According to Time/CNN, Barack Obama hits a new high!

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1846065,00.html

some interesting points from this article:

"Among the poll's most dramatic findings: McCain is losing female voters faster than Sarah Palin attracted them after the Republican convention. Obama leads McCain by 17 points with women, 55%-38%. Before the conventions, women preferred Obama by a margin of 10 points, 49%-39%. After McCain picked Palin as his running mate, the gap narrowed to a virtual tie, with Obama holding a one point margin, 48%-47%."

"Non-college educated white women split virtually evenly, 46%-45% for McCain. By contrast, Obama remains weak among white men. That group supports McCain 57%-36% overall, and non-college educated white men back the Republican ticket by an even greater margin, 63%-27%."

The less educated you are, the more republican you are!!!!!!!!

J

No Holiday wrote:

The less educated you are, the more republican you are!!!!!!!!

J

So Reps have a great amount of white dumbasses, whereas Dems have the rest of the dumbasses that are of other ethnicities...

EdelBrock wrote:

No Holiday wrote:

The less educated you are, the more republican you are!!!!!!!!

J

So Reps have a great amount of white dumbasses, whereas Dems have the rest of the dumbasses that are of other ethnicities...

Actually, it's been well-established that the college-educated demographic by and large supports Obama. His problem, highlighted by the protracted campaign with Hillary, has been in attracting the demographic that isn't college-educated.

But apparently that's starting to break his way now...

How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

Tex wrote: How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

And then the Willie Horton shitstorm hit...

But are the Repugnicans so truly bereft of anything to say to the American people, so bankrupt of leadership and ideas, that they would stoop to another Willie Horton campaign?

Apparently.

(Coincidence? I think not.)

No Holiday wrote:

The less educated you are, the more republican you are!!!!!!!!

J

If you are white, that is obvious, as a stereotype. Country music fans are usually Republicans. Radical white literal bible christians, who usually are less educated, are always Republicans. Guys who wear sleeveless t-shirts with big pot bellies are usually Republicans. White people who talk with a definite rural accent are usually Republican. Republicans hate to face up to that fact, but love to reach that demographic on AM radio.

But the biggest voting block out there (of people who actually vote) is the white 40+ years old group. And they tend to not like a smart alect, well dressed, well spoken black man.

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote: How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

And then the Willie Horton shitstorm hit...

But are the Repugnicans so truly bereft of anything to say to the American people, so bankrupt of leadership and ideas, that they would stoop to another Willie Horton campaign?

Apparently.

(Coincidence? I think not.)

Did you just figure out how politics works? When McCain was starting to lead, Obama sent out his own negative ad campaign... acting as if one candidate is above the fray just shows the blinders you have on for your own personal candidate... This type of negative ad started with Hamilton's articles when Jefferson was running for President. Its not new and not Rove invented as you'd like to act (though Rove did tap into the 'art' of it quite well).

EdelBrock wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote: How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

And then the Willie Horton shitstorm hit...

But are the Repugnicans so truly bereft of anything to say to the American people, so bankrupt of leadership and ideas, that they would stoop to another Willie Horton campaign?

Apparently.

(Coincidence? I think not.)

Did you just figure out how politics works? When McCain was starting to lead, Obama sent out his own negative ad campaign... acting as if one candidate is above the fray just shows the blinders you have on for your own personal candidate... This type of negative ad started with Hamilton's articles when Jefferson was running for President. Its not new and not Rove invented as you'd like to act (though Rove did tap into the 'art' of it quite well).

So you agree that the Repugs have nothing left to say...

Walking the walk and talking the talk

America will vote McCain in.

Why? Because over half of voters were dumb enough to vote Bush in TWICE and because many voters can't get past the darker skin tone and the subliminal Osama Hussian Bin Laden.

Sad but true methinks.

DigitalWaters wrote: America will vote McCain in.

Why? Because over half of voters were dumb enough to vote Bush in TWICE and because many voters can't get past the darker skin tone and the subliminal Osama Hussian Bin Laden.

Sad but true methinks.

In mock electoral vote results (you know, the vote that really matters), Barack was up by a landslide. I can't imagine anything in the next month that would change that. I was scared at first that many people would be scared of Barack and all the bs the conservatives tried to feed us ("he's not born christian", "his father is a muslim", "his wife hates america"), but McCain and Palin are fucking up so bad more and more every day that they are basically ruining their own chances of any type of victory.

And for the record....Obama is not a muslim. His father abondoned him at an early age and he was raised Christian. I think Obama got this one in the bag. I hope I don't stand corrected.

J

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote: How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

And then the Willie Horton shitstorm hit...

But are the Repugnicans so truly bereft of anything to say to the American people, so bankrupt of leadership and ideas, that they would stoop to another Willie Horton campaign?

Apparently.

(Coincidence? I think not.)

Certainly you are not going to leave out the very important fact that it was Al Gore that first brought us Willie Horton?

Look, there is pleny of time for B. Hussein to trip on his farcical run to the center........

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote: How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

And then the Willie Horton shitstorm hit...

But are the Repugnicans so truly bereft of anything to say to the American people, so bankrupt of leadership and ideas, that they would stoop to another Willie Horton campaign?

Apparently.

(Coincidence? I think not.)

Certainly you are not going to leave out the very important fact that it was Al Gore that first brought us Willie Horton?

Another Republican fantasy. File it right next to "the economy is strong."

Tex wrote: Look, there is pleny of time for B. Hussein to trip on his farcical run to the center........

So Obama's moving left?

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote: How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

And then the Willie Horton shitstorm hit...

But are the Repugnicans so truly bereft of anything to say to the American people, so bankrupt of leadership and ideas, that they would stoop to another Willie Horton campaign?

Apparently.

(Coincidence? I think not.)

Certainly you are not going to leave out the very important fact that it was Al Gore that first brought us Willie Horton?

Another Republican fantasy. File it right next to "the economy is strong."

Tex wrote: Look, there is pleny of time for B. Hussein to trip on his farcical run to the center........

So Obama's moving left?

So, you are actually denying that Al Gore was the first to bring up Willie Horton....... ??

I was curious how things were reported in the polls in past elections at this point, so took a look and noticed something different this year...

...all independent and smaller party candidates are completely off of them. What happened to them? There are five other candidates, but absolutely no coverage... the only way I found out is through Googling... i never hear about any of them at ANY point in ANY news show...

...Dems and media worried Nader or someone like Nader might steal the election away again?

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote: How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

And then the Willie Horton shitstorm hit...

But are the Repugnicans so truly bereft of anything to say to the American people, so bankrupt of leadership and ideas, that they would stoop to another Willie Horton campaign?

Apparently.

(Coincidence? I think not.)

Certainly you are not going to leave out the very important fact that it was Al Gore that first brought us Willie Horton?

Another Republican fantasy. File it right next to "the economy is strong."

Tex wrote: Look, there is pleny of time for B. Hussein to trip on his farcical run to the center........

So Obama's moving left?

So, you are actually denying that Al Gore was the first to bring up Willie Horton....... ??

Yep.

BTW, due to the extremely sensitive feelings of those on the right, I'd like to make it clear that I'm not calling you a liar, Tex.

But I am calling Sean Hannity a lying sack of shit.

Please let him know, in case he wants to sue me for defamation of character.

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote: How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

And then the Willie Horton shitstorm hit...

But are the Repugnicans so truly bereft of anything to say to the American people, so bankrupt of leadership and ideas, that they would stoop to another Willie Horton campaign?

Apparently.

(Coincidence? I think not.)

Certainly you are not going to leave out the very important fact that it was Al Gore that first brought us Willie Horton?

Another Republican fantasy. File it right next to "the economy is strong."

Tex wrote: Look, there is pleny of time for B. Hussein to trip on his farcical run to the center........

So Obama's moving left?

So, you are actually denying that Al Gore was the first to bring up Willie Horton....... ??

Yep.

BTW, due to the extremely sensitive feelings of those on the right, I'd like to make it clear that I'm not calling you a liar, Tex.

But I am calling Sean Hannity a lying sack of shit.

Please let him know, in case he wants to sue me for defamation of character.

It's not defamation if its true.

Knuckles wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote: How many points was Dukakis up at about this point in time????

And then the Willie Horton shitstorm hit...

But are the Repugnicans so truly bereft of anything to say to the American people, so bankrupt of leadership and ideas, that they would stoop to another Willie Horton campaign?

Apparently.

(Coincidence? I think not.)

Certainly you are not going to leave out the very important fact that it was Al Gore that first brought us Willie Horton?

Another Republican fantasy. File it right next to "the economy is strong."

Tex wrote: Look, there is pleny of time for B. Hussein to trip on his farcical run to the center........

So Obama's moving left?

So, you are actually denying that Al Gore was the first to bring up Willie Horton....... ??

Yep.

BTW, due to the extremely sensitive feelings of those on the right, I'd like to make it clear that I'm not calling you a liar, Tex.

But I am calling Sean Hannity a lying sack of shit.

Please let him know, in case he wants to sue me for defamation of character.

It's not defamation if its true.

Exactly!

True, McCain cannot win on the economy or Wall Street or VP or anything at all.

So here come the viscous attack ads-bank on it!

LiamShed wrote: True, McCain cannot win on the economy or Wall Street or VP or anything at all.

So here come the viscous attack ads-bank on it!

It's already started... McCain has already decided that to bypass the 'classy' campaign

0_o wrote:

LiamShed wrote: True, McCain cannot win on the economy or Wall Street or VP or anything at all.

So here come the viscous attack ads-bank on it!

It's already started... McCain has already decided that to bypass the 'classy' campaign

so McCain will start his ads on Tuesday. Tomorrow The Obama campaign will launch this ad

MCain is erratic and out of touch

Smart idea-hit back-turns the attacks back on the attacker. as James Carville said to Bill Clinton in 1992-and it stil applies now

"It's The economy, stupid"

But was not McCain's original concept, during the primary, that he was going to get the more independent/moderate voters to his side because he was going to stop the partisan polarizing and all the hate/fear mongering of Limbaugh/Hannity/etc... McCain has changed his mind quite a bit.

I'd like to hear Obama/Biden/ads stress that the "surge" was just a change of tactics in dealing with the Shites and Sunnis because the previous policy was dysfuctional from the start. That the reason the US kept Saddam in power before was to control the Shites in Iraq so they would not side with Iran, but by getting rid of Saddam they made the problem with Iran worse, the Bush administration emboldened Iran and made the problem much worse. That Americans are fighting at least three different enemies out there, they are not "all the same evil guys", that the Bush policy has been arrogant. That billions of tax dollars are being paid to American companies in Iraq, apart from the troops, why? Where does this taxpayer money go?

And I'd like to hear Obama have the guts to explain what Western "liberalism" is at core... equal freedom for women and different groups/races in society to avoid unfair persection from gov't or neighbors, freedom of the media, freedom from government censorship and intrusion (like wiretapping), freedom from torture, being a good neighbor as a nation in the world, conservation of remaing natural areas, having compassion for children and the elderly. Americans enjoy the long history of liberalism, are these bad things? Do they really want to go back to the "good all days"? Give example of what life was like 50, 100, 150 years ago in the US, what life is like some other nations. Is all this damn "liberalism" so horrible?

0_o wrote:

And I'd like to hear Obama have the guts to explain what Western "liberalism" is at core... equal freedom for women and different groups/races in society to avoid unfair persection from gov't or neighbors, freedom of the media, freedom from government censorship and intrusion (like wiretapping), freedom from torture, being a good neighbor as a nation in the world, conservation of remaing natural areas, having compassion for children and the elderly. Americans enjoy the long history of liberalism, are these bad things? Do they really want to go back to the "good all days"? Give example of what life was like 50, 100, 150 years ago in the US, what life is like some other nations. Is all this damn "liberalism" so horrible?

I think you are confusing "liberalism" and the left-wing tag of "liberals". Kinda makes as much sense as the tag "Republicans" with "republic". Funny how each has fairly opposing veiws to what they are named after.

US's foundation (as was the French Revolution) was built on Lockean Liberalism, which basically states that private ownership (mainly real estate) should have little to no government regulation. That a person who owns will care for thier property, product, society, etc. more than if told to do so, as personal interest is at hand. A bit funny as Liberals tend to want an exponential increase in government regulation and supervision of the private sector.

Same with Republic, as a government with a strong central government. Funny as most Republicans desire stronger State government and desire deregulation and weakening of the central government.

So yes, liberalism is the core of Western idealogy that we are trying to impliment in the ME.... but it has nothing to do with liberals....

These are McCain supporters-God help the USA

There are idiots backing Obama as well, doesn't mean that this is his base.

How ACORN, with its problems of registering voter fraud and Obama giving it $800,000, plus his past ties with it might change a few things. I seriously hope there is more coverage on this, as this isn't some "reverand wright / ayers" topic-changing-ploy. Sure seems pretty damning....

EdelBrock wrote: doesn't mean that this is his base..

Yeah, people lining up to see McShame aren't his "base." That makes a lot of sense...

Make-Believe Maverick...

I suggest that the US-election should be controlled by the UNO.

McCain supporters are universally cunts, even though McCain himself isnt.

Discoring: rock electronico wrote: McCain supporters are universally cunts, even though McCain himself isnt.

I never liked his politics but i always respected him. However, it turns out he's a cunt like all the rest of politicians. He ran out of bullets so his campaign has resorted to character assaination. He showed a conscience yesterday but his operatives and Palin have encouraged these hate rallies. I don't ever think i've seen a bigger sellout in a president candidate.

Jeffari-al-Texani wrote: I knew there was a reason I didn't particularly care for the Dallas Cowboys!

According to The Las Vegas Review Journal, Terrell Owens, Tony Romo, and the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys plan to vote in Nevada in November based on voter registration forms found in the Las Vegas office of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

why? Because their registered to vote?

scrimshanker wrote:

Discoring: rock electronico wrote: McCain supporters are universally cunts, even though McCain himself isnt.

I never liked his politics but i always respected him. However, it turns out he's a cunt like all the rest of politicians. He ran out of bullets so his campaign has resorted to character assaination. He showed a conscience yesterday but his operatives and Palin have encouraged these hate rallies. I don't ever think i've seen a bigger sellout in a president candidate.

I don't see it as him doing it though. There is a strong right-wing conservative side that has a strangle-hold on the Republican name for the last 8 years... seems he wants to go one way and the rest of his operatives think they can steer the ship better...

...either way, though, its not a good thing since Novemeber is around the corner...

EdelBrock wrote:

scrimshanker wrote:

Discoring: rock electronico wrote: McCain supporters are universally cunts, even though McCain himself isnt.

I never liked his politics but i always respected him. However, it turns out he's a cunt like all the rest of politicians. He ran out of bullets so his campaign has resorted to character assaination. He showed a conscience yesterday but his operatives and Palin have encouraged these hate rallies. I don't ever think i've seen a bigger sellout in a president candidate.

I don't see it as him doing it though. There is a strong right-wing conservative side that has a strangle-hold on the Republican name for the last 8 years... seems he wants to go one way and the rest of his operatives think they can steer the ship better...

...either way, though, its not a good thing since Novemeber is around the corner...

Your probably right but you forget that he has ultimate control over them. That's not saying much for his leadership. He's been all over the place in the last month.

scrimshanker wrote:

EdelBrock wrote:

scrimshanker wrote:

Discoring: rock electronico wrote: McCain supporters are universally cunts, even though McCain himself isnt.

I never liked his politics but i always respected him. However, it turns out he's a cunt like all the rest of politicians. He ran out of bullets so his campaign has resorted to character assaination. He showed a conscience yesterday but his operatives and Palin have encouraged these hate rallies. I don't ever think i've seen a bigger sellout in a president candidate.

I don't see it as him doing it though. There is a strong right-wing conservative side that has a strangle-hold on the Republican name for the last 8 years... seems he wants to go one way and the rest of his operatives think they can steer the ship better...

...either way, though, its not a good thing since Novemeber is around the corner...

Your probably right but you forget that he has ultimate control over them. That's not saying much for his leadership. He's been all over the place in the last month.

Yer right he has been all over the map like a shotgun, but I truely think Republicans have issues within thier own party... similar to the problems Dems had in the last 8 years. The party just has too many split factions in it. The ultra-conservative right took control of W., mainly I see it because he was weak and allowed those from underneath control things (whhich led to 2 elections). McCain is different, in that he goes his own way, wanting to go in one direction, but the ultra-conservative think they control the candidates future and will steer him where they want (not to mention they never really trusted McCain to begin with).

I think its a Catch 22. If he took total control over his campaign, he would make too many enemies on the ultra-conservative side and would lose the election... if he allows them to take part they screw things up, but at least he has a chance at winning.... but that's looking bleaker everyday.

Discoring: rock electronico wrote: McCain supporters are universally cunts, even though McCain himself isnt.

He did have an effect on the obscene corruption within boxing matchmaking,and the sharks who pull the strings within said field....Granted,with alot of help from pissed off punters and fighters...A fucking lot of help..

It needed it,to help prevent boxing as a sport becoming further marginalised.

5 years ago,this mattered in the boxing world,bigtime...crucially so,for the future of the sport worldwide,and Mcain made a decent fist of the task...

He could have done alot more,but carried the necessary clout,or more accurately,served as a catalyst in a way that the Don Kings of this world,HAD to sit up and take notice,after years of ripping every fighter off,and the public, having their own way...

So he's not a total useless cunt..So keeping it brief...I won't bore you with any boxing politics,unless you ask me to..even then I won't,I have shit to do..

Even so,President??? I don't know,but I think he is conscientious in what he does,based on his efforts to clean up boxing...Which is something to go on.And his deputy is well worth one,by all accounts...

But I like the idea of a black president,just to nark the Wizbit head Klan,and raise hell...so long as he's not a radjed power pissed moron like Bush..Even though chances are he will be..They all are.. It's the nature of the beast...In order to rise to such a position you have to have a power pissed streak of shit,step-on-every-cunt's-toes,If they die they die fuckem..me,me,POWWWWWWER!...within.. Who was the last philanthropist President?

Slags.

Boatraceface wrote:

Discoring: rock electronico wrote: McCain supporters are universally cunts, even though McCain himself isnt.

He did have an effect on the obscene corruption within boxing matchmaking,and the sharks who pull the strings within said field....Granted,with alot of help from pissed off punters and fighters...A fucking lot of help..

It needed it,to help prevent boxing as a sport becoming further marginalised.

5 years ago,this mattered in the boxing world,bigtime...crucially so,for the future of the sport worldwide,and Mcain made a decent fist of the task...

He could have done alot more,but carried the necessary clout,or more accurately,served as a catalyst in a way that the Don Kings of this world,HAD to sit up and take notice,after years of ripping every fighter off,and the public, having their own way...

So he's not a total useless cunt..So keeping it brief...I won't bore you with any boxing politics,unless you ask me to..even then I won't,I have shit to do..

Even so,President??? I don't know,but I think he is conscientious in what he does,based on his efforts to clean up boxing...Which is something to go on.And his deputy is well worth one,by all accounts...

But I like the idea of a black president,just to nark the Wizbit head Klan,and raise hell...so long as he's not a radjed power pissed moron like Bush..Even though chances are he will be..They all are.. It's the nature of the beast...In order to rise to such a position you have to have a power pissed streak of shit,step-on-every-cunt's-toes,If they die they die fuckem..me,me,POWWWWWWER!...within.. Who was the last philanthropist President?

Slags.

Didn't know about the boxing thing.

Unfortunately our country is run by two extremes. Bush was the far right, didn't have much expierence so relied on his cabinet for most of his decisions. Obama is far left and well he's headed to do the same thing, but in a different direction. Honestly think its the only way to win a presidency is to be on either extreme.

People cry for a moderate politician, but rarely vote one in

EdelBrock wrote: Unfortunately our country is run by two extremes.

Bollox.

The country swings between far-right and center-right. That's one extreme and center-ish.

EdelBrock wrote: Bush was the far right,

Correct.

EdelBrock wrote: Obama is far left:

More bollox.

Obama is center-right-- closer to the center than most, but still to the right of center. To get to the center, he'd have to veer left. He only seems "far left" to those on the extreme right.

EdelBrock wrote: There is a strong right-wing conservative side that has a strangle-hold on the Republican name for the last 8 years...

Again, bollox. Ronald Reagan ushered in the ascendancy of the far-right wing 26 years ago.

And if you go back to '68 and the Nixon campaign, he set the stage for the ascendancy of the far-right with his "Southern strategy" of courting the embittered segregationists of the South.

That you think Obama is anywhere near center amazes me. Every news show mentions Obama's voting record as far-left... its pretty much accepted. He's gone more center recently to pick up votes...

..and Reagan was no where near far-right... maybe if you're far-left he seem that way, history books say otherwise...

...you fail to be able to see past your own party's partisan politics and your own standing on the issues. That you actually think Dems are above the fray, and not politicians just like Republicans shows either your naivity or ignorance.

EdelBrock wrote:

That you think Obama is anywhere near center amazes me. Every right-wing news show mentions Obama's voting record as far-left... its pretty much accepted.

By the far-right.

EdelBrock wrote: ..and Reagan was no where near far-right...

EdelBrock wrote: maybe if you're far-left he seem that way, history books say otherwise...

Oh, really?

Which ones?

EdelBrock wrote: ...you fail to be able to see past .. your own standing on the issues.....

The Political Compass-- 2008 U.S. Presidential election

I know where I place on the scale-- left of Center, right next to the Dalai Lama.

Now, since you seem to believe that your own politics are at the center, perhaps you'd like to confirm it with a little test?

Surprise, surprise, I'm a libertarian-leaning lefty. Who knew?!

Guess I better get back to smokin a fat-packed bowl and dreaming of electing Barack Hussein Obama, then attend a Shinto Commitment Ceremony for my lesbian neighbors.

Sarah Palin dropped the puck at the Philadelphia Flyer home opener Friday.

Philly fans booed Santa Claus so guess how she was greeted?

Notice how the music was pumped up to drown out the booing...

This view is from the stands...

On the test I'm somehow slightly left and liberal? Something tells me this test is trying to recruit more Dems

I'm .88% leaning left, 5% down halfway to fucking anarchy! Fuck it, who the fuck are they? Fuck' em anyway.

I think this shows just how extreme the right wing rhetoric has gotten, and how moderate compromise is being called extreme liberalism now by some. People don't really believe in all these "conservative" rhetoric when it come down to it, at least when it comes down to their lives.

0_o wrote: I'm .88% leaning left, 5% down halfway to fucking anarchy! Fuck it, who the fuck are they? Fuck' em anyway.

I think this shows just how extreme the right wing rhetoric has gotten, and how moderate compromise is being called extreme liberalism now by some. People don't really believe in all these "conservative" rhetoric when it come down to it, at least when it comes down to their lives.

or it could be the way the "test" asks questions. Some of the questions for instance "do you think rich people are taxed too much?" are twisting waht people on the right think. The way the question was worded, and the answer I gave, suggests that I would want the rich to be taxed more. Its not that I think rich shouldn't be taxed because I feel they are taxed too much, rather that there is no real-world way to tax the rich, as every tax given to them will be filtered down to the consumer and could force more negative impacts in the economy. So by taxing the rich more, you are really indirectly subjecting the poor to more taxes. However, the way the question was worded, it suggests that I would want the rich to be taxed more.

All the test answers in thier placement on a graph are purely subjective. Its not a scientific test... me thinks it was designed by a left-leaning person... so i wouldn't put that much water in it...

EdelBrock wrote: Obama is far left.

Bere wrote: I suggest that the US-election should be controlled by the UNO.

Exactly.

And I may also add: the rest of the world should vote for the American presidential election because it is to us that American way of life costs so much.

3615 Jiphy wrote:

Bere wrote: I suggest that the US-election should be controlled by the UNO.

Exactly.

And I may also add: the rest of the world should vote for the American presidential election because it is to us that American way of life costs so much.

Why don't you countries outside of the USA band together into a group (like a neutral league of nations or something) and say either you will moderate our elections by sending in peacekeeper forces so that they are fair and honest (or get the people you want into power) or you will cut off all the US imports of oil, natural metal resources, quality automobiles, quality HDTVs and phones and iPods, and cheap mass market clothing until the United States gives up all our weapons of mass destruction. You've got to be a bully to deal with a bully. Can we take it like we dish it?

0_o wrote:

3615 Jiphy wrote:

Bere wrote: I suggest that the US-election should be controlled by the UNO.

Exactly.

And I may also add: the rest of the world should vote for the American presidential election because it is to us that American way of life costs so much.

Why don't you countries outside of the USA band together into a group (like a neutral league of nations or something) and say either you will moderate our elections by sending in peacekeeper forces so that they are fair and honest (or get the people you want into power) or you will cut off all the US imports of oil, natural metal resources, quality automobiles, quality HDTVs and phones and iPods, and cheap mass market clothing until the United States gives up all our weapons of mass destruction. You've got to be a bully to deal with a bully. Can we take it like we dish it?

Do I suffer from déjà-vu syndrome?

Tex wrote:

Look, there is pleny of time for B. Hussein to trip on his farcical run to the center........

i take it you're voting for j. sidney?