Thread: Democracy is always right?

Originally Posted by Hanul

Lol? Obama spent about $11 million in Pennsylvania compared to Hillary's $5 million. Obama failed on that one, she got almost every county in Pennsylvania.
Obama got his crushed in Pennsylvania by 10 points. Double digits. He hasn't made much inroads with the female, older, or blue-collar voters. Hell, he's given his opponets so much cannon fodder with his pastor, American flag pin, bitter small towns, wife's patriotism, etc.

Have you looked at polls preceding the election? The point of a proportional win system is to gain as many votes (and thus delegates) as you can, Obama changed a 30 point lead into a 9 point lead. And I don't know why you would want to mention financing, what exactly is your point? Clinton can't manage her money and fund raise properly, she almost went broke before Iowa, and she loaned herself 3 million through February (which still hasn't been paid back), she hasn't paid off many of the people she's hired even as far back as Iowa (catering ect), and a large percent of her donor are already capped, how exactly is any of this supposed to inspire confidence in her leadership and managerial skills? As for the cannon fodder that you mention, how those events will influence public perception is quite subjective, and frankly it tell you more about the people who react to that sort of non-news than anything else, which of those do you personally disagree with?

Originally Posted by Hanul

Plus, if you included Michigan and Florida voters, she has the popular vote. Without Michigan and Florida, Obama has the popular vote.

Bullshit argument is bullshit. I would pull a Godwin here, but even the Nazis had competition in their elections, can you tell me who was on the ballot in Michigan and Florida?

Originally Posted by Hanul

Though I do admit, both of their policies are pretty similar, and Obama could make a either a great president or VP. Same with Hillary.

Neither of them would make a good VP, not for each other at least, had the race gone differently this might not be case, but we are at where we are. Thinking that you can just magically add together the support of two candidates by putting them on the same ticket is at the best, unrealistic. For one thing, the "change" advocated by Obama, is at the core, a change in the tone of politics, having Clinton as VP would be a complete repudiation of that. That alone would be enough for Obama to not choose her as VP. The other scenario is pretty much impossible at the point (play around with the numbers, it is pretty much impossible short of Obama suddenly caught with a 10 year old boy), but in a hypothetical scenario where Clinton holds the advantage, why would Obama want to be the VP in a Clinton presidency?

Originally Posted by martyr3810

Personally, If I were Hillary I'd go as OBama's VP double-quick... the amount of assassination attempts that guy is going to go through if he gets elected, gonna be the center of a assassination industry xD

Actually, I think it was found a while ago that out of the three major candidates, "white nationalists" prefer Obama because they think that Clinton and McCain are puppets of the ZOG.

So, it is either Islam or Judaism? Tough choice America, tough choice.

Originally Posted by Dante Obscuri

So, it is either Islam or Judaism? Tough choice America, tough choice.

I wouldn't mind if the white people who are afraid of brown people and the white people who are afraid of brown and jewish people kill each off.


Seriously though, people will go to incredible lengths to ease their cognitive dissonance. There's threads in stormfront about Japanese ultranationalists where the neonazis basically go "fuck yeah, our Japs friends are going to come back and help us take over the world!" but the "normal" racists just go "but not white == bad?" And then there's their their religion forum, where half the forum is made up of Odinists because it's the true white man's religion, unlike the Jewish conspiracy that is Christianity.

Originally Posted by adonai

I wouldn't mind if the white people who are afraid of brown people and the white people who are afraid of brown and jewish people kill each off.

But that'd mean the people who are afraid of brown people would kill each other, leaving only those who fear the Jews alive. That'd be bad for business.

I find that while democracy in itself has some gaps, and tyranny having some major faults I don't like mixing them.
I find democratic republics and having a president being rather stupid. As a president is more or less a soft dictator. Sure, he's chosen by the public, but he still has way to much power for being one man/women/thing. While the system they have in England and several other constitutial monarchys (royal who sists on his or her ass doing almost nothing, with a government that make's sure what the Parliament decided get's done) are a system that is well, smoother. Even tho having a president when it comes to war make's thing alot faster.

Originally Posted by coolpuprocks

Do you believe democracy is always right?

Hypothetically speaking, let's say you ran an election and you were the only one counting the ballets... and the difference between the ballets were extremellllllly small (single digits). And let's say the guy you did NOT like [in fact, you strongly hate this person] ended up winning the election by a small marginal vote.

Would you have let that guy win or would you announce the victor as the other candidate which you liked more because you knew the other candidate had EXTREMELY better credentials and knowledge and lost merely cause it was a popularity contest? Would you destroy morals and announce what you felt was better for society?

Would you have trusted democracy?

Originally Posted by coolpuprocks

By the way, I just wanted to mention...

that in this hypothetical situation, if you DID decided to "Screw the rules" and announce your favorite as the winner that there was no possible way for anyone else to find out you cheated. There's no such thing as "recount" in this hypothetical situation so ultimately you could act as a tyrant and get away with it...

Well then the question is not "is democracy right?" since that is subject to opinion (i say the idea is fair, but in practice its horribly abused). The question here is what are your values? Do you believe that fairness, honesty and democracy supercedes your personal opinion or do you think you are making the right decision for the greater good by rigging the vote for the one you favour?

Originally Posted by coolpuprocks

At the moment, I'm doubting democracy...

and have to suffer the consequences of "the People's" choice even though I really do believe the People were really stupid..

How does a person who was a VP... who NEARLY QUIT the board around January, whose speech was practically "I'm sorry I fucked up this year, but please vote for me anyway," win the position of President? I don't get it. >_<;;

Tyranny all the way!!!

I thought this was hypothetical?

Originally Posted by coolpuprocks

btw, in reference to the hillary vs obama. Omg, Hillary should just give up. Seriously, there's no need to continuously spend more cash and draw out this election even further. She already ruined all opportunity of her becoming Obama's VP. XD

I think Hillary is just a stuck up bitch and a sore loser. All I can see her doing is besmirching the party's name and dividing the party in two. I don't follow the primaries as much as some of you do, but the impression I get is that Hillary is some childish bully who will take every oportunity she can get to put Obama in bad light, while Obama is the mature one who is trying not to let the anme calling hurt him.

Originally Posted by 98abaile

I think Hillary is just a stuck up bitch and a sore loser. All I can see her doing is besmirching the party's name and dividing the party in two. I don't follow the primaries as much as some of you do, but the impression I get is that Hillary is some childish bully who will take every oportunity she can get to put Obama in bad light, while Obama is the mature one who is trying not to let the anme calling hurt him.

nah. They both just got out of their tit-for-tat phases. Obama certainly gave as good as he got. The fact is, by this point they have made it clear how they want to represent their opponent. Its time to step back and take the high road for the last two months

Originally Posted by 98abaile

I think Hillary is just a stuck up bitch and a sore loser. All I can see her doing is besmirching the party's name and dividing the party in two. I don't follow the primaries as much as some of you do, but the impression I get is that Hillary is some childish bully who will take every oportunity she can get to put Obama in bad light, while Obama is the mature one who is trying not to let the anme calling hurt him.

It is hurting him, I would argue that it hurts her more though. Negative campaigning never drives up your own score, it lowers it, you just have to hope that it hurts your opponent more than you. That's why watching her debate is just hilarious, she gets all these opportunities where she can appear mature and magnanimous, but instead she makes completely retarded attacks that just makes her appear ridiculous.

Actually, I think it was found a while ago that out of the three major candidates, "white nationalists" prefer Obama because they think that Clinton and McCain are puppets of the ZOG.

Adonai... I don't mean to make too big a point of it... but I -live- in a state of white supremacists. Highest &#37; white in the entire nation... and thats just plain not true. It would be nice if you ever bothered double checking your facts...

P.S. In the history of white supremacy, Jews were/are liked more than Blacks or Islamics. Period. At ANY time.

P.P.S. I'm actually amused because right now McCain seems to have the best chance.

Just speaking for personal experience in people I've talked to... but most of the independents have gone over to him... and all the people supporting one democrat side over the other have come to hate the other candidate more than the republicans... so whoever loses the Dem race, the majority of their followers seem to be going the McCain route as their second choice, the 'lesser' of two evils. Its hilarious. Continue the negative speaking dems! It only helps us republicans xD

Yeah, McCain has the best chances to become the next president.

If Hillary wins the democrats election then the Obama supporters won't vote for her in majority (Only 35 - 40%). Same goes if Obama wins the candidateship. Pity democrats shoot their own leg again.

Well, but McCain will be a way better president than Bush. I hope.