Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

"I really don't see much difference between bad and worse. But beyond that: Isn't it interesting to see how a country with such a strange and mostly broken system goes and bombs other nations to "bring democracy to the world"?

As opposed to what country? It is funny how critics of America suddenly develop amnesia about the history of their own countries.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Oh? So you can help me with my memory... When did we bomb any other nation recently to "bring them democracy"? It could well be that I forgot such a minor incident.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

for some interesting commentary on the us elections, if give you:

sinfest

heh, slick would have gotten my vote ;)

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

"When did we bomb any other nation recently to "bring them democracy"?

Since I don't know what country you're from, I can't manufacture that evidence, but whatever country you're from, I'm confident that your country has bombed or subjected some innocent country to some evil. Maybe not yesterday, but within recorded time. And maybe not to bring them democracy, but for some equivalently bogus reason.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

<sarcasm mode ON>

I vote for King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud of Saudi Arabia. At current oil prices, he is the person who runs America. :rolleyes:

<sarcasm mode OFF>

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

meh, he may own it, but who should he bother run it when he can get someone else to?

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

He is from Austria (you only needed to check his profile) and pretty much the only thing you can blame on him is being from the birthplace of Adolf Hitler. Being a birthplace of a tyrant does not make your country an aggressor though.

It is funny how quickly you declare your eagerness to manufacture evidence though. You are an American, aren't you? Registered Republican party voter? =)

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Godwin's Law in full effect after only 5 pages.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Interesting is not the term I would use. Evil would better describe it. Democracy by definition cannot be forced onto people. You cannot bomb a sovereign nation and force them to be free. It just does not work that way.

Please realize America is a great and giving nation. That does not mean we are not able to be evil. America in the last eight years has ruined more than just foreign countries, its ruined America itself.

Half of America may be blind, but the other half has a clue. I hope all the *****s that voted for Bush twice, now realize how they hurt their own families, because Bush made you believe he is a good Christian? Bush is an evil self involved "American Idiot", Please don't hold it against America, or the innocent people here who disagree with the politics as usual.

Germany and its people are not evil because Hitler once ran it.

I love my country, its my government I am affraid of......

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

"It is funny how quickly you declare your eagerness to manufacture evidence though. You are an American, aren't you? Registered Republican party voter? =)"

Hey, that's a teriffic guess! And you're almost right, except that I am a lifelong Democrat and have never voted for a Republican or an Independent in my life.

And the word "manufacture" was an obvious joke.

And yes, I am an American, though I did live in Russia for a few years, which probably explains my narrowmindedness.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Hehe, 50% hit rate is still pretty decent, as far as clairvoyance is concerned. =)

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Chuck Baldwin, here. I'd normally lean towards the Libertarian party, but Bob Barr isn't much of a Libertarian, IMO.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

my points:
1. Two-party system is not good enough. I believe 3-party system should be better.
2. Before 1949, the communist party in China who promised the politicians Democracy; businessmen the right to the private property; and the farmers a piece of land, well.... It is not difficult to make promises, especially in order to win, but it is difficult to fulfill the promises.
3. There should be changes. It does not necessarily have to be Obama. He has given too much of I WILL, but I do not think he knows HOW after checking what he did as a Senator.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

you don't need a "x party system". you just have elections and whoever gets enough votes is in.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I think he's using the same sort of reasoning I was, ie, that 2 + 1 = exponential improvement in process. ;)

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

The trouble's not the precise number, it's the practical lockout of "others". If there's one good thing to be said for winner-take-all electoral college apportionments, it's that they leave people in a non-contended red or blue state to send a message by voting for third-party candidates, but they still don't (by and large), and even if more did, at some point the spoiler effect does kick in for whichever side would have taken the state. A third party can't get any meaningful share of votes unless one of the big 2 falls of to less than 25% share, or fragments into 2 or 3 parties. If the situation were to be the same for "fourth-parties" in a 3-party system, it would be practically as bad.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

just watch out for dividing the cake to much, or your stuck with coalitions all over the place...

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I vote for I'm not eligible to vote.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I live in California. It doesn't matter who I will vote for; California will go for Obama. So why bother, right?

BTW, in the past whoever I voted for would lose. So should I go to vote the guy I don't like? :p

We need popular vote for U.S. presidents.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I suspect the polls showing a close McCain/Obama race are inaccurate to put it mildly. So many other polls show a large margin of discontent with the status quo. Either that isn't rendering into actual voter rebellion, or the close polls are (ahem) rigged.

Given Diebold's history, though, I expect a close outcome could be easily engineered. :rolleyes:

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

you know there is something wrong, when people make cheap jokes about rigged elections...

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Mine was just barely a joke.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

By the way, it seems that some people are against parties. How exactly would you prevent people from forming parties? Death penalty?

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Straw man alert!

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

If that's a straw man, then I guess there isn't anyone against parties. Great!

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I'll vote for Obama because I'm not insane.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Um... that was another one geneven. :rolleyes:

Seriously, there was a fatal flaw in the logic of your previous question. You don't see it?

Hint: no one in the thread advocated extreme measures to prevent the formation of formal political parties. All I saw was a PREFERENCE...

Edit: by the way, when did you stop beating your dog? :p

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Ah, here's one of those pesky polls: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/...oll/index.html

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

First they make you think its close, then less people complain when Diebold does their thing. Wag that dog!!

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Shame Obama just changed his technology platform to be in line with Biden's... (shouldn't it be the other way around).

Now both Obama and McCain suck for future internet related issues.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Well, it's always possible that some of us are very displeased with how things are, but even more displeased with how things would be if Obama had his way.

And I think things are in fact pretty close. There's no reason to suppose a large number of people would be rendered either sane or crazy vs. last election, so why should things shift dramatically? The parties are basically the same, and their candidates stand for basically the same thing.

As I said before, the parties will move to the center, separated just enough to be distinguishable, so the long term effect is having things "pretty close" all the time. Major shifts are only likely if a disruption occurs close to the election, and things can't equilibriate.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I agree with the 2 major parties being essentially the same, but the polls I'm referring to show dissatisfaction with events under Bush's watch at the 70% to 80% range. That sort of gap would suggest anti-incumbent fever... but that may indeed be countered by Obama's lack of useful experience.

It's very unfortunate that, IMO, the two main choices grow poorer with ever election.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

meh, all nations show a drop in support for their current leadership, for whatever reason.

basically, people dont get what they want fast enough. and from that, no longer want to support the current leader(s).

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Polls suck. They're inaccurate and used as non-news to influence voters.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Push polls, yes... but not all.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I got polled recently by a legit organization, but I forget their name. A long time ago I was polled by Gallop, but I forget if I was for Adlai or Ike.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

I always asked to be paid when asked to participate in a commercial poll. My opinions obviously have a value, so I'd like to get some of it.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Yeah, but be at least a little wary of any organization willing to pay for your opinion. Personally I'm less likely to respond to paying polls because I wonder about their agenda...

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

Polls suck. Push polls suck even more, but there are grey areas between the two.

Here are some reasons why polls suck:

They're used to sway opinions. They assume people are honest in their answer to polls. People aren't even able to vote sincerely in a Plurality system on D-Day e.g. due to strategic voting. Why would they vote sincerely in a poll which bears no legal consequences? Because they're Christian, and God taught them not to lie? And I'm a Jehova...

Instead of developing discussion or giving less popular candidates a chance they create a dogmatic 'us or them' attitude working zealotry, lazyness, polarisation, and argumentum ad populum in hand. They're easy, cheap, hyped news and food for pageviews, a waste of time, and distract from other, relevant issues. They're one of the factors supporting the very thing you are against: a 2 (or 3) party system.

They often lack options which contributes to swaying opinions. Take this very thread. A) Several candidates are excluded B) There is no blanc option C) There isn't an option to state one is not eligable to vote (e.g. minor, non-US citizen). Although it doesn't applt here they often implement the Plurality system which, arguably, doesn't allow the voter enough freedom to express their opinion.

Internet polls suck even more because there is no meaningful authentication, and they're not anonymous. Its child's play to manipulate them. See e.g. Slashdot's poll disclaimer.

Resumee, as far as I'm concerned anyone who takes polls seriously is a fool and knowingly or not serves their dreadful uses, or abuses if you will. Unfortunately, many do take them serious. Individuals who contribute to polls keep their myth alive thereby supporting their usage.

Instead of a poll, an analysis, discussion or interview is much more useful. It still has some of the mentioned problems (albeit usually in lesser extend) but go in depth of a specific issue, making the reader less lazy and more thought-provoked. They also allow freedom of expression to the writer(s), and the reader is able to verify the identity of the writer and/or his/her arguments and references.

Although I have to admit its possible to do faux interviewing and quoting as well. Faux News are seemingly proudly famous because of their ability.

Re: US Presidential Candidate Poll
 

First, again: not all polls. There is such a thing as a strictly scientific approach. A proper design of experiments will enable one to construct a poll that approaches true objectivity.

However, I grant the big "IF". Still, it's been done. I know. My polls are never used to sway opinions.

Second, there has to be an assumption of honesty. And guess what? For the most part it bears out, especially the more anonymous the poll is. People tend to be more honest in well-constructed polls than in almost any other venue. Margin of error accomodates dishonesty.

I'm thinking your exposure to polls has been somewhat limited. I'm just glad I'm not the most cynical person in the discussion. :D