Next President
Next President
we must nominate Nolan to run for office... then maybe we can legalize gambling..
Next President
we must nominate Nolan to run for office... then maybe we can legalize gambling..
Republican v. Democrat
- Thread starter pacerfan
- Start date
Ace--
I live in the one state in the country that beats NH to the punch-- Iowa. However, we do have a caucus system rather than the primary system that most(if not all) of the other states use.
Your description of the "fringe" or not-as-well known candidate traveling across the state 1.5 to 2 years prior to the election year has gone on ever since Carter came out of nowhere to capture the Dems nomination in '76.
In fact, the nutjob governor of Vermont has already been here 5 times to meet the party faithful and try and build a group of activists to help him do well in the '04 caucus.
I was an undergrad from '83-'87, and in '84 I had the opportunity to meet almost all of the democratic candidates for President as they tried and drum up support. We also have almost weekly reports of various pols coming to Iowa to gage support levels and/or try and get their names out.
You want to see "grass-roots" politics in its most basic form? Show up in Iowa on a bitterly cold February day for the Presidential caucuses.....................
I live in the one state in the country that beats NH to the punch-- Iowa. However, we do have a caucus system rather than the primary system that most(if not all) of the other states use.
Your description of the "fringe" or not-as-well known candidate traveling across the state 1.5 to 2 years prior to the election year has gone on ever since Carter came out of nowhere to capture the Dems nomination in '76.
In fact, the nutjob governor of Vermont has already been here 5 times to meet the party faithful and try and build a group of activists to help him do well in the '04 caucus.
I was an undergrad from '83-'87, and in '84 I had the opportunity to meet almost all of the democratic candidates for President as they tried and drum up support. We also have almost weekly reports of various pols coming to Iowa to gage support levels and/or try and get their names out.
You want to see "grass-roots" politics in its most basic form? Show up in Iowa on a bitterly cold February day for the Presidential caucuses.....................
Freeze - Hopefully we can agree to disagree then. My belief is big picture. My belief is that on any political issue there is no "right" or "wrong". There is one opinion and the opposite opinion. I respect people's right to an opinion and when it differs from mine, I call it just that a difference, not a wrong. Sounds like this group could have some real great debates some day over a few rounds.
Nolan - My focus over the past two years in school has been on economics. As such, I think Bush has no grasp of the economic realities facing this country. He is not willing to concede that his brilliant idea for a tax cut did not work and maybe it is time to roll it back. He has plunged the economy back into 200B worth of deficit. He signed a fvucking ATROCIOUS farm bill that is going to do more harm than good. He is putting up tarrifs and other barriers to trade in what is already the most closed "major" economy in the world, that being the US. So economically I think he is a disaster. So far. Again, he has time, its not easy this job of President. Perhaps over time things will improve. Its too early to tell.
Nolan - My focus over the past two years in school has been on economics. As such, I think Bush has no grasp of the economic realities facing this country. He is not willing to concede that his brilliant idea for a tax cut did not work and maybe it is time to roll it back. He has plunged the economy back into 200B worth of deficit. He signed a fvucking ATROCIOUS farm bill that is going to do more harm than good. He is putting up tarrifs and other barriers to trade in what is already the most closed "major" economy in the world, that being the US. So economically I think he is a disaster. So far. Again, he has time, its not easy this job of President. Perhaps over time things will improve. Its too early to tell.
I am a pro life democrat, I also am for banning smoking and all casino gambling. I would like to see Larry Elder president of the NAACP.
You and I will be buried long before Larry Elder holds any position with NAACP. Though I agree, he would make a fine choice. What about Allan Keyes? I really respect Keyes because he offers a viewpoint that is seldom seen by politicians today. I think he is too "religious" to ever hold a major national political office. Neither of these guys are short on brains and common sense to be sure. But there are segments of our population, white and black, that don't like to hear the message they put out. After all, who wants to take responsiblity for their own life today?
Right or wrong, Alan Keyes is absolutely too religous to ever garner much of a political following in this country.
In listening to Keyes, I came to two conclusions. One that he is very religous. Personally, thats fine with me. Its not like we couldnt use more ethics in politics these days. But too many of his arguments come down to whether or not an issue is moral or immoral and not necessarily how the public wanted a vote to come down. Keeping in mind that the President is an elected official, not a King handing down personal proclamations. Keyes wanted to speak out against gambling as immoral, regardless that a third to half of the country liked it, based on its immoral effect on society. (Oddly enough, the Bible says nothing of the sort. And what happened to Mark 15-24 "they crucified him. Dividing up his clothes, they cast lots to see what each would get.")
Personal preference, but I just dont want a President drawing public policy directly from the Bible, republican democrat or otherwise. The two documents he uses as his sounding board for most of his decisions are the Decleration of Independance and the Bible. It doesnt leave much room for modern day interpretation or issues that the American public is concerned about when the youngest of your documents is 226 years old. Recognition of homosexual marriages for instance, the internet, school choice, sex education orcountless other issues that may have arisen between 1776 and now.
Two, is that he had a very limited, if not an alltogether teritary grasp of economic and trade issues. He was/is very much against opening up our borders to trade. He spoke out strongly against international trade organizations. What polticians like Keyes do not seem to grasp is that among G-10 nations and like-sized trading partners, the United States is the most CLOSED economy in the world. That is pure economic fact. Making our economy more closed is NOT a good thing. First and foremost in my mind a President absolutely must have a grasp of economic issues and domestic/foreign trade policy.
However to be fair, there are two things I liked a great deal about Keyes. In general, I found him to be very literate and an excellent speaker to listen to. I attended a couple of his speaches back in 96 and found him to be almost Clintonesque in his public speaking ability. He also, to my knowledge, never significantly backtracks. He is religious, his policies reflect that, and he makes no apologies. Very refreshing in my mind. Regardless of what one's views are, I respect people a great deal who have views and are willing to stand by them.
And Larry Elder, while I dont know much about him, wrote one of the very best pieces I have read on the nonsense lawsuits for slavery reperations. One of the defining quotes of that article:
"Pro-reparations "black leaders" like the Rev. Jesse Jackson remain locked in the victicrat mantra that blames slavery for America's "black plight," while, of course, suggesting money as the solution.
Will the "black leadership" stand up and recognize the primary problem facing America, in general ? black America, in particular ? the absence of involved, responsible fathers?"
In fact in the same speech he support LL Cool J for NAACP President.
In listening to Keyes, I came to two conclusions. One that he is very religous. Personally, thats fine with me. Its not like we couldnt use more ethics in politics these days. But too many of his arguments come down to whether or not an issue is moral or immoral and not necessarily how the public wanted a vote to come down. Keeping in mind that the President is an elected official, not a King handing down personal proclamations. Keyes wanted to speak out against gambling as immoral, regardless that a third to half of the country liked it, based on its immoral effect on society. (Oddly enough, the Bible says nothing of the sort. And what happened to Mark 15-24 "they crucified him. Dividing up his clothes, they cast lots to see what each would get.")
Personal preference, but I just dont want a President drawing public policy directly from the Bible, republican democrat or otherwise. The two documents he uses as his sounding board for most of his decisions are the Decleration of Independance and the Bible. It doesnt leave much room for modern day interpretation or issues that the American public is concerned about when the youngest of your documents is 226 years old. Recognition of homosexual marriages for instance, the internet, school choice, sex education orcountless other issues that may have arisen between 1776 and now.
Two, is that he had a very limited, if not an alltogether teritary grasp of economic and trade issues. He was/is very much against opening up our borders to trade. He spoke out strongly against international trade organizations. What polticians like Keyes do not seem to grasp is that among G-10 nations and like-sized trading partners, the United States is the most CLOSED economy in the world. That is pure economic fact. Making our economy more closed is NOT a good thing. First and foremost in my mind a President absolutely must have a grasp of economic issues and domestic/foreign trade policy.
However to be fair, there are two things I liked a great deal about Keyes. In general, I found him to be very literate and an excellent speaker to listen to. I attended a couple of his speaches back in 96 and found him to be almost Clintonesque in his public speaking ability. He also, to my knowledge, never significantly backtracks. He is religious, his policies reflect that, and he makes no apologies. Very refreshing in my mind. Regardless of what one's views are, I respect people a great deal who have views and are willing to stand by them.
And Larry Elder, while I dont know much about him, wrote one of the very best pieces I have read on the nonsense lawsuits for slavery reperations. One of the defining quotes of that article:
"Pro-reparations "black leaders" like the Rev. Jesse Jackson remain locked in the victicrat mantra that blames slavery for America's "black plight," while, of course, suggesting money as the solution.
Will the "black leadership" stand up and recognize the primary problem facing America, in general ? black America, in particular ? the absence of involved, responsible fathers?"
In fact in the same speech he support LL Cool J for NAACP President.
Last edited:
"He signed a fvucking ATROCIOUS farm bill that is going to do more harm than good. He is putting up tarrifs and other barriers to trade in what is already the most closed "major" economy in the world, that being the US. So economically I think he is a disaster. So far. Again, he has time, its not easy this job of President. Perhaps over time things will improve. Its too early to tell."
basically my thoughts on the matter, the US congress and this President seem to be going more protectionist. Agreed with most of what Nolan wrote except that both parties are pro free trade.
I believe it is just talk, the US farm subsidies were so much that they made the EU blush. Two large government organizations that will spend billions (increasing) over the years on agriculture subsidies, killing any market price one can get. hurting nations that do not have the billions to subsidize farmers (austrailia, Canada, ect. And many poor nations.
the tarriffs on Cdn. Softwood lumber just raises the prices on home constuction for thousands of Americans. They have put large tarrifs on agricultural and textiles (main export) of the 50 poorest countries in the world. is that a way to help out these poor nations trying to develop an economy.
Now there is the question of Iraq, I have many concerns about the whole situation. It should be noted that there is new proof that there was significant funding of OSB from Saudia Arabia, guess that does not matter. They have some of the worse human rights abuses in the area, even compared to Iraq a hard thing to accomplish. The US should stop trying to prop up the regime of Saudia Arabia, there will be a rebellion in time there, that will make Iran look tame.
thanks
selkirk
basically my thoughts on the matter, the US congress and this President seem to be going more protectionist. Agreed with most of what Nolan wrote except that both parties are pro free trade.
I believe it is just talk, the US farm subsidies were so much that they made the EU blush. Two large government organizations that will spend billions (increasing) over the years on agriculture subsidies, killing any market price one can get. hurting nations that do not have the billions to subsidize farmers (austrailia, Canada, ect. And many poor nations.
the tarriffs on Cdn. Softwood lumber just raises the prices on home constuction for thousands of Americans. They have put large tarrifs on agricultural and textiles (main export) of the 50 poorest countries in the world. is that a way to help out these poor nations trying to develop an economy.
Now there is the question of Iraq, I have many concerns about the whole situation. It should be noted that there is new proof that there was significant funding of OSB from Saudia Arabia, guess that does not matter. They have some of the worse human rights abuses in the area, even compared to Iraq a hard thing to accomplish. The US should stop trying to prop up the regime of Saudia Arabia, there will be a rebellion in time there, that will make Iran look tame.
thanks
selkirk
selkirk, agree on everything you wrote. Except worth pointing out even the governments own studies indicate this will add between $600 and $700 onto the price of each new home. At last check there were just around one million new home sales per year in this country. Thats a pretty heavy price to pay to protect our domestic timber industry.
I don't see much difference between either party.As already mentioned both are bought by big business(Enron comes to mind).When I do vote I tend to focus on the candidate instead of the party.
