Americans: Question

Post by **seremtan** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:14 pm

Nightshade wrote:If those were the choices, I'd vote for Canada.

I'd like to see a Jesse Ventura/Ted Nugent ticket. I'm dead fucking serious, too.

lol, every time i hear about jesse ventura i think of him as he was in predator

A W E S O M E ! ! !

Post by **shaft** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:19 pm

I'm sorry..but after Jesse as governor...i think ill pass.

Post by **phantasmagoria** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:23 pm

seremtan wrote: A W E S O M E ! ! !

Bunch of slack-jawed faggots around here. This stuff will make you a god damned sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me.

Post by **werldhed** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:28 pm

I wouldn't mind seeing Howard Dean back in the race, but there's no way that will happen.

And I'm not sure I'd go for Ventura. He started out decently enough as the guv'ner, but then he reverted back into "I'm a superstar" mode.

Post by **Foo** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:30 pm

Al Gore \o/

Post by **werldhed** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:37 pm

Gore said he won't run, though...

Post by **bitWISE** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:41 pm

werldhed wrote:Gore said he won't run, though...

He doesn't have time to be president with manbearpig on the loose!

Post by **Nightshade** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 6:33 pm

shaft wrote:I'm sorry..but after Jesse as governor...i think ill pass.

What about his tenure as governor did you not like? I don't live in Minnesota, so I'm not intimately familiar with his running of the state, but every time I heard him on the radio he seemed to be making a lot of sense.

Post by **Chupacabra** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 6:43 pm

there were a lot of minnesota people at my school and most of them thought that he did a terrible job and fucked a lot up stuff up.

i didnt get around to asking them what exactly went wrong. so i cant answer your question, though maybe shaft can

Post by **werldhed** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:15 pm

I don't think he was too bad. In fact, I liked him for the most part. He certainly was better than our current admin. But he started reacting poorly to political life, yelling at the press, etc.

I think he got a bit full of himself near the end. Most people who say they hate him typically are jumping on the bandwagon of bashing him. They never have good reasons for disliking him.

Post by **Foo** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:16 pm

Noone's even touched on the subject of how utterly corrupt the system must be for 3 members of the same family to stand a shot at presidency.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:31 pm

Foo wrote:Noone's even touched on the subject of how utterly corrupt the system must be for 3 members of the same family to stand a shot at presidency.

that's cause it's old. Enough money and powerful family members can pull a lot of strings for you. There's no changing it, at least in this life time.

Btw, I'm majoring in political science, you guys can vote for me when I'm 35 regardless of my stance. thnx.

Post by **Foo** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:36 pm

ctrlnuke wrote:that's cause it's old. Enough money and powerful family members can pull a lot of strings for you. There's no changing it, at least in this life time.

Right, but then to carry on regardless and talking about possibly voting for them doesn't make any sense if everyone already knows this.

Post by **bitWISE** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:05 pm

http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page1.asp

Post by **seremtan** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:22 pm

bitWISE wrote:http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page1.asp

SATAN SATAN SATAN

i'm a republican, so don't tar me with your ermine brush, sonny

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:38 pm

Foo wrote:
ctrlnuke wrote:that's cause it's old. Enough money and powerful family members can pull a lot of strings for you. There's no changing it, at least in this life time.
Right, but then to carry on regardless and talking about possibly voting for them doesn't make any sense if everyone already knows this.

No one really wants to admit it. It's still fun to pretend your vote counts.

Post by **Foo** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:41 pm

ctrlnuke wrote:
Foo wrote:
ctrlnuke wrote:that's cause it's old. Enough money and powerful family members can pull a lot of strings for you. There's no changing it, at least in this life time.
Right, but then to carry on regardless and talking about possibly voting for them doesn't make any sense if everyone already knows this.
No one really wants to admit it. It's still fun to pretend your vote counts.

And jesus exists, and stuff like that. I think I know what you mean.

Post by **bitWISE** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:45 pm

why does there have to be foul play?

Post by **Foo** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:47 pm

bitWISE wrote:why does there have to be foul play?

What do you mean?

Post by **bitWISE** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:53 pm

Is it unbelievable that a family would have more than one politician? Two that I can think of off the top of my head are the Adams and the Clintons.

Post by **Grudge** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:56 pm

Kennedies

Post by **bitWISE** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:01 pm

Grudge wrote:Kennedies

wow, that one was so obvious too

Post by **Foo** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:02 pm

bitWISE wrote:Is it unbelievable that a family would have more than one politician? Two that I can think of off the top of my head are the Adams and the Clintons.

No, it's fairly transparent how these things come about. However, what qualifies a person fit for presidency? Surely that person must require exemplary skills that rise them above all other contenders in regards intelligence, charisma, cultural appreciation, perception and so forth. Instead, what we see more of is people being propelled as the running candidate because of their family ties.

thus george w bush. qed.

Post by **rgoer** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:24 pm

Massive Quasars wrote:
rgoer wrote:russ feingold
lol

haha don't give me lol russ would be awesome

although I guess it is lol because there's no way it would ever have a chance of actually happening

Post by **bitWISE** » Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:18 pm

Foo wrote:
bitWISE wrote:Is it unbelievable that a family would have more than one politician? Two that I can think of off the top of my head are the Adams and the Clintons.
No, it's fairly transparent how these things come about. However, what qualifies a person fit for presidency? Surely that person must require exemplary skills that rise them above all other contenders in regards intelligence, charisma, cultural appreciation, perception and so forth. Instead, what we see more of is people being propelled as the running candidate because of their family ties.

thus george w bush. qed.

Well, we start off with a selection of candidates from each major party and the winner for each party goes on to the vote for president. The candidate selection goes on within the party and besides being 35 I have no idea what other qualifications there are. I would be interested in seeing how they select people.