Elections - November 2007

Does anyone else find it extremely dumb that many liberals are willing voting for Hillary only because she is a woman. They would rather have someone as that will completely destroy the greatest health care system in the world (among other things) than have a republican another male might actually help our country.
I am not against a woman president, but Hillary is not the right one.

2007-11-09 20:57:55 · 13 answers · asked by bigT 3

Yeah ??? well what about THIS ???

http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Home-repossessions-double-in-three-years/2007/11/10/1194329562331.html

"The ALP's first home saver account will reduce the rate of home repossessions in Sydney that have more than doubled in the past three years, opposition federal treasurer Wayne Swan says.

The Labor Party has obtained official data from the NSW Supreme Court under Freedom of Information (FoI) that shows mortgage repossessions rose from 1,170 in 2003 to 3,642 in 2006 across NSW.

Mr Swan said figures showed a further 2,196 applications have been issued in the year to August this year.

"Mr Howard still thinks working families have never been better off, while his successor Mr Costello denies there is a housing affordability crisis at all," Mr Swan said"

read on
and what is your opinion ?

2007-11-09 20:08:33 · 25 answers · asked by ll_jenny_ll here AND I'M BAC 7

Mal Brough has related to the Press that the Unions are going to spend $120,000:00 on Political advertising for the Labor Party.Hasn't someone pointed out to Him, How much the Howard Govt. has spent on their Shifty Liberal Add's? WHAT A BLOODY JOKE.

2007-11-09 19:46:43 · 6 answers · asked by Dick E knee 3

New poll shows hes opened up huge new leads in Iowa and NH, hes also ahead in SC.

2007-11-09 18:32:17 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

hilary clinton is my first choice. any views?

2007-11-09 18:23:30 · 6 answers · asked by stacey c 2

The only good thing the weasals who actually think they did something good for the American people is by raising the wages and telling us they pulled it off with a sh eating grin is the only thing they actually did at all and I do not think it amounts to anything to help the American people. Have you noticed when you get a raise in minimum wage (like how do you live on that?) All busnesses raise their prices some are raised double . so noone benefits a thing but maybe they take more taxes out. They just laugh at us and we all just take it from these weasel's who need to be replaced they are not for us it's all about them! Call them the do nothing clan who is slowing destroying America if we do nothing about it,don't vote for people who do more damage and blame the next guy


(hopefully this will not get erased again)

2007-11-09 17:49:12 · 15 answers · asked by arls7 1

2007-11-09 16:15:51 · 5 answers · asked by truck 1

2007-11-09 16:05:29 · 10 answers · asked by justafan 2

2007-11-09 15:56:55 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-09 15:56:22 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

Doesn't she know anything or stand for anything besides just getting elected?

2007-11-09 15:56:17 · 15 answers · asked by artiegordon 1

2007-11-09 15:45:56 · 11 answers · asked by razor 5

The thing I don't understand is if a candidate wins the popular vote like in 2000, but doesn't get elected because he loses the electoral college, what is the point of voting? Does the popular vote mean anything? Which one determines who gets elected and why do we need 2 different ways to vote? This is driving me crazy and it is hard to find an answer online that can fully explain my question.

2007-11-09 15:27:37 · 14 answers · asked by Landon Donovan 2

2007-11-09 14:44:14 · 15 answers · asked by thomasdavidhalbrook@yahoo.com 2

Who do you choose? Why? Explain... Who do you think is going to win the democratic primary???

2007-11-09 14:12:50 · 13 answers · asked by bestanswerman 2

who are you voting for?
Fucl< the polls i wanna get stats from my peers

2007-11-09 14:07:42 · 10 answers · asked by boris 3

They all have swords.
Please give details, thank you.

2007-11-09 13:28:59 · 15 answers · asked by jiahua448 4

It seems to me the Mitt Romney might be the strongest Economic mind of the bunch.

2007-11-09 13:17:20 · 8 answers · asked by nac7149 3

2007-11-09 13:14:38 · 25 answers · asked by thomasdavidhalbrook@yahoo.com 2

all eligible voters whether participating or not, deservethe government put in.Is not that the case?

2007-11-09 13:08:25 · 3 answers · asked by FriendlyLionLeo 2

I was floored when I watched Loose Change 911. It's at the following address:
http://loosechange911.com , Watch the trailer for the final cut, then go to the bottom of web site and click current website to watch full 90min 2nd cut version. Wow!

2007-11-09 13:04:42 · 24 answers · asked by DAMN_YANK 1

The latest Liberal party ads go on about interest rates under Whitlam, Hawke and Keating. There were some Liberal Party leaders during this time so can anyone tell me how the interest rates faired when they were in charge of the economy???

2007-11-09 12:20:17 · 9 answers · asked by Kay P 3

For so long the Liberal Party have been touting how interest rates would be higher under a Labor Government. With the latest interest rate rises John and Co. have been quick to point out that they have no control over interest rates.

If that's the case, what has the interest rate debate really all been about?? No one seems able to really control it and if John and Co are correct we are all headed for a drubbing on rate rises because of the market in the U.S. and oil prices.

I wonder, if/when Kevin Rudd and the Labor party get in will the then opposition keep their mouths shut when interest rates rise due to this flow on of the U.S. prime market and oil???

In a word, NO. They'll suddenly forget all that's been said in the campaign and go for the th

As it is, both parties are pumping more money into the pockets of voters which can only mean that they, supposedly, will have more money to spend which in turn will only serve to increase the economy and interest rates more.

2007-11-09 12:14:02 · 3 answers · asked by Kay P 3

You just know it's going to be politicized.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071109/ap_on_bi_ge/mortgage_mess_banks;_ylt=AlKbDOsu.9KyE1KReQfS_tas0NUE

2007-11-09 11:35:59 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

Please read and see complete video at: http://www.blacklistednews.com/view.asp?ID=4751

2007-11-09 11:27:35 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-09 11:13:36 · 13 answers · asked by lexy 2

Political parties are made up of a coaliton of people who share similar interest. Since this is the case, I think it would be ridiculous to vote for somone from a party that does not share your interests. If they belived as you do, they would have joined the same team as you.

2007-11-09 11:02:01 · 10 answers · asked by MellowYellow84 2

2007-11-09 10:58:12 · 6 answers · asked by R J 7

(in terms of a presidential candidate etc.)

2007-11-09 10:45:47 · 4 answers · asked by BarryBadrinath 2

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/016770.html

WASHINGTON (AP) — If anything can tarnish Rudy Giuliani's armor, criminal charges against his police commissioner might do it.

Giuliani, the former New York mayor, has established himself as the front-runner in the Republican presidential race, defying predictions that his views on abortion and gay rights and his three marriages would repel conservative primary voters.

Now, his former protege Bernard Kerik may face federal criminal charges including tax evasion and corruption. The case against Kerik — Giuliani's friend, business partner and former police commissioner — is an opportunity for critics to question Giuliani's judgment.

"Rudy Giuliani has a few Achilles' heels, and Bernard Kerik is definitely one of them," said Tobe Berkovitz, interim dean at Boston University's college of communications. "The question is, can one of his opponents capitalize on it?"

2007-11-09 10:23:04 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous