It's baaacck. Mods might want to stick this.

Obama

I am not thrilled with either main stream party choices, but I will not be voting for Obama because of his extreme positions on most issues. I dislike Bush for the way he expanded the federal government but if Obama gets elected , he and the democratic congress ( and he will have huge majorities in both chambers) will turn America into a Nanny State.

I chose... Ralph Nedar!

When I started bathing daily, wearing shoes around town, and stopped smoking dope, I realized Ron Paul wasn't the best decision. Go Obama.

When I started bathing daily, wearing shoes around town, and stopped smoking dope, I realized Ron Paul wasn't the best decision. Go Obama.

 

Hey Dodge, you think Virginia can go for Obama? The NOVA area might not be as easy as I would hope as there are a lot of indys that might like McCain. Plus the military areas will probably like him a lot. Black turnout in Richmond might be able to counter him. Any other opponent and I think NOVA goes to him, but McCain is tough.

When I started bathing daily, wearing shoes around town, and stopped smoking dope, I realized Ron Paul wasn't the best decision. Go Obama.

 

Hey Dodge, you think Virginia can go for Obama? The NOVA area might not be as easy as I would hope as there are a lot of indys that might like McCain. Plus the military areas will probably like him a lot. Black turnout in Richmond might be able to counter him. Any other opponent and I think NOVA goes to him, but McCain is tough.

 

I think it's going to depend heavily on rural VA. The area I'm from is predominantly red, but I've been speaking with many neighbors who would have unquestionably voted Republican in the past, but have decided either not to vote, but mostly have decided to vote for Obama. We're going to see a significant shift in former semi-evangelicals re-evaluating what matters when going to the polls. I feel good about VA going blue, we have elected Dems to our senate and governer positions since 04.

When I started bathing daily, wearing shoes around town, and stopped smoking dope, I realized Ron Paul wasn't the best decision. Go Obama.

 

You obviously haven't stopped smoking dope if you're voting for Obama..

When I started bathing daily, wearing shoes around town, and stopped smoking dope, I realized Ron Paul wasn't the best decision. Go Obama.

 

You obviously haven't stopped smoking dope if you're voting for Obama..

 

You're right. Pass that reefer man.

Undecided

Obama supporter since last year.

Other:

 

Writing in "Ronald Ernest Paul"

We need someone LIKE Ron Paul, only less batshit crazy. :thumbup

 

Given the choices, I have to support McCain with 47% certainty versus Obama with 39% certainty.

The widescale changes that Paul was advocating for the country were very unrealistic, even if you agreed with them (I don't). I believe the only thing that I agreed with was his concept of foreign policy.

I agree 100% that we need to cut down the government's budget, but that does not include cuts in education, regulatory agencies, medical care for the poor or elderly, or the essential programs that keep this country running. The first thing that needs to be reduced is our bloated military budget. We now spend more on the military than the next 20 nations do COMBINED. That's just insane.

Just out of curiosity, since you are not voting for either of the two candidates, which would you vote for if you had to vote for one?

If I had a gun to my head and had to choose McCain or Obama?

 

I don't know, I'd have to think about it.

 

McCain has the worse foreign policy while Obama has the worse domestic policy. When Clinton was in the race she was my preference of the three.

 

 

The way I look at is McCain's foreign policy will be more expensive than Obama's horrible domestic policies. Gives the slight edge to Obama, but then I'm not so sure I trust that he will actually do what he says and end the spending overseas.

He's not as bad as McCain is in terms of foreign policy, but I still wouldn't classify Obama as non-interventionalist or possibly even anti-war. His sudden shifts on these issues lead me to believe that Obama is not going to be divorced from the people actually running the show.

 

However, under an Obama adminsitration we are likely to see ridiculous legislation like the Global Poverty Act (which will cost $900 billion/7% of our GDP). He is also more likely to implement a heavily government involved health care program, which scares me to death.

 

Still, if I had a gun to my head and had to choose one or the other, I would gladly take the bullet. Thankfully I live in a country where that does not need to be the case.

 

 

OK I know it doesn't matter, but -- Good Lord, you'd take the bullet over casting one vote?

You're right, but you still missed my point.

GOP had their turn at screwing up the country.

 

It's the Democrats turn now.

Well, yes, I'm being somewhat facetious, but I find it nearly impossible to choose between the two.

 

 

I'll play your game. Wouldn't you rather have the leftist guy screwing up the country, somebody besides a Bush or Clinton for a change, then the righty-tighty John McCain? You know he's not ALL that moderate.

McCain's voting record proves that he is running for Bush's 3rd term, as he voted with the president 95% of the time in 2007, and 100% of the time so far this year.

 

So, if you like Bush, please vote for McCain.

I agree 100% that we need to cut down the government's budget, but that does not include cuts in education, regulatory agencies, medical care for the poor or elderly, or the essential programs that keep this country running. The first thing that needs to be reduced is our bloated military budget. We now spend more on the military than the next 20 nations do COMBINED. That's just insane.

This is where I start to get antsy in the pantsy.

 

The 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution, read it, know it, love it. Education? Not within the parameters of the federal government. Medical care? Not within the parameters of the federal government. Abortion? Death penalty? Gay Rights? State 99% of "hot button issues" here? Not within the parameters of the federal government. Am I saying I don't think the federal government has any business in any of these things? Mostly. I could probably argue that education is important enough on a national level to merit use of the "good and welfare of the people" clause. However, it needs to be done at a MUCH higher level [NSF is awesome, NASA is inefficient but a better option than disparate public entities] than something like "no child left behind." Once the federal government starts dictating how a state should run their school systems, I want to punch a Congressman's puppy.

 

US Federal Budget Fiscal Year 2008

Social Security budget? $624 Billion

DOD budget? $530 Billion [$115 Billion of which goes to salary and housing].

Interest on National Debt = $406 Billion.

Department of Education [97]+ NSF [5.5] + NASA [16] = $118.5 Billion combined.

 

So we are dumping $624 Billion into a pyramid scheme in the hopes it will remain solvent just long enough for us to reap the rewards, and another $406 Billion on - well - waste. Does anyone else think there may be better ways of spending $1 Trillion [roughly 40% of our budget!]?

I was a Ron Paul supporter, but most likely won't vote in November.

Yankeefan, everytime you bust out the Constitution to a liberal it causes their head to explode. :|

There are several different views of the Constitution. I know that there are strict constructionists that believe that anything not explicitly spelled out in the Constitution is not Constitutional. I prefer to believe that the Framers wanted there to be some flexibility in this document, as they were unable to solve the slavery problem in the 1780s when it was written. Unfortunately that problem was given to future generations, with disasterous results.

 

I understand the concerns with the amount of debt that this nation is running up. Most of the recent debt wouldn't have been created if it wasn't for the Iraq war, the creation of DHS, borrowing money to finance the tax cuts given to corporations and the very wealthy, and other pet projects of this administration.

 

Clinton was really good at managing the budget, leaving this country with a $5 trillion surplus in 2000. The last I heard, this president has managed to turn that surplus into a $4 trillion deficit. That's just insane. So much for us Dems being the drunken spenders...

Yankeefan, everytime you bust out the Constitution to a liberal it causes their head to explode. :|

 

He is using an interpretation of that amendment that he favors, not one that is established law that people misintepret.

 

The framers had an opportunity to pass an amendment that would limit the federal government to powers expressly delegated. They chose not to. McCullough v. Maryland is long established authority that the necessary and proper clause allows congress to pass laws related to a plenary power. Congress has the power to tax and spend, and they choose to do so through improvment of the nation's education, reduction of abortion, etc.