US Presidency Election

On Nov 4th, the most important election happens. The President of the United Stated (aka POTUS) gets elected.
This job will have a big influency to the foreign policy of the whole world.
As not all OPC-members are US-citizens, most of us have not the right to elect.
Here all OPC members (and the TTL members ARE allowed to give the vote to either McCain of Obama, if there are further candidates please tell me.

Who will make the race? Obama or McCain?

lol who voted for me , mickey mouse , or osama bin laden ???

please take this shit a little bit more seriously .

ir eally want barack obama all the way, i voluntered to work at my town's democratic headquaters. i voted micky mouse because we are so stupid we could vote for a fictional disney character.

why do you long for barrack sparrow? as a citizen who works massive amounts of overtime, i wish for a candidate who will work the taxes down across the board. unfortunately the candidates that make the most fiscal sense for ALL Americans have been pushed to the side by our inadequate two party system. also, for the non-citizens, sorry but i could honestly care less about foriegn diplomacy and what our image is, as long as the financial security of my family is in jeopardy. unfortunately the media and both coast bias has steered this election away from the mainstream goals of most Americans, and turned it into a comedy instead of a documentary.


P.S. if i see one more "Joe the Plumber" ad, i might just go postal.....WTF do either of these guys know about REAL America anyways.



Edit: i am voting for the "none of the above" choice that is not there!!

@bogram.. do you really think you have high taxes???

we in austria pay about 43% (including social insurance)

ouch

i am sorry to hear that jesper, however, that is your countries own fault. our country was formed on the idea of not paying tyrannical tax amounts. that was the main motivation for the revolutionary war against england. i as an american citizen am not interested in socialism, you europeans can have your marxist way of life, i dont want it. i believe whats mine is mine and not some lazy slob who is pillaging the socialist gov't programs for MY money. the better good does not concern me, i am here to take care of mine and that is all. the fact that you dont seem to have a problem with paying such a high tax concerns me the most, what exactly do you recieve for that amount jesper? it better include a vehicle or mortgage payments. that is the question everyone should ask of the govt, what do i recieve for the money i put in. im my country, the politicians should fear the people, not the other way around, we have the power, just not the balls to use it!!

bogram wrote:i am sorry to hear that jesper, however, that is your countries own fault. our country was formed on the idea of not paying tyrannical tax amounts. that was the main motivation for the revolutionary war against england. i as an american citizen am not interested in socialism, you europeans can have your marxist way of life, i dont want it. i believe whats mine is mine and not some lazy slob who is pillaging the socialist gov't programs for MY money. the better good does not concern me, i am here to take care of mine and that is all. the fact that you dont seem to have a problem with paying such a high tax concerns me the most, what exactly do you recieve for that amount jesper? it better include a vehicle or mortgage payments. that is the question everyone should ask of the govt, what do i recieve for the money i put in. im my country, the politicians should fear the people, not the other way around, we have the power, just not the balls to use it!!

the country puts large amounts in a good health system, social system, invests in the infrastructure, security....
you also get money if you're unemployed for some time.... from this side i like living in Austria, this has nothing to do with socialism or marxism...

i know you in the US live a total different life, and i yeah i forgot the high taxes where the reason for the independence from the british crown.

We have fairly high taxes in Britain, 40% on what you earn over £36,000, I am personally for the redisribution of wealth to the poor and disadvantaged. Bogram has raised an important point though about the state of democracy in Britain and more so America. The majority of American media , Fox for instance, are extreemly right wing and there is very little critical analysis from both sides of the political spectrum.

Americans pride themselvs on their 'freedom', freedom in the negative sense which is epitomised by philosophers such as J S Mill as well as others. This negative freedom means that they believe that the state should not interfere with the freedom of the individual to, for example, spend the money they have earned on what they want. Robert Nozick claimed that taxation is a form of slave labour, if you work 10 hours for £10 an hour and pay £20 tax, in Nozick's view 2 hours were slave labour for the state. Nozick also said that someone starving has no right for the state to give them food and must starve, which in my opinion is wrong.

I don't care who wins the Presidential election, it will make no difference who wins anyway as both paties are getting similar and similar I'm just glad to be in my safe European home.

Oh and on a final note, America has just nationalised some of its banks which is a socialist action so there is some socialism in America...

Is this a question of who will win or who do we want to see win?

I would prefer to see Barack win, but then again i do think the whole American election system is screwed. It always looks to me like random rich people decide they want to run a country because running businesses has gotten boring, or because daddy did it. Also the argument for Sarah Palin about her being a soccer mum wow that must make her fit to be ready to run a country. And don't get me started on mixing religion and politics.....

The fact is the world is getting rather close to hanging on that knife edge. Economically, Environmentally and in terms of war etc. If America goes over Europe will follow and I don't want my future in the hands of a "Soccer Mom" and an O.A.P



May I just point out lower tax doesn't necessarily mean better economy. well apart from in the UK where our unemployment benefit & council houses too easy to get and keep, our health system is a sham and Don't get me started on public transport.

And America land of the free? How sure are you about that?

Is it really free speech if it gets you your phone tapped?

Keela wrote:

May I just point out lower tax doesn't necessarily mean better economy. well apart from in the UK where our unemployment benefit & council houses too easy to get and keep, our health system is a sham and Don't get me started on public transport.

Woo go england we rock

Seriously though I have no experiance in politics and don't really care to be honest, Lke Bogram said I would just like the goverment to leave my money(or my dads) alone and let me spend it how I wish.

keela you are right but palin is not a soccer mom.......................................she's a hockey mom.


every US citizen should vote(except bogram) for obama. CHANGE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i am sorry McCain supporters, i do not want a hockey mom staring down vlad putin with the nuclear codes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you want the freedom to spend your money on what you want and pay less tax institutions such as the NHS would not exist. I know it is in a bit of a mess still but after 18 years of Conservative government all of Britains infastructure was suffering from dire under funding. The New Labour government has done much to address this but it still needs more funding to make it on par with European health care.

The NHS was founded on a simple premise: YOU SOULD BE TREATED ON THE SEVERITY OF YOUR INJURY NOT HOW MUCH MONEY IS IN YOUR POCKET

As for public transport in Britain, there isn't any, just private companies and the market to guide them. This is all on top of the tax payer having to pay subsidies, through council tax, for these companies to run unprofitable routes.

John McCain says that Obama is a closet socialist, I don't think McCain actually knows what a socialist is.

Read a good article in the Guardian about American anti-intellectualism:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/28/us-education-election-obama-bush-mccain

for one, thank you for clarifying that palin issue sparrow LOLZ. now, i would like someone to tell me what the change that obama is gonna bring? after that i would like to address the fact that i said that I was against socialism, not that my govt. was against it. unfortunately it seems that the lines of socialism and not socialism has been blurred horrendously in europe and possibly america. the fact that jesper could say in the same sentence that austria has nationalized healthcare but not socialism is evidence of this. the fact remains that the U.S. was not founded on socialist ways, and that the Constitution states what the federal govt.'s powers are. it needs to be remembered that this country is BOUND to the Constitution and that the federal govt. has but a few duties and the rest is to be left up to the individual states. unfortunately this gets forgotten with every passing generation. the perversion of the federal govt.'s duties is almost unreal if you were to study the constitution. what i cant bring myself to accept or even have the ability to rationalize is the idea of "wealth ditribution". has our own human nature been so diluted that self-perseverence has taken a back seat? the idea that if i work hard trying to get ahead in life, only to be punished for said work and have what i have earned and is mine be given to someone who either refuses to or cannot, is against every fiber of my being. the problem with any sort of welfare or social program is that it gets abused, that is a fact there is no example that i can think of that this is not true. along with that problem we have the fact that social programs generally have a negative return on the investment other then the "feel good factor". that alone is not justification for taking my money. when we talk about what eachothers taxes are in this thread, we need to remember that in america we do not only have a federal income tax, but also a state income tax. that puts us over the 40%-ish threshold that ppl seem to think is bad, those along with the property taxes, gas taxes, and sales tax is just overwhelming anymore. and to voice my opinion on the idea that healthcare should not be based on the amount of money in your pocket, privitization is a great thing unless your the one without the money. and dont think i am going to miss a shot at you keela, with your is it really free speech shot. the short answer is yes, it is, if the supreme court can find some way to twist the constitution enough to squeeze out that abortion should be legal, then yes that is free speech. besides, if your not doing anything wrong, what do you have to worry about? the ppl who complain about that remind me of a woman at that time of the month, they would bitch if they were hung with a new rope.

well u all have good strong points and was fun to read lol

i voted for MM as i think any of the above runs america as a cartoon character (well not Jesper and Tony) but the others r just puppets like every other pres for america lol

Chippie wrote:well u all have good strong points and was fun to read lol

i voted for MM as i think any of the above runs america as a cartoon character (well not Jesper and Tony) but the others r just puppets like every other pres for america lol

puppets of whom? the weapon industry?

the so called "land of the free" wants to bring freedom and democracy into the world... the point is: the people are betrayed buy their own government (they call it administration) and kept in fear.
for sure it is a good idea to bring the civil rights and democracy into other countries, but this doesnt justify wars (like in Iraq). it would be better to support institutions like the UN (this organisation should be reformed too, but that is impossible - thx to china and russia) or the OSCE who helps in Nation-building.

the problem in our days is: countries are often leaded not by statesmen, they are reigned by managers and some companys.

Well, honestly it is probably a bad idea to get involved in a political discussion when we are all trying to stay friends, however . . .

Let me say that I do not thing a progressive tax has anything to do with socialism. In fact, Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations, which is more or less the equivalent of the Capitalist Manifesto wrote, "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

Consequently, if Adam Smith thought a progressive tax (whereby poorer people are taxed at a lower %) was a moral imperative, one can hardly fault obama for doing the same.

The bottom line, however, is that the policies of the US government need to change if it is going to remain a super power. For too long, the US has avoided investing its considerable resources in a forward thinking way. When we should have been leveraging the intellectual capital that comes out of the world's best universities, instead we let science funding decline, built an economy on a pyramid scheme based on the false supposition that housing prices would go up forever and there was an unlimited market for them and tried to reduce how much science was taught to our children in biology classes.

Meanwhile, future competitive states such as India and China are doing everything in their power to industrialize and educate their workforce in such a way as to be globally competitive -- good for them, but the US needs to find demons other than "socialism" to blame for its economic woes. In actuality it was wall street greed, lack of technological investment, and backward government leadership over the past 8 years (mixed in with lots of military-industrial complex courruption) combined with many forces outside anyone's control that have led to the U.S.'s current predicament. I think that either McCain or Obama would be infinitely better than Bush, but strongly and fully endorse Obama for President because I feel that McCain has let himself be corrupted by the Republican campaign and has begun to say things that I know, from years of watching him in the Senate, that he does not believe. I hope that Obama can bring sound leadership and a new direction to this country, but there's a lot of inertia headed in the wrong direction and I'm very worried about my country's future.

there are good points in your post @paul... i totally sign it...

i dont think that McCain would be a bad president... he often was against the line of the Bush administration. But i think he is old, and if he dies (beware us!!!) a stupid dumbass like Palin could be POTUS. im not against women, dont understand me wrong, i think a woman could do the job as well maybe better than a man.

wow these are some long posts. Ok well first thing is first john mccain, you don't say you are going to run a"respectful campaign" then go pick palin and have her say barack obama is a terrorist.whoever is the next president will have to immediately take action. They will have to deal with iraq and fight the economy troubles, not to mention finding alternate fuels. they will also have to deal with china Iran and of course russia and also north korea so they must work very hard.

when people blame buisness i.e fannie and freddie, and wall street for the crisis that the economy is in, i begin to think of personal responsibility. we elected the officials who made the policies that were exploited by these institutions. we have nobody to blame but ourselves for letting the officials stay in office. nobody can lay all the blame at the doorstep of wall street and "big buisness". they simply did thier job. the objective of any buisness is to make the most amount of money possible. therefore they were simply accomplishing thier objectives. an argument could be made for fannie and freddie to have more responsibility than for thier top executives to bail on the companies. then again we are back to the officials that WE elected who made these back doors possible for said executives. i dont have any problems paying my bills and i couldnt imagine the agony that families across america are experiencing by losing thier homes. that being said we are back to personal responsibility, predatory lending is a horrible thing, however blame should be assigned to the people who agreed to these horrendous terms in the first place. now that fannie and freddie are tits up these same officials have enacted socialist policies by bailing them out. i believe that these policies are akin to putting a bandaid on a gunshot wound. now we are talking about dropping the interest rate and possibly inflating the false dollar again. we are simply delaying the inevitable, a serious, depression type recession is what i see down the road. the fact remains that the market always correct itself, and i personnaly would rather be generation to deal with this problem then my kids or my grandkids.

Bogram,

I agree with you about personal responsibility, but the bottom line is that a lot of people are suffering who had nothing to do with either taking out or handing out bad loans -- this is why there should have been regulation on credit swaps inside Wall Street. I agree that the people who underwrote or took out loans should be held responsible for their bad actions -- but the fact that these large institutions got themselves so overleveraged that they were on the brink of collapse, which would have caused our entire financial system to collapse meant that ALL taxpayers had to go in and take control of these crappy financial derivatives. This is unacceptable. We should have been regulating these to prevent big banks from getting themselves so overleveraged on credit swaps that the only recourse was to let the entire system melt down or hand them the keys to the US treasury. Alan Greenspan said, more or less, he was wrong to oppose the regulation -- props to him for owning up to him, too bad for us he thought the free market would always regulate risk properly.

Barack Obama got elected... Hard work will wait on him. After Jan 20th we know more about how he is doing. But im sure he will do better then Bush Jr.

As we have 2 other topics this one is closed.