Presidential Candidates

[Dave Schwartz]

This is an interesting site...

Take the poll.

http://www.selectsmart.com/president/


Dave Schwartz

[Trijack]

Dave
That was an interesting poll. My canidate meets my thinking 100%.

[doophus]

Dave:

I can't believe that the results dictate that I vote for GWB. Does this possibly mean that I shouldn't have voted for Ralph Nader last time? <g>

According to the results I'm a minority. Where are my increased guvment benefits and rights? Didn't Sandi O'Connor include Rednecks in the latest Supremy rights ruling?

Oh, *ell! I'm probably going to be forced to wait until my next go-around; heaven filled with old conservative horseplayers may be fun or it may be difficult to get them to place a bet. <g>

Anyway, thanks for the site.


George

[Lefty]

Doophus, this board seems to be full of us conservative horseplayers and by all accts I think we're betting plenty. But if we have to place our bets with a liberal we may not get paid.
Yes you were wrong to vote for Naderl he makes no sense.
Ex: He wants to sock it to Corporations yet he thinks all workers should make more money. He doesn't seem to know if you put the corporations outta bus. who's gonna pay that money?

[LutherCalvin]

I took the poll...no surprises... cannot vote for any democrat as they are consistently wrong on EVERY issue.

[MikeDee]

Before I take the poll or pay any attention to it I want to know who owns this web site and why was it put up in the first place.

[doophus]

Originally posted by Lefty
Doophus........Yes you were wrong to vote for Naderl he makes no sense.
Ex: He wants to sock it to Corporations yet he thinks all workers should make more money. He doesn't seem to know if you put the corporations outta bus. who's gonna pay that money?

In one of my previous diatribe's on this board, I explained that I felt strongly that Louisiana was a Bush lock in the 2000 campaign; so, I wanted to help the Dem's a bit (their desire to share the wealth). Had Nader received the requisite 5% of the total votes cast, his party would have participated in the Federal election handouts; thus, removing a bunch of $$ from the Dem's (remember what Perot did to the Repubs during the 90's).

Mike:

I don't know who owns the site, but I might lay sizable odds that it ain't Falwell or Robertson or Limbaugh or even the RNC. <g>

Dave:

I've got you pegged as a moderate who leans the right way. How did this site find you?


George

[Lefty]

Doopus, gotcha. My apology to you duly delivered.

[ljb]

I took the poll. It said I should vote for G.W. Bush. Based on the photo of Lewinsky in upper corner I thought web page was a RNC site.

[Dave Schwartz]

George,

I consider myself "relatively" conservative and generally, I am for less governmental control. That is, the federal govt should tell the states what to do less often, but the states should tell their citizens what to do less often as well.

For example:
I am "generally" against government interference in areas such as affirmative action. Disadvantaged people need to be helped but it must be incentive based. The current quota-type system has ruined American business standards and education is following in its footsteps.

So, I think we need assisted self-improvement programs as opposed to a program that encourages/forces companies to hire more people from a particular ethinic background.

But we still SHOULD address the above need as a social program. (This is where I lose some of my conservative friends whose knee jerk reaction is that all social programs are wrong. <G>) This country NEEDS to take responsibility for having contrived a situation where certain groups start life at a disadvantage that may be impossible to overcome.

But (again) that does not mean we need to guarantee them jobs because of their ethnic heritage. We need to guarantee them the OPPORTUNITY to be QUALIFIED for a job. If they choose not to participate then we need to let them become the people who populate the streets.


Someone (I cannot recall who) said something like: "The poor will always be with us. We have a responsibility to act in a humanitarian way towards them but that does not include lifting the mantle of poverty from their shoulders. They must do that themselves."


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

PS: Oh, about the link. I found it on a programmer's news group. Three interesting things about that thread...

1. Can't help but notice that there is just the one Rep. and lots of Dems. Many of the conservatives were outraged that their seond choice was a democrat. <G>

2. Many of the liberals were outraged that their first choice was a Republican. <G>

3. There was obviously something for everyone to be upset about. <G>

[Tom]

Heres who I like, according to the poll.

1. Bush, George W. - US President (100%) Click here for info
2. Libertarian Candidate (71%) Click here for info
3. Phillips, Howard - Constitution (53%) Click here for info

I thought the poll's questions were not fairly worder. I could not answer all of them the way they were worded. IT was a lot like the old question..Yes or NO...Do you still beat your wife?

[Dave Schwartz]

By the way, I often consider myself to be "politically apathetic."

It is not that I do not care, and it certainly is not that I lack for an opinion on any issue (<G>). And I certainly vote in every election. It is just that I doubt that my vote has much value. Afterall, it is not votes that win elections it is the MONEY that buys the MEDIA TIME that garner the VOTES. (Dang, there I go again sounding l-l-l-iberal and all. <G>)

Do I think I, personally, can effect change in this country? Sure. Providing I am willing to devote my life to making those changes happen. But, since I am not willing to do that, my opinion means no more than anyone else's.

So, like most of us here, I have opinions... some of them strong some lukewarm, but none that I am prepared to sacrifice for.

I come close on one... veteran's benefits and rights.

I find it disgraceful that we, as a country, permit our veteran's to be so abused. A man gives his leg... and make no mistake, he did GIVE that leg. He knew up front that there was a chance he would pay a dear price... for what?... doing what he was told... in the service of his country. And that means you and me.

Okay, so he gave his leg... and often lives out his years unemployed (or unemployable), in poverty and squalor. That happens because we simply want to "move past" the last "regrettable" war. So, those of us who are healthy and relatively unscarred from a war are able to move on. These men often aren't so able.

I used the phrase "relatively unscarred" because nobody that experiences was up close and personal ever comes away without scars. The question is how deep the scars go.

Most people have heard of PTSD... Post traumatic stress disorder. Do you know that many service people have been diagnosed with PTSD after Viet Nam BECAUSE they saw no combat?

Now, one might say that I am biased because I'm a veteran. But this is not abou tme. I simply do not carry the scars that many of my brethren do. And I don't need the V.A. support that they do.

These men (and women) should be treated as royalty... not forgotten.

Now, here is the tough part... we TALK about how wrong this is but we don't DO anything about it. That is, in my opinion, political apathy and I am guilty.


The Never Stuck For An Opinion Guy,
Dave Schwartz

PS: See what happens when I find a soap box? (Thanks for listening.)

[PaceAdvantage]

Said I should vote for John Edwards....uh oh.....LOL

[Tom]

Originally posted by PaceAdvantage
Said I should vote for John Edwards....uh oh.....LOL

Is that the guy that talks to the dead????

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Tom
Is that the guy that talks to the dead????

Edwards is from the Carolina's .......not Chicago!