McCain vs. Obama: Your Vote and Why

[pure_mercury]

Originally Posted by Enyo

I would like to point out that it's a naval aviator thing. The aviators that I came to be acquainted whilst living in Jacksonville area (home of Mayport and NAS Jax) were a superstitious lot.

So was my grandmother. And my dad. *shrugs* Better to have odd little quirks than to surround yourself with people that are so far left that they've moved to Crazy Town.

The problem is, it's become so much about left and right that people in Washington are forgetting right and wrong. I don't trust our politicians. I don't trust their judgment.

I'm a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican. (Depends on who makes the accusation, I think.)

*I'm pro-choice.
*I'm pro-second amendment, but I support limited gun control. (Seriously, who needs an Uzi to protect their house or hunt Bambi? But if I want to teach my boy how to shoot a .22 for his 13th birthday, that's up to me, not the government.)
*I support gay marriage.
*I support a secure border.
*I support naming English the official language of the country. (I do, however, speak enough French and Spanish to get by.)
*I'm against the war, but I'm uncertain as to how we should get out, seeing as how we've destabilized the entire region.
*I'm not too keen on the nationalized health care. I live in Canada now, but I'm an American citizen. My doctors here are definitely not as good as my doctors back home.
*I believe that the economy would straighten itself out if the government would stop putting their fingers in the way in effort to fix it. Yes, this includes the mortgage crisis.
*I support off-shore drilling.

And I love both Glenn Beck and Jon Stewart.

Neither of these candidates offer what I'm looking for. It's becoming a choice of the lesser of two evils. Again.

I'd love to see a strong Libertarian candidate come up. A viable third party candidate who is a bit more centrist in view would be great.

I think there are a lot of Americans like you, Enyo. People who naturally have a fear of what the government can do, but who believe that there are many things that ONLY the government can do effectively. Bob Barr is probably the least-nutty Libertarian Party presidential candidate they have turned out in at least 20 years, so I hope that his campaign will appeal to the disaffected centrists and small-government conservatives who can't stand Bush and Co., but who also can't bring themselves to vote for the Democratic nominee. Personally, I am a minarchist/classical liberal-type libertarian, so, while I am not an anarcho-capitalist, I'd decrease the size of the federal government far more radically than most people would. I'd be satisfied with sustained, incremental change in that direction via a legitimate and popular LP, though. If they ever got to a UK-style Liberal Democrat "two-and-a-half party system," it would be a great development for those of us concerned about the welfare/warfare state.

[Enyo]

Originally Posted by pure_mercury

I think there are a lot of Americans like you, Enyo. People who naturally have a fear of what the government can do, but who believe that there are many things that ONLY the government can do effectively. Bob Barr is probably the least-nutty Libertarian Party presidential candidate they have turned out in at least 20 years, so I hope that his campaign will appeal to the disaffected centrists and small-government conservatives who can't stand Bush and Co., but who also can't bring themselves to vote for the Democratic nominee. Personally, I am a minarchist/classical liberal-type libertarian, so, while I am not an anarcho-capitalist, I'd decrease the size of the federal government far more radically than most people would. I'd be satisfied with sustained, incremental change in that direction via a legitimate and popular LP, though. If they ever got to a UK-style Liberal Democrat "two-and-a-half party system," it would be a great development for those of us concerned about the welfare/warfare state.

And I think you've got it in a nutshell. I honestly agree with Glenn Beck and think that we should just invade Washington with pitchforks at this point.

Neither party has it right. Nancy Pelosi is such a bleeding liberal nutjob that she scares me. Mike Huckabee is such a religious right fundamentalist that *he* scares me.

I don't want a nanny state. The first words of the Constitution starts out "We the people". It needs to be government of the people, for the people, by the people, as opposed to special interest groups, warmongers, welfare lovers, etc.

(Welfare? A good thing, but it should be a hand up, not a hand out.)


Government size should be radically reduced. I'd almost go so far as to say, at this point, that the USPS should be eliminated or privatized, as it's borderline obsolete. The Department of Education at a national level should be darned near eliminated, or at least reduced to basic administration. The schools need to be returned to State and local level.

We need our government to focus on common sense solutions and the concept of right and wrong. And I'm not convinced that either of our two party candidates can handle that.

[Peguy]

I'll vote third party as usual. My man Ron Paul was snuffed out of the Republican race, so I'd say a pox on both your houses.

I hate both men, but Obama annoys me more. Mostly because of the charade image he presents himself as some kind of pure-hearted saviour who stands above petty-politics and seeks to "change" the world. STFU already!

Oh and Obama's supporters are even worse, protraying him as some kind of messianic figure. They remind me very much of the Manson family and Peoples' Temple. Seriously, these people creep me the heck out of me.

And the fact the media has bought into this BS is just beyond absurd. Thankfully, piece by piece this charade is being dismantled.

[sassafrassquatch]

How's this for a campaign slogan?

[Enyo]

Originally Posted by sassafrassquatch

How's this for campaign slogan?

Damn it, sass, coke burns when you choke on it. :P

[Jack Flak]

I have a little hypothesis that today, i.e. not fifty years ago when things were different, Republicans get proportionally more SP and NT votes while Democrats get more SJ and NF votes--That the relative libertarianism and socialism of the parties are in line with Keirsey's Independent vs. Cooperative idea. Make sense?

[sassafrassquatch]

Originally Posted by Jack Flak

I have a little hypothesis that today, i.e. not fifty years ago when things were different, Republicans get proportionally more SP and NT votes while Democrats get more SJ and NF votes--That the relative libertarianism and socialism of the parties are in line with Keirsey's Independent vs. Cooperative idea. Make sense?

I've heard the Democratic party described as a "big tent full of crazy people" but since we have a two party system both parties have to be big tents full of crazy people. It's hard to describe either party as being X where as the others is Y. The Republicans have to be the party of corporatists, nationalists, fundamentalist christians, "small government" people and people who just want to keep their guns. The Democratic party is home to everyone from hippie-dippie tree hugging flower children to union workers, socialists, women who want sovereignty over their uterus and gays.

And there's the oversimplified bumper sticker about Republicans being for social control and economic freedom, Democrats for social freedom and economic control.

Point is the U.S. is a nation of 300 million people and judging by the past two elections and current polls is split 50/50ish between two irreconcilable visions for the course of the country. They can't just break up and go their separate ways since both halves live right on top of eachother.

So we're pretty much doomed to our Sisyphean political struggle. Each party in turn gaining power and reshaping the state in their image only to be voted out for the other party to institute their policies.

[LostInNerSpace]

Originally Posted by Jack Flak

I have a little hypothesis that today, i.e. not fifty years ago when things were different, Republicans get proportionally more SP and NT votes while Democrats get more SJ and NF votes--That the relative libertarianism and socialism of the parties are in line with Keirsey's Independent vs. Cooperative idea. Make sense?

I seriously doubt Republican's will get the bulk of NTs. NTs are rationals. Republicans (conservatives) are generally gaurdians.

SP and SJ much more likely to be conservative. NT and NF are generally liberal. Just lookup the definition of liberal.

[Jack Flak]

The definition of liberal isn't the same as Democrat. I said Democrat.

And when I said proportionally more, I meant like 55%, maybe.

[scantilyclad]

I'm voting for Obama, because i like where he stands on the issues.