Sorry but I respectfully disagree. That is all. 
Anyone watch the debate???
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (33)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
From: South Jersey/Moorestown
Anyone watch the debate??? Don't know if we can talk about this here lol. But what are everyone's thoughts and opinions. Personally, I think I am a little torn. I do like some of what both candidates say. I think I might be leaning towards John McCain on this tonight.
McCain all the way. obama seemed dumb founded the whole time...also McCain kick dirt in obamas face and proved every thing bs on him....also i had no idea obama spent that much on bashing.....ha like i want a crybaby to run america???
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (33)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
From: South Jersey/Moorestown
Eh, the he said she said was the least of my concerns in the debate. I did however like when McCain called Obama out all the time saying to watch what he has to say on issues. Mentioning that he just kind of floats around the topic. I did like Obama when he was talking about energy concerns. He mentioed that oil companies have 68 million acres that they own that could be used to refine oil. His goal is to have them use it or lose it. Well, I like that idea but HOW. HOW can you take something someone owns. They can do whatever they want with it. Obama says a lot of nice things, but a lot of it seems like it would take a lot of money to make work. Where does this money come from????? You and me
Agreed.
First off, I personally think the whole 2-party system is complete B.S.
I find it funny one side wants less goverment control becuase it's in their intrest that we have deregulation, NAFTA, and allow American jobs to leave.
They try to be everything to everyone but end up being nothing to no body.
Not saying the other side of the coin is better but when we had the election of 2000 Bush basically stated, if you vote for me, i will give you money. WTF was that about, talk about legalized buying of an election.
Beleive me, I can go all day.
Long story of the short, unless something bad happens to Obama, its not even a race, it has overtones of a Clinton vs Dole. When you have locked states that may vote democrate. Then you have problems.
When you want that party backing, you take all the baggage w/ it.
Trending Topics
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
I have to say i went with Obama, i dont think McCain did much "dirt kicking" as he did have a lack of information. For example, at the end with the talks on abortion, McCain went out and talked about how Obama had voted. However their were key factors as to why he voted the way he did, one being the state law already having in effect what they were voting on, and secondly he voted against the bill because it did not include care for the mothers well being.
You cant help but look at the debate in the simplest of ways. McCain wants to keep things going the way they are an "reinforce" it. Obama notices that we need some big time change and is actually presenting great ideas on how we can and will fix these issues. Ive been saying, since clinton was in office, that we needed to focus more on in house issues rather than fighting wars for someone else. Granted the terrorists attacks were something that needed attention, however we went over there and sent the "dont **** with us again message" now were just beating a dead horse.
Without media influence (cuz honestly, my tv goes on for the debate and off immediately after) i dont see how anyone cant look at McCain and go "wow is that Bush with a mask on?" were headed for 4 more years of the same bullshit if people vote for McCain.
and a friend of mine made a good point, right now obama is ahead in the polls...the past i dunno 4-5 times a candidate has been lower in the polls he has won. but look at it this way, we put Bush in office, not once BUT TWICE, and i have not met a single person who has told me they thought he was great. are we really looking to make that same mistake?
You cant help but look at the debate in the simplest of ways. McCain wants to keep things going the way they are an "reinforce" it. Obama notices that we need some big time change and is actually presenting great ideas on how we can and will fix these issues. Ive been saying, since clinton was in office, that we needed to focus more on in house issues rather than fighting wars for someone else. Granted the terrorists attacks were something that needed attention, however we went over there and sent the "dont **** with us again message" now were just beating a dead horse.
Without media influence (cuz honestly, my tv goes on for the debate and off immediately after) i dont see how anyone cant look at McCain and go "wow is that Bush with a mask on?" were headed for 4 more years of the same bullshit if people vote for McCain.
and a friend of mine made a good point, right now obama is ahead in the polls...the past i dunno 4-5 times a candidate has been lower in the polls he has won. but look at it this way, we put Bush in office, not once BUT TWICE, and i have not met a single person who has told me they thought he was great. are we really looking to make that same mistake?
The only credit I give to Mcain is his service to the country, other than that him and Bush have 90% of the same policies, and now look at the country after 8 years. Like we need another 4 years of this same ****.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/...nge/index.html
HEMPSTEAD, New York (CNN) -- If the presidential election were held today, the latest update of the CNN Electoral College Map estimates Democratic candidate Barack Obama would win enough electoral votes to capture the White House.
The new map indicates that Sen. Obama would have 277 electoral votes, with Sen. John McCain, the Republican candidate, amassing 174 electoral votes; 87 electoral votes are still up for grabs in several states.
In order to win the presidency, a candidate needs 270 electoral votes.
The new estimate for Obama is a change from CNN's October 7 Electoral College Map, which indicated he would take 264 electoral votes. Interactive: CNN's new Electoral Map Calculator
Obama picked up 13 electoral votes when Virginia was moved from the category of tossup state to a state that is leaning toward him. That put him over the 270 electoral-vote threshold needed to win the White House.
"Virginia hasn't gone Democratic in 44 years," said Alan Silverleib, CNN senior political researcher. "But a number of polls -- including our own -- now show Obama up double digits there. And, as the map shows, if Obama holds that lead, it may be enough to put him into the White House."
"Conversely, McCain really can't afford to lose Virginia's 13 electoral votes. That state is a key part of the Republican electoral coalition," Silverleib added.
Teching In
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
I did like Obama when he was talking about energy concerns. He mentioed that oil companies have 68 million acres that they own that could be used to refine oil. His goal is to have them use it or lose it. Well, I like that idea but HOW. HOW can you take something someone owns. They can do whatever they want with it.
Oil companies do not own those 68 million acres. They simply lease them from the Government, allowing the Government final control of the land. Those 68 million acres are like a haystack with a needle, but the only tool the oil companies can use to find the proverbial needle is a set of tweezers. Meanwhile, right next to the haystack is a pile of needles that the oil companies aren't allowed to touch.
There is much more profitable land, the Democrats have been using the 68 million acres line to scare people and make it seem like the oil companies have a ton of land they're not using and just attempting to hoard more land with oil on it. Simply not true, if it costs 10 billion to explore the 68 million acres and only 11 billion of oil is available there; that's an obvious no go. If there is land right next door that costs 5 billion to explore, and 500 billion worth of oil is available, I'd want that land too.
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (33)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
From: South Jersey/Moorestown
McCain addressed Obama last night and said that maybe yes his party may have gotten us here, and well quite frankly George W. Bush may have out us here directly, but McCain said that if he wanted to run again Bush he should have 4 years ago, and he was a different man altogether.
Thank you Carlo for the information provided. I appreciate you clearing that up for me. Now that exploration vs quanity vs profit seems to make sense. Now, I read there are estimated 22 billion barrels of re-finable oil off the coasts east and west of the USA. We have not refined there. McCain and Obama have both announced that they would totally be in favor of lifting the ban in drilling offshore of the Pacific and Atlantic. =P We'll see where that goes.
Foreign attention I think is going to be needed in the future with Russia looking as it did in the Cuban Missile crisis. I personally don't think that Obama would handle such an agenda as well as McCain would. As we saw then Russia is not a country to mess with without takin every possible precaution.
Thank you Carlo for the information provided. I appreciate you clearing that up for me. Now that exploration vs quanity vs profit seems to make sense. Now, I read there are estimated 22 billion barrels of re-finable oil off the coasts east and west of the USA. We have not refined there. McCain and Obama have both announced that they would totally be in favor of lifting the ban in drilling offshore of the Pacific and Atlantic. =P We'll see where that goes.
Foreign attention I think is going to be needed in the future with Russia looking as it did in the Cuban Missile crisis. I personally don't think that Obama would handle such an agenda as well as McCain would. As we saw then Russia is not a country to mess with without takin every possible precaution.
i dont feel obama has the experience to help our country in the situation we r in via economy and other countries ie russia with out completely screwing us worse then we are now
From what I've seen from both is that Obama has been very specific in what his plans are as opposed to McCain who is has been giving us more of a Rah Rah speech when he speaks of issues.
I definately identify with Obama and I think McCain will be more of the same business as usual.
I really don't care about some of the issues brought up on both sides, right now I just want more damn money staying in my household so I can take care of my wife and kids without having to miss 1/2 my kids chlildhood working overtime to do that.
No way McCain gives a damn about that and his healthcare plan is down right scary. I work in healthcare, his plan is horrible.
Obama seems to me to have the right plan for working class families NOW when we need it. McCain is for the rich-I'm not rich.
I definately identify with Obama and I think McCain will be more of the same business as usual.
I really don't care about some of the issues brought up on both sides, right now I just want more damn money staying in my household so I can take care of my wife and kids without having to miss 1/2 my kids chlildhood working overtime to do that.
No way McCain gives a damn about that and his healthcare plan is down right scary. I work in healthcare, his plan is horrible.
Obama seems to me to have the right plan for working class families NOW when we need it. McCain is for the rich-I'm not rich.
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (33)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
From: South Jersey/Moorestown
To be honest I don't believe many people are "rich" in tis country anymore. Rich is making 300k+ a year. There is no "middle" class anymore. I think Obama saying that we will raise the bracket that people get taxed from 100k a year to 250k a year. Well that doesn't exactly help the guy making 45k a year. Doesn't give him any more or less. Now you get taxed less if your in that class between 100-250 a year. Now you would pay less on taxes. Now take that into consideration. All that money that was generated from those people now who pays?????
WOW this just goes to show how misinformed the american public can be. its sad to think votes will be wasted on account of lack of knowledge with the facts.
You do realize a lot of this has come from the OVER Regulation of the banking industry caused by the democrats. Even hilary clinton has stated she regrets what her and Bill did trying to PUSH home ownership to low income families. Families who could physically not afford to pay the amount of debt they were given. So, what happens when they cant pay, they default and more often then not the banks are out of a lot of money. Even Obama has ties with Acorn who specifically pushed banks to give loans to low income families.
In 2004 McCain, who you are blaiming, pushed to regulate the lending industry and identified Fannie and Freddie as problems that will have serious economic impact on the country in the future. In the senate a bill needs a 60/40 vote to pass. While the republicans did have the majority, they did not have a 60% majority. The bill was shot down by democrats who claimed there was nothign wrong with fannie and freddie...and what happened, the bubble burst and here we are.
While the Republicans have gone on record saying they screwed a lot of things up and admit it, The coward dems like Barney Frank (the house finance committee chairmen) still claims today that he was right and admits no fault.
This is why voting regulations should be more strict. People should HAVE to pass a simple knowledge test to be able to vote in each election. Otherwise you have cases like this where people are voting with TOTALLY misinformed information.
You do realize a lot of this has come from the OVER Regulation of the banking industry caused by the democrats. Even hilary clinton has stated she regrets what her and Bill did trying to PUSH home ownership to low income families. Families who could physically not afford to pay the amount of debt they were given. So, what happens when they cant pay, they default and more often then not the banks are out of a lot of money. Even Obama has ties with Acorn who specifically pushed banks to give loans to low income families.
In 2004 McCain, who you are blaiming, pushed to regulate the lending industry and identified Fannie and Freddie as problems that will have serious economic impact on the country in the future. In the senate a bill needs a 60/40 vote to pass. While the republicans did have the majority, they did not have a 60% majority. The bill was shot down by democrats who claimed there was nothign wrong with fannie and freddie...and what happened, the bubble burst and here we are.
While the Republicans have gone on record saying they screwed a lot of things up and admit it, The coward dems like Barney Frank (the house finance committee chairmen) still claims today that he was right and admits no fault.
This is why voting regulations should be more strict. People should HAVE to pass a simple knowledge test to be able to vote in each election. Otherwise you have cases like this where people are voting with TOTALLY misinformed information.
From what I've seen from both is that Obama has been very specific in what his plans are as opposed to McCain who is has been giving us more of a Rah Rah speech when he speaks of issues.
I definately identify with Obama and I think McCain will be more of the same business as usual.
I really don't care about some of the issues brought up on both sides, right now I just want more damn money staying in my household so I can take care of my wife and kids without having to miss 1/2 my kids chlildhood working overtime to do that.
No way McCain gives a damn about that and his healthcare plan is down right scary. I work in healthcare, his plan is horrible.
Obama seems to me to have the right plan for working class families NOW when we need it. McCain is for the rich-I'm not rich.
I definately identify with Obama and I think McCain will be more of the same business as usual.
I really don't care about some of the issues brought up on both sides, right now I just want more damn money staying in my household so I can take care of my wife and kids without having to miss 1/2 my kids chlildhood working overtime to do that.
No way McCain gives a damn about that and his healthcare plan is down right scary. I work in healthcare, his plan is horrible.
Obama seems to me to have the right plan for working class families NOW when we need it. McCain is for the rich-I'm not rich.
maybe the right plan for your working class family NOW would be to sell that extravegant car so you wouldnt have to rely on the government putting more money in your pocket.
Tax rates are already low and at a good level because of the bush tax cuts. they arent going to be cut anymore even if obama is elected.
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (33)
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
From: South Jersey/Moorestown
Another thing that upset me. I was talking politics with one of my African American friends. I asked him if he watched the debate. He replied yes, yes I did. I asked who he was voting for. He said Barack Obama. I asked him why he felt he was a good choice to run the country. His reply was "Us ****** got to stick together" Now I'm not racist, and I feel that this is a huge problem with this election. A lot of people are voting for wrong reasons. Republican and Democrat. My own sister is voting this year, only reason she is voting for McCain is because she wants to see a woman as Vice President. Come on, these are reasons to cast a vote?????
