Cigargeeks Political Poll!

Started by Bob Cordell, 03/03/2008 07:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bob Cordell

If you feel like it, please tell us who you are supporting for President and why. It looks like Ohio and Texas are becoming real battle ground states for the Democratic party and could be a clincher for the GOP party.

** Please don't attack any other members for their positions, this is a pleasant place with alot of great guys and let's keep it that way. You may not agree with another members viewpoints that keep that to yourself please.

I'm supporting McCain because I believe in conservative values, even though he isn't the "perfect" candidate according to many far right pundits.
"I bet there's rich folks eating in fancy dining cars,
They're probably drinkin' coffee and smoking big cigars"

Duker511

Im going with McCain I think. Being both a veteran, and a native american, I like the way he supports our troops and understands  the needs of native americans. His stand on immigration is another reason hes got my vote. I do believe that who ever is elected will give this country a morale boost because Bush has divided the country it seems. Maybe some new blood will bring people back together. When I say divided I mean that alot of people I know are either all for Bush or they despise him, not many in the middle.
Tim

emind56

Mcaine here.  More because of who he is not than who he is.

mhuss

I'm not so sure this time around.  It may come down to picking the lesser of two, or maybe more, evils.  I'm a registered Republican, but for some reason (forgive me because I'm not too sure why yet) I'm not too thrilled about John McCain.  And I'm certainly not thrilled about Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama at all.

While we're on the subject, I have to say that I do not like the presidential primary process at all.  I live in PA, and we don't hold our primaries until April.  By that time, most of the contenders have dropped out of the race.  Even though those 'drop-outs' may be on the ballot, they aren't going to win the nomination.  I think it should be more like the general election, where everyone goes to the polls at the same time.  Once a few states vote, a trend starts and a "favorite" emerges.  All of a sudden, the guy out in front early starts to get all the votes, just because all the states in front of theirs voted for him.  And once a favorite emerges, everyone else tends to drop out.  And that leaves folks like me in a state with a very late primary with virtually no choices.  I feel like my vote and input during the primary doesn't matter.  Like I said, it should be more like the general election, where everyone speaks all at the same time.

ljlemer

Quotemhuss - 3/4/2008  12:27 AM
Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama at all.

While we're on the subject, I have to say that I do not like the presidential primary process at all.  I live in PA, and we don't hold our primaries until April.  By that time, most of the contenders have dropped out of the race.  Even though those 'drop-outs' may be on the ballot, they aren't going to win the nomination.  I think it should be more like the general election, where everyone goes to the polls at the same time.  Once a few states vote, a trend starts and a "favorite" emerges.  All of a sudden, the guy out in front early starts to get all the votes, just because all the states in front of theirs voted for him.  And once a favorite emerges, everyone else tends to drop out.  And that leaves folks like me in a state with a very late primary with virtually no choices.  I feel like my vote and input during the primary doesn't matter.  Like I said, it should be more like the general election, where everyone speaks all at the same time.

I think a lot of people are waiting to let others decide for them. They want to know who can win because they hate losing. They want to pick a winner. A national primary defeats part of the purpose of primaries by not letting the consensus evolve over time. I think 4 primary elections are enough, with states from every region in each. I also believe January and February are way too early.

As for identifying my political affiliations, I choose not to precisely because I'm a very political animal and I don't want politics dividing us the way it's dividing our nation. I believe I already revealed aspects of my views in previous posts, but I have confidence nobody remembers.
"Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil".

Thomas Mann

Bob Cordell

Nobody remembers huh? I remember the day you said who you were supporting...your candidate is a left handed male, right?

Ha, I do remember which one you support.


I agree on the primary process, maybe they could campaign a bit longer and have 2 or 3 super primaries, that would cut the process down and give everybody a fair voice in choosing the ultimate winner of each party.
"I bet there's rich folks eating in fancy dining cars,
They're probably drinkin' coffee and smoking big cigars"

kgoings

Quoteljlemer - 3/4/2008  1:43 AM

Quotemhuss - 3/4/2008  12:27 AM
Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama at all.

While we're on the subject, I have to say that I do not like the presidential primary process at all.  I live in PA, and we don't hold our primaries until April.  By that time, most of the contenders have dropped out of the race.  Even though those 'drop-outs' may be on the ballot, they aren't going to win the nomination.  I think it should be more like the general election, where everyone goes to the polls at the same time.  Once a few states vote, a trend starts and a "favorite" emerges.  All of a sudden, the guy out in front early starts to get all the votes, just because all the states in front of theirs voted for him.  And once a favorite emerges, everyone else tends to drop out.  And that leaves folks like me in a state with a very late primary with virtually no choices.  I feel like my vote and input during the primary doesn't matter.  Like I said, it should be more like the general election, where everyone speaks all at the same time.

I think a lot of people are waiting to let others decide for them. They want to know who can win because they hate losing. They want to pick a winner. A national primary defeats part of the purpose of primaries by not letting the consensus evolve over time. I think 4 primary elections are enough, with states from every region in each. I also believe January and February are way too early.

As for identifying my political affiliations, I choose not to precisely because I'm a very political animal and I don't want politics dividing us the way it's dividing our nation. I believe I already revealed aspects of my views in previous posts, but I have confidence nobody remembers.

You did, and I do. ;)

I am not thrilled with any of the candidates. Can we call a re-do? I am not old enough to run for president yet, but next term I am sure to win! lol

I used to like (what I knew of) McCain, I thought he spoke his mind and didn't let people sway him in his beliefs or opinions. But not so sure now.

I am not really "in to" politics. I am kind of middle of the road with a lean to the right. Honestly I am probably more all over the place from far right to far left to dead center depending on the issue. So it all averages to a middle of the road with a lean to the right????

BTW when I run for president during the next election, I will have my own party...The Republicratics. A mix of what I think are good ideas from both sides! ;)

Bob Cordell

Lets bring back the Whig party...I just like saying "Whig"
"I bet there's rich folks eating in fancy dining cars,
They're probably drinkin' coffee and smoking big cigars"

qman22

I am pretty conservative and sadly none of my choices fit that bill.  So, the lesser of the evils would have to be McCain.  I certainly am not crazy about him though.  Hilary is just a power monger, who will do anything to benefit herself and her agenda.  Barack is a substanceless tool.  I think both would lead us back to the days of Jimmy Carter.  The economy is my biggest issue and hopefully McCain will pick a good fiscally strong running mate.
Lets GOOOOOOOO Mountaineers!

incredible_elmo


For a while I liked Mitt Romney.  His focus on economic development would have been acceptable to me.  To me it was either the Mormon or the Muslim.  The guy who's first name sounds like a baseball glove, or the guy who's last name sounds like 'Osama'.   Romney would have been a more serious contender to Obama, because he would have conservative middle-America covering his back.  Yes, it's still there.  Somewhere between the east and left coast I think.  Now we have this 70-yr old fart, John McCain, who's trying to look young by shaving a lot.  When he looks in the mirror, what does he see? The man who would be king.  McCain is also a political Ric Flair and knows all the nasty tricks.  Might as well break out the black shoe-polish//hair-color, like Reagan did.  Reagan was great.  I loved that guy!

McCain can pull in every favor, conjure up every dirty political trick he's ever learned.  That won't save him.  Even without a totally biased media on Obama's side, ready to dredge up McCain's past for the next 8-9 months (the whole recent scandal with the female lobbyist is child's play compared to what's coming), I don't think McCain's ever encountered anything like Obama.  Who else could have done to Hillary Clinton what this man has done?  How do you fight something like that?  Obama is a pure political animal; on top of that he easily has a higher IQ than most people in Washington.  He's likeable too; no one who's listened to him can deny that.  It's like something out of a cheesy Chinese Kung-Fu movie.  The new evil guy has that sh*t-eating grin and a fight style that totally perplexes (and finally undoes) the old evil guy.  Hitler was also a very popular with crowds.

The shocking part will be the swearing in, when Obama whips out the Koran and says he'll swear by that, not on a Christian Bible.  We've got problems, no doubt.

Who do I support?  I'll vote for Obama and commit political suicide.  The 'Republican Establishment' should have learned from their last beating (when Bob Dole LOST).  They haven't learned anything.

Ironically, I've been a hard-core Republican ever since I could vote.  

- Mikel


Proph

#10
Well.. Bush was CIA(both of them actually, not that bush can run, just tying this in to Obama).  Obama is a CIA asset.  Hillary is a criminal(drug cartel, cocaine in Arkansas).  I won't even get started on McCain and his false bravado.  

SO, how about we do away with the position of president altogether and go back to independant states actually governed by "we the people" as opposed to a corporation (United States is a corporation, look it up if you don't know) run by a president without "we the people's" best interests in mind before profits or agendas.  :)

My 2c
"Do not be too timid or squeamish about your actions, all life is an experiment." -Ralph W. Emerson

ljlemer

QuoteProph - 3/4/2008  2:44 PM

SO, how about we do away with the position of president altogether and go back to independant states actually governed by "we the people"
My 2c

Every state has its own laws. Some things are legal in some places and illegal in others. (Enforcement differs too-that's no small issue). For murder, in some states, you go to jail for 20 years and then they let you out having served your time. In others, you go to jail for 20 years and then they execute you because your appeals have run out. Driving interstate you pass through different jurisdictions with different laws. This certainly isn't the legal clarity conservatives dream of. Most states swing back and forth between Dems and Reps because the population is polarized into two camps of roughly equal strength. Both parties get to dominate the other periodically rather than compromise for the greater good. What the heck do you mean by we the people? We the people can't agree on very much at all. Do you mean we the temporary majority until next election?
"Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil".

Thomas Mann

Proph

Another reason all the power shouldn't be centralized, cause as you said no one can agree on anything.  So.. like-minded ppl should live in certain areas.. and this sort of does occur(neighborhoods, areas, etc.)  Umm, what I mean by "we the people" is, that we as a group should be able to reach a general consensus about obvious things.  We don't NEED complex jibber jabber laws to keep lawyers and judges busy and the rest of us annoyed.  If you can find it(Out of print), get and read a book called Woe Unto You Lawyers(Fred Rodell), and/or get your hands on Adventures in Legal Land(Marc Stevens).  What REALLY needs to happen, but will take some growing up on all our parts', is everyone needs to learn to be responsible for themselves and then we wouldn't need nazi governments with wannabe tyrants.  We've kinda grown out of that as humans, but apparently some ppl at the top didn't get the memo.   :confused:

So, in the meantime, power going back to the states would be a good start.  And, don't think that the states have power, they all sold out for federal money which then put them under the federal government.  When a city incorporates, the US can take over that corporation by offering federal funding.  Which reminds me, a city(Big one, Vallejo, Ca) near where I live has gone bankrupt, and that's interesting.  Anyways, what we learn in puppet/parrot school, is that all this nonsense exists when really it's all imaginary.  There are no real borders, just temporary imaginary lines that some people think are necessary for whatever reason, though we can look forward to the powers that be attempting to dissolve those in favor of a new North American Union with money being the Amero.  This is what happened to many countries in Europe, with the Euro and some countries have started regretting entering the European Union as it was weakened their national currency while at the same time centralizing power.  It's all about business.  There's only really ONE type of law any "court" pays attention to in this reality we currently are in, and that's the UCC which is based on English Common Law, which came from Roman Law, which came from... :P  can trace it back quite a ways.  Back past Sumer.  The point is, it's all imaginary, common sense or consensus that some feel needs enforced while at the same time those some try to get you to break those laws.  What's that saying?  "The winners get to write history"?

Anyways.  I honestly don't know if there IS a solution to many of the problems we have these days.  But, I'm pretty sure if we each take personal responsibilty and stop depending on governments and paid off "experts" and scientists paid by special interests we'd all be better off for it.  (which is part of why naturopathic/homeopathic medicine is making a comeback, cause a lot of it works whereas our advanced medical community is only interested in $, cancer being the perfect example)
"Do not be too timid or squeamish about your actions, all life is an experiment." -Ralph W. Emerson

Sticks

#13
If you are middle class... good luck because we really don't have a single person in our corner. We pay for everyone, rich and poor.  So thank God for cigars as this is one of my pleasures that no one will take away even if I have to grow my own tobaccy on the south fourty. Yeeeha! :lmao:

ljlemer

#14
QuoteProph - 3/4/2008  9:49 PM

Another reason all the power shouldn't be centralized, cause as you said no one can agree on anything.  So.. like-minded ppl should live in certain areas..

Partition is a consideration. Divide up the states, red and blue. Expel dissenters. Have one state just for gays, another just for druggies. Smokers would have their own state too. The heathen Left would have theirs too. There would be a Bible Belt region.
Complex people would have dual citizenship, like gay, leftist druggies and closeted, smoking bible-thumpers.

I think we're on to something!
"Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil".

Thomas Mann

Bob Cordell

#15
Oh boy, you guys are running this one in the ditch now! Thats funny.

It looks a little clearer for the GOP side tonight, as if it didn't before but look at the Democratic side tonight. Hillary comes up with  clutch wins just when you think she's down for the count. I'm not sure the delegate count will change all that much, perhaps she will draw closer, but at least she will have some momentum to stay in the race. I think in the long run this could divide the party, especially if Florida and Michigan delegates aren't seated. We could be looking for legal challenges there,we shall see...


Regardless it was a good night for my man, McCain. I hope he dosen't fade from the spotlight due to a hell of a mess on the democratic side.
"I bet there's rich folks eating in fancy dining cars,
They're probably drinkin' coffee and smoking big cigars"

ljlemer

QuoteBob Cordell - 3/3/2008  8:12 PM


** Please don't attack any other members for their positions, this is a pleasant place with alot of great guys and let's keep it that way. You may not agree with another members viewpoints that keep that to yourself please.

You forgot to ask people not to say really nasty things about any of the candidates.
"Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil".

Thomas Mann

mhuss

QuoteBob Cordell - 3/4/2008  11:30 PM
Regardless it was a good night for my man, McCain. I hope he dosen't fade from the spotlight due to a hell of a mess on the democratic side.


The Dems have held the spotlight almost the entire time so far anyway.  All the cable news channels have seen that side of the race as more interesting and worth more attention.  Since there is no more race on the Republican side, the only that can happen is for him to not get as much attention and for everyone to purely focus on the Dem side.


   
Privacy Policy     Terms of Service
Copyright © 2007-2024 Cigar Geeks, Inc. All rights reserved.