Socialism and the free market work just fine together, those aren't the options.
This country has too many stupids and fearful retards to even consider a working system of socialism. Don't know why people keep mentioning it other than as a fear tactic.
The problem is not free market vs socialism, it's to remove the public sector from....
Have polls in the US ever been significantly wrong regarding an eventual actual presidential result?
The person that wins is the person who invested the most moeny in their campaign. It's all in the advertising. Follow those numbers and you'll have your winner.
I don't like the Washington Post, but here's the NY Times on it. Obama has raised more and spent about $85 million more as of August.
Do you think this explains Obama’s present lead? Do you think if they both spend the same amount (roughly) that it will be a close contest?
Obama did out campaign Romney. I don't if that's why he's currently in the lead. All I'm saying is, the candidate that spends the most wins. It's an ad campaign.
quote:WASHINGTON -- The historic election of 2008 re-confirmed one truism about American democracy: Money wins elections.
From the top of the ticket, where Barack Obama declined public financing for the first time since the system's creation and went on to amass a nearly two-to-one monetary advantage over John McCain, to congressional races throughout the nation, the candidate with the most money going into Election Day emerged victorious in nearly every contest.
In 93 percent of House of Representatives races and 94 percent of Senate races that had been decided by mid-day Nov. 5, the candidate who spent the most money ended up winning, according to a post-election analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. The findings are based on candidates' spending through Oct. 15, as reported to the Federal Election Commission.
Continuing a trend seen election cycle after election cycle, the biggest spender was victorious in 397 of 426 decided House races and 30 of 32 settled Senate races. On Election Day 2006, top spenders won 94 percent of House races and 73 percent of Senate races. In 2004, 98 percent of House seats went to the biggest spender, as did 88 percent of Senate seats.
"The 2008 election will go down in U.S. history as an election of firsts, but this was far from the first time that money was overwhelmingly victorious on Election Day," Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, said. "The best-funded candidates won nine out of 10 contests, and all but a few members of Congress will be returning to Washington."
I'm more of a weed and porn kind of guy. But I think we can both agree Americans are easily fooled into thinking presidential elections mean something.
People give money to a candidate 'cos they like him, so it serves as an index of his popularity.
Not at all. If there was a cap on how much ANY entity can contribute, then maybe, but as it is now there is no regulation. If a candidate received $1 from 3 million people and the other candidate received $6 million from one person, sure, the guy with 3 million supporters is more popular. But that's not how it works. When Dreamworks Animation donates $2 million it doesn't mean 2 million people support Obama.
You can raise way more money than the other candidate from far fewer sources and not be as popular.
we are measuring donations from ordinary people, not from corporations.
The CEO of Dreamworks Animation donating $2 million to the Obama campaign is not really an ordinary people contribution.
The link both Straggler and I provided reflected total campaign contributions, including those of the corporate world. Which I guess are considered "people" too.
If money spent were the only significant factor we should expect Romney to close the gap as he spends his extra-as-yet-unspent warchest shouldn't we?
And perhaps we will, esp after last nights "debates" where it seems the media feels Romney did better somehow. I watched it. I didn't see a sway in any direction.
I don't know if it will be enough to close the gap but it will get closer as Romney gives the final push.
I guess it remains to be seen who raises the most cash as these things are presumably ongoing up until the last minute.
Or are you saying Obama is just as much of a liar as Mittens?
I'm saying all politicians are liars, and to pick one out for being "the most liar" is not really fair.
Obama told his fair share of lies during his campaign and made promises he knew he could not keep so he could be elected. They all do that though, Mittens is no exception.
quote:"The Obama administration has lost its way on medical marijuana and is about to seriously anger millions of Americans," said Aaron Smith, executive director of the National Cannabis Industry Association. "For some inexplicable reason, they have suddenly decided to target providers who are faithfully complying with state and local laws and pay their taxes.
"Without citing any harm caused by these providers, the Obama administration is trying to destroy them, kill thousands of jobs and drive medical marijuana patients - and profits - back underground," Smith said. "This new policy favors the criminal market over legitimate, taxpaying businesses and is absurd."
THIS WILL HURT MY BROTHER, RAZD - HIS CHANCES OF STAYING ALIVE.
Really? One of the main things helping your brother seems to be marijuana, a drug Obama is using federal money to control and shut down production of.
Why isn't Obama concerned with a clear cut cancer medicine, that as your brother has linked in his thread is showing evidence of helping with tumors let alone helping get through the entire process? Why has Obama turned his back on ALL the people who need this medicine? Why is he using federal money to take a proven cancer medicine and aid from those who need it? Because he stinks! Because he's a fuckin puppet who said one thing but is now dealing with the reality that he can't do shit other than what he is told to do.
They all suck in their own way. They all fuck the system up.
Obama just signed NDAA into law. Just another step to us living in a police state.
Things like gay marriage and abortion and gun control are things delt with at the state level. No president INCLUDING OBAMA will make same sex marriage legal in every state. He will not make a country wide gun control law, that's up to the states. He won't make marijuana legal in the country, that's up to the states. He also isn't ending any wars any time soon, isn't closing down Gitmo any time soon. So what the fuck is he really going to do to change any part of our lives?
Vote for your state officials, that's the only thing that affects you directly.
Good god they are so different.
Of course they are, but presidents do nothing to affect your daily life. Vote democrat in your state, that way it benefits you directly.
But to this point:
If Romney is elected he will immediately change it back to being illegal.
Where is the evidence to support that? He said this? When?
Because I'm looking at a current president who said he wouldn't fuck with weed, that federal money wouldn't be used to stop growers and that state laws would be followed.
Tell it to Asagara dealing with cancer now in a state where medicianl marijuana is illegal. And not just to Asagara, tell it to all the other cancer patients who can't get marijuana how awesome Obama is when it comes to supporting cancer medicine.
Obama supported stem-cell research because his campaign was well funded by those in that field of science. He had to return the favor. Now you hold him as some kind of hero in the field of cancer research? Please. He's a corporate shill doing what he has to do to keep his shitty job.
First of all, to say that they are all liars is the laziest way to go about this. This is an evolution vs creation debate forum. We see this kind of lazy thinking all the time.
A horse can move from point A to point B 2 miles away. A car can do the same thing. A car must be the same as a horse.
Well you know, I guess you're right. Being that Obama IS president his lies and broken promises actually affect people - such as those suffering with cancer, or those prisoners in Gitmo held without trial, the dead, innocent civilians being killed by drone attacks from a war he promised to end. Or how about the future of our soon to be police state after he signed NDAA into law?
You're right, some lies are worse than others.
But more importantly, when you made the statement that Obama hasn't kept some of his promises, you're assuming we elected him as the absolute emperor dictator of the country.
Wait, he's not?
Repeat after me, we didn't elect Obama to be the absolute dictator emperor of our country.
How many times should I do that? I've said it 10 times now and I still feel he's emperor dictator sir. You're going to need to be way more specific.
Since you've eaten chicken and my dogs also have eaten chicken, you must be the same as my dogs. I don't suppose you want to play catch with me?
Sometimes I read an analogy and I'm very impressed with how clear of a point it makes. Great job. I eat chicken, dogs eat chicken, I'm the same as dogs. I guess we are both meat eaters? Was this a vegan's are gay joke?
Anyway...
Now, can you tell me how "we're all doomed" if Romney is elected?
I looked all over and couldn't find it, but then there it was:
™ Version 4.2
