Election 2008 Crackberry Style

Originally Posted by w00dy65

And don't get me wrong, I'm not an Obama bin Biden supporter...by any means...but I don't really want to be catagorized as affilliated with people like Vinnie either.

The sad thing is that US politics are like a sporting event...us verses them...and WAY too many people walk lock-step with a "party" for the sake of "the party".

Years ago someone wanted the words "under God" removed from the pledge. But there is a one word sentence that follows that is devastating this country...INDIVISIBLE!!

There's a saying or proverb that goes something like so... A great nation is not defeated from the outside-in, but rather from the inside-out.

And that's what has been happening for decades, slowly eating away...like a cancer...at all that is good & true in this country. There's an enemy out there and he's not an American...one day we will all wake up and say "Hey, I didn't vote for that!"

Americans have become complasent (sp?), fat & lazy. All we truly care about is our BlackBerry's or cars or my nice watch or my iPod or fill in the ________.

w00dy...that's a very touching montage you wrote above; however it can often be the minute intricacies in one's thoughts...that altogether dispel the value of their words.

You aren't any different from what you've written. 'Obama bin Biden'?? Is that your cute and inept attempt at a play on words?
What are you trying to imply?

You know, exelant has been very kind to your post above...but you pretty much contradicted and bastardized those words that read beautifully on paper...by your divisive words just in the first paragraph.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

It's hard to believe we're getting so close to the election. What is it, 41 days? I can't wait, the excitement is growing. I am sure McCain is cursing the White House and their bail out plan. I wish I knew the answer to the problem.


I am proud of the Congress for not caving to the pressure -- the last thing they want to do is give those who got us into this mess an easy way out with bonuses intact. There has to be a price to pay. No bank executive should walk away with a golden parachute. If you or I declared bankruptcy, all of our assets (except for modest retirement accounts)would be used to pay creditors.

The debate ought to be d*mn interesting! It should be easy to put the Republicans on the defensive. It does seem as if Paulson is trying to take care of his wall street friends. God forbid they should lose everything and be forced to start over -- like the rest of us. Only problem with that is that there aren't as many jobs no that they've helped ship so many of them to other countries. Hmmm, I might have an entry level position down here at the sewer plant -- long as they don't mind getting their hands dirty.;)

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Hi def, I have no problem with you, exelant on the other loves the personal attacks, so I play devils advocate. He calls me slow, yet his posts are littered with spelling errors and grammatical ineptitudes. I can only imagine him hammering away at his keyboard with what he envisions is an ingenious reply to my post. At the end of the day, the current state of the economy isn't president Bush's fault. Yes he allowed the de-regulation of the market to occur. On the flip side of that coin many americans took advantage of the opportunity and own wonderful houses and have no problem paying for them. Then you have people that fell prey to predatory lending because they were greedy. I would almost consider it mortgage fraud. People get interest only mortgages that they can barely afford, and then a few years down the road they cant pay when the principle is added. I can hardly see justifying blaming bush for that. He seems to be the easiest scapegoat so I guess thats what happened. To put it simple, Obama is unqualified to run this country, he is a junior senator that was groomed by his party, and is the media's current love affair. His overwhelming number of gaffes rarely see the light of day. His shifting towards the middle has upset many hardcore liberal fans of his, and shows his true nature. To address the argument that I dont agree with everything my pastor says, of course I agree with that. If my pastor started saying he hated America and black people were to blame for the current situation, I would leave the church. His pastor has been saying things like this for years, and he has passively sat through it. That is until it was brought to the world's attention and he left the church and publicly disowned his pastor.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Am I the only one that doesn't feel like reading with Vinnie said? I read the first and last sentences but I just cant bring myself to read it all.

Keep looking for approval online big guy, it will pay off one day.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Ok, "big guy." Why not just call me honey or sweetie?

I'm not looking for approval, I'm just wondering if anyone honestly cares about what you have to say.

Didn't realize you were a female, so sweetie is appropriate.
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

It's no use, Snow. Like I posted and Vinnie agreed, he just likes to stir the pot and anger people. It is a typical bully stunt, belittle and put people down and then shift the blame to those he pushed around. I must admit, it is kind of fun to touch a nerve of someone like that every once in a while -- like I did this morning. :D who loves ya Vinnie?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Ok I will stop gassing everyone here up, as fun as it is, it is time to be serious. The basis of the next election as I see it

If you want the government to act as your mother/father, then vote obama

If you are mature enough to handle your own business and accept the consequences of your actions, then vote mccain.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Originally Posted by vinnie_dugan

Hi def, I have no problem with you, exelant on the other loves the personal attacks, so I play devils advocate. He calls me slow, yet his posts are littered with spelling errors and grammatical ineptitudes.

How dare you give credit to someone else for calling you slow...it was ME my dyslexic brethren. Don't let it happen again. Do you even know the root of what assuming the role of devil's advocate traditionally means? It means when a person says things they don't necessarily agree with; or have a neutral stance on.

Therefore, now that you've been taught the use of the term: devil's advocate..applying that would mean that all the FICTION you spew towards Obama, all the fiction you spit about the dire nature of this year's election...isn't really believed by you. Perhaps there is some hope for you afterall.

I can only imagine him hammering away at his keyboard with what he envisions is an ingenious reply to my post.

For the love of God; remove me out of what all runs through your defunct imagination. Creepy indeed.

Originally Posted by vinnie_dugan

Ok I will stop gassing everyone here up, as fun as it is, it is time to be serious. The basis of the next election as I see it

If you want the government to act as your mother/father, then vote obama

If you are mature enough to handle your own business and accept the consequences of your actions, then vote mccain.

I thought you placed vinnie_dugan's mind into serious mode? That's what you have to show for it?

Numbers throw you off; so here's an equation w/o the numbers...Bush = McCain. If you're using the logic that McCain/Bush/Their party is the party that gives autonomy to people for being mature enough to handle their own business and accept the consequences of their actions...why is it that the CEOs of failed conglomerate corporations...are being rewarded by HUGE severance/compensation packages and bailouts...while their employees are biting the dust, losing their 401k and pension plans??

Here's a riddle...what word is the opposite of fast and is best when a drink like a Pina Colada is drunk this way? In the answer; you'll find what describes the wannabe heir apparent to Rush Limbaugh's throne...mighty vinnie_d!

Originally Posted by Hi-Definition

w00dy...that's a very touching montage you wrote above; however it can often be the minute intricacies in one's thoughts...that altogether dispel the value of their words.

You aren't any different from what you've written. 'Obama bin Biden'?? Is that your cute and inept attempt at a play on words?
What are you trying to imply?

You know, exelant has been very kind to your post above...but you pretty much contradicted and bastardized those words that read beautifully on paper...by your divisive words just in the first paragraph.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Def,

I'm no different than the next guy...notice how I included "I" and "we" into what I wrote. I am just as much a part of that "political sadness" which I wrote about as you are. I honestly feel Obama believes what he says, same with McCain...I think they both believe it in their hearts. Now toss in somebody like Hillary or Biden or even Romney...and it's all an agenda that's focused on personal gain and not-so-much for the good/betterment of the country.

I voted for Bush twice...and I regret the second one. He should have stepped down after his first term as far as I'm concerned. Also I don't have a problem voting for a Dem, I've done it locally many times, I just can't palce my confidence in any of the recent national contenders. I think people like JFK are a thing of the past...it's too bad!

Vote with your heart, not the party...but the main thing is to VOTE!!!

Thanks man!

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Originally Posted by Hi-Definition

How dare you give credit to someone else for calling you slow...it was ME my dyslexic brethren. Don't let it happen again. Do you even know the root of what assuming the role of devil's advocate traditionally means? It means when a person says things they don't necessarily agree with; or have a neutral stance on.

I almost peed my pants laughing when I read this. :D

Originally Posted by vinnie_dugan

Didn't realize you were a female, so sweetie is appropriate.
Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Just fyi, you don't know me and I don't know you. I was being sarcastic. Don't call me anything other than my s/n or real name. Thanks.

Now I have to put my berry in rice. I laughed so hard, I got tears on my device. :)

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Hey! I started wondering about something...it will never happen, but what if???

What if NO ONE voted for anybody...not a single vote casted. Zip, zilch, nada!!

Would it be another court case, or maybe Speaker of the House would reign? Talk about a vote of no confidence...I wonder how that would work? It would probablly result in revolt, civil unrest, and marshal law.

Makes ya wonder though...

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Under your scenario, if there were no votes were cast for any official candidate (write-ins in a moment) then it would go to the House of Representatives, since there were no electors. In the House, each states delegation gets one vote, and that vote is based on the vote of each states delegation. So, Wyoming's one representative would cast the vote for his state, while California's would be based on the votes of their 52 congressmen.

The candidate (any candidate) with the most votes becomes president. The above procedure is used if there is a tie in the Electoral College. Obviously if there are not votes and no electors, there is a 0 - 0 tie.

Write-in votes will not work, because when you vote for president, you are actually voting for a slate of electors that are committed to casting their electoral college vote for that candidate. That's why when a candidate wins the state they are given the electoral votes even though the electoral college vote doesn't take place until later (Dec.?) Even if only one vote was cast in the election for a write-in candidate, that candidate could not win, because they would not have any electors. I'm not sure what would happen at this point, or if it would be any different than going to the House.

I have advocated the following system for any election:

In addition to the list of candidates, there would be a "None of the Above" choice. If None of the Above got the most votes, there would be a new election, and none of the candidates for the first go around could run again. It would have to be an entire new list of candidates. Eventually, someone would run who might not have been able to afford to, or stood a chance under a more partisan climate and they would get elected, and we might actually have competent government.

I think this thread has been visited by a little gnome riding on a unicorn he's named godspeed; he comes from a village called utopia and has sprinkled some of the people in this thread with magical dust made of two ingredients..one part wishful; the other part thinking.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

HA. Yeah I had a friend suggest "boycotting" voting. It's never going to happen so I'm not going to even wonder about it. I can't remember if I've already said this but people forget about the electoral college. everyone could vote one way and then, yoink! Someone else becomes president.

Just like in 2000.....Bush won electoral, gore won popular.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

It's there to keep the more populated states from having too much power. We worry about things like that in the West. We have a certain amount of water allocated to the Colorado River's upper basin states like Colorado, Wyoming and Utah. If the more populous lower basin states like California and Arizona had the ability, they would be legislating themselves larger shares of the river.

The ability to dilute their power is very important to preserve a fair allocation of resources. It's the same principle at work with the Electoral College. A large majority has a tendency to impose their will on smaller entities. It's just human nature, but the founders were pretty smart to try to mitigate it -- even if we don't always like the results.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

I had an American National Government Professor that always told us to not even bother voting.

She said it was a waste of time, that the Electoral College was put into place to make sure that the "sheeple" of america don't elect who ever "they" (the government) don't want.

Is that true?

~~~

On a side note-

Has anyone noticed that if you aren't voting for Obama your automatically labeled a Racist?

What is that about?

Seriously.

Prada, for all practical purposes, yes your prof. was correct. Your vote holds no weight other than making you feel good, and yes it seems if you don't like obama, you are crazy.

Sounds like an amazing Campaign!

"Vote For Obama, Or Be Stoned As A Racist!"

It's the most ridiculous thing in the World.

I like Mccain, he seems more Qualified than Obama.

And most importantly, We don't need a SOCIALIST in office.

Palin, who is running for Vice President is MORE qualified than OBAMA, and he is Running for Presidency.

Lunacy.

Well to put it plainly, yes Mccain is far more qualified than Obama. Palin on the other, that can be argued to no end. At the end of the day I agree though, Obama brings socialism, and punishes those who do well in this country.

Originally Posted by xxxxpradaxxxx

Sounds like an amazing Campaign!

"Vote For Obama, Or Be Stoned As A Racist!"

It's the most ridiculous thing in the World.

I like Mccain, he seems more Qualified than Obama.

And most importantly, We don't need a SOCIALIST in office.

Palin, who is running for Vice President is MORE qualified than OBAMA, and he is Running for Presidency.

Lunacy.

The electoral college exists for a purpose; the main premise is as exelant pointed out in his post...allocating disporportion as best as can be done within the given population of the U.S.

For some of you; please don't bring up the electoral college aspect of voting...if all you know about its operation is very minimal knowledge of it; and that it's referred to as the electoral college. It's an injustice to this great country if you don't educate yourselves as to how the voting process works; and why it's structured the way it is. Some of us may not agree with it; but agreement shouldn't be a pre-requisite to attaining and acting on knowledge.

As for the racist label for not voting for Obama; if someone truly believes a person is racist just because they don't vote for Obama...that's unsubstantiated. Sure, some may feel that way...just as some may feel it's 'unpatriotic' to not vote for McCain and the Republican ticket. Both mindsets are vexed.

Prada...obviously parts of this post were directed towards you and some others; but I want to make what I'm about to say clear; I respectfully disagree with a lot of what you've said (especially the way you curtailed your post with the Palin to Obama equation).