ASE Voteing Thread.

Wow, I'm surprised by your knowledge on this. I don't even have to say much cause that's something I wanted to say. It feels weird having so many that agree or have similar views. (the other forums have ultra libs or libertarians, which i would consider libs anyway cause they agree with them soo much)

You're wrong about Libertarians. My political views are much aligned with Libertarians.

http://www.lp.org/

Libertarians:

Less Government.
NO FEDERAL TAXES.
More Feedoms.
More Privacy.

See this page: http://www.lp.org/platform

I don't know why more people aren't Libertarians.

Then those I speak to certainly are no Libertarians.

Well,I voted for Barack Obama because I didn't want Sarah Palin as a vice president.

I wanna move to Japan so I can get a good job as either a manga artist or a lolita fashion designer. I know I could be a manga artist in America, but I would rather have it published in Japanese first in hopes that it could one day become an anime. =3 And it's not like I'm going to move there alone because I hate being alone to begin with and I don't think I'm ever gonna really go out alone anyway so I dont' think I really have much to worry about getting raped. XP Actually, I think I would be safer there than here. I was at the mall with my friend one time and some big scary guy came up to me and asked me if I wanted to "get to know him". >.< Scary!

Yeahhh,your dreams are nice and all but this is about voting.I know my dream is near impossible with America being $22 trillion dollars in debt.Including all of this Global Warming shit.I know Barack Obama can't change our debt within one term,but I brainwashed myself into believing that "yes he can".Too bad global warming can't be stopped by the power of man.I hope we can slow it down fast enough before it gets serious.God damn.

The problem I see with most of the discussion on Barrack Obama is that there seems to be an aversion to his campaign slogans. "Yes we can!" and "Change and Hope!" are two things that the country does need to repeat to itself. I would have preferred a more liberal candidate than Obama (which I why I am glad Nader ran) but I am glad that he won. Whether you all believe it or not this is a historic moment in our history as Americans. He is an African-American and he is president.

You don't win on a 2-1 ratio because you're celebrity. You win on that ratio because you were the best man for the job. I was there in Grant Park when he gave his speech and I urge you all to watch it again. When Obama came out, he was all business. There were supposed to be fireworks at Grant Park that night and Obama canceled them because he felt they were too celebratory. His election is not celebration. The celebration will be when he gets the ball rolling in the directions that he wants to.

Did you all see McCain's speech? Did you notice the crowd booing Obama as McCain was congratulating him? Consider that for a moment. Consider even the history of that. There are many of these "Grand Ol' Party" ideals that were standing in Arizona that night and refusing to accept change and the hope for progress under Obama. Consider the people at Grant Park last night celebrating and supporting an African-American Presidential candidate. Consider that 40 years ago in Chicago a gathering of that size was beaten by the police for their protestation of the Vietnam war. Then consider why Obama might have canceled the fireworks.

I mean, guys, this is history. There is a chance for something good to come out of this. Something good already has. We can consider the landslide that Obama won by as fault of Palin's or fault of McCain's or the fault of the Republican party; we can even say that he is a celebrity in McCain fashion and that his victory only reflects the naivety of Americans to vote for the person that they like rather than the person whose policies they support. I won't be doing that though. I think that discredits much of the work and sweat Obama and his team have put into his own campaign. It discredits his ideas and his slogans as cheap gimmicks under which America fell victim toward. I don't think hope is a gimmick, I don't think change is a gimmick. I think that Obama has lifted some of the apathy of from the hearts of young and old Americans and for better or worse it is time to support him.

I think it's too early to say that Obama has saved or Obama cannot save America. Let the term take its course before you start condemning him. Let yourself be open to the idea that things can change. Certainly disagree with him, disagree with his policies. Allow your voice to be heard, but don't discredit his victory and the ideals of hope and change as a mere gimmick. Change has to start some where.

The aversion is this: "Change and Hope!" are bullshit remarks and give no policy direction.

Aside: Obama is ultra liberal (running stance, probably not as President). What do you consider liberal? I'm interested since most younger people haven't a clue about what it really means.

What is change? What is hope? It seems that this election was not anything more than the country voting out George Bush (who wasn't even running).

And don't give me the bullshit examples of people booing for Obama getting elected. We've had EIGHT YEARS of Democrats BOOING everything the Republicans did... ALWAYS. I agree that we need to band together and support our President as I said above. I agree that mudslinging is a terrible practice. But don't think for a second that it is the "crazy conservatives" that only do the slinging.

Liberal people have a very foggy view of the world. When their viewpoints match someone else, it is good. When someone disagrees, it is hate speech and needs to be quashed. Regardless if the booed or not, they can do whatever they want.

Now let's go into more nitty gritty matters. McCain was a horrible choice by the Republicans. I'm sure they knew that they weren't going to win this election and opted to hold back their bigger guns. If you ever listen to talk radio (mostly conservative, not necessarily Republican), you'd know that when McCain was picked, everyone HATED it. They wanted Romney, Huckabee, or any other TRUE conservative. I'm conservative and I said the same thing when McCain "won" the primary.

In the end, we'll move on. History making? Sure, whatever. I didn't really grow up believing that race differences mattered, but apparently you did. I guess it is history changing to you since you still felt that way? Who knows...

History changing will be when I get my personal freedoms back and the government stops robbing me by making money. That'll be one for the books. Hope and Change is bullshit, let's see some good action.

Well honestly if he gets the job done who the hell cares what his race is?

But the best thin that i liked about Obama, Was when (Now im not saying he said this exactly coming off of memory.) The whole Sara Palin-Daugheter-Geting-Pregnant Issue, The media Patronizing her about that and what not, Then comes obama and states That this had absolutely nothing to do with the election and how well she would do as a VP.

I'm not sure why you seem so aggravated about my post, but I'll try to alleviate some of your concerns about the "liberal youth" of America.

My point in bringing up the booing was not to compare them to mudslingers. It was to offer a point at which you could start to think about the historical significance of Obama's election. It was to bring the image to your mind of many people who are very rooted in conservative ideals and views stood strong. It was to point out that there were supporters of McCain and that Obama did not win because he was a celebrity or because he was black. He won because an overwhelming majority of Americans believed he was the best candidate.

If you think that race doesn't matter in America, then you are very mistaken. Race will most likely never stop mattering in America. I guess it becomes easier to relate to if you have experienced racism personally, but I still can't believe how you can honestly believe that America is totally equal for everybody all the time. And then to imply that because I can recognize the historical significance of Obama's election I must have some skewed vision of the role that race and ethnicity play in America? I am glad you grew up able to not take race into account. That's great, we need more people like you. I will say that I am Hispanic and I grew up believing that being white was the equivalent of success. The only common images that I had ever seen of success were white. Hispanics were portrayed in the news, movies, and the media as being not only a burden to American society, but also gang-affiliated, lazy, and stupid. I grew up believing that Spanish was an inferior language to English. Look at the many bi-lingual education programs America has; how many of those programs do you think are additive? How many of those programs offer primary language instruction or multi-cultural materials to study from? How many students are able to see positive depictions of people of their race or ethnicity? And do you think that I have just had shitty luck going through the institutions? Do you think that all of the recent literature (poetry and prose) dealing with the social frustration of subtle racism are all drawing on a dead, overused cliche?

As far as change and hope being "bullshit remarks". I feel that they are words that describe his policies pretty well. If you think that something like the idea of promise neighborhoods isn't hopeful then I guess there won't be anything I can do to change your mind. If you don't think that the reform of NCLB and the reduction of tuition costs is hopeful then so be it I guess. I will remind you that these words are part of his campaign though and are no different than McCain's "political maverickism". In the end, I guess you feel that the majority of Americans were snowed by these words and that they have no real baring on what his term will be like. The only thing I can say to this is that the coming years will allow both of us to make informed decisions on this matter.

I suppose raising taxes doesn't suit your liking. Then again, a cut in spending or a raise in taxes is something that I think we both can agree the country needs. The truth of the matter is that both are probably needed at the same time.

Your points don't country most of my post.

I said that Obama won because McCain was an awful pick. Add to the fact the media was in love with him plus that everyone hates Bush (which is now a stigma of the Republican party), it was pretty obvious that a majority voted for Obama. There are PLENTY of more quality and "better" people for the job. I voted for Bob Barr.

My aggravation is due to people voting for Obama, the black guy, instead of Obama, the Senator from IL. Couple the fact that "Hope and Change" is not a policy, why did you vote for him exactly? "Hope and Change" really did it for you?

What is the HOPE?

What is the CHANGE?

I will concede that the media dropped the ball on coverage of third party candidates. My friend, Stephen, is the state coordinator for Nader in Kansas and I've talked with him about the issue. We both feel that neither of the candidates were taken seriously enough to allow a fair campaign. Couple that with the fact that most of the major news networks did not give updated polls on either candidate and it's clear that the media didn't do it's part with that one.

I think addressed many of your points pretty well, but I'll reiterate them. I voted for Obama because he plans to reform NCLB, an issue that, as a future teacher, hits home dearly to me. Obama also plans to create new teacher scholarships as well as increase teacher pay. The ideas that he has in this area intrigue me as it will be based on accountability. This is opposed to the accountability of teaching toward a standardized test. Obama also plans to address middle class America. Obama's plan tax-cut plan is perhaps one of the biggest "changes" I can see in his policy as opposed to McCain's plan. Obama's plan to end the war in Iraq is also something that I feel extremely strongly about. Obama has an intention to end the war where McCain has not laid out an intention to end the war.

Change is reforming NCLB so that schools will be able to teach kids properly instead of teaching kids to a test, receive funding, and keep schools from becoming a business that has to meet quotas. Change is providing middle-class Americans with tax breaks that would otherwise go toward multi-billion dollar corporations. Hope is the idea that college will some day be affordable for all Americans. Hope is the feeling that some of us get when a politician says the war in Iraq will be ending soon.

I don't think Americans voted for Obama the black guy, but I don't think that stopped Americans from realizing that Obama, who is a black man, made history by winning that election.

Sure, I agree that candidates like Nader or Barr should have gotten more coverage. I admire that you were able to vote for the candidate you felt would best serve the country. One thing I hate is when people believe that a vote for a third party candidate is a vote wasted. I am a resident of Kansas. I knew Kansas was never going to go blue. I still voted for Obama. The only vote wasted is the vote that isn't cast.

Obama's "tax cuts" are already known to be false. The term "middle class" is muddled so much that it basically means nothing. Ohh, I'm sure that everyone earning under $250,000 will get a tax cut... sure. That's the campaign promise that just doesn't work out in the end.

Sorry, Obama is a guy that wants to spend money to fix problems in government. This is precisely a reason why I didn't want him in office. Couple that with his tax plan that hurts small business, this is a wrong time for this guy to push his bigger government plans.

Do we need reform in our government for almost all of our programs? YES. Do we want to spend more money to fix it? NO. There is something to be said about not raising additional money past the budget to reform programs. I doubt that will happen. We need government cuts.

Hiking payroll taxes will hurt businesses. ANYTHING that hurts small business is hurtful to America and the "American Dream." Why should I be penalized for starting a business. As a small business owner, I worry about the changes in the tax code under Obama.

Edit: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/07/AR2008110702895.html Read that from the Washington Post. Even the media claims they were biased toward Obama.

That's a promise that I hope he sticks to. I agree that the term middle class is muddled, but that is precisely why the middle class gets ignored in policy most of the time. If Obama wants to cut the middle class off at $250,000, then so be it. I realize $25,000 to $250,000 is not a realistic representation of the middle class. Families who earn those amounts are certainly not going to run into each other shopping for homes, but I also realize that it is the middle class that needs to have faith and security in the government right now. We need the tax cuts in the middle class to increase their spending and saving. Taxing the wealthiest families and businesses in America in order to compensate for this seems fair. It is no secret that America has been working to "keep the rich rich and keep the poor poor" for a while now. I can only hope that through this plan some type of fairness will be restored. He does plan on providing at least a $500 tax relief to small business owners as well.

I agree with his jump-start of the economy plan. I would like the money to come from corporations or from the military budget as we remove our troops from Iraq. The excess amount of money that we have placed into our military over the last 8 years should go to this as well as education. Reforming the government from the inside is a nice plan and it will work, but in the meantime there is something that needs to be done. We've spent trillions on a war in Iraq and you are concerned that Obama now wants to put money back into the economy? I'm sorry, but I don't find that to be a problem at all. I encourage leaders to put money into America rather than war efforts that I don't believe in or stand for.

As a student and a future teacher I am hopeful for the tax cuts and education programs that Obama has promised.

I read that article. As I'm sure you know, it is not Obama's fault that the media chose to cover the race that way. We could get into an entirely different discussion about the media's failure to examine candidates in any real light. It's all hollywood-ized now. You have to take what you can get though. What is covered on issues, readers do have to consume and make decisions on. Democracy will work better with a media that is more concerned with the truth than with ratings, but how do you see that happening? There is a reform that needs to happen within that business and it's certainly not something that is going to happen soon. Look at Fox News, look at MSNBC, I mean, there are "political talk shows" on those networks that are plainly theatrical. Shows like Hannity and Colmes or the O'Reilly Factor or even shows like the late Crossfire are rooted in a partisan "us vs them" mentality that most of America eats up. It's no secret that the media has played a huge part in Obama's success. No candidate can expect to win without coverage (please see: Ralph Nader and Bob Barr), but because the media failed does not mean necessarily mean Obama will.

Quote

We need the tax cuts in the middle class to increase their spending and saving. Taxing the wealthiest families and businesses in America in order to compensate for this seems fair. It is no secret that America has been working to "keep the rich rich and keep the poor poor" for a while now. I can only hope that through this plan some type of fairness will be restored. He does plan on providing at least a $500 tax relief to small business owners as well.

It's fair to you since you don't have to pay it? That's FAIR? Fair would be a flat tax. Progressive taxation is terribly unfair. Businesses are the backbone of America, You tax business, jobs will be lost. That doesn't seem like a good trade-off to me.

You're "keep the rich rich and keep the poor poor" is a line that the socialists have been pushing since the movement began. America used to be a place that fostered economic growth by encouraging prosperity... With the progressive tax, you are penalizing people for making more money! Tell me how that's fair?

As a small business owner, you and I have very different opinions of what fair actually is. As a liberal, I'm sure you believe that government hand-outs are fair as well. Sorry, I don't believe in welfare. I don't believe in Social Security. I don't believe in any program that rewards laziness.

You keep spouting the need for tax cuts for the middle class. Talk to me in four years when all of our taxes have been raised. It happens all the time during Democratic rule. By the way, I don't want to have "faith and security in the government" EVER. It is my job as a voting citizen to always be cautious of my government. You talk as we should all roll over now that Obama has been elected and let him run wild. No, that's not how it works. I don't have "faith" in government. That's a poor word choice.

Anyway, if you cut taxes on small businesses, you'll see more job growth and more prosperity than just a personal tax cut. I still believe that federal taxes are unconstitutional and should not be collected.

I'm actually appalled every time I read someone saying that taxing someone more (higher percent) is fair. What is the argument?

The argument is that the upper class and multi-billion dollar businesses in America have been taxed much less (in ratio) than middle-class Americans. How has that been fair? Progressive tax aims to fix some of those problems and alleviate some of the pressures off of middle class Americans who have been carrying that weight for a while now. Jobs will be lost if you tax business? There are programs that are helping to create jobs under Obama's policies. However, if you are talking about upper echelon corporations, then I think you know my answer to that... It has to do with greed, being about the dollar and not about the person, etc. Typical liberal bs, right?

I do believe in welfare and I do believe in Social Secruity. But as a Liberal, I also recognize that not everybody on Welfare is "abusing the system" as most conservatives seem to think. As a lower class American who has been extremely lucky in achieving middle class, I know the psychological and social pressures of having to choose whether you want to keep the lights on or eat for the next week. It seems pretty arrogant to believe that all Americans in the lower class are there because they aren't able to pull themselves up from their bootstraps. It's a terribly unequal system. Do you really think all Americans have equal opportunity to live the "American Dream"?

A majority of public schools are funded by property tax. What do you think property taxes are like in heavily urbanized areas? Kids in the lower class who grow up in these areas are already at a disadvantage because the schools they go to are using materials that are way out of date. They spend more money in these schools for things like gang prevention than they do on kids' education. When you are sixteen and you realize that college is not an option for you because of how much it costs, how do you think you will react? They push kids into vocational jobs with a sub-par education. Now, these kids are working class parents and mothers who never had a chance to get out and be something different. Don't tell me that I'm being too sympathetic or unrealistic, I'm aware we need plumbers, electricians and burger flippers, but I'm also aware that we need a choice to be these things instead of having them forced upon us. You can see the cycle that begins and you can see that something needs to be done to fix it.

I am for tax-cuts in Middle-Class America, but I also recognize that in order to fix some of these problems some taxes might need to be raised. That's fine too. At the end of the four years, or some time in between, if economy starts to be on the rise again, absolutely raise taxes and start collecting money to provide long-term solutions to these problems. Middle-class tax cuts are something needed now, the raising of taxes are needed for the future. I don't see the sense in raising taxes now.

It seems to me that we are treading the same ground with different shoes. You are firm in your beliefs and I am firm in mine. You've stated yourself that you and I have very different ideas of what the government should be and should not be. I'm glad we are able to have this discussion, but I don't know how much more we can cover with out letting the term take it's course. Obviously we can speculate on what will and what will not happen, but it seems prudent to me to discuss issues as they arise and talk about their execution and effect in America.

Progressive tax is unfair. Period. And if you tax businesses too much, they'll move out of America. I can select not to have my business in America if it gets too tough because of taxes. It is an internet business and location doesn't matter.

Regardless, we are in agreement about one thing... we'll never see eye to eye on socio-economic issues. We'll just leave it at that.

There is fact in both of your points of views. Obama's tax slash on everyone under $250,000k was a good idea as it complemented the Bush tax cuts nicely, and likely would have actually done something (which McCain's tax policy wouldn't have). Had he left it at that, I would be behind it. However, when he pledged to raise taxes on anyone (much less the upper class) was when he started showing he cluelessness that he has over economic matters. Had he pledged the simply slash taxes, his economic plans may have actually done something. As they stand, he will get nothing done.
You do not, will not and can not increase economic growth by raising taxes on anyone. Especially not the upper class. You raise taxes on the upper class, and you know who ends up paying more of the burden? The middle class. This has been the case every single time it has occurred since income tax has been collected.
Regarding the fairness of progressive taxation: If I have $100 and someone else has $25, why should I have to pay $50 if he has to only pay $5? Yeah, it may not hurt me as much to have half my income taken instead of 20% if I am guaranteed another $100 later, as I would still have more money; but it is in no way, shape or form fair and it is an insult to say it is. It looks like punishment towards the successful, and it isn't far from it. Because of how unfair it is, it stifles economic growth. The New Deal shows this quite well.

I see your point in citing that study; however, I wonder what the case would be if the people required to pay taxes actually paid the taxes. The claim here is that raising taxes cannot stimulate growth, but it looks from that study like it was not given a chance. I think you can agree that if 40% of the projected revenues were missing then the tax hike was not given a fair chance. I still believe if people would pay the taxes they are assigned then we can expect to see some stimulation and growth.

As far as the issue of progressive taxation goes: my view on the matter is that proponents of flat tax rates would have the moral "fairness" issue locked if everyone started off on an equal playing field and income reflected how hard a person has worked in their life. Unfortunately, this is not the case. I find it morally offensive that the upper class would want to use institutions funded by tax dollars, such as the stock market, the legal system to protect and maintain their wealth and then not want to give something back.

To cite a source that would be able to sum up my feelings more eloquently on the matter:

Quote

Ordinary people just drive on the highways; corporations send fleets of trucks. Ordinary people may get a bank loan for their mortgage; corporations borrow money to buy whole companies. Ordinary people rarely use the courts; most of the courts are used for corporate law and contract disputes. Corporations and their investors — those who have accumulated enough money beyond basic needs so they can invest — make much more use, compound use, of the empowering infrastructure provided by everybody's tax money.

The wealthy have made greater use of the common good—they have been empowered by it in creating their wealth—and thus they have a greater moral obligation to sustain it. They are merely paying their debt to society in arrears and investing in future empowerment.

cited: http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/research/lakoff/progressive-taxation-some-hidden-truths.html

Now obviously we have different views on the matter and, as you have stated, your views align very similarly to Aron's own. I felt the need to state why I supported progressive taxation as you have stated why you support a flat rate taxation. I want to make it very clear that I'm not trying to induce an argument over the matter, I'm sure that Aron and I have discussed this to death and I don't know that I could go another few rounds on it (or how helpful it would be). I understand your points and I can see why you would believe progressive taxation is morally wrong, this is why I believe it isn't.

My original point was that federal income tax is unconstitutional.

Ohh, most government programs aren't paid by income tax... that's a farce.

Well,my opinion is that this has been the most controversial election ever.There's now a black man in the White House.We could've had a female president (Hilary Clinton).Sarah Palin has a 17 year old daughter who is pregnant.United States is currently heading toward a new Depression.AND ohemgee this is giving me a headache.I like this picture.

A republican walking with a democrat~~~beautiful!!!!

What does her daughter being pregnant have to do with anything?

That would be ideal.

Said By Saruto

I have no idea why but they support him

I heard they support him because a black president is better then having a woman (Palin) as president

actually that was hillary clinton that they were referring too...



just thought i help out and clear that up

Every time I stop in to read the threads on this site, I understand more and more why I stopped posting here.

I miss you Froogle!!!! We could use more anti-idiots back here.

Well ... I developed a horrible addiction to a video game ... Soooo I rarely have time. That, and music ...

Have fun with your petty arguments.

Said By Garra_Uchiha

dude your an idiot macain isnt that old he wasnt even past his 60s

YOU calling someone else an IDIOT?

PLEASE stop your stupid fucking posts and utterly terrible spelling and grammar and run-on sentances. Reading your posts gives me a headache! Hell, you can't even spell PRESIDENT!

GO BACK TO SCHOOL MORON!

...and stay on topic.

I did not Vote in this topic, but I voted for REAL because I'm old enough. Which is more than I can say for half the kiddies here.

Said By FroogleDoop

Every time I stop in to read the threads on this site, I understand more and more why I stopped posting here.

Annoying isn't it? This site has gone to shit. It used to be pretty good back when RudeMoody was around and all these stupid kids were not.

To Froogle and areamike: Both of you just need to shut the hell up and leave. This was a really good thread and I'm sure both of you jumped to the end to make your lame "I HATE THIS SITE" comment.

With that being said, this debate has been over for a long time and there is no point in keeping it open.