PickleHosting - Game Servers - Voice Servers - Web Hosting - Best Value and Great Service!
 
 
  Create an account
Need help running your HTML, PHP, ASP website? - Evaders Squadron Coding - Webmaster Services  
SW:Rebellion Network
imminent-bean
 

Star Wars: Rebellion [SWR] :: View topic - U.S. 2008 Election
These forums are archives only. Visit our new forums here: http://forums.swrebellion.com
U.S. 2008 Election
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Star Wars: Rebellion [SWR] Forum Index -> Outside Interests
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who do you support to be the next President of the United States?
Obama
37%
 37%  [ 3 ]
Clinton
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
McCain
37%
 37%  [ 3 ]
Rommney
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Huckabee
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Other (specify in post)
25%
 25%  [ 2 ]
Total Votes : 8

Author Message
Darth_Rob

<!-- Warlord -->


Joined: May 04, 2005
Posts: 2510
Location: Stoneyonta, NY

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:34 am    Post subject: U.S. 2008 Election

Here is the results from "Super Tuesday". It appears that McCain is the clear Republican winner, while it is still a toss-up between Clinton and Obama.

My personal feelings on the matter is that whoever wins the Democratic primary is gonna be the next president. Even though I am a Republican, I don't think they will win. The nation is fed up with President Bush, and they will take it out on his party. The people want change, and want to look to outside forces. Its history repeating itself.

Look at Nixon's Presidency. After he resigned due to Watergate, Ford took over. When Ford ran for re-election, he lost to the peanut farmer Jimmy Carter, because many people connected Nixon with the rest of the Republican party. I feel it will happen again this year.

Dont get me wrong, I will be voting for McCain. But I will be more than happy if Obama wins. I just dont want Clinton winning. Everyone knows I believe she is the anti-Christ. I just feel she is way to ambitious. Shes been planning for this since 1992, and that scares the hell out of me. Im not sexist, and I have no problem with there being a woman President, its just that I have a total disdain for "Hellary". So I am just hoping that Obama has what it takes in the end to take her down...
_________________
Your feeble skills are no match for the power of the Dark Side!

Test

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address

Evaders99
Dark Lord of the Sith
Dark Lord of the Sith


Joined: Jan 11, 2002
Posts: 3079
Location: USA

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:51 pm    Post subject:

Ron Paul - I know he's not going to win, but he's the only one the represents my views (he's a Libertarian running as a Republican). He is one of the two supporting Fair Tax .. the other is Mike Huckabee
_________________
Evaders99
SW:Rebellion Fans! Webmaster
Star Wars roleplaying community! Administrator

Fighting is terrible, but not as terrible as losing the will to fight.
- SW:Rebellion Network - Evaders Squadron Coding -

The cake is a lie.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger

RenegadeMax

<!-- Sergeant //-->


Joined: Jun 25, 2007
Posts: 52
Location: 8300 feet above sea level

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:27 pm    Post subject:

Kucinich, then Edwards, and now I'm torn between Obama and McCain...

It's a very confusing time for the Rebellion...

I like McCain a lot. Always have. If he'd just tell the right wing of his party and the conservative evangelicals to blow, I'd probably vote for him. Heck, he might do that anyway if and after he were elected, but I don't think he'll make me a promise, so it's probably Obama for me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

SOCL

<!-- Supreme Moff //-->


Joined: Mar 27, 2003
Posts: 3660
Location: Alexandria, VA

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:40 pm    Post subject:

Barack Obama.
_________________
SOCL

- Read the Forum Rules - [url=http://www.swrebellion.com/forums/pos
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

DarthTofu

<!--n00b//-->


Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Posts: 3979

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:42 pm    Post subject:

I put McCain down, but I still want Barack Obama to go for the Democratic ticket. Once he's got the experience he'll make a good president, IMO, but right now I think he'd be too controlled by the rest of the Executive Branch to make the sort of decisions that need making.

Hillary has taken too much by way of campaign contributions; she's just going to go and open Washington up to corruption moreso than it already is. Ron Paul... I don't like Libertarians. I guess I'm just too liberal at heart. Huckabee: I know that he's said that he won't force his views on the country, but it takes a lot of refution of the evidense to keep claiming that Evolution is a hoax and that the world is really only 6,000 years old when tons of evidense says otherwise. I think he'd get us into some Bush-like situations.

Mitt Romney is actually alright, I don't have much of a beef with him- I just know that McCain is willing to work with Democrats and to come close to center, a skill that is always good to see in the White House.
_________________
12/14/07
Nu kyr'adyc, shi taab'echaaj'la
Not gone, merely marching far away Zur Hölle mit dem Bösen

And on the eighth day, God said, "Let there be sanity!"

... There's
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

SOCL

<!-- Supreme Moff //-->


Joined: Mar 27, 2003
Posts: 3660
Location: Alexandria, VA

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:58 pm    Post subject:

Tofu and I generally have the same opinion on this matter.

If I might add, though, I rather like Hillary Clinton as a politician, but dislike her for being a politician (or rather, a stereotypical politician). Further, she's too much of a divisive figure to serve the Democrats can true purpose. She is more potentially dangerous in her ability to unify the Republican base against her rather than unify the Democratic base in her favor; indeed, I'm rather certain a large percentage of independents wouldn't so much cast their vote in favor of the GOP as against Clinton. As a Vice Presidential candidate, I have a hard time saying anything other than she would still be potentially dangerous to the electorate and especially the Democratic Party; further, she an extremely strong-willed person who will likely not take being VP very kindly and make hell for anyone who is made the Presidential nominee. As much as an Obama-Clinton ticket might be nice (or at least interesting) to see, I think that would cause too many problems and ought be scrapped.

I don't generally favor Republicans, but among the GOP candidates McCain has my vote. Romney I don't have too much against, but I believe he's a waning power. Huckabee and Ron Paul are both political dangerous, not just for the GOP but for the country as a whole, especially with regard to foreign affairs.
_________________
SOCL

- Read the Forum Rules - [url=http://www.swrebellion.com/forums/pos
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Jahled

<!-- Jahled //-->


Joined: Mar 30, 2002
Posts: 5213
Location: London

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:13 pm    Post subject:

SOCL wrote:
Tofu and I generally have the same opinion on this matter.
I don't generally favor Republicans, but among the GOP candidates McCain has my vote.


McCain is an odd one, I say as an obvious outsider. I read the 'serious newspapers' this side of the pond, so like to think I have probably more of a realistic understanding of potentially the most powerful man on the planet other than what's in the silly papers for the lazy/working class.

What attracts me to him is his apparent 'liberal' edge to Republican politics, ie: not curling up to the various religious lunatics on the right who do stuff like like oppose women's right to abortion, question evolution, justify scum like Al-Qaeda with questionable 'spiritual beliefs' without realizing, and affording neocon's a free reign on diplomatic policy which has reduced the US to the status of a rampant warmonger in the eyes of the rest of the industrialized western world. The very fact his 'conservative' credentials are open to question within the Republican Party warms me to the guy, as it reminds me at what disgusts at so much of the Republican Party stands for.

What disturbs me are things like his comment that North Korea should face extinction, and some song concerning Iran being bombed to the tune of the Beach Boys. Hilarious stuff for a potential diplomatic statesman in command of the most formidable arsenal on the planet. Think how this goes down elsewhere.

As for the Democrats, I think it was a shame John Edwards couldn't build more momentum; from what I read and understood, part of his message was the insanity of all this presidential-campaign funded bollocks, the amount of money spent is insane, and to be be frank offensive all over the place if you think about about, where ever your charitable leanings. But there you go, the Clinton/Obama clash evolves; not entirely sure yet as an outsider, though leaning to Hilary.

My UK five pence


Smile
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website MSN Messenger

DarthTofu

<!--n00b//-->


Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Posts: 3979

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:01 pm    Post subject:

Your five pense? Come, now, Jahled, your European money already outweighs ours- is it really necessary to go pouring in an extra three pense on our discussions as well? Razz

The thing with Obama is that apparently he hasn't been taking lump cash donations- rather, it's a large, working-class base that's been giving small donations (By "Small" I mean anywhere from five to fifty dollars per person). I certainly see what you mean, though, Jahled- the money that our politicians fuel their campaigns with unbalances the election based on matters of economics and encourages money to take the office as opposed to the most skilled person in most cases.

I believe you fellows across the Atlantic have a system where not only can a campaign only spend a certain amount of money, but it can also only campaign for so many hours- it keeps the voters focusing on who the greater good is as opposed to who is the lesser evil.

Granted, this is just me regurgitating what I remember from last year's AP US Government class (We didn't always stick to the subject matter), so I may have some details wrong. McCain has a history of going for election reform, though, which is nice- the McCain-Feingold (sp?) bill called for election reform in one of the houses, though I don't think both. It limited spending on campaigns to what is, unfortunately, still a rather exorbitant amount, but it certainly kept a couple of thousand dollars out of the races and prevented large donations of "soft money."

If he becomes President he no longer has the legislative power of his vote, but he has the ability to toss a call toward the Congress and pressure them to pass that reform bill.

Has anyone noticed that the election is conspicuously silent about the economic ties we have with China right now? We don't seem to have a lot of discussion on how to break those ties so that we can (hopefully) intervene in Africa eventually. Those poor Darfur (sp?) citizens could certainly use some US or, better yet, UN intervention to keep the Chinese from supplying militant groups with weaponry. (I was reading an article another student had written on the situation today, thus my sudden caring about the genocide.)
_________________
12/14/07
Nu kyr'adyc, shi taab'echaaj'la
Not gone, merely marching far away Zur Hölle mit dem Bösen

And on the eighth day, God said, "Let there be sanity!"

... There's
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Moribundus

<!-- Lieutenant //-->


Joined: Jan 04, 2007
Posts: 97
Location: Dark side of the Yavin moon.

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 11:27 pm    Post subject:

Please this time elect someone sane, who doesn't try to create another cold war (or any other war).

USA is going to build military base in our country, Russia has already cancelled it's disarming treaties and threatens to aim it's missiles at us. So I'm slowly considering packing my things and getting the hell out of here.

I don't know much about you presidental candidates for this elections, but I sincerely hope your pick will be better than the last one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

RenegadeMax

<!-- Sergeant //-->


Joined: Jun 25, 2007
Posts: 52
Location: 8300 feet above sea level

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:10 pm    Post subject:

Me too, Moribundus, me too...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

SOCL

<!-- Supreme Moff //-->


Joined: Mar 27, 2003
Posts: 3660
Location: Alexandria, VA

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 2:02 pm    Post subject:

Well, this is ironic. I sat down hoping folks from abroad would respond, since I'm very interested in hearing those opinions! Very Happy

You folks, especially Mori and Max, bring up a point that has (though quietly) been looming over the election. The fact of the matter is, whoever we elect in the U.S. will reflect a certain way of thinking to the rest of the world. You would be amazed at the reaction that Barack Obama, an African-American, can run for President. To much of the world, and especially the Middle East, we are seen as white, racist nation, and the fact Hillary Clinton is running means very little since it's not particularly unusual for women to be among the chief executives of the world (i.e. Margaret Thatcher, British PM in the 80s; Angela Merkel, present German Chancellor). The fact he is a minority has actually, and quite radically, changed many people's views abroad. I know in the USA much of electorate has become jaded with the issue of race in the present election, but what we perceive here is only a drip in the ocean of perception internationally. Indeed, the election of Obama might be enough to change the perception of the United States greatly and perhaps help with rekindling international relations, most of which are in a state of disrepair and rot if only for a lack of upkeep, but also from the totally offensive, unilateral manner of the present Administration. There are greater forces at work in this election that we as U.S. citizens cannot see (being so close to it), but that what we decide will affect. In many ways, I think this goes beyond the best candidate for the job, but instead for the sake of a greater issue: that of the United States image abroad.

Jahled, don't get me wrong, McCain does not have my vote. I was trying to say that if I was forced to choose among GOP candidates, McCain would be my pick, but he is far from being (in my opinion) the best qualified candidate.

Tofu, I've always had this theory that had we not got ourselves involved in Iraq, Afghanistan might be stabilized (seeing as we could have placed the emphasis from Iraq and Afghanistan on just the one country) and might perhaps be helping this UN coalition in Darfur with perhaps a brigade or two of peacekeeping forces. Additionally, we might also be assisting the government of and the European peacekeepers in Chad, along with perhaps even stabilizing Kenya, but of course, only if so invited or requested by the particular country or the United Nations. We might even be helping strengthen associations like the United Nations and NATO rather than weakening them by "going at it alone." It was quite heartbreaking back when the NATO allies wanted to enact Article 5 of the treaty--a bit created with the intention of the United States assisting Europe in the case of war with the USSR--to assist us after September-11, but the Administration turned down the offer. It was an extension of friendship and solidarity, and it was snubbed, which only goes to show how important my earlier argument about strengthening international ties continues to be.

It's interesting, though, to see the Republican base divided in the same, if not extremely similar way the Democratic base was fragmented in 2004...
_________________
SOCL

- Read the Forum Rules - [url=http://www.swrebellion.com/forums/pos
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Aenivae_Ikeda

<!-- Colonel -->


Joined: Mar 03, 2005
Posts: 544

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 2:57 pm    Post subject:

I've been set on Ron Paul from the beginning. I'm not really opposed to big government entirely, but for the most part it seems less effective and more expensive than the market.

Besides that, all of the candidates are spouting off these massive programs that aren't going to work because the amount of money needed to invest in their success while either paying off a massive debt, or continuing to maintain a massive foreign policy. Not that these programs couldn't be instituted, it's just the degree of expense they require is absurd. Accountability, and management, over and over again to prevent corruption. And without those then you lose money and efficiency to corruption. All that jazz.

So I think a small government is most beneficial at this point until everything is fine and dandy once again.

But, since that's not going to happen I have to either go for Obama or Huckabee- Although Obama seems a little absurd in his ideas to diplomatically talk Iran and Syria into leaving Iraq alone after we've left.
_________________
"I saw the greatest minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving, hysterical, naked, dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix." -Allen Ginnsberg, "Howl"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Jin_Roh

<!-- Sergeant //-->


Joined: Oct 11, 2002
Posts: 56

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:18 pm    Post subject:

I'm delurking to voice my equally worthless opinion.

Romney suspended campaigning today, so that leaves:

Hillary - but the thought of a redux of the 90's Clinton corruption completely depresses me. Face it: policy wise and by inclination this woman is practically Stalin in drag. No thanks Mrs. C.
McCain - who has proven himself to be as vindictive and egotistical, not to mention as cynical and downright dishonest, as any politician in D.C. Anyone who could proudly author the kind of attack on the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution that McCain-Feingold represents, has no business holding national office. All in all McCain is unfit to be President imho.
Huckabee - the Huckster. McCain light. I'm so sorry that something as cool as the Fair Tax has become associated with this tool. Again, a lying cynical d'bag of a politician. No way he gets my vote, hopefully he'll go back to Arkansas and throw another squirrel on the barbie or the fry baby or whatever it was he was cooking them with in his college days.
Obama - Hillary with a human face. Jimmy Carter politically-reincarnated with a more ambitious (and destructive) shopping list of federal social programs. A naif up against Beijing, Bin Laden and Ahmadinejad (though after campaigning against the Clintons you can no longer call him a total naif). But I'll still be hoping that he wins the democrat nomination since 08 is going to be their year, and a return to Billary is more than I can stomach.
Ron Paul - will ultimately get my vote now. He's probably the only guy in the race who has read and understands the Constitution and has an inkling of how the Framers intended the country to be governed. His foreign policy would be dangerous in war time, admittedly. But I can't not vote, and all of the others are a guaranteed disaster.

I believe 2009 is going to see an acceleration of the US national decline that is so rapid it becomes irreversible. I'm sure if that happens it will gladen some hearts on this forum. Careful what you wish for. A bumbling, arrogant, self-absorbed but largely indifferent capitalist superpower might one day seem like a neighbor you mildly disliked, compared to what might follow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

DarthTofu

<!--n00b//-->


Joined: Jun 28, 2005
Posts: 3979

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 6:36 pm    Post subject:

Woah- McCain-Feingold was hardly a limiting of the first amendment, mate! It evened the playing field out in order to make Congress a meritocracy as opposed to a pecuniaucracy (Rule by money. Not a real word according to Firefox, but it's part Latin, so you're not allowed to dispute it). McCain-Feingold cuts back dramatically on the corruption of politicians with special interests upon entering the office and further reduces the Senate from the "millionaires club" it was in the early nineteen hundreds.
You can argue that, in limiting the amount of campaign money a candidate can spend, his freedom of speech is attacked, but let's be perfectly honest: the candidate is just using that money for television ads, automated phone calls, automated E-mails, and automated regular mail. It's not so much "speech" as "spam." When you compare the amount of money an incumbent member of Congress has to spend on their seat to the woefully tiny amount of money the challenger has, you see just how difficult it is to break in, even if the challenger is a better candidate for the position. In removing that overhanging advantage of money it becomes easier for the more effective legislator to enter Congress.
_________________
12/14/07
Nu kyr'adyc, shi taab'echaaj'la
Not gone, merely marching far away Zur Hölle mit dem Bösen

And on the eighth day, God said, "Let there be sanity!"

... There's
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Jahled

<!-- Jahled //-->


Joined: Mar 30, 2002
Posts: 5213
Location: London

Reply with quote
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:04 pm    Post subject:

Jin_Roh wrote:
I'm sure if that happens it will gladen some hearts on this forum.


Why?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website MSN Messenger

Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Star Wars: Rebellion [SWR] Forum Index -> Outside Interests All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


 
 
 
^Top 
Home Your Account Forums Downloads F.A.Q. Submit News Hosting Contact Us

© 1999-2013 by SWRebellion.com. All Rights Reserved.
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters.
You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php
PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi.
This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL.
PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
Page Generation: 0.60 Seconds