joker, you're not doing a very good job of convincing me that Obama is a bad candidate. He just doesn't agree with your views and you're trying to convince everyone that he's wrong and you're right.

I wish that McCain would stop talking about victory in Iraq. Victory is not possible in Iraq. This is not a win/lose war because the otherside DOESN'T have to win. They just have to make sure we lose. And that's not hard.

Since Saddam is a goner, I'd consider that somewhat of a victory.

Did that make the situation in Iraq any easier? If anything, the violence is escalating. All we did was destroy their government and now we have to put it back together again.

He's not trying to convince you guys that Obama's a bad candidate; he's trying to convince you he's not any better, or worse, then McCain.
This thread is full of fingers pointing at McCain's problems; and yet the only person who dares also expose Obama's is Joker.

Its not about convincing you that Obama is not the right candidate; it's about showing you he's not as perfect as everyone would like to believe.

Most of you view what Joker is doing as "defending McCain", he's not. He's just exposing Obama, why expose McCain when everyone's already done it?

Well said

This.

Oh? Could you point me to a source please?

I'm trying to convince you to explore your views while also promoting the knowledge of his actual views, so that if you do vote for him, you vote for him for the right reasons... not because he's a Democrat, or because he's black, or because he can speak well, or because he's NOT a Republican, etc.

If you support him, at least tell me why you support him. Don't tell me the premanufactured crap that they give you to counter the arguments... tell me why you believe in something that he believes in (if you can figure out what he believes in). We all believe in unicorns and rainbows for everyone, but that's just not possible. He is talking about Marxism, pure and simple. This, just like all of Obama's views, is more rhetoric than substance. It truly is great in theory, and bad in practice.

A lot of you hold your views because that's what you've been socialized into believing (well, in a way, all of us have, really). I just want to make sure you can understand why you believe it. My views have changed dramatically in the last 10 years, solely because I sought every side of the situation out. Now that I know where I stand and why I stand there, and while my ideals may still be in flux (changeable depending on future experiences), at least I do understand my decisions. Most people here do not understand the situations that they are referring to, and instead blindly support the candidate that they like better, whatever the reasoning may be.

FYI I have more respect for McCain after hearing him say that he believes in deregulation, and that mandates are not the way to go at the expense of choice. Before anyone claims that the existing financial chaos is because of deregulation, please also tell us why the economies of Europe, Russia, and China, which are all more heavily regulated, have performed worse than ours this year.

Once you start trying to make adjustments to a natural balance, you'll forever be adding things to it to keep it from toppling.

People are quick to slam Bush for declaring victory after that... but victory is relative... we did accomplish the goal that we set out to do when we started... topple a dictator and prevent him from being a (real or not) threat in the region. The people want so much, though. The perceived cost is high, and they do not see the benefits. In actuality, the cost is low, and the long term benefit potential is high. However, Democrats are quick to use dissidence as a political advantage by discounting the future for short term gains in order to win elections now. This is probably my largest complaint about them.

It is humorous to watch Obama dance around the question on whether we should use our military for things that are ethically right. For instance, to stop genocide. I've never heard so many hesitations and qualifiers (should, if possible, etc) while someone is trying to walk the line between doing what is right and doing what is popular (take those two either way, depending on your viewpoint). He can't, of course, say that we absolutely should, because that could negate his condemnation of the Iraq war. He also can't say we absolutely shouldn't because that would make people thing he's weak or immoral.

One of the major ones for me is his foreign policy. Being Australian, it's pretty obvious that that'd mean a lot to me... when America's the most powerful nation in the world, you want someone with good foreign policy. John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as a running mate made the Obama/Biden ticket a lot more promising on that level than the McCain/Palin ticket. Obama's policies on ending the genocide in Darfur, and nuclear weapons are particularly appealing to me.

The typical Republican views contradict many of mine. I'm very liberal, and am pretty much opposed, frustrated and offended by many things McCain or Palin say in interviews.

Well... being from Australia, society in general doesn't really talk about the American election. My friends know very little about it. I'm more involved and interested in it than anyone I know locally, so I've done all the research individually through the 'net and stuff. Of course, there's the bias the media brings, but I've spent a good amount of time on both sides - John McCain's website, Obama's website, and various media outlets.

Well, my favourite Australian Prime Minister deregulated the Australian dollar when he was treasurer, which resulted in a slight recession around 1990, but I think we're better for it. I'm not as familiar with the American economy as I'd like to be just yet, so I'll reserve my judgement on the deregulation in America for now.

Also, something interesting to read:
http://therecord.barackobama.com/?p=1807

Judging from Obama's words, it looks like he supports McCain's health care plan.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12234382...08_mostpop

no, what hes doing (whether he knows it or not)is trying to convince tentative obama supporters to a)vote for mccain b)vote third party or c)don't bother voting

all of which could result in 4 more years of rebublican BS, loss of civil rights, horrible supreme court nominees, another failed war, plummeting economy,

none of which this country needs, so his devils advocacy (if that is truly what it is) is irresponsible at best and karl-rovian at its worst.

Can you prove that is what Joker's doing? Or do you just think he's doing that because he's, as Rawr said, exposing some stuff on Obama?

I mean come on, it's been a pretty (boring) one-sided topic here. Luckily Joker isn't boring.

I challenge you to prove

(A) McCain is exactly like Bush and would not change a thing.  He did earn his Maverick status honestly through the years (go back and watch that Bush speech in ~04 with the comedian playing a double, and notice that Bush refers to the crowd as "Republican, Democrats, and John McCain" since McCain went against the Republicans on many major issues).

(B) that the Republican policies are causing this economic mess.  Explain how and when it started.  

(C)why you consider us at "war" and why you think it is failed.  

(D) Why have the supreme court nominees been bad?  

(E) On civil rights, I'll give you that one.  We did ask for it though... safety comes at the cost of freedom.  

(F) Finally, why you think the Democrats are the best group for fixing all of the problems that you just proved the Republicans were responsible for.

I'll be happy to counter your points, but from now on, I have to wait until you make some.

This post was last modified: 10-11-2008 03:52 AM by z6joker9.

First off, I would like to say I love debates, and I am only here to stimulate this on further... I am on neither side (obama or Mccain) ,but I love getting people more involved. So I will start and answer one of your questions. I will answer the letter © "why you consider us at 'war' and why you think it is failed[?]"

We are not at war by definition we only have an "authorization for use of military force against Iraq".( http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf ) The senate has not offically declaired war so, even though the media reports it as the "war on iraq" it is not truly a war. The issue is not about the official name of what is going on in Iraq, but what is the point of what’s going on and its affects. First off a poll that took place in March 2003 72% of people agreed with the use of military force in Iraq, while “recent” (February 2008) poll shows only 38% of people agreed with the use of military force in Iraq. I hate to quote a politician but here is a conversation between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Anchor Wolf Blitzer. Anchor Wolf Blitzer asked: “Are you not worried, though, that all the gains that have been achieved over the past year might be lost?”
“There haven't been gains, Wolf,” the speaker replied. “The gains have not produced the desired effect, which is the reconciliation of Iraq. This is a failure. This is a failure. The troops have succeeded, God bless them. We owe them the greatest debt of gratitude for their sacrifice, their patriotism, and for their courage and to their families as well. But they deserve better than the policy of a war without end, a war that could be 20 years or longer. And Secretary Gates just testified in the last 24 hours to Congress that this next year in Iraq and Afghanistan are going to cost $170 billion. Afghanistan is not settled because the president took his eye off the ball and took the full attention that should have been in Afghanistan, and shifted some of that to Iraq, a war without end, without a plan, without a reason to go in, without a plan to win, without a strategy to leave. This is a disaster … we cannot perpetuate.” ( http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8422.html ). That pretty much sums it up.
Now for my personal opinion on the matter is that we went into Iraq with good intentions. I hate to say some of the worst things have come out of “good intentions”. I will be honest I agreed with what we did back in 2002, but now after seeing what the “plans” are I can’t help but be mad. And what’s worse is the things I and my family have gone through for this “war”. As of last two weeks ago my brother was officially put on active duty and last Saturday he was shipped off to New Jersey to train before going over to Iraq. There was a ceremony for the troops on Friday, and at this ceremony I was sickened. First I was informed my brother was going to Iraq so that “the people of Iraq could turn their light switch and not have to worry about weather or not the lights will come on or not.” said the army general at the ceremony. First off I don’t think anyone should have to risk their life for that. The deciding factor of failure will be made when the troops are pulled out and the “war” is over. The problem is our country cannot afford the price (of lives or money) to stay in Iraq much longer. Let alone the views of Iraqis should be taken into account. We tend to look at the “war” from our own point of view and just fill in the blanks for the Iraqis. A recent poll done by a London news channel said that over two-thirds of Iraqis want US to pull out.( http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Seven_out_..._0317.html ) there were also positives to what they had to say as well. I personally think that this “war” has gone on way to long and needs to come to an end. I feel that if we pull out now or in 20 years the results will be very similar for the Iraqis, but very different for US. I am honesty afraid that when we pull out. all will be lost... and I am not the only one who feels that way (sent. McCain and sent. Obama) each just have diffrent views on how to succeed.

Joker seems to have this problem with every time he mention something he's always got an attack on Obama but nothing on McCain. He's ALWAYS got praise for McCain but he barely says anything good about Obama.

He also assumes that every time he hears a redundant argument that it's been manufactured. Why is that? Not everyone is this socialized robot which you seem to believe.

It's true, I dislike Obama but I also disliked McCain. As stated numerous times before, I only try to wipe the shine off of Obama because everyone here already attacks McCain while leghumping Obama.

I will say, though, after hearing the debates, I am much more impressed with McCain. Many of the things he said made me feel better about where he stands, but I'm still not sure it's enough to vote for him.

On the other hand, I've only gotten more scared of Obama and the possibility of a Democratic supermajority. We could see a huge shift to the left. I can understand people wanting change, but you have absolutely no idea how much change you might be getting. Hopefully some southern democrats will help the GOP keep things from passing, but it truly has me worried about our country's future. If you don't know what I'm referring to, take a look at this recent article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html

Obama wants government control over matters of business, redistribution of wealth from the productive to the unproductive, reduction in political dissidence, and new policies to keep the Democrats in majority for years to come. This is a classic setup for a long-term takeover. Even if the GOP wrestles control back in 10 or 20 years, liberal policies are notoriously difficult, or even impossible to remove once they are enacted. This is a frightening time to be an American.

Thanks, but you've got to find someone better that Pelosi.  Quite possibly the only politician with a lower approval rating than Bush.  

The fact that your brother is getting the chance to serve his country is a pretty selfish reason to not support the war, you know.  You can still disagree with it, but you should at least consider it with less bias.  You did, of course, support it initially, as did most people.  It really isn't as bad as the media makes it out (notice they ignore it now that things are going well, and instead focus on the economy, which is crumbing from Democratic regulation but being blamed on the GOP that is currently in office?)

I would wager we are not at war.  We have troops deployed overseas, just alike always.  Less than 300 have died this year.  The Iraq security force loses more soldiers each month.  We are simply there supporting and training them, just like other places all over the world.  We just happen to have the media aiming their camera at Iraq.  The media loves to call it a "war" because that gets people to tune in.  When everything is going well, the news agencies do not do as well.  Nobody watches the news when nothing bad is happening.  In regards to how much is being spent... it's about 5% of the GDP... quite normal or almost low for a non-war year.  So, if we aren't really spending more than usual on defense, and we aren't really losing soldiers, and we aren't really doings things different than we always do, why exactly are we at war?  Because the media said so?  Since when does the media declare war?

This post was last modified: 10-17-2008 09:17 AM by z6joker9.

i guess i am just gonna be the olberman to your hannity

perhaps we should agree to disagree

This post was last modified: 10-17-2008 10:25 AM by drew102e.

if it looks like mccain will at least give a fight in for pennsylvania's electoral votes, then i will vote for obama. however, if it looks like obama will win by a good margin (>5%) i will not vote for either as i find both candidate's platforms irrational and largely distasteful (obviously i find mccain to be the greater of 2 evils). this election has only reinforced my desire to leave my native country as soon as is reasonably possible. for me a choice between a neo-fascist and a social democrat is no choice at all.

Right now with the economy it doesnt matter much who wins. This country is going to be in deep **** in about two years and I dont think its even worth going through college because i wont be able to find a job anyways.

I'm very scared about being a young adult (19) in this time of economic crisis and I'm not sure how many of us in the new generation will get a good start in life with this problem.

I'm voting for Obama and so is 90% of college students are. His overall healthcare plan is way better than McCains. Also Obama is raising taxes for the RICH and for big buisness's and giving cuts to people with income of under 80k. That is what this country needs the rich now hold 40% of the countries wealth and that is only 8% of our population. Something is wrong with that and it needs to be fixed now.

Don't get me started on Palin I could write a book about her explaining to america why she should be shot.

Based on what they say and how they vote, I would call McCain a centralist and Obama and socialist. I do agree, though... which is why I encourage people to look closer at third parties. If you're not planning on voting (assuming Obama has big advantage, as you said), then why not cast your vote for a third party to make the winner notice that there is still demand for that ideology? I dare say McCain's message has changed upon noticing the Ron Paul movement, much to my delight. Obama, surprising, is staying in his left pocket, rather than playing towards the middle. Most people are too ignorant to know what that means, so they just go for the charismatic speaker that the mean adores.

What would your ideal political candidate stand for?