ID:49660
 
Keywords: 08, mccain, obama, president, vote

Poll: Your vote?

McCain 13% (3)
Obama 86% (20)

The polls are now closed.

Been a lot of posts about politics - so in the end, who are you voting for?

My girlfriend's voting for McCain(I'm against him so she's officially dumb now <_< (joke))

And I'm going for Obama.

Feel free to leave a reason as to why you're voting for you who are voting.

Also if you're underage but DO understand what's going on, feel free to leave a vote/comment as well.

edit:

Well. 20-3. This might not mean anything on election day. We'll have to wait and see.
Hmm, neither.
Hi, I'm only 15.
My primary reason for voting Obama is because McCain already lost -- most of the country has seen the stark contrast of the state of the economy between Clinton's term and Bush's, and only the wealthy have any initiative to vote for McCain anymore.

I'm an uninsured, unemployed lower middle class citizen on the verge of poverty, and almost all of McCain's policies don't impact me in a good way.
The economy was good when Bill Clinton was president is because of the .com boom and had nothing to do with him. He also got a lot of money by raping the military and we would not be having the troop shortage today, if he would have left the troop level at Pre-Gulf War. If we had 500,000 troops in Iraq like the first Gulf War the current war would probably only lasted a couple years also many less soldiers and civilians would have died.
And we would not have needed having troops today if we didn't invade Iraq for bogus reasons. But anyways, what a crazy idea! Cutting down the military during times of peace.
Actually I was talking about Pre-Gulf War levels of troop which was set during peace time,so you make no sense. Also you think Bush administration was the only one who wanted to attacked Iraq again? Well then you would be wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Desert_Fox

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/ transcripts/clinton.html

Bill Clintion transcript highlight:
Heavy as they are, the costs of action must be weighed against the price of inaction. If Saddam defies the world and we fail to respond, we will face a far greater threat in the future. Saddam will strike again at his neighbors. He will make war on his own people.

And mark my words, he will develop weapons of mass destruction. He will deploy them, and he will use them.

Because we're acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future.
Classic "my penis is bigger than yours" American nationalism.
From an outsiders point of view(Im british), I really hope obama wins because if he doesnt... nothing will change for the possitive in the long run IMO and hell its going to be ow so much worse if McCain kicks the bucket and Sarah Palin is in the white house.
Well, when comes to sex I don't know if it matters, but when it comes to war you definitely want the bigger penis. As for the candidates I think we are screwed either way
The only reason McCain got Palin as vice president was to offset the race issue. People originally wanted Obama cause it was different -- the first non-white man in office. Now everyone wants to see the first woman as #2 instead. At its' core, this election is which vice president we want running our country -- no crazy bastard is going to be able to resist assassinating the first non-white president, and McCain will probably die in office. Take a look at any "before term" and "after term" photos of any president in recent history, and look at how terribly they age. McCain likely won't survive his term if elected.
I would rather see Colin Powell as the first black President.
Mobius Evalon wrote:
Classic "my penis is bigger than yours" American nationalism.

okay, wow. So how exactly did you derive this from an argument about how more troops were necessary during the initial stages of occupation?


McCain actually pissed off a lot of females that way. Thinking he could just get a random female and then "win" all of the Hilary voters when instead it backfired on him.


Also I'm curious to hear, anyone voting for McCain, do you actually back up PALIN? I think it's impossible to defend her with such...well...we all know.

Vexonater wrote:
okay, wow. So how exactly did you derive this from an argument about how more troops were necessary during the initial stages of occupation?

Because it's American nationalism at its finest -- we have to keep troop counts high in the off chance we have another small country whose business to stick our nose in unnecessarily, then oppress with democracy and/or Christianity. The long story short is that the economic structure of Iraq isn't our damn problem. We killed the crazy and his bastard spawn, so now we can pack up and leave them to their own devices instead of stuffing what we think is best for them down their throats.
If we left Iraq it would turn into a worse terrorist safe haven then Afghanistan. Unfortunately we will probably be in some fashion, stuck in Iraq for decades to come. Hopefully it will get it a very small level like South Korea(30,000) soon. Almost every war we get into we never leave that country. I think they already have or currently building permanent bases in Iraq.
Soldierman wrote:
If we left Iraq it would turn into a worse terrorist safe haven then Afghanistan. Unfortunately we will probably be in some fashion, stuck in Iraq for decades to come. Hopefully it will get it a very small level like South Korea(30,000) soon.

Which is one of the several problems with our occupation of the country -- we have to form an infrastructure to hold the place up after we swept the entire system out from under the citizens. It's kinda like that party trick where you pull out the tablecloth, except we pretty much pulled everything onto the floor with it.
Yeah, but how do you set up a system that people don't want and are willing to die to stop it? I bet if you put a vote in Iraq to pick either Sharia Law or Democracy. Democracy would lose in land slide vote. You know there is reasons the first President Bush did not go into Iraq in the Gulf War. I wonder if he tried to talk his son out of it.
Soldierman wrote:
Yeah, but how do you set up a system that people don't want and are willing to die to stop it? I bet if you put a vote in Iraq to pick either Sharia Law or Democracy. Democracy would lose in land slide vote. You know there is reasons the first President Bush did not go into Iraq in the Gulf War. I wonder if he tried to talk his son out of it.

Actually, the first Bush has openly regretted not deposing Sadaam after the first gulf war, which, in my opinion, would have been a much better time to do it than in '03.
Yeah, your right it would have been better to have taken him out then; we had more soldiers, more global support and a good reason. Also he told the Shiite's to rise up against Saddam and then the military foolishly gave Saddam flight permissions. He in turn sent in helicopter and slaughter probably over 100k Shiites. If only we would have continued to attack them until the republican guard was completely defeated. Then they might have been able to over throw him
Page: 1 2