So, how is the world luvin the new world leader, Obama

[Killer Kyle]

Originally Posted by Jeffro

Yeah, because being a mediocre president is grounds for a religious doomsday scenario.

Get real.

You never know, though biblical fact actually lessen my claim.

Anyway, I'm throwing my vote away on someone else. In my opinion, we could have undone the damage Bush had did with this election, but we have already failed.

[Octovon]

I began to dislike Obama when he said he wanted to renegotiate NAFTA. He speaks about multilateralism, but he wants to unilateraly renegotiate the treaty without hearing from the two other concerned parties. In any case, I couldn't care less about American politics seeing as how I dislike my native Canadian politics (or rather, politicians) to begin with.

[Monster_user]

Originally Posted by Afterburner

I use to think people didn't know about the third parties, but most people do,

Around here, it seems that most people know OF the third parties, but don't really pay any attention to them. Nor do they believe that a good candidate can be found within the political system, much less the barely recognized "third party".

Its all about the publicity.

Originally Posted by Afterburner

they just have all unanimously, silently agreed that the third parties can't win.

Yeah...

Wonder if we'll ever get a write in Candidate.

Originally Posted by MrFancypants

edit: Since I have now completly derailed this thread I'll move the off topic posts to a new thread.

Aww....

[Nemmerle]

Originally Posted by Quetron

If you seen the documentary "Obbsession in their own words" you might know what you don't know.

If your argument carried any weight you wouldn't need to reference people to those of others that they conveniently don't have access to. If you go and read an original copy of the Necronomicon you'll know what I'm talking about.

Originally Posted by Quetron

I guess hitler didn't like us either, by your logic we should have stayed here, right?

The Russians were a threat, or at least percieved as one at the time, and there were good arguments that could be made for taking Hitler and his regime out from the perspective of America. America probably benefited in the long run from taking part in that war. The terrorism in Afghanistan is not a threat to most countries and is unlikely to become one.

Originally Posted by Quetron

you are uniformed, is all i will say.

What can I say? You've met all my expectations of you.

[Jeffro]

Originally Posted by Afterburner

Two things. First, in the long run if people vote for a third party the third party will win. The problem is people are stuck in this mindset that voting for a third party is worthless, and it is when EVERYONE thinks that way. I use to think people didn't know about the third parties, but most people do, they just have all unanimously, silently agreed that the third parties can't win.

People are swayed by media more often than you or I would like to admit. CNN, NPR, NBC, ABC, FOX, etc.

Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and the rest of the outspoken underdogs whom are associated with a third party only get sparse media coverage. That is the saddened and unfortunate truth of today. Therefore, if they aren't exposed through a mass media outlet, then:

1.) The citizen will have never heard of that candidate and won't vote for him.

2.) Will be too lazy to search for other candidates.

3.) Vote for whomever pundit, political analyst, or commentator recommends. Shit, how often have you seen those mass media dudes put in a good word for a third-party candidate or somebody outspoken? Almost never.

Libertarians, for example, often take votes away from the Republican party, while Greens tend to removed votes from the democratic party.

The Libertarian candidate is an assclown and is just a Republican in disguise.

In the past they've managed to swing enough votes to cause the other party to lose. And the usual consequence of that is that the main parties change their policies to incorporate at least some of what the third party that took so many votes has proposed.

So, basically they sway a vote between two candidates who basically won't change a goddamn thing in terms of major social issues they ignore. Brilliant.

[UNDIESRULES]

Well tbh, i had no idea he was in Germany, dont know what ideas he has and dont really care. I am sick of hearing his name on tv, and sick of hearing about US elections.

how is the world luvin the new world leader, Obama

?? Not my world m8.

[Afterburner]

Originally Posted by Jeffro

People are swayed by media more often than you or I would like to admit. CNN, NPR, NBC, ABC, FOX, etc.

Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and the rest of the outspoken underdogs whom are associated with a third party only get sparse media coverage. That is the saddened and unfortunate truth of today. Therefore, if they aren't exposed through a mass media outlet, then:

1.) The citizen will have never heard of that candidate and won't vote for him.

2.) Will be too lazy to search for other candidates.

3.) Vote for whomever pundit, political analyst, or commentator recommends. Shit, how often have you seen those mass media dudes put in a good word for a third-party candidate or somebody outspoken? Almost never.

It's a free country, the mass media can focus on whomever they want, you really can't blame them for the laziness and sloth of the average person.

The Libertarian candidate is an assclown and is just a Republican in disguise.

Though I support Libertarianism in general I think I have to agree with your assessment of Barr(though in a less hostile way ). He was a Republican during the first Bush term and before who has since joined the Libertarian party. Though I suppose the fact that he left one of the big parties, where he stood a chance of making it in the political world, and joined a third party speaks something of his character. From what I know of him I'd still probably vote for him over any other candidates, but I'm unsure of his commitment to his policies.

So, basically they sway a vote between two candidates who basically won't change a goddamn thing in terms of major social issues they ignore. Brilliant.

I believe you missed my point. In the past, the winning candidate has often changed their policy to incorporate some of the policies of third parties that do pretty well. Yeah, the reason they do it is to get more votes, but that doesn't change the fact that they do it in the first place.

[Quetron]

And this is a lot of the reason I don't want liberals or dems in office, including Obama.

RFFM.ORG: Is Baghdad Safer Than Chicago or Detroit? Liberal Politicians Blame Guns, Not the Gunners
And who is in charge in these high crime areas? By and large, liberal Democrats control American cities.


I also seen a thing today about the top cities that have the highest tax, most crime, and most infringment on ones rights, it was chicago, Obamas territory.

But if you read this, this kinda sums up why I will never vote democratic, despise liberals, especialy Obama being from Chicago, high taxes etc etc..

[judgeking]

I thought Obama was center-right, not left.

[liddlemonkey]

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

[Mr. Matt]

Originally Posted by Quetron

All I know since all these other countries are bowing to the new messiah, locks in my vote to NOT vote for him.
If they want him , then I know for sure it's bad for America.
100,000 ?
200,000 ? people at his podium in Germany, WTF
They mainly cheered when he mentioned the things we supposedly do so bad. (torture). (immigration) etc etc
When he talked about helping with terrorism, no cherring.

Hell all you counties out there should be sending every damn army guy you have, NADO to Afganastan, only talk at USA but we still have to do the heavy lifting.

A few points:

• America isn't 'the world', as much as you might believe/like to believe it is.
• Obama hasn't won yet. He's not even the leader of America, let alone the world.
• The population of Germany is approaching 85 million. 200,000 people don't constitute the whole of Germany. Don't ever think it does.
• People cheer when an American would-be president says he would like to try and correct some of the human rights abuses of his country, such as torture.
• People (outside of America anyway) don't generally cheer when talking about international terrorism. It's not a cheery subject and many have felt its effects directly or indirectly, either by being a victim of terrorism, losing a loved one to terrorism, or simply having to suffer through some of the totalitarian measures which have been brought into effect to combat terrorism. Moreover, many of us have lived through significant domestic and/or international terrorist acts long before it became America's favourite buzzword, particularly in Britain and Spain.
• Why is it automatically 'bad' if (some) people outside of America support Obama? Would you have said the same thing if they had supported Bush too? You're a xenophobic muppet, and I don't like you. Serve America, and stop talking!
• The United Kingdom is a major player in Afghanistan too. There are over 8,000 British Army personnel active in the country right now, with various other MoD assets being deployed in support. Various other NATO forces have been, or still are, active in the region including Germany and Canada. Numerous countries have diverted billions of dollars to aid in its redevelopment too. The war on the Taliban actually received widespread support, unlike the Iraq War. Many countries have shed the blood of their servicemen and women over that country, and your total ignorance to that is highly offensive.

[Mephistopheles]

Originally Posted by Quetron

200,000 ? people at his podium in Germany, WTF
They mainly cheered when he mentioned the things we supposedly do so bad. (torture). (immigration) etc etc
When he talked about helping with terrorism, no cherring.

Good for McCain that he didn't show up in Europe. Most likely he would not have had such a warm welcome.
On the other hand, the 200,000 folks prove that many people in Germany still sympathise with the USA, just not with the questionable politics of their current leader.

Some scenes from the speech:

+ YouTube Video

By the way, he actually took the time to thank some German police officers personally for protecting him.

This will surely not bring him more voters in the USA but he had earned my respect because such a behaviour is not common for many politicians. I really hope he will become the next president. He would certainly improve the poor Euro-American relations.

Originally Posted by Quetron

Hell all you counties out there should be sending every damn army guy you have, NADO to Afganastan, only talk at USA but we still have to do the heavy lifting.

The situation in Afghanistan would most likely be a lot better now without the unnecessary invasion of Iraq.

[Quetron]

No he isn't elected yet, he shouldn't be at quite such an historical place either, until he's prez.
All 3 news networks are folllowing him around.

Basicaly i all these other contries think he is cool, by the tune of 100,000 plus..We don't want him.

[Karst]

Originally Posted by Quetron

Basicaly i all these other contries think he is cool, by the tune of 100,000 plus..We don't want him.

You don't want him. But most likely a majority of American voters do, and certainly a vast majority of the rest of the world does - as is demonstrated wherever he shows up abroad.

[Rikupsoni]

Originally Posted by Mephistopheles

Good for McCain that he didn't show up in Europe. Most likely he would not have had such a warm welcome.
On the other hand, the 200,000 folks prove that many people in Germany still sympathise with the USA, just not with the questionable politics of their current leader.

How could he have? He thinks Vladimir Putin is the president of Germany.

+ YouTube Video

That old man couldn't really handle such trips abroad, most likely he would have screwed up like that manymany times. Maybe he would have even been booed for that.