True...which is why I don't let my emotions get the best of me anymore...what's the point when both sides suck?
2007-11-15 06:19:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
I don't think so. I agree that right now politics are pretty much at an all time low, but this does not mean that this trend has to continue. In fact, maybe the national dislike of the current administration might enable a future administration to finally push through some long needed reforms (i.e. health care and social security).
I do agree with you partially, in that the price for the recent actions in the middle east has not been paid yet. There are several things that will bite us at some point (e.g. the global hatred against the US, the low dollar, inflation and the high national debt). But none of these things are catastrophic (except that hatred thing - we will see....).
The good thing is, people forget fast. We experienced the downside of that with Vietnam, but the upside is that soon Bush, Cheney and co will only be anecdotal memories like Nixon and others.
2007-11-15 14:36:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by kq 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't think any (very few if any) politicians represents the people. They will do/say, lie, whatever needed to get elected and then do different after in office. Must be an ego trip for them because they sure don't work for the people anymore.
2007-11-15 14:23:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by Really ? 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Define screwed?
Frankly anyone other than Dubya has to be an improvement, I truly cannot imagine anyone who currently has a real chance of being elected could be worse. But I agree the whole system is broken and will take some major overhaul, be it through radical legislation to change the whole electoral system, revolution by the people, or a global catastrophe of such magnitude it renders the current situation moot.
Sadly I think the last is the most likely option.
2007-11-15 14:22:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
There's no doubt that the enormous amounts of money required to mount a campaign and up distorting the entire process. But there is a wide range of choices available, with dramatic differences in policy, background and priorities. And I'm personally pleased that we can still say we don't like the direction of the country and choose someone new. Most of the world doesn't work this way.
2007-11-15 14:20:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by TG 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
As an actual "real" liberal, one in the classical sense, I am totaly feeling this dilema. Either I have to vote for big powerful, intrusive republican government that spends like drunken sailers and has been userped by a bunch of corrupt neocons and dixiecrats, or I can vote for big powerful, intrusive, socialist democrats, who are economic policy morons and think government sovles all problems.
Theres no party or individual freedom, prosperity and limited government anymore.
Though I think hes a little too crazy, I might end up voting for Ron Paul as a protest vote.
And oh yeah, one dumb thing would be to vote for democrats because you think republicans have caused high oil prices:
Its the dems that dont allow more drilling or refineries to be built. Cant build nuclear reactors under them either. And if you think gas is expensive now, wait until the Dems pull us out of Iraq with our head behind our legs, and see oil explode in price when the whole region is at war. Oil went up $4 a barrel in one day when Turkey just hinted that they might invade northern Iraq. When there is genociide going on there, Saudi Arabia and Iran are fighting a proxy war with one another, the kurds rebel causing Turkey to invade which will in turn divert oil pipeline traffic through Russia instead of Turkey... not to mention an emboldened Iran that might press its border dispute with Barhain and Quatar, taking their offshore oil...then we will see what expensive oil really is.
2007-11-15 16:33:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by tv 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yep.
Voter turn out, even for presidential elections is no where near 100% many of those not voting likely feel 'disenfranchised,' as you do.
Actually, I feel the same way, but I still go to the polls to lodge a third party 'protest vote.'
2007-11-15 14:56:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by B.Kevorkian 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes and No.
In my opinion, the Congress is where most of the problems are. We can talk about the Presidency all we want, but the low approval rating of Congress, which is lower than Bush's, is where the real changes have to take place.
I understand your frustration that the choices are downright crappy, but that is all the more reason to vote.
2007-11-15 14:21:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by Cold Hard Fact 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Yes, i totally agree. We're in the middle of a war, that I don't see us getting out of anytime soon. Economy's entering into a recession, if not already in recession. No one seems to care about the issues, whatever they may be.
2007-11-15 14:21:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Natalie 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'll back you up on that one. We're just screwed anyway you look at it and that Rue Paul person is one of the worse ones. He lies and people believe him no matter what.
2007-11-15 18:00:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
if a computer virus entered the voting machines on election day and shut them down, maybe we get to keep what we have until the problem gets solved, which would be never! maybe that was the point of installing them in the first place.
2007-11-15 14:21:27
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋