OK, people are stupid. You should only be allowed to vote if you are not a complete idiot. Saw the debate tonight and boy was it fun. What I enjoyed most were the stupid people the networks had on afterwards giving their opinions of who won. First, some clarification: 1. I do not support Gore. 2. I do not support Bush. 3. I support myself. Anyway, a few comments made me think, "huh?" For example, one person said Bush did better because he was more specific and Gore did not answer questions. Truth is, neither of them answered many questions and Gore was far more specific. Examples: A woman asked about what her middle class tax would look like - Gore outlined the different brackets and tax benefits for futurte considerations. Bush said she would get tax releif. Then spouted off things not dealing with the question. The farm thing - Bush stumbled out about "farmers good" - gore said specifics. Bush said he did not like quotas, in regards to Affirmative Action. Gore pointed out quotas were illegal, asked Bush if he would support current AA action - he said not if they have quotas. Huh? I do not care about the issues in this context, but Bush never answers anything specifically. That is probably a strength because he cannot get tied up in numbers and overall he seems to come accross well to people - more human. So people think he answers more with specifics? For both, "What will you do in the mid east?" Bush - set a real goal, bring people together, be patient, support peace building agreements" Hmmm, all being done now. Gore - "I served in the military. Bring peace, blah blah blah." Same as above. I guess it was a tie for dumb there. Some dumb questions were asked - "will you keep promises made during the campaigns" Uh, not really. "What will you do to make sure that parents do a better job?" Uh, nothing that is impossible for a government. "What will you do to reduce young voter apathy?" Dismantle the current electoral process, giving more control to voters - one person one vote. Hee hee, yeah that would go over. Oh yeah, these questions were edited and chosen as the best. Either the others were horrible, or the selectors were also big idiots - both are equally probable. Here are my thoughts: Bush is not ready, regardless of his policy, he is not up to being president. He really does not know much about the way things work. Gore is ready, but would probably not be very good. Bush will probably win. I say this because Gore kills himslef with his lack of charisma and often comes across as mean. He also has a condescending speaking manner - probably due to his attempt to give life to his speech. Bush comes across with dumb honesty and people are eating it up. Because he is not polished and prepared, he must be sincere. Anyway, the solution is to bring about Socrates's idea of philosopher rule and enforcing intelligence at the voting booth. And no standardized test that people can prep for and that will take place of real learning, as the TAAS has done here in Texas. Essay writing and analytical thinking exercises. Problem solving, etc. The minority elects presidents as it is, why not ensure that it is a smarter minority? All votes count equally, no electoral crap. Add "none of the above" as early as the primaries. Then weak candidates like Gore and Bush would not ever make it to this point. Anything, please! ------------------ Talking to a dead hare about art [This message has been edited by rimbaud (edited October 19, 2000).]
This is why I don't vote. (Actually, I did vote earlier this year in the primaries, but that was the first time since 1992, and I'm not voting in November). I don't have the strength to stay awake and interested while either of these candidates talks about their "plans", etc. Neither one of them should be President. And no one better say that if you don't vote, you lose your right to complain. That's a bunch of hogwash. Exercising your right not to vote is a legitimate choice. If, by some miracle, Jack Kemp manages to lose by only one vote (in a race that he is not even running in, mind you), then I will regret not voting. Either one of these saps who will be elected isn't worthy of my vote. I didn't watch the debates because I don't care anymore, but I don't necessarily agree about Bush. I don't think it's that he doesn't understand the process or know how things work. I think he just doesn't want to come off as a policy wonk or alienate potential voters. The way to the undecided voter's heart is to speak in broad platitudes about things that are important to the undecideds. Staking out a solid position will either confuse them (these are people who haven't been paying attention) or turn them against you (because you don't say what they want to hear). It's far better for the candidates at this point, to be vague. Anyone who is going to make a decision based on specifics has already decided at this point. Debates at this point are really for the stupid voters. Speaking of people without a clue, though. I remember after the first debate, CNN or one of those channels talked to some undecideds who watched the debate with them. One of the people kept saying that he wasn't hearing anything about perscription drugs. This despite the fact that both candidates had spoken at length about perscription drugs. ------------------ Houston Sports Board DFW Sports Board
mrpaige, We are of like mind. Politics in this country is a joke. I gave up on following politics after the '88 elections and don't plan on ever following it. Most of the people that vote can't even tell you their nominee's platform/stance on most issues. I hear ads stating that people should vote a "straight [democratic/republican] ticket". And this is supposed to make me feel better about the government that runs the country I live in? Don't worry about what anybody's views/beliefs are... just vote for the whole damn party, no matter whose name is on the ticket. I heard another ad on the radio here in the DFW area where an African American running for an elected position said (paraphrasing), "If every African American votes, I will win". Umm... ok, was there a compiment somewhere in there? Even if it's statistically true, it's a tacky statement to make on broadcast airwaves. The same guy also said that he cried with families at their loved-one's graves (or slain police officer's graves, can't remember which). Again, how tacky can you be? I'm going to vote for your lame ass because you cried at a grave? While that was a thoughtful gesture, I cried at my aunt's funeral... wanna vote for me? I was so disgusted when I heard that that I flipped the station. Ok... must back away from the keyboard now... politics only pisses me off... ------------------ I got nothin'.
I have been watching the debates purely for entertainment value. And even when it gets tired, it's still kind of entertaining ... I don't vote either, but I also don't think Bush is being vague for purely tactical reasons. I think it's painfully obvious that he either doesn't have all his bases covered or he lacks the ability to articulate his intentions. He obviously didn't have any idea how to answer the question about American farmers, and when Gore called him on Affirmative Action, he looked to Jim Lehrer like a deer in headlights. But this is not to say I've got Gore stickers all over my car. I think people who display their political affiliations all over the place are the people who always vote the party line. Everyone's always so disappointed by the choice of candidates, so who was the last president who actually deserved to be in office ... ? ------------------ Brought to you by the letter M.
Does anyone else feel as I do that, this year more than ever, the vice presidential candidates are both much more qualified to be president than the presidential candidates are? ------------------ I am the b*stard son of LHutz. Huh? Right!
I don't live in Harris County, though. I would certainly go and vote for the arena if I lived down there. Issues like that I can get behind. ------------------ Houston Sports Board DFW Sports Board
Anyone that is tired of the idiotic candidates do one simple thing, Vote Nader. ------------------ please venture to atheistalliance and rocketsonline I AM SPARTACUS
mrpaige Don't forget, there's more on the ballot this year than just unqualified presidential candidates (read: Arena Referendum). [This message has been edited by ChrisP (edited October 18, 2000).]
You people are so apathetic! You are what is wrong with this country! I need someone to argue with me - say that these are good candidates, debates, issues, questions. Poll test bad, direct democracy bad. Something! Show a pulse. Vote for me. ------------------ Talking to a dead hare about art
Actually, I'd prefer if it were easier to vote. The fact is that only about 30% of the country eligible to vote actually votes. Only about 50% of registered voters vote and just slightly more than half of those eligible to register are registered. Pitiful. If the process were easier, more would vote and our system would actually work. How's that? ------------------ Save Our Rockets and Comets SaveOurRockets.com
Sorry, Jeff, if someone doesn't vote because it is "too hard", then that person does not deserve the right to vote. Making it easier would result in more stupid people casting their ballots. I do not care about race, religions, sex, or sexual orientation - just intelligence. ------------------ Talking to a dead hare about art
I think you're an optimist. (And actually, I haven't noticed that it is all that hard to vote. We have easy registration procedures. We have no-questions asked early voting. It couldn't get much easier than it already is. I guess voting online so I wouldn't have to get off my butt would be the only improvement they could make). ------------------ Houston Sports Board DFW Sports Board
mrpaige, You bring nothing to this discussion - you are not allowed to vote! The only way you can make up for it is by starting a new thought provoking thread, because there aren't any out there now. ------------------ Talking to a dead hare about art
I believe I already said I wasn't going to vote this year. I'm exercising my right not to vote. And I've never started or participated in a thought-provoking thread on this board. I'm not going to start now. ------------------ Houston Sports Board DFW Sports Board
These are good candidates. How often can you say you're smarter than the Republican nominee? Or more charasmatic than the democratic one? When was the last time you could say both? About the poll test - what kind of test would it be? Would it be multiple choice, short answer, essay test or an oral exam? If you passed it once would you have to take it every election? Could you take a more general one(a history of U.S. politics exam) instead to recieve a lifetime exemption? I have questions, someone has to have the answers. ------------------ Who would've thought Don Nelson would pass up Olumide Oyedeji not once, not twice, but thrice?
Puedlfor, It would not be multiple choice - tricks can be devised to beat that. It would be essay, general knowledge questions (history, politics, literature, etc) where you had to come up with the answer completely on your own. Maybe some analytical like there is on the GRE - except not multiple choice. A little math - no calculators and just problems, no answers. They could be valid for 10 years - that way enough could have changed for the test - people would have to keep up with events. Also, this checks against the old getting senile. ------------------ Talking to a dead hare about art
I have often thought the dumbest thing our country does is have elections on a friggin' Tuesday! Where was the brainflash for that? I think much of the reason for poor turnout has to do with procedures that started in 1776 and have no relevence now. Another big example is the electoral college. When your vote can only affect your state, it is easy for your vote to become meaningless. Move election day to a Saturday and remove the electoral college and more people will get off their lazy butt and go vote. Or maybe I'm optimistic. dylan ------------------
rimbaud -- interesting posts. I wholly agree. Remember...fear of what the majority would do if given free reign is why the Founders set us up as a republic. We seem to have abandoned that idea for a more "populist" democracy. Fortunately the apathetic and the uninformed usually are synonomous...not always, but generally speaking I'd say that's correct. I'd like to see some knowledge of the Constitution in voters. That's just me though. But don't worry..it will never happen..it would be attacked as racism were such a test to ever be given. ------------------
Mulder, I could pass that test easily because I am a genius! In answer to your question, I would make up the test and it would be hard! You cannot vote anymore because you question me - for shame! As far as the test being racially biased. Yes, that is my goal. I want to make it so that most whiteys will not pass. They have already done enough damage to this country. Let some others try. Outlaw, You can vote because you are gay. That is all. ------------------ EZLN
