This is my first ever post in the political forum (unless the admins move some of my posts here) but I wanted to state my view even if some of this has been mentioned before.

I have only voted for a democrat for office once, Jimmy Carter. I was young and impressionable and he came to an Allman Brother's concert I was at. Stupid reason I know. Since then I have always like the conservative ideas expressed by the Rep. party.

In this election I sense that this country needs a change. Obama may not have the experience, he may not have the proper vision for the country but I think many people will have confidence in him and sometimes a psychological change is better than an actual change. You see this type of thing all the time in the stock market. Everything looks bleak but something happens that boosts confidence and BOOM we have a new bull market. It's time for a new bull market in Washington and for that reason, this conservative Republican, is hoping that Obama gets the nod. But 4 years from now...

Russ. Great post. My husband was going to vote Republican as usual, until McCain picked his VP.

Originally Posted by Russ_Boston

This is my first ever post in the political forum (unless the admins move some of my posts here) but I wanted to state my view even if some of this has been mentioned before.

I have only voted for a democrat for office once, Jimmy Carter. I was young and impressionable and he came to an Allman Brother's concert I was at. Stupid reason I know. Since then I have always like the conservative ideas expressed by the Rep. party.

In this election I sense that this country needs a change. Obama may not have the experience, he may not have the proper vision for the country but I think many people will have confidence in him and sometimes a psychological change is better than an actual change. You see this type of thing all the time in the stock market. Everything looks bleak but something happens that boosts confidence and BOOM we have a new bull market. It's time for a new bull market in Washington and for that reason, this conservative Republican, is hoping that Obama gets the nod. But 4 years from now...

I feel the same as you, as I've always voted as an Indepedent until 2000 and I stupidly believed Bush's promise to be the "uniter of Washington". (Boy,did I get conned) Well, this time I'm voting for Obama!! And, I cannot BELIEVE how McCain is just using this woman from Alaska to help him w/the Hillary women voters (which WON'T work) AND to try to get back the Christian voters that he insulted & condemned back in 2000 when he was running then for President!! If people can't see through his manipulating of these groups of voters that he NEEDS to win the election, then I'm afraid we're in for another 4 yrs of the same type of government as GWBush. And another major issue that's been bothering me about McCain's pick for VP is the fact that he KNOWS he's had 2 bouts with Melanoma (the most deadly form of skin cancer than can kill a person in a few months) and the fact that he's 73 and he picks a woman that was a Mayor of a town about the size of Wildwood before being elected as Gov. of Alaska!! She could very conceivably be our President during the next 4 yrs if McCain died!!!!!!!!!!! Why isn't anyone bringing up her background AND EDUCATION???? I need to know more about her and McCain has said he's wants a VP that he knows and feels comfortable with, WELL, it's been stated that he's only met her ONCE!!!! And, we want him to be our next President??? What a PHONEY he is! As a country we should be asking MORE tough questions about this "potential" President (if McCain died). In the kind of world we live in NOW we don't need a woman as VP :who boasts that her husband is a "snowmobiler champion"!!!! ???

Russ, I agree with you ! MY only problem is that as you know in your stock market analogy, many times the change is worse than what you were changing, and in this case our choices are minimal at best. I could easily support a Democrat this year EXCEPT for this one...change for change sake is not necessarily a good thing.

I wll say no more lest I get lectured again, but I respect everyones opinion and I agree with most of yours !

One distinct disadvantage both parties is suffering from (hence the voters as well) is not having the very best candidates for the job.

When the primary criteria that most want to talk about is experience and change...clearly none of the candidates excel in either.

We know for sure that if one is a part of the existing system they do not have the ability to change it. They have been a part of it for too long. They know why it needs to stay like it is. They are part of the non representative representative group, that only needs a constituency to get re elected....NOTHING MORE!!!

So in many respects experience is an over worked ideal that in the Presidential race, IMHO, adds no value to decision making....ours as voters and theirs as to whether they can. The real measures of accountability, capability and accomplishment some how never seem to make the agenda.

Since non are President or VP incumbents......NONE are experienced in that regard.
All the candidates are politicians....3 out of 4 are lawyers...none of which qualifies as relevent experience to be an appropriate candidate for their respective positions.

I for one would like to hear more of what they think they have accomplished....what they are capable of doing....who they really are VS the prime time prepared actors we only get to see.

All the speeches, debates, conventions, commercials are scripted, canned, rehearsed, prepared by a multitude of staff.....so NONE of those presentations are really the individual.

I need to know more that that. I certainly need to know more than the partisan parroting. I want to know what the individual(s) are capable of doing when the next terrorist event takes place in America...remember the terrorists have promised it will be bigger than, more spectacular than and claim more lives than 9/11. Too many Americans have forgotten....the terrorists make good on their promises.
The response of the one in office cannot be scripted...or made up to look good...and it can't be done by the staffers...we better have some one there that has the CAPABILITY to handle...because NONE HAVE THE SO CALLED MUCH DEBATED EXPERIENCE on this all important future event!!!!!!
And of course we all hope and pray it does not happen....but It has been promised by those who have made good on their promises in the past.

That is what I worry about!

BTK

Good post BILLETHKID...I would encourage everyone to investigate each candidate on both sides totally..find out where they came from, how they trained for this moment in time, etc and to do that investigation in the most non bias manner. It is difficult to find a website, etc that is not partial one way or another but I would ask that every voter try very hard.

I know that so many americans just want CHANGE,.....what an overused word...but change for change sake can be so very dangerous and you mention the terrorist threat from folks who have and still say they are going to kill us all.....the stock market CHANGE does not kill people.

Investigate facts, not emails sent to you.....not from the various websites set up to promote one party of another...find out as BILLETHKID said "..who they really are VS the prime time prepared actors we only get to see."

Originally Posted by Bucco

Good post BILLETHKID...I would encourage everyone to investigate each candidate on both sides totally..find out where they came from, how they trained for this moment in time, etc and to do that investigation in the most non bias manner. It is difficult to find a website, etc that is not partial one way or another but I would ask that every voter try very hard.

I know that so many americans just want CHANGE,.....what an overused word...but change for change sake can be so very dangerous and you mention the terrorist threat from folks who have and still say they are going to kill us all.....the stock market CHANGE does not kill people.

Investigate facts, not emails sent to you.....not from the various websites set up to promote one party of another...find out as BILLETHKID said "..who they really are VS the prime time prepared actors we only get to see."

The entire reason we have elections is to allow periodic change, whether that be because of the personalities in office, the policies being followed or any combination thereof. Which is why it is healthy and proper to dissect the candidates (for their capabilities and beliefs) and the policies (as they are the guidelines for action).

I find it strange that people will want to defend a candidate to the point of fanaticism, never really knowing the person except for what the candidate or others in favor of the candidate choose to release. The same goes for policies to be followed as well.

Change for change sake is nothing more than a coin flip. Unstructured change, with the projections and alternatives downstream not objectively measured, is pure folly. That's why there have been so many challenges to the "Change, We can believe in" moniker, as there is nothing from the front-end "we shall do this" showing any objective measure of the potential effect. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction is the basis for most physics, and without objective projection of what that opposite reaction is, change can be more devastating than the status quo. Common sense says you look both ways before stepping off a curb - and the same holds true for any other kind of action or choice.

Slamming candidates for the pure sake of "mine is better than yours" is childish. Examining all of the qualifications of the candidates - academic and experiential - is mature. There will NOT be any one (or two) candidates that will provide the perfect package, but that is human. The kicker is to find the better of the candidates, or candidate-teams if you prefer that, to be the next holder(s) of a 4-year job.

Senators Biden, McCain and Obama, and Gov. Palin all have their good points, bad points, shortcomings, baggage et al. The same goes for the policies they promote. The campaign is the time for all voters to "kick the tires" before relying on the new vehicle in times of peace and crises.

There is no reason for anyone to take personally a challenge regarding the qualifications (or lack thereof) of any candidate. They are not our property and don't need us to defend them, nor does anyone owe anyone else an explanation as to why we prefer any particular candidate.

These boards on TOTV were meant to share information, and not to be electronic battlefields. We are still neighbors, and will continue to be long after the moving van has dropped its load at 1600 PA Ave, DC. Let's enjoy our intellectual diversity and learn from each other as honest inquirers with a common goal - making the right choice in the next election. And let's also recognize that none of us knows everything and that being wrong goes with being human.

GREAT GREAT POST Steve !!!!!!

Originally Posted by Russ_Boston

It's time for a new bull market in Washington and for that reason, this conservative Republican, is hoping that Obama gets the nod. But 4 years from now...

Russ, Understand your frustration and respect your opinion. Coincidentally, Jimmy in '76 was the very first Democrat I voted against. And like you (I think), at times I kinda wish the GOP would get an old fashioned ass-kickin' that just might wake them up. But then I think of all the permanent damage to the country the Soros-led far left could do in 4 years. Picture 2 or maybe 3 new Ginsburgs on the Supreme Court and a slew of clones on lower courts. Picture the "Fairness Doctrine" sailing through the leftwing Congress and shutting down talk radio as we know it. Picture the equally absurdly named "Employee Free Choice Act" making union membership mandatory everywhere in the country. Picture a windfall tax on any company that makes more than X% return on investment. Picture increasing entitlements and reducing tax responsibility for larger section of society, creating an ever growing dependent class. Picture mandated health insurance. Picture a society where banned tobacco is joined by multiple banned substances (fats, red meat, diet sodas, non-red meats, theater popcorn, whatever) that some panel has determined is bad for you. Picture an elimination of trade agreements combined with open borders. And I won't even touch what such a government could do vis a vis radical Islam and such groups as La Raza.

It'd be nice to teach 'em a lesson, but the risk is too great.

Originally Posted by Muncle

...
Picture the ...."Fairness Doctrine"..."Employee Free Choice Act" ... a windfall tax... increasing entitlements and reducing tax responsibility ...mandated health insurance...[and so on]

One good thing is that there is still is a system of checks and balances. Getting these bills through the Legislature is one thing, but getting them to withstand an Executive veto is another. Even if a veto is overturned, the Supreme Court is the ultimate ruler whether an Act of Congress is unconstitutional, thereby also killing the legislation. If the Supreme Court rules an item as unconstitutional, then an Amendment to the Constitution is the only vehicle left to impose the item upon the public.

The crummy part of all of this is the cost. When Congress wastes its time (for which we taxpayers pay) and resources on legislation destined from the beginning for the shredder, instead of working together for real progress, we taxpayers are fleeced.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

One good thing is that there is still is a system of checks and balances. Getting these bills through the Legislature is one thing, but getting them to withstand an Executive veto is another. Even if a veto is overturned, the Supreme Court is the ultimate ruler whether an Act of Congress is unconstitutional, thereby also killing the legislation.

Steve, agreed that the checks and balances process works remarkably well, especially 200+ years later. However in the scenario I described, the Soros-led radical left would have the White House and would have a significant majority on the Hill including a filibuster proof number in the Senate. Among the first programs would be to nominate and approve scores of ACLU-approved judges for the lower courts, making San Francisco's Ninth Circus Court of Appeals the model rather than the abnormality it is today. This would seriously damage the checks and balances process. As slots came open on the Supremes, it would destroy it.

I guess you both must have slept through much of the Bush presidency. So for a refresher, consider his creative use of "signing statements". He merely signs a bill and then states portions of the bill don't apply to him. How nice!!

John McCain has personally stated he strongly disagrees with Bush's disregard for the law.
"My view is Congress passes it you either veto it or enforce it". Checks and balances, you must be kidding!!! As McCain has clearly stated, it's a disregard for the law, but I guess if he isn't lying about sex, nobody cares!

Then of course there is his claim of "executive privelige" for just about anything. How about how it applies to the death of Pat Tillman? His family still seeks documents from the corrupt Bush White House who won't release them based upon claims of, you guessed it, executive privilege.

Then there is Harriet Miers, who "W" nominated for the Supreme Court, (laughable) who blows of a congressional subpoena under the guise of, you guessed it, executive privelege, (Rove also).

Muncle, "checks and balances process works remarkably well, especially 200+ years later". Great comedy line!!

Looks like Bush has you two hook line and sinker!!!

Originally Posted by bimmertl

I guess you both must have slept through much of the Bush presidency. .....

Looks like Bush has you two hook line and sinker!!!

No - have been wide awake and in the thick of things. Have been involved in the challenges and rebuttals.

Yes, I still believe in checks-and-balances. They only don't work when they are conceded. And say what you will about the Supreme Court, despite "liberal" and "conservative" courts having occurred since the first Court came into being, darned few decisions have ever been overturned by subsequent Courts. So, the Court haas one heckuva record in being right...

The only thing that has me Hook, Line and Sinker is the Constitution and our system of government.

[quote=tucson ]
In the kind of world we live in NOW we don't need a woman as VP :who boasts that her husband is a "snowmobiler champion"!!! ? [quote]

This comment is beyond strange. Excuse my confusion Tucson. Could you please explain how the hobbies of the husband of the Republican VP candidate have anything whatsoever to do with the candidate's ability to perform responsibly? :dontknow: