Who would YOU have voted for???

[devonin]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

Okay guys, you're already crossing some lines here, I'll lock and delete this if I have to, and some trolling bans are already looming around.

[SpammyMcSquirrel]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

If I was old enough, I would have went with Obama. McCain stated to do some dumb *** things that could have greatly affected me and he just sounds like a dumb *** when he talks all together.

Yeah. I personally dislike him, and his ~15 (srs) political calls a day before the election annoyed the hell out of me.
Out of the choices, I'd choose Obama, but Stephen Colbert if you had included an "Other" option.

[funmonkey54]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

i supported edwards aswell, sex scandal or not, he was a smart guy.

on a related note,
funmonkey, are you rich?

nope. 30,000 a year combined income for my family.

Ok, that is so ****ing retarded to say.

And posting that wasn't?

Okay guys, you're already crossing some lines here, I'll lock and delete this if I have to, and some trolling bans are already looming around.

That was pretty much a wink wink at me, so I will be done with this thread now. Not worthing starting any problems over.

GLAD TO SHARE MORE INSIGHTFUL OPINIONS ON MY STANDPOINTS VIA PM IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE.

[tha Guardians]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

nope. 30,000 a year combined income for my family.

Rofl.
Okay, so you probably have a hard time paying taxes. Or paying for other things.

You don't want other people to pay your taxes for you? People that wouldn't even notice the money's gone?

[Quigly]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

I definitely think that Ron Paul was the best choice, if only he was on the ballot...

[SpammyMcSquirrel]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

Lmao no Hilary votes yet

[tha Guardians]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

I don't want to risk getting banned, so I am taking this question on here.

Believe it or not, they do notice the money is gone. When we have richer and poorer people, it supports a free economy. They buy the nicer things and those businesses are supported. I understand that, as a lower class income person, I will have a hard time paying things throughout life. But, the idea of "spreading the wealth" is a completely socialist idea. And we have seen in other countries where this has been attempted. It just simply does not work.

But it's not socialism. It's social capitalism. It's demonstrated all throughout our economy.

For example, social security. People who can't afford to support themselves get a helping hand from people can easily offer it.

Obama is not raising taxes on really anyone but the big corporations. If they just payed their taxes like normal, that would easily even out the tax cuts for the lower and middle classes. If they payed say 5% more than what they would be if they even payed their taxes, then that provides us with extra money for a wealthier government, happier people, and better benefits.

We're taxing maybe the top 1% of the wealthy in America, who incidentally have 10% of America's money. It's not at all hurting them to tax a little more.

I don't like the idea of taking more money from one person than another. The reason I support Obama's tax policies is because not everyone can afford to pay their taxes, or afford to pay both their taxes and electricity bill. Well, that money has to come from somewhere, right? If you don't make up for those taxes, then firefighters and policemen are risking their lives for what, minimum wage? Just doesn't seem right to me.

By the way, I'm posting this in the thread. It definitely does not constitute for a ban, so I wouldn't worry about it. As long as we keep the debates clean and rational, I don't see a problem


Edit: Adraped D:

I am still not risking it.

Also, I see where you are coming from, but you have to understand a little thing called corporate greed. The big companies are not going to just pay the extra 5% out of pocket. They will cut it from the paychecks of people such as lineman and engineers. The working class would still be paying for it in the end.

Also, Social Security is a load of crap. Ask any older person who is trying to retire now. They have paid into social security for YEARS and now they are receiving as little as $300 a month. That doesn't pay bills. Social Security is a waste in my opinion, but I do realize that it is just another fancy way of the government taxing us.

Yeah. It's all bull****. I think if we can improve the country enough, we'll start cracking down on the little issues that affect American workers. That's why I personally like Obama better. He seems more interested in restoring our economy not only to what it was before Bush, but better and better.

[pokelda]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

Bob Barr

[pokelda]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

you know, im kinda pissed that you only put up a few choices. I mean, I would have taken Nader or even a Third Party option but to leave those out is pretty ignorant.

[welsh_girl]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

Obama, I hope he doesn't end up ****ing up your country anymore than it is, because it affects everywhere else, especially the UK.

[massflavour]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

lmao there's people that still like ron paul.

hilarious.

[Rubin0]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

I happily voted for Obama and threw a little party when they announced he won. I think America has made the right choice.

[championanwar]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

I only seem to hear about Barak Obama down here. I haven't really heard that much on McCain. Their public speaches were really good though, so I'm undecided.
Edit:
Hillary Clinton?!

[sapheroth40]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

I think that McCain has more military exp. he should have won.

[Svaz]

Re: Who would YOU have voted for???

Nader, if there was more than two parties receiving most/all of the media coverage. Went with Brobama instead, I'm so sorry.