By-Torian Polling Place

Open discussion about the world we live in today. Topics in here can get heated, but please keep it civil.

Moderator: Priests of Syrinx

Who Should Be President of the USA?

Poll ended at Sat Nov 06, 2004 1:36 pm

George Bush -- US citizen vote
9
60%
John Kerry -- US citizen vote
2
13%
Other -- US citizen vote (please specify)
0
No votes
George Bush -- Non US citizen vote
1
7%
John Kerry -- Non-US citizen vote
2
13%
Other -- Non-US citizen vote (please specify)
0
No votes
Not going to vote -- US citizen
0
No votes
Wouldn't vote -- Non-US citizen
1
7%
 
Total votes: 15

User avatar
awip2062
Posts: 25518
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:15 am
Contact:

By-Torian Polling Place

Post by awip2062 »

Okay, I thought it might be fun to see how the election for US President would go if it were only up to By-Torians. So, please vote here. If you don't want people to know how you voted, you don't have to leave a post, just vote and don't tell us.

Oh, I made the poll such that you vote according to if you are a US citizen or not, because I think it would be interesting to see if there is a difference between the votes of US and non-US By-Torians.
Onward and Upward!
Sir Myghin
Posts: 9148
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 10:12 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Post by Sir Myghin »

i put in a tally for non us bush, i don't care who knows it
User avatar
Kares4Rush
Posts: 3191
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 9:31 am
Location: New York

Post by Kares4Rush »

Nader doesn't get a mention? (silly wink)
Image

Freeze this moment a little bit longer...
User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11085
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude »

I think Gus Hall has finally stopped running as the communist party candidate. I remember seeing him the first time I voted way back when and being surprised there was even a communist on the ballot. A school teacher told me that he'd been on the ballot for years and years before that.
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image
User avatar
Slaine mac Roth
Posts: 1295
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 2:09 pm
Location: Mansfield, (UK)

Post by Slaine mac Roth »

As a non-US citizen I've put myself as a non-voter for two main reasons.

Firstly, I don't really know enough of the issues involved to place a vote in a considered, informed manner. This however leads me to my second reason.

The knowledge I have of the situation comes mainly from the political threads on another forum. Basically, all I have seen is childish bickering and point scoring (rather like the House of Commons here in the UK). If the candidates are any reflection of the most vocal of their supporters then the US is in deep shit.
'Do not despise the snake for having no horns, for who is to say it will not become a dragon?'
User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11085
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude »

Slaine mac Roth wrote: The knowledge I have of the situation comes mainly from the political threads on another forum. Basically, all I have seen is childish bickering and point scoring (rather like the House of Commons here in the UK). If the candidates are any reflection of the most vocal of their supporters then the US is in deep shit.
Fortunately, at least in my opion, what's being said in the campaigns over here, what's being said on the news and on the comentary shows... none of it really matters. Anyone who wants to be an informed voter can simply look at what the candidates have done in the past. In the case of John Kerry, there's a 20-year senate voting record we can look at. No matter how he currently says he stands on issues, we can look and see how he's voted on them. For George Bush, we can look at what he did in Texas as a governor and more recently how he handled our nation suffering a huge terrorist attack and all that that influenced (security, economy, etc.). Whatever your most important issue is, look at how the candidate has voted on it in the past and see if he's on your side.

Acording to the most recent poll I've seen, national security issues were picked by 55 percent of Americans as the most important problems facing the nation. After that come things with much smaller percentages like health care and education. So the majority of the American voters will be voting based on whether they think Kerry or Bush will be the most likely to lead us to a victory in the war on terrorism.

All the campagn rhetoric... at the end of the day I just don't think it really matters that much.

I'll sure be glad when it's over.
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image
User avatar
schuette
Posts: 17945
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 2:45 am
Location: Grangemouth, Scotland

Post by schuette »

I'm not gonna get into political debates but what from I've saw on the telly and read...John Kerry
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
happysmilies007
Posts: 1564
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 10:57 am
Location: out in the boondocks

Post by happysmilies007 »

nader's not on the ballot in nc!! :P :P

i voted Bush. 8)

carolynn :evil:
"What do I do when we're not taping? Sit in a dark room and refine my plans for someday ruling Earth from a blimp. And chess." --Ryan Stiles .. brought to you by the letter 3!
User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11085
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude »

happysmilies007 wrote: i voted Bush. 8)

carolynn :evil:
You're not of voting age! Do I need to call the voter fraud cops on you? :shock:
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image
User avatar
D'Anconia
Posts: 411
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 4:12 pm
Location: Beaverton, OR

Post by D'Anconia »

I'm voting for George Bush.
Regards,
Bri

"...from here in Oregon, where we are far too stupid to dispense our own gasoline." Neil Peart
User avatar
Slaine mac Roth
Posts: 1295
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 2:09 pm
Location: Mansfield, (UK)

Post by Slaine mac Roth »

You'll have to excuse my ignorance here but I have no idea how your political system works. Over here, you vote for a local MP and the party with most MPs forms the government (a pain if you've got a good local MP whp represents a crap party like we have in Mansfield). The impression I get is that the elections for you parliamentary representatives and the presendential elections are seperate. Am I correct here?
'Do not despise the snake for having no horns, for who is to say it will not become a dragon?'
User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11085
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude »

Slaine mac Roth wrote:You'll have to excuse my ignorance here but I have no idea how your political system works. Over here, you vote for a local MP and the party with most MPs forms the government (a pain if you've got a good local MP whp represents a crap party like we have in Mansfield). The impression I get is that the elections for you parliamentary representatives and the presendential elections are seperate. Am I correct here?
We have two levels of representation underneath the President. The first is called congress, or the House of Representatives. A particular area gets a congressman (yes, they can be female) when its population is of sufficient size. And yes, which ever party has the most members in congress can have a bit more control over how the show is run. Above the congress is the senate. It's a bit more like a bunch of elitist statesmen. Each state gets two senators. 50 states... 100 senators. Any new law must pass a majority vote in both the congress and the senate, and then be signed by the president. The preisdent holds veto power.

Congressmen are up for election every two years. Senators every six.
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image
User avatar
kazzman
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 6:34 pm
Location: In a cellar thinking of ways to assasinate Gary Bettman

Post by kazzman »

Kerry's nothing but the tipical polititian. It's been proven (you're blind as hell if you haven't been able to notice yet) that he'll say just about anything that sounds good to get into office. His status as a war hero is laughable, and he's even commited treason by plotting the assasination of key members in the US Senate in the early 1970's.

With that said, I'm voting Bush on Tuesday.
Kazz
User avatar
Devil's Advocate
Posts: 927
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2003 2:42 pm
Location: Pembs, Wales, UK
Contact:

Post by Devil's Advocate »

kazzman wrote:Kerry's nothing but the tipical polititian.
Well, that makes him perfect Presidential material then, since all (recent) presidents have also been typical politicians, by your criterion.
... and he's even commited treason by plotting the assasination of key members in the US Senate in the early 1970's.
Ummmmmm. Yeah, right. You have evidence, I assume? There has certainly been a crime committed: either he did what you say, or you're committing libel right here.
User avatar
ElfDude
Posts: 11085
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 1:19 pm
Location: In the shadows of the everlasting hills
Contact:

Post by ElfDude »

I hadn't heard any stories of assasination conspiracies either. I'd like to know your source on that one.

In speaking of his fellow Viet Nam veterans, Kerry said "... they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, tape wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country side of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war... "

He has also said, "There are all kinds of atrocities and I would have to say that, yes, yes, I committed the same kind of atrocities as thousands of other soldiers have committed in that I took part in shootings in free-fire zones. I conducted harassment and interdiction fire. I used 50-caliber machine guns which we were granted and ordered to use, which were our only weapon against people. I took part in search-and-destroy missions, in the burning of villages. All of this is contrary to the laws of warfare."

Now... is he lying or is he telling the truth? If he's lying, is he not unfit for command? If he's telling the truth and he really did that stuff, is he not unfit for command?

I'd really like to hear the opinions of the vets on this board about that one.
Aren't you the guy who hit me in the eye?
Image
Post Reply