Political Discussion

Moderator: Game Masters

Posts: 110
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 2:09 pm

Post by damon »

The sad thing is, I believe this is in the Communist Manifesto (correct me if I am wrong), it says that there needs to be a dictator to set up the communism for it to work. Then that dictator will back down and the system will run on its own. Obviously, nobody has gotten that far yet. So it is still communism, it would be similar to a democracy saying that it wasn't a democracy if a vice president had to become president. *cough Gerald Ford cough* Kind of hard to follow, if what I'm saying isn't clear I'll try better to explain it.
Kong Tanmeng (235) 95-72-41-69-23
Aid I, Discipline II, Instructor II, Military Administrator II, Qiangshu II, Wall II
Xiang Zhuang
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 12:01 pm

Post by Xiang Zhuang »

I have been paying a lot of attention (possibly too much attention) on the debates and races so far leading up to the US Primary Presidential Elections. It's difficult at times to separate candidate from candidate to figure out who really believes what, and who is going to accomplish what if they get into office, since oftentimes primary elections are more suited toward what will get you the party nomination, not the actual vote.

I am a Libertarian philosophically, but when forced to make a choice between Democrat and Republican, I tend to lean Republican unless one of the candidates involved has made an impact on me one way or another. I've been paying attention to both primary races. I haven't decided which party I will file as when I vote in the primary election, or if I'll file for either. Probably depends on which race seems the most contested at the time. Regardless, I'm curious to see what others think of what has happened so far.

According to Wikipedia (heh, not the best source, I know), here are the candidates for each party:

Joe Biden
Hillary Clinton
Christopher Dodd
John Edwards
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich
Barack Obama
Bill Richardson

Sam Brownback
Rudy Giuliani
Mike Huckabee
Duncan Hunter
John McCain
Ron Paul
Mitt Romney
Tom Tancredo
Fred Thompson

I don't know if that list is still accurate, but those seem to be all of the names I'm familiar with anyway. My personal preferences from both parties at the moment are Christopher Dodd from the Democratic party and Mike Huckabee from the Republican party. Both are unlikely to win their nominations, but I have been impressed with the way both have presented themselves so far, and Huckabee in particular has been gaining some ground in his race, although with Fred Thompson now in the race, he's been rating right around fifth, with Ron Paul, a good deal behind the rest.

I am unlikely to vote for a Libertarian candidate this year (as I have the past two Presidential elections) unless I feel that the nominees from the Republican and Democratic parties are both unworthy of the position. This is possible, as it seems the people I am always interested in supporting end up getting knocked out of the primaries somewhat early on.
Fáng Ai (防哀) hao Aishī (皚獅, White Lion), Duke of Yan (Yan Gong)
Dash I, Gongshu II, Jianshu II, Smith II, Trainer II, Wall II

Sim Turn Length Analysis - Last Updated 4.06
Administrator Emeritus
Posts: 2029
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 5:40 pm

Post by Galagros »

I'm voting for Kicinich. He's a good guy, but unfortunately he'll probably only get more votes than Gravel. At first I liked Dodd best, but things change. :)
Chen Yu
Officer Info
Tian Dan, King of Qi
Officer Info
Zhong Ce
Officer Info
Game Master Emeritus
Posts: 1537
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:39 pm

Post by Tevye »

I feel like Huckabee has a pretty solid chance for the republican nomination. The Republican party won't want to alienate the Christian right by picking Romney or Giuliani. McCain has no chance anyway. I feel like Fred Thompson isn't going to do so well.

Huckabee is a god-send for the Republicans, if they choose to pick him. He's a very conservative Christian, which will keep them the votes for the Christian right that they lost in 06, and the more middle ground Christians will probably go for him too. Most of all though, he's a nice guy, unlike Bush. He's pretty much the only Republican candidate I'd even consider voting for.

The Democrats now have a decision to make regarding which part of their party they'll alienate. Clinton won't get any middle-ground voters, but will guarantee the feminist vote. Obama will get more middle-ground voters, and will guarantee the black vote, but the passionate Hilary supporters will be stupid.

I'd say it's between Huckabee, Paul, and Biden with the Repubicans and Obama, Clinton, and Edwards with the Democrats.

Let's just hope the democrats win though.
Xiang Deng (33)
Civil Admin II, Engineer II, Jeer II, Public Planner II
http://simwarlords.net/forum/viewtopic. ... 86#p167186
Xiang Zhuang
Posts: 5489
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 12:01 pm

Post by Xiang Zhuang »

Kucinich is entertaining. I don't care for most of his positions, but I'm glad he's around. Outside of him, the Democratic debates have been a bit dry.

I still haven't seen much in the way of the results of the New Hampshire Republican Debate other than hearing that Huckabee and Paul are planning to have a debate between the two. Fred Thompson claimed his reason for ignoring the NH debate was that the debate process itself was flawed to the point where nothing was accomplished, and that he wanted to have some of the old-style debates like Lincoln did. In response, Mike Huckabee requested a debate with Fred Thompson, and Thompson declined. I suppose it's one of those things where if Thompson agreed, I'd be impressed, but I'm not surprised that he declined.

I actually think Huckabee's congenial nature would eventually go against him. The leading candidates on both sides are not known for being particularly nice (Clinton, Giuliani at the forefront of that). There doesn't seem to be much of a vote going for nice this year.

For basically all the time up until now, Hillary Clinton has been dominating the Democratic race. However, I keep hearing things about how this is the time when the parties need to start thinking about who can actually win the Presidency. I feel like the Democrats lost the last election because John Kerry was a bit too far left. Hillary Clinton has tried to take some stances to make her appear to be Centrist, but I don't know if they are effective enough. I think that, if the Democrats could get a candidate that could occupy the centrist vote, that they should win this election just based on the typical political swings. But at this point, the main candidates all seem to be fairly far to the left.

I don't think Ron Paul has a chance to win the Republican nomination. I agree with some of his policies, and in general would like the federal government to be reduced in size, but he's asking for too much too quickly. I am all for reform, but the process has to be done methodically. He wants to uproot everything all at once, and that just won't work.
Fáng Ai (防哀) hao Aishī (皚獅, White Lion), Duke of Yan (Yan Gong)
Dash I, Gongshu II, Jianshu II, Smith II, Trainer II, Wall II

Sim Turn Length Analysis - Last Updated 4.06
Posts: 9101
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:51 pm
Location: Leader of Team Coke!

Post by ann »

I've never really understood the perception of Hillary as far left. Bill Clinton got that label sometimes too but he was very moderate. She's always seemed pretty moderate to me. Not surprising - she started out as a republican after all. When Bill was running they said she was a radical because she supported laws protecting the rights of abused children. It was the 'sue your parents' garbage - in fact she wasn't encouraging children to sue their parents but supporting legal reforms which protected minor children from their abusers. Health care reform is the latest thing they are trying to call her an extremist about. I don't think it's going to fly with anyone who has to pay for insurance or who cannot. Our insurance is a little over $900 a month (family of five). We aren't that unusual.
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 8:21 pm
Location: Tyrion is way cooler than you. Trust me.

Post by nurgles_herald »

Kerry lost not because he was too far left, but because he was too far center. Not to say that catering to moderates is, necessarily, a bad thing- however, I didn't vote for him because he struck me as disingenuous. He was presenting himself as more moderate than he really was, which probably alienated more than a few progressives.

I'm siding with ann on this one. There is nothing about Hillary Clinton that even resembles a liberal agenda. If you want to focus on the serious leftists, look at Kucinich or John Edwards (yes, Edwards has some hair issues, but his platform is infinitely more fleshed-out and liberal-minded than Hillary's). I also don't really know what you're talking about, Xiang Zhuang- Kucinich, while he certainly isn't going to win, isn't "entertaining". He is a legitimate candidate with legitimate ideas. It's possible you're thinking of Mike Gravel, the former Senator from Alaska. It is also possible that you haven't actually seen any of the debates.

For that matter, democrats in general have been moving steadily towards the center. If you think that these candidates are too far left, you obviously don't know anything about politics in other nations. The Democratic Party is described on wikipedia as "centrist" in regards to fiscal policy and "center-left" in regards to social policy. This fits in with the rhetoric of leading Democrats over the past few years. You've all ready won this one, Xiang Zhuang. You've eliminated the only plausible liberal party in the entire United States of America. Please, for the love of God, stop- we don't need two conservative parties running around.
Yang Yinong (54)
Aid II, Escort II, Scout II, Envelop II
Dao Xia
Posts: 959
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 2:56 am

Post by Dao Xia »

I will just turn 18 in time to vote for the upcoming elections, so I have looked into it a lot. I think that if you look past Clinton's obvious baggage and relative cold and uncharismatic nature, she is the most capable candidate in the field. Her new health care plan is the best I have seen from any of the candidates yet, and she has more experience than anyone could ask for. I think that Obama would have a better chance in the general election just because of how charismatic and idealistic the guy is. A lot can happen between now and the primaries though, so I'm not going to put out any predictions.

On a different note, I have been involved in politics non-stop for the last few months because of my mom's campaign. She is running for the House seat against Marylin Muskgrave (Colorado).
Lurking Tyranny
The Florentine Admin
The Florentine Admin
Posts: 4954
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 9:52 pm
Location: "When you play the game of thrones, you win or you die. There is no middle ground."

Post by Lurking Tyranny »

I'm rather anti-hillary clinton and i'm from NY. She's just so political. She, like many currently in the field, are the say anything to get elected type. I hate to sound typical, but she's a big phoney.

I'm utterly disgusted with Guiliani and how he keeps using the tragedy of september 11th, 2001 to further his political agenda. Plus his obvious flop on his gun stance proves that he's willing to sell out his ideals to get into office.

On the Democrats side I think at the moment I am actually leaning towards Edwards, though I'm not sure he has much of a chance. From the Republican side of the spectrum, I still favor McCane to a degree - but he's really lost touch and his definately not on the winning path.
Fan Zeng, Prime Minister of Chu

Player Character
Gu Hama of Ba

Liu Bang then asked Han Xin, who had served under Xiang Yu but was driven out, "what is Xiang Yu's weakness? Is there a way to defeat him?" Han Xin calmly replied, "No, Xiang Yu himself is invincible, he is destined to be king."
Lu Kuang

Post by Lu Kuang »

Barack Yamama and John McLame.