they think that there was a Democrat or Independent running, who leaned more to the right? Just doesn't make sense to me.

SJ: PLEASE tell me YOU vote....regardless of how visibly turned off you are by politicians - we need people with your smarts and passion voting!

I have always exercised my voting privilege, but here lately, I am beginning to wonder why I bother. On so many levels, I see a blending of the two parties, at least in public office. On the street, there is much difference between people with strong Dem or Rep ties. However, today, in order to get elected, one must lean rather straight up down the middle, or slightly to the left of center, and that is why Republicans tend to think that all of the Republican candidates don't lean far enough right. The average joe Republicans have two choices: 1) vote Republican because the avg joe Rep agrees more with the Rep than the Dem., or 2) vote Democrat, because having a Democrat in office just might piss off enough Republicans to raise hell and it will also help keep the Dems in check.

I dislike the ever-growing arms of Gov't, and would like to see it govern itself a little better.

I don't vote in the primary because in Florida, I would have to select a party to join, and I don't think either of those parties are worthy on a whole.

If they didn't think Bush was right enough for the job, did they think that there was a Democrat or Independent running, who leaned more to the right? Just doesn't make sense to me.

Well they did not vote for Kerry - most of them abstained (somewhat regrettable I guess - they absolutely refused to cast a vote for Bush but could not stand endorsing anyone else).

I have always exercised my voting privilege, but here lately, I am beginning to wonder why I bother. On so many levels, I see a blending of the two parties, at least in public office. On the street, there is much difference between people with strong Dem or Rep ties. However, today, in order to get elected, one must lean rather straight up down the middle, or slightly to the left of center, and that is why Republicans tend to think that all of the Republican candidates don't lean far enough right. The average joe Republicans have two choices: 1) vote Republican because the avg joe Rep agrees more with the Rep than the Dem., or 2) vote Democrat, because having a Democrat in office just might piss off enough Republicans to raise hell and it will also help keep the Dems in check.

I dislike the ever-growing arms of Gov't, and would like to see it govern itself a little better.

I don't vote in the primary because in Florida, I would have to select a party to join, and I don't think either of those parties are worthy on a whole.

I agree with you that the current state of politics is dire and depressing and that both parties have had to move to the center to court the most votes. And the line between all of these politicians is more and more blurry and most of all seeing them all dodge questions and waffle about with canned answers is infuriating as hell.

I am not as strongly opposed as many of you are to the arm of the government but I certainly deplore the waste and abuse that is so prevalent and in most cases, I probably would agree that private enterprise would be more efficient and cost effective at running different departments than the gov't BUT I do fear many more people would be left behind and under-represented.

It was a long and arduous process for me to get the US citizenship and the main reason I wanted it was to be able to vote in the country that was now my home. So even if I deplore the current slate of politicians I would feel obligated to cast a vote, even in the primaries. Nevertheless it is hard to argue with people who feel more and more disengaged.

I plan to set an example for more efficient government by eliminating the middle man and simply voting directly for my favorite corporation/special interest/lobbyist as a write in.

I plan to set an example for more efficient government by eliminating the middle man and simply voting directly for my favorite corporation/special interest/lobbyist as a write in.

Well it is corporate America so that makes sense. Then we won't need the politicians and won't have to worry about the Golden Fleece retirement system for them either. Everyone wins.

I have always exercised my voting privilege, but here lately, I am beginning to wonder why I bother. On so many levels, I see a blending of the two parties, at least in public office. On the street, there is much difference between people with strong Dem or Rep ties. However, today, in order to get elected, one must lean rather straight up down the middle, or slightly to the left of center, and that is why Republicans tend to think that all of the Republican candidates don't lean far enough right. The average joe Republicans have two choices: 1) vote Republican because the avg joe Rep agrees more with the Rep than the Dem., or 2) vote Democrat, because having a Democrat in office just might piss off enough Republicans to raise hell and it will also help keep the Dems in check.

I dislike the ever-growing arms of Gov't, and would like to see it govern itself a little better.

I don't vote in the primary because in Florida, I would have to select a party to join, and I don't think either of those parties are worthy on a whole.

SJ,
The GOP wins when it runs far right, but it doesn't have the balls to do so. Let's look at since 1980. Reagan ran pretty far right and won in landslides in 80 and 84. Bush ran as Reagan's successor, but not as far right and won in 88, then when he moved towards the center, and lost in 92. Dole was playing to the middle and lost in 96. Bush leaned towards the middle with compassionate conservatism and barely won in 2000 and won in a close race in 2004. This goes to Congress as well, sweeping with the Contract With America, then losing when the GOP couldn't stop spending. I could go on, but you should see something of a trend.

Well it is corporate America so that makes sense. Then we won't need the politicians and won't have to worry about the Golden Fleece retirement system for them either. Everyone wins.

Politicians and the illusion of government are a vital distraction for those who actually run the country.

Funny that people think distractions are things like cigars, flag burning, and gay marriage.

I didn't say that Bush was unbeatable. (Gore beat him after all) My comment addressed your assigning blame to the Dems for his getting elected this last time by not putting out a better candidate. What put him over the top in votes was the turn out for family values. It wasn't the Dems weak choice but Bush manipulating his base that got the turnout to put him over the top. I know Dems pander to churches, but they don't have influence over the religious right, Bush did. Reread the post.

No, Gore didn't. Sorry you aren't familiar with the Constitution. And no sh** Bush has influence of the RR. If it was the RL you might have added something insightful. But alas...

Furthermore...
Are you kidding? The problem is that too many people vote??? Voter turnout is low considering our population. You brought this thread up as evidence that people are more interested in tv shows than the election. One of the people you are referencing to in this paragraph is Kitty's own sweet daughter, so please tread very carefully. You were able to bait her into this discussion and then draw her into a reality show post. By the way her daughter seems very excited about the upcoming election in her post prior to the one you reference. So I don't think that she is more interested in "stupid reality shows" than the election. She seems to be a very bright girl and able to make a decision while still watching TV. Maybe it comes from being open minded. Give it a try and have a nice day.

No, I'm not kidding. I brought this up because in every other thread, the peanut gallery is posting that they can't wait for 2008, to get someone else in office. I was curious as to who that someone else was. I wasn't trying to bait anyone in particular, but I'd love to hear why people support Obama other than being photogenic, a minority candidate and able to craft a sentence. My response about reality TV was directed at you, Cheering, since it wasn't important for you to be well read on the subject until the last minute.

Politicians and the illusion of government are a vital distraction for those who actually run the country.

Funny that people think distractions are things like cigars, flag burning, and gay marriage.

Which leads back to the question that I asked in a previous post. Why would we expect any highly intelligent, qualified person to want to subject themselves to the daily abuse. It would make more sense to work hard to have someone elected that would do your bidding, or at least support your ideals and stay out of the process.

The smartest people are not typically willing to wake up every morning and go to a job where they are seldom appreciated and only their faults are shown to them, more often then not in a public way. If this was any private job, the employee would probably have justification for a hostile workplace lawsuit. Like I said earlier, I don't see how it's worth it to be a public servant, and am not surprised that many decisons are lesser of two evil votes.

In a national election, I am looking at donor rolls and campaign participants to decide which "backers" are more qualified to do the job, or which ones would support those ideals that I think are important.