if gore wins i wll want to become an expatriate.
just for a change how about a libertarian president?
HARRY BROWNE IN 2000!!!
Tymp: My comment was not a snide remark… I’m quite familiar with the Gore’s political philosophy, and have a keen understanding of most of the dozen-or-so major forms of government in existence today. Suffice to say, there is very, very little difference between a) what Gore is proposing, and b) the policies and structures inherent to socialistic forms of government.
I’ve asked people on a number of occasions to explain the difference between a diehard socialist and Al Gore. After much thought, most were able to come up with a few. But only after much thought.
Oh, like Bush is any better a candidate for a Libertarian. Increasing military spending and forcing all libraries to use filtering software!
Personally, though, since I’m not a U.S. citizen in the first place, being an expatriate is my first choice. That’s why I am with a clear conscience volunteering my time at the polling station to try and convince people to vote Libertarian.
And what do you define as “socialism”, Crafterman?
What is so bad about it?
What is good about it?
Why is Al Gore a socialist?
What are you afraid of?
With that reasoning, I could perhaps argue that a vote for Bush would put fascism into our government.
Crafter_Man,
You seem to be overlooking the very simple fact that the United States Constitution (great piece of literature that I strongly suggest you read) quite effectively prevents any type of social organization or government in the United States other than a form of democracy balanced on a capitalist economy. There are socialists, communists, anarchists, theocrats, and others in this country who are eager to undo the nature of our political system and the power of our constitution in order to implement their preferred forms of government. Democrats[sup]TM[/sup] have no such agenda. They are quite happy to redecorate and stock the kitchen, just like the Republicans[sup]TM[/sup], without leveling the damn house.
Apparently, you asked some loser to outline the differences between democracy, capitalism, socialism and communism and he or she was unable to provide a sensible answer. That does not mean that a sensible answer or explanation is unavailable. In fact, we have – right here on this very message board – a few brilliant people who have a knack for concisely expressing just the sort of thing of which you seem to need an understanding.
For a start, I will direct you to a thread called Ask the Commie Bastard, offered up by our dearest Olentzero. Here at the SDMB, people are frequently encouraged to learn new things and develop a better understanding of the world around them rather than spewing tired, useless, baseless drivel that’s been picked up and adopted in support of small mindedness and the comfort of ignorance.
Enjoy!
[sub]p.s. For the record: I am, in no way a proponent of socialist ideals. I am a proud capitalist running dog. However, I hate political party lines, bumper sticker philosophy and pop politics more than any revolution.[/sub]
I am predicting that George W. Bush Jr will win by a slight margin. Of course, my views may be coloured by the fact that I live in a heavily republican county in California, and so any time I see a democrat win I’m amazed.
You’re wrong.
First of all, the Constitution itself has no inherent power; it’s a contract that is only as good as the bounded parties, so it can’t “effectively prevent” anything. (There are many laws on the books that are patently un-Constitutional. How did these get passed??) Secondly, the government and most citizens have adopted the “loose constructionist” interpretation of the Constitution (i.e., if it doesn’t say you can’t, then you can). This effectively “allows” the government to enact virtually any type of socialistic legislation it wants (see the dreaded Commerce Clause). Thirdly, we are not a democracy in the strictest sense; we are a Constitutional Republic first and foremost.
And let me end this “debate” for 2 reasons:
I ain’t got time.
This really belongs in the debate forum.
Cheers!
No, this does not belong a debate forum of any sort.
Perhaps you missed the parts of the US Constitution that outline the way in which laws will be passed and political leaders will be chosen?
Perhaps you also missed the part of my post where I specifically referred to “a form of democracy”. This is of interest considering that the comment was contained in the portion of my post that you chose to quote. Reading more thoroughly might have saved you the effort of defining what type of democratic process is in place here in the United States.
No matter how much “socialistic legislation” is passed, we cannot have a socialist society under our Constitution. Cries that one of the Democratic Republican parties is socialist are juvenile – especially when one considers the viewpoint of the Socialist party in this country which is sizeable and influential and which has no love for either of the major presidential candidates.
The General Cinema movie theater chain does a Straw Poll that has accurately predicted the winner of the every presidential election since 1968. When patrons purchase soft drinks at the concession stand, they are asked to choose a Democratic or Republican straw.
The current results with over 800,000 “votes” cast:
Gore 55%
Bush 45%
I said months ago that Bush would win unless he and/or his campaign blows it themselves. I see no reason to change that opinion.
I was frightened by Bush’s speeches yesterday where he said that the economic boom had nothing to do with Gore and the Clinton Admin. Ahem, it was scary to see such little analysis and much pandering to illogical thinking.
Yes, I grant him that the actual growth is done by entrepreneurs, workers and investors. They cannot work or succeed in a vacuum. Good public policy is paying down the national debt to free up filthy lucre for investment, promoting the information age by NOT restricting the internet [anti-tax and anti-censorship policy promoted by the Clinton/Gore admin], welfare reform which has pushed additional workers to join the workforce, expanding health care coverage to a large number of the formerly uninsured etc. This is what the Clinton Admin has been doing.
So what have the Republicans been doing the last couple of years? Shutting down the govt, exerting a multimillion dollar effort in search of scandal, talking tax relief when our top priority is Medicaid, Social Security and paying off the national debt.
Bush’s comments sounded as like the man who is promoting himself as our next national leader does not understand what his role as national leader could be.
I am amazed that there is little public discussion about the New Democratic Party and its political shifts to reflect the current economic and social American scene which would be continued under a Gore Administration. Nor is there a discussion on the impact of the moldy and outdated Republican platform. All we get from Bush is “I trust you” so I’ll give you a big tax break and you can do what you want - even waste money on luxury items like Ford SUVs.
This is the same old same old that the Republican party has pushed since the early 80s which resulted in higher poverty rates, skyhigh national debt and resulting out of control national budget, wasted millions on fun toys for defense which needed a better analysis to meet a real strategic need.
Sorry for the rant but I was appalled at Bush’s comments.
That’s a neat bit of fuzzy logic. The office of the president is powerless to influence the economy. The fact we’re doing well now is therefore irrelevant. Make me president, and I will cause us to do even better by using the powers of my powerless position!
I hope hope hope hope Gore wins pleasepleaseplease I don’t want to go back and live in 1952 please please please…
David
I guess Bush figures then he can say that Daddy and Uncle Ron had nothing to do with the recession and the debt then…
I still think Gore will win. I’ve said all along that it’s his election to lose, and in the debates, he almost managed. But I think this election, with remarkable resiliency, keeps on coming back to issues. And it seems that as each debate recedes into the past, the damage Gore does to himself by looking like a jerk gets overshadowed by whose stands on the issues people feel better serve the country.
Gore it is.
Let’s get this back on topic, folks. The question isn’t who you want to win, why the other person shouldn’t win, or any variation thereof-the question is who do you think WILL win.
This is not a political debate, this is a poll.
Heh, heh. Send it to me, slythe. < evil grin >
Seriously, though, I’m starting to come to the depressing conclusion that Bush will win – which only reinforces my impression about the stupidity of the masses.
(Whoops! Let a bit of “debate” slip in there, didn’t I? 
)
Brother D, you can have this if you ship me 2 “sex” threads, or 1 “chocolate” and 1 “beer” thread. 
It seems to me that a chocolate and a sex thread, or a beer and a sex thread, would more appropriately go together.
But we’re digressing again – into Bush’s lost years, I think…
was that “lost”, or “last”?