Hey everyone,
I haven't really been on here in a while, so I hope I didn't miss this, but who are you voting for for President and why?
Also, what do you think of the electoral college? Is it time to do away with it?
I have my ideas, but I want to here what you guys think first......
Posted in
Political
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
I was talking to a philosophy grad student and he and I agree. This sounds hmm undemocratic to say the least, elitist and "not nice" but these are our views:
1.) We are all special in our own ways
2.) For 90% (random but rough guess of number) of us, the "special" doesn't involve intellectual labor
3.) Thus 10% of us should determine the directions of the country
4.) The electoral college is an attempt to do this.
Unfortunately there's more:
5.) Because of the low amount of pay, and possibly because of the disappointing actions of electoral people when they were children, intelligent people rarely find their way into politics
6.) The electoral college is full of idiots...and they chose their king to be our president
7.) They will run this country into the ground...as happened in England pre-Revolution
8.) Finally some smart people will realize they should go found their own nation...
And that is my line on our politics...o and i'm not going to be voting
mmm... I'm not into politics much. It isn't one of my interests but I understand it's important.
I was going to vote for Obama cuz he's from Illinois and I am assuming if he knows what is best for Illinois... hes good in my book.
However, I sent in my registration card like a month ago... and still haven't received my voting card. And i believe it is too late to send in an absentee ballot... so hopefully Illinois doesn't come down to only one vote.
I'm with Obama! He's an awesome guy.
I'm not voting and I would have gone with McCain - but I live in Illinois. Unless all the racists in Illinois vote for McCain, I don't think the political affiliation of Illinois will change any time soon.
I don't think the electoral college should be abolished. It's there for a reason. The country is too big to involve all voters due to logistical problems and plain voter apathy. This country is a democratic republic - we are represented by 538 elected officials, who by the way are directly elected by the people in the first place. They in turn choose the one man who represents the United States to the world.
The US of A has lasted for 232 years (or 221 if you count from the institution of the Constitution in 1787) and has been the power to contend with since 1865 after the American Civil War. The system works. It will continue to work. It's stable. That's all that matters for a nation-state.
I don't think it's fair to say that only "intelligent" people should choose the political directions of the country, Joey. George W. Bush is a stupid man but one with character. Dick Cheney is a shrewd politician but one without morals. Bush believes in things and sticks to them; Cheney does things out of expediency and greed. Yes, the US is in an economic crisis and involved in messy wars. Unavoidable, considering the direction the Bush administration took after 9/11. But I would not have Cheney in office over Bush. Smart men think that they know everything and that disasters are not their own making. History has proven that leaders are not necessarily extremely smart, but they are always characters. People lead through will - not through intelligence only.
gnawmit, you said that "Unless all the racists in Illinois vote for McCain, I don't think the political affiliation of Illinois will change any time soon." So you are saying that the racists are voting for Obama? What race are they racists against exactly? If they are racists shouldn’t they be voting for McCain? Your first paragraph is either really confusing or utterly wrong. Could you please take another look?
Yes, the Electoral College is there so the low population states won't get left behind. The age of a country does not mean anything. China lasted for a few thousand years under an Empirical rule but look what happened to that? Besides, 232 years is not that long at all. The stability of a nation depends on the people's needs. If situation changes, then there will be a revolution. You are assuming that what works now will work forever, but sorry to say that history does not agree with you.
In your last paragraph you make it seem like "character" is a special trait only a few have. Sure GWB got character, but what about you and I, are we characterless? Even you said "George W. Bush is a stupid man". Why can't we have a smart man with character? You say that "Dick Cheney is a shrewd politician but one without morals." Why can't we have someone that has morals and have character? If McCain is stupid and has character and Obama is intelligent and also have character then why vote for the stupid one? To quote you again, "Unavoidable, considering the direction the Bush administration took after 9/11." So the actions that the Bush administration took after 9/11 made it unavoidable. Therefore if the Bush administration didn't take those certain actions then it is avoidable. This is saying that he made a stupid decision that brought us into our current position. I think you are telling us although Bush is stupid and brought us a load of mess yet he is still a very good president because he has character.
I also disagree with your idea of smart men. Your description of smart men sounds like the description of arrogant men. A smart person would see how badly he/she fucked up and take action to fix it. Lastly, lets say that people lead through will, but shouldn’t it be the will of the people as a collective? Bush has ruled through his own will and the will of the mega rich, but I guess that is what gives Bush his character.
I’m not saying that I am against you voting for McCain (or in this case, wanting to vote for McCain). I want to make a point about your logic here. I think that it is very important that we choose an intelligent president who can read a report and say “O shit! I better not do this or else I’m going to fuck up the country!” over some one who has a lot of character but say, “O Shit! I’ll do this. I am a man who should stick to his believes because it shows that I have character!”
snakesayswhat, i think you assumed too much of my beliefs from an admittedly not very well-written comment.
First, the racist voters thing was meant to be a semi-joke. Not to be taken literally as my belief that racist voters are simply against obama just because he's black.
Revolution is inevitable when things don't work. That is evident in the French Revolution, which I believe is the prime example of revolution. But what happened there? The revolution tore itself apart internally through disagreement and people unable to compromise. And in the end, Napoleon came to take despotic power over France to get it back on track.
I never assumed that things will stay forever. I'm a history major. Great examples are littered throughout history of crappy governments and bad decisions, leading to the fall of nations and such. I never said that the current political system of the United States will stay in existence, nor did I say that the United States would last forever. But the current system works. Sure, it's "only" been 232 years - but what large-scale "democracy" has lasted that long since ancient Greece? That's why the electoral college should not be abolished, in my opinion. Do you really think that a "revolution" is needed? Revolution doesn't just entail a change of government - it's also a social and economic shakeup of society itself. Is that what you are talking about?
I never even said Bush is a very good president, which you claimed I am saying in your response. I think he made some very bad decisions. Obama is inheriting two wars and an economic crisis. I don't think that's any legacy a "good" president would leave for his successor.
I think both of the candidates of this recent election had pretty strong campaigns. Both of them are smart. Smart people always has some element of arrogance in their personalities. I'm arrogant in some ways. I'm sure you are too. Your definition of smart men seem to be that they are humble enough to admit every mistake they make and good enough to think for the people and the nation at all times. Napoleon was arrogant and never admitted mistakes - that doesn't mean he wasn't a great leader. But Napoleon had character and a strong sense of morals too (examples are found in the law code he instituted - the legacy of which can be found in almost every Western European country today). I said that people lead by will - not through intelligence ONLY. Emphasis on the ONLY.
Obama has some very strong beliefs - he will show whether or not he has "character". He has not shown any public arrogance, but I think only time will tell whether or not he will be a great president. Every president has had the chance to be great. Obama will too.
Lastly, I would have voted for McCain because I think his policies are more sound than Obama's. But we'll never find that out will we?
Post a Comment