|
|
Post by quickboy on Oct 31, 2006 13:58:22 GMT -5
I'm curious, what's the big issue(s) that is on your mind as you get ready to vote? Is it only about Iraq, as some say, or are there other issues that you're weighing?
|
|
|
|
Post by pinkdancer on Oct 31, 2006 20:52:45 GMT -5
stem cell research.
I don't know a whole lot about it, except that I know it is beneificial for some.
It's just something that I want to know more about.
Also, in Carroll County we are voting on a law that would allow certain laws that currently have to go to Annopolis to get approval can now be done by our County Commissioners. I believe it's called the home code law. I am against this.
|
|
|
|
Post by rakshasas on Nov 1, 2006 7:50:51 GMT -5
I think that Bush going against Stem cell research is going to cost so many lives.It`s dissapointing because from what I`ve read it looks to be very promising.
|
|
|
|
Post by mobyrox on Nov 3, 2006 14:26:32 GMT -5
This election we have 2 issues intended to bring out the republican base in Wisconsin. That will be on the ballot in which we need to vote on.
1) A constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages/civil unions/ or any recognition of same sex couples.
I strongly disagree with this. It's a duh factor where I stand, I think gays should be able to marry and have equal rights. Besides that however I think that the amendment is redundant. We already do not recognize gay marriages in WI and it is still technically illegal.
2) The Death Penalty-should the death penalty be reinstated for WI if DNA evidence proved conclusively that the person was in fact guilty of the crime he/she is accused of.
I am against the death penalty no matter what. It's against what I stand for and believe. DNA evidence is not perfect and the wording they use is manipulative.
The other issues for me is helping the poor and working class, stem cell research, gay rights, pulling out of Iraq. For the most part Dems represent me so I want the dems in and republicans out. There's a big question hanging in the air here whether the republicans will try stealing the election, if not here than in other places.
|
|
|
|
Post by relay on Nov 3, 2006 18:24:42 GMT -5
Steal the election? How exactly would they do that? And I suppose only the Reublicans would do this? Never a Demorat? Because they don't want to be in power...oh wait, they are running.
I thinks its rediculous what's goes on around the elections. One side will tell you something bad about the other side, and people just believe it. Like, recently, for example - they tell you Bush lied about the WMD. Its not that he made a decision that we can't know the details about and info he had. Its that he lied. But they also point out his grammatic errors and how he isn't the best speaker in an effort to make him look unintelligent. Well, then, which is it? Is he stupid or is he a mastermind tampering with intel and lying to the entire country? They need referees.
|
|
|
|
Post by mobyrox on Nov 3, 2006 19:20:27 GMT -5
Steal the election? How exactly would they do that? And I suppose only the Reublicans would do this? Never a Demorat? Because they don't want to be in power...oh wait, they are running. I thinks its rediculous what's goes on around the elections. One side will tell you something bad about the other side, and people just believe it. Like, recently, for example - they tell you Bush lied about the WMD. Its not that he made a decision that we can't know the details about and info he had. Its that he lied. But they also point out his grammatic errors and how he isn't the best speaker in an effort to make him look unintelligent. Well, then, which is it? Is he stupid or is he a mastermind tampering with intel and lying to the entire country? They need referees. I was just making a remark based on a concern I've found around here. Please don't act like you weren't aware of the diebold voting machine problems its pretty much common knowledge. I did not post my thread to start a fight. Anyway, I blame democrats for not standing up against this and fighting just like I blame Gore for caving in 2K. He should have done more and the SC should not have gone that way and Katherine Harris should have recused herself from that decision. I'm all for democrats getting strung up too by the way. I also think it's wrong for Leiberman to say, "I don't care if my party wants me for my candidate, I'm running anyway" as Bill Maher says [Lieberman's] 'a selfish, selfish man' and that is one good thing in Gore not fighting in 2K we would have had a blankity blank for VP. Relay, tell me when democrats stole an election. I'd be interested if you can find a recent example. I'm curious. I'm not saying it's never happened. |
|
|
|
Post by relay on Nov 5, 2006 7:35:57 GMT -5
When have republicans stole an election? They haven't. Elections are elections. If you're talking about the Florida thing, the democrats don't talk about not wanting to allow absentee votes. Alot of guys in the military overseas, sent in ballots, but they was a screw up. They went through the wrong post office or something. That's a technicality. They were legitimate votes. Who do you think all those guys were voting for?
|
|
|
|
Post by relay on Nov 5, 2006 7:39:20 GMT -5
I'm just saying. It sounds like believe the republicans do anything and everything to get into power, and then of course screw everything up. Both sides do what they can to get into power. And I'm sure its under the law, at least under some loop hole. There are people watching these people, we don't know what really goes on. We only know what the people opposed to them say about them.
|
|
|
|
Post by mobyrox on Nov 9, 2006 14:49:57 GMT -5
I'm just saying. It sounds like believe the republicans do anything and everything to get into power, and then of course screw everything up. Both sides do what they can to get into power. And I'm sure its under the law, at least under some loop hole. There are people watching these people, we don't know what really goes on. We only know what the people opposed to them say about them. Hey don't get thingyy, dems can screw things up just as badly as republicans. we just got two years to find out just how bad. I think absolute power corrupts absolutely. I think that America this election wanted true checks and balances on this administration. It's gotten corrupt and the rhetoric was out of control. I'm not saying things will be perfect under the dems. We may even screw a few things up but I can't imagine this country getting worse than it has been the last six years. Nancy Pelosi says we're not out for revenge. I don't think you'll see the dems looking to excercise the "nuclear option" as was threatened against us many a time. On a brighter note, I think we need more than a 2 party system. Yes, we have greens and independents (Joe Leiberman for one) but unfortunately many are really not viable options. Especially when Hastert said that Republicans spent BILLIONS on this election. Anyone else see that as being a tad overboard? What a waste of money (not just because many lost but just in general). Aren't the Republicans the ones who used to care about pork barrel spending? There needs to be fairness in how much money can be spent on campaigns? Right? or am I off the mark on this? |
|
|
|
Post by quickboy on Nov 9, 2006 17:08:08 GMT -5
Especially when Hastert said that Republicans spent BILLIONS on this election. Anyone else see that as being a tad overboard? What a waste of money (not just because many lost but just in general). Aren't the Republicans the ones who used to care about pork barrel spending? There needs to be fairness in how much money can be spent on campaigns? Right? or am I off the mark on this? I was really shocked when I learned that there are no spending limits on American Elections. They say that to put limits on spending would limit the freedom of speech, however I think to not put limits on election spending silences those candidates or parties who don't have Billions to still contribute to a National election. In Canadian Elections there are both limits on how much one can spend on an election, as well as how much an individual or group can contribute to an election campaign. I really think those limits are beneficial. That way, no one person can "own" a candidate by donating a lot of money to their campaign, and there is more of a level playing field when it comes to advertising and such. Here's a more detailed link of what the rules are: www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=fin&document=index&dir=limits&lang=e&textonly=false |
|
|
|
Post by mobyrox on Nov 25, 2006 12:13:06 GMT -5
yeah, we definitely need to have an even playing field for all candidates.
|
|
|
|
Post by somasoul on Dec 9, 2006 22:15:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mobyrox on Dec 11, 2006 16:34:24 GMT -5
sorry soma, I can't cut and paste at the library.... what's this about? I doubt the dems have been stealing every election in Philly.... also what is the source? Are you just upset that the Dems actually took back the house and senate? |
|
|
|
Post by mobyrox on Dec 11, 2006 16:37:19 GMT -5
oh and I should say i could care less if you are upset about the election. I myself am happy the dems won because I do lean heavily democratic BUT and this is a big one and I don't know if you ever heard me say this but I do stand by it the dems can screw up America just as bad as the republicans no doubt. If senators or reps stop representing me I will vote against them. I think we need to seriously look into a 3rd party system where everyone can be on equal footing with one another.
|
|
|
|
Post by somasoul on Dec 11, 2006 18:17:13 GMT -5
sorry soma, I can't cut and paste at the library.... what's this about? I doubt the dems have been stealing every election in Philly.... also what is the source? Are you just upset that the Dems actually took back the house and senate? What's your issue dude? You ask me if the dems steal elections, I provide proof and then you accuse me of being upset? The deal with Philly is that the dems control everything. Every election one of three things happens: Nearly every living resident votes, every living resident votes, or more people then the census beauru have on file as living in Philly vote. Considering that most major cities have turnouts somewhere between 50% - 60% it's quite astounding that everyone in Ohilly votes. Bear in mind, that when you have turnout of, say, 60%, what that is counting is registered voter turnout. In fact, it's usually only about 35% of citizens vote. So I think it's safe to assume that Philly, having everyone vote, is a Christ-like miracle at best and governmental fraud at worst. Why don't you go ahead and type the link by hand next time? |
|
