What's new

Politics Poll 2007

Fishfan79

Muckdog
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
6,916
Reaction score
0
Ireally dont like how alot of those questions are phrased. Like the Iran one is totally foolish. There is inbetween from letting them continue, going to war or ignoring isreal.

Immigration too there is many different policy to be taken instead of the current one.
 

Buckeye

Muckdog
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
4,985
Reaction score
0
I actually laughed out loud at going to war with Iran. It's not even concievable. Especially considering our problems now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people wouldn't have it.

The Ronald Reagan response made me laugh even harder. People around here want to blame Clinton for Osama and yet forget Reagan and Hussein. Hell, we wouldn't be in Iraq now if it wasn't for that a**hole.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2003
Messages
5,296
Reaction score
0
I actually laughed out loud at going to war with Iran. It's not even concievable. Especially considering our problems now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people wouldn't have it.

The Ronald Reagan response made me laugh even harder. People around here want to blame Clinton for Osama and yet forget Reagan and Hussein. Hell, we wouldn't be in Iraq now if it wasn't for that a**hole.


haha ya right
 

Buckeye

Muckdog
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
4,985
Reaction score
0
I actually laughed out loud at going to war with Iran. It's not even concievable. Especially considering our problems now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people wouldn't have it.

The Ronald Reagan response made me laugh even harder. People around here want to blame Clinton for Osama and yet forget Reagan and Hussein. Hell, we wouldn't be in Iraq now if it wasn't for that a**hole.


haha ya right

I'm sorry, to what part are you responding? I need to you to be more literate.

Also, I'm skeptical as to how many people on this board were actually alive and old enough to remember Reagan anyways? I was an 80's baby, but have severe doubts at least 6 or 7 people on this board were alive enough then to realize how bad things were under Reagan.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2003
Messages
5,296
Reaction score
0
I actually laughed out loud at going to war with Iran. It's not even concievable. Especially considering our problems now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people wouldn't have it.

The Ronald Reagan response made me laugh even harder. People around here want to blame Clinton for Osama and yet forget Reagan and Hussein. Hell, we wouldn't be in Iraq now if it wasn't for that a**hole.


Open your eyes.....it's a legit question. No ifs and or buts....We can not let Iran have nukes!
 

FreshFish

Muckdog
Joined
Jun 26, 2003
Messages
8,720
Reaction score
0
I actually laughed out loud at going to war with Iran. It's not even concievable. Especially considering our problems now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people wouldn't have it.

The Ronald Reagan response made me laugh even harder. People around here want to blame Clinton for Osama and yet forget Reagan and Hussein. Hell, we wouldn't be in Iraq now if it wasn't for that a**hole.


Open your eyes.....it's a legit question. No ifs and or buts....We can not let Iran have nukes!

Wether we like it or not. We can't stop(by physicaly means) Iran from having nukes . We won't go to war with Iran, unless they nuke us first or something extreme happens.
 

bobbob1313

Muckdog
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
7,820
Reaction score
0
I'm not sure how anyone can say Global Warming doesn't exist. Any scientist with any sort of credibility will say it is true. The question is how much the human effect is.
 

Buckeye

Muckdog
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
4,985
Reaction score
0
I actually laughed out loud at going to war with Iran. It's not even concievable. Especially considering our problems now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people wouldn't have it.

The Ronald Reagan response made me laugh even harder. People around here want to blame Clinton for Osama and yet forget Reagan and Hussein. Hell, we wouldn't be in Iraq now if it wasn't for that a**hole.


Open your eyes.....it's a legit question. No ifs and or buts....We can not let Iran have nukes!

So, after Iraq and Afghanistan you want to go and kill more troops? Thanks for caring about American lives!

Here, I'll simplify it: A vote for another potential warmonger in office is a vote against the troops.

It would follow too soon on the heels of Iraq, period. Remember how pissed off people were after Iraq I? Well, Iraq II isn't even over yet and ALREADY people are pissed off. I don't think they would be willing or ready to send our kids back into the fray like that.

I'm not sure how anyone can say Global Warming doesn't exist. Any scientist with any sort of credibility will say it is true. The question is how much the human effect is.

There hasn't been enough time to measure whether it's due to humans or it's natural. That's the argument. The only people you ever hear from are the global warming guys, but there's a large number of skeptics. Not that it's the be-all, end-all of the argument, but check out Penn and Teller's first season of bulls***. There's a skeptic's treating of global warning and a lot of good information presented for the skeptic's case.

Plus, if you're not a scientist, you're honestly not qualified to say it's either true or false. And, at this point, I don't think there's enough evidence to fully support the theory, YET. Doesn't mean there won't be tomorrow, or in 7 year's time, but right now it's close but still not there yet.
 

MarlinFan10

Muckdog
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
11,760
Reaction score
0
For president, I'd say as of right now I support McCain, but would vote Newt, Mitt, or Rudy in the primary once I know more about them. Right now I don't know much about Romney. After the primary, I would open to voting for Obama. Under no circumstances would I ever support Hillary.

Besides that, none of the issues except Iraq and Iran are issues I care about. We need to start slowly getting out of Iraq because the country has proven they don't want to be civilized. Mahmoud wants to end the world, and you can't let someone who wants to bring about the end of the world have nukes, ever.
 

Flying_Mollusk

Muckdog
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
5,230
Reaction score
0
I agree that Mahmoud should not have nukes. But that's a truism. How exactly are we going to engage him? A ground war is absolutely out of the question because we have no resources to do so. A missile war would provide no guarantees and would only further alienate us. Only a fool would think we are in a proper position to engage in another offensive attack. And what standing do we have in terms of proof?

This is the kind of cowboy diplomacy that got us in trouble in the first place. Maybe we should start letting intelligent people make decisions instead of people who just want to flex muscle. That's the same mentality that prompts people to get these damn weapons in the first place.

And I seriously doubt he wants to have a war. Iran is not some rogue nation that just wants to anhilate the US and Israel. They are a sovereign entity the infrastructure. They aren't stupid enough to know war is not in their best interest.

Maybe this is just too complex. Alas, time to bring out the rhetoric. THEY ATTACKED US ON 9-11!!!
 

FreshFish

Muckdog
Joined
Jun 26, 2003
Messages
8,720
Reaction score
0
I actually laughed out loud at going to war with Iran. It's not even concievable. Especially considering our problems now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people wouldn't have it.

The Ronald Reagan response made me laugh even harder. People around here want to blame Clinton for Osama and yet forget Reagan and Hussein. Hell, we wouldn't be in Iraq now if it wasn't for that a**hole.


Open your eyes.....it's a legit question. No ifs and or buts....We can not let Iran have nukes!

So, after Iraq and Afghanistan you want to go and kill more troops? Thanks for caring about American lives!

Here, I'll simplify it: A vote for another potential warmonger in office is a vote against the troops.

It would follow too soon on the heels of Iraq, period. Remember how pissed off people were after Iraq I? Well, Iraq II isn't even over yet and ALREADY people are pissed off. I don't think they would be willing or ready to send our kids back into the fray like that.

I'm not sure how anyone can say Global Warming doesn't exist. Any scientist with any sort of credibility will say it is true. The question is how much the human effect is.

There hasn't been enough time to measure whether it's due to humans or it's natural. That's the argument. The only people you ever hear from are the global warming guys, but there's a large number of skeptics. Not that it's the be-all, end-all of the argument, but check out Penn and Teller's first season of bulls***. There's a skeptic's treating of global warning and a lot of good information presented for the skeptic's case.

Plus, if you're not a scientist, you're honestly not qualified to say it's either true or false. And, at this point, I don't think there's enough evidence to fully support the theory, YET. Doesn't mean there won't be tomorrow, or in 7 year's time, but right now it's close but still not there yet.

Is not about killing more troops, or voting against the troops. Jeez! That's the typical liberal commentary that is getting old. I really hate the liberal vs conservative point of view that this country is engaged in that won't gets us anywhere. And that most Americans do not care to hear.

Is about using the troops on the right things. Bush and this administration hand cuffed this country in a pointless war. And now we are in deep sh*t committed in Iraq, with ZERO support from the UN or the international community. So now we are screwed, if we need to respond to a real thread (not that I'm saying that Iran is a real thread, and if it was real we won't believe a word from the Bush administration). That's the reality of this country. And the reality is that Bush has no power to initiate another war. So why worry?
 

Mabdul Doobakus

Muckdog
Joined
Apr 30, 2003
Messages
6,058
Reaction score
0
I have no idea how the death penalty continues to receive such widespread support in this country.

I also can't see any reason why "In God We Trust" should be on currency, but it doesn't really bother me that much.

And there were a few questions here where really none of the answer choices quite fit my position.
 

Juanky

Guest
This poll sucks.

1) Primary season is a long way away and having the candidacy start this early is stupid. Don't encourage the morons in the media.
2) Why in the world would we lower the voting age? Is there seriously any argument for this at all?
3) You know, there are more options than you've stated on a lot of these.
4) Where is the section at all for "let the states decide"?
 

FutureGM

Muckdog
Joined
Jul 6, 2003
Messages
10,845
Reaction score
5
I have to say that I have not heard a debate in a long time about lowering the voting age again, or removing "In God We Trust" from U.S. currency. I'm far more concerned with Iraq, Iran, and security issues.

Your immigration question does not have enough choices, so I chose to continue the current policy. I want to see current immigration laws actually enforced, which is not always happening today. A fence could help, but it's not going to be a real solution.

As far as Iran, the entire threat is very overblown. However, make no mistake, they WILL become a threat to this nation economically if we bomb them. No one seems to be discussing the fact that Ahmadinejad has NO REAL POWER as President. The power lies with the mullahs, and people like Ayatollah Khamenei. They are far less extreme than the rhetoric of guys like Ahmadinejad, and are closer to the average person in Iran, who has no wish to provoke America. There is also no evidence that Iran wants to actually build nuclear weapons, and even if they wanted to, they are 5-10 years AT LEAST from building their first weapon. There is also a lot of evidence to support their claims that they need nuclear energy in order to keep their nation running smoothly. I also really doubt that they failed to notice how we kicked Saddam's ass twice in a decade, both times rather easily.
 

Dodge

Muckdog
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
12,304
Reaction score
0
President in 2008

I voted for Obama although I may be swayed towards Giuliani if he is the Republican nomination.

Global Warming

It's true, we are causing it at least part way, and we have an obligation to do something about it.

Iran

Intervene. If we let Israel handle the situation, and step aside, we will still get attacked if Iran launches a nuclear offensive.

Best President

I voted Reagan, however I didn't want to vote in this at all because I don't care for any of those guys.

Iraq

I voted to stay in Iraq until things are working. I truly believe that if we leave or set a time table that is unconditional, Iraq will not only go into all out civil war but will become a terrorist factory. It makes no sense to spend all this time on a cause, however bad of an idea it was, to leave the place more dangerous to us than it was before.

Voting Age

Do not lower the voting age.

Immigration

Needs to be addressed, it is already difficult to be a U.S. citizen, that is not the problem, the problem is it's too easy to make a living in the U.S. without being a citizen.

Death Penalty

I do not believe in the death penalty, as a Christian I believe that vengeance belongs to the Lord.

Prisoners Voting

Yes, they should be able to vote, but obviously not at the local polling station. I don't see any harm in giving them absentee ballots.

Abortion

To me, nothing can change the fact that it is dead wrong in any circumstance. However it does need to be legal. I agree fully with parental consent laws and mandatory waiting periods.

Gambling

Should be legal everywhere.

Gay Marriage

Should be legal. To me the fact that this is such an issue disgusts me. It is very small fraction of the population we're talking about, and marriage is not even close to being sanct in the first place. Divorce happens in the Christian nation as much as it happens among nonbelievers. We have boys dying in Iraq and this is the main issue of the midterm election? Please.

"In God We Trust"

Keep it on the currency, shut your mouth and stop whining, and start raising hell about some REAL issues.
 

Buckeye

Muckdog
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
4,985
Reaction score
0
I think if we take away prisoner's rights then voting should be included in that bunch. Commit a crime, then screw you.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2003
Messages
5,296
Reaction score
0
I actually laughed out loud at going to war with Iran. It's not even concievable. Especially considering our problems now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people wouldn't have it.

The Ronald Reagan response made me laugh even harder. People around here want to blame Clinton for Osama and yet forget Reagan and Hussein. Hell, we wouldn't be in Iraq now if it wasn't for that a**hole.


Open your eyes.....it's a legit question. No ifs and or buts....We can not let Iran have nukes!

So, after Iraq and Afghanistan you want to go and kill more troops? Thanks for caring about American lives!

Here, I'll simplify it: A vote for another potential warmonger in office is a vote against the troops.

It would follow too soon on the heels of Iraq, period. Remember how pissed off people were after Iraq I? Well, Iraq II isn't even over yet and ALREADY people are pissed off. I don't think they would be willing or ready to send our kids back into the fray like that.

I'm not sure how anyone can say Global Warming doesn't exist. Any scientist with any sort of credibility will say it is true. The question is how much the human effect is.

There hasn't been enough time to measure whether it's due to humans or it's natural. That's the argument. The only people you ever hear from are the global warming guys, but there's a large number of skeptics. Not that it's the be-all, end-all of the argument, but check out Penn and Teller's first season of bulls***. There's a skeptic's treating of global warning and a lot of good information presented for the skeptic's case.

Plus, if you're not a scientist, you're honestly not qualified to say it's either true or false. And, at this point, I don't think there's enough evidence to fully support the theory, YET. Doesn't mean there won't be tomorrow, or in 7 year's time, but right now it's close but still not there yet.

Yes, smart one....that is my goal. Kill more American troops? Are you crazy? Simple minded Democrat doesn't look at the future of the world. You just want to mind your own business instead of being the global leader we are. It is our responsibility to combat terrorists. Oh yeah, or we can sit back and let these guys plan the next 9/11.....haha you're probably one of those 3% of people who thinks Bush was in on it huh?

In case you don't realize what is happening in the World today, if Iran does not back down, then I guarantee that the US will intervene- and rightly so. You have no idea how bad it would be for the world if that crazy dictator got nuclear weapons. Oh well, at least most people on here realize that Iran better back off their plans (which are to end human civilization).

I actually laughed out loud at going to war with Iran. It's not even concievable. Especially considering our problems now in Iraq and Afghanistan. The people wouldn't have it.

The Ronald Reagan response made me laugh even harder. People around here want to blame Clinton for Osama and yet forget Reagan and Hussein. Hell, we wouldn't be in Iraq now if it wasn't for that a**hole.


Open your eyes.....it's a legit question. No ifs and or buts....We can not let Iran have nukes!

Wether we like it or not. We can't stop(by physicaly means) Iran from having nukes . We won't go to war with Iran, unless they nuke us first or something extreme happens.


Oh yeah, we are finding Iran is helping terrorists in Iraq.....watch that development.....the Dems will think Bush is making that up too.

It would follow too soon on the heels of Iraq, period. Remember how pissed off people were after Iraq I? Well, Iraq II isn't even over yet and ALREADY people are pissed off. I don't think they would be willing or ready to send our kids back into the fray like that.



Oh boo hoo.....people are pissed off? Who cares! Thank god we have a President who doesn't care about stupid polls. Look throughout history genious....Abraham Lincoln, at the time of his Presidency WAS HATED by many! He goes down as the best President of all time.

Wars are ALWAYS unpopular however, American is almost always right looking back on the past.
 

Juanky

Guest
And historians tend to have a bias towards Presidents that had a lot of action during their presidencies as far as who get the top ratings. Even if you look at historians who classify themselves as conservative, all the same Presidents are chosen (including FDR!!!) except Reagan is higher.

Why isn't it possible that the people who lived during the time of that president actually are good judges?
 

Top Bottom