Are you electable?

[In My Memory]

This could be a fun thread: how would you rate yourself as a politician if you ever decided to run for an important office? (That is, of course, if you havent run for office already ) Lets assume that you have the money, the time, and the will to run:

 

Do you have good policy ideas? Fiscal? Social? Education, Environment, Foreign policy?

Are you a talented public speaker?

Do you scare children? ( )

Could you woo the voters?

Do you cater to partisan interests?

Would you run a smear campaign against a competitor?

 

Overall, would you consider yourself an electable politician? If so, what party would you associate with, what would you do once elected, and how would you ensure another term when election time rolls around again? What happens behind the publics eye, and should they know about it? Would tabloid newspapers discover any scandals, could you expect to be on the cover of TIME? Consider these questions and much more that comes with being a career politican.

[Mokele]

Well, I'm a white male from an affluent family, so that's most of the election won. On the other hand, I'm also bi and an immigrant.

 

But if I go into the closet and it's for anything other than president, well, rich white male = win. Oh, wait, except I'm an atheist and actually have moral scruples.

 

But seriously...

 

Do you have good policy ideas? Fiscal? Social? Education, Environment, Foreign policy?

 

No, yes, yes, yes, and only if unleashing 500-foot atomic monsters counts as "policy"

 

Are you a talented public speaker?

 

I've been told so.

 

Do you scare children?

 

Yes and no. I'm like a scaled-up Gimli with collosal sideburns (complete with the love of battle-axes and fighting), but kids also seem to inherently know that I have knowledge of weird and cool animals.

 

Could you woo the voters?

 

Not without mind control technology. I'm not exactly Mr. Popular unless we narrow the competion to a severely bias sample in terms of charisma (like, say, the population of a sci-fi convention).

 

Do you cater to partisan interests?

 

No, hence making me even more un-electable.

 

Would you run a smear campaign against a competitor?

 

Smear? No. Would I be scathing, cynical, sarcastic, critical and just plain mean? I can't give up my hobbies, now can I?

 

Overall, would you consider yourself an electable politician?

 

Oh hell no.

 

Would tabloid newspapers discover any scandals

 

Does being a former polygamist count? No, I'm not making that part up.

 

Looks like I'll just have to resort to conquest via robot armies.

 

Mokele

[john5746]

Do you have good policy ideas? Fiscal? Social? Education, Environment,

 

I think so, incourage saving and investment(Tax Breaks), discourage consumption of vital resources - raise Taxes on gas.

 

Foreign policy?

 

Are you a talented public speaker? No

 

Do you scare children? ( ) Sometimes

 

Could you woo the voters? No.

 

Do you cater to partisan interests? If I agree with them.

 

Would you run a smear campaign against a competitor? Yes.

 

I would run in the Reality party. Tell people they need to get up off their butt and work hard, improve their education and keep learning. Quit buying big, gas guzzling cars and running up debt. Cause the future ain't pretty.

[In My Memory]

My death as a politician is probably the result of being desperately out of the mainstream. Here are a list of reasons why I could never be elected:

 

Religious affiliation:

* none / atheism.

... polls suggest electability from this point on is cut in half.

 

Spiritual Quotient:

* none / skeptical of pseudoscience and the paranormal.

... polls suggest I've just alienated 90% of my remaining voters.

 

Sense of ethics:

* I am very moralistic, and committed to being ethical

... unfortunately this means I cant compete the likes of Tom DeLay or force myself to create false smear campaigns about my opponents

 

Political affiliation:

* none / independent / politically confused

... I am now severely handicapped, and at best expect to see about 15% of the popular vote. I now lack the built-in voter population of the 25 million or so self-identified Democrats or Republicans.

 

Fiscal issues:

* Government is very wasteful, I would look for ways to cut wasteful spending rather than increase taxes.

... public approval increases by 10%

* I find the military to be an incredible drain on money that could be better spent, so I'd like to start by reducing the size of the military.

... previous spike is gone, and now the 33% of remaining voters who are also active in the military now refuse to vote for me.

 

Social issues:

* Pro-choice

... public approval wanes yet another 75%

* Pro-gay rights

... public approval plummets 60% more

* Pro-France

... I've just lost Bill O'Reilly's vote if I hadnt lost it before

* I'm fairly liberal, on the Political Compass test, I score a -6.00 social scale (more liberal than average)

... now I've alienated whatever conservatives might be left to vote for me

* Pro-gun ownership

... hey, all of a sudden, I've recieved the approval of the NRA

* Anti-hunting

... the NRA apologizes for supporting me in the first place

 

Environment:

* I call myself an environmentalist

... 25% of people automatically assume I am a lunatic who is afraid of SUVs and styrofoam wappers. I dont fit that kind of stereotype at all, but no one takes the time to ask me to clarify particular details, so I'm still left looking like a lunatic.

* I am very fact-oriented, so I dont buy much of the "we are buldozing 10% of the rainforest every year" nonsense

... environmentalists suddenly think I'm no longer dedicated to the environmental cause, they withdraw support

 

Health:

* I'd like to do something about Social Security

... oops, there goes the voting base of the older Americans, but fortunately I've picked up support from some fiscal conservatives

* Privatizing SS is not a solution, I'd recommend allowing people simply to opt out of the system

... the economic conservatives dont know what to think, so they withdraw support

 

Foreign policy:

* More US multilateralism

... Americans dont know what that word means, or why its antithesis unilaterialism is so bad, so they assume I am speaking about giving the US over to France.

* I consider wars with countries who never attacked us to be very bad

... Micheal Moore voices his approval for my opposition to the war in Iraq, but unfortunately being associated with Michael Moore frightens all but the most fringe of the liberal weirdos.

 

Voter appeal:

* I speak in compound sentences

... voters are quickly bored by the complete absence of soundbyte catchphrases, and are confused by the use of conjunctive adjectives to append several ideas together at once

* I speak clearly, concisely, with force, and rarely mince words

... voters are now bewildered that I dont sound like a politician at all, and they are upset that I try to base my policy decisions on reason and objectivity rather than towing the partisan line.

* I would not stand up to say the pledge of allegiance

... my conservative voter platform has vanished in a puff of smoke

* Most people probably know me for my veganism

... now people think I associate with PeTA, despite my pubic condemnation of the group. Even the liberal weirdos are beginning to reconsider at this point.

* I have a redeeming quality of having movie-star good looks and dress professionally

... my appeal to the 18 - 25 year olds is in vain, because they dont vote. That leaves the only people left to vote for candidates on a basis of attractiveness to be old musty men in trenchcoats, and I dont want their vote.

 

Overall, would you consider yourself an electable politician?

 

At about this point, I want to reiterate the eternal words of Mokele: Oh hell no.

[ydoaPs]

I'm probably too evil to win, but then again, look at Bush and Clinton.

Do you have good policy ideas? Fiscal? Social? Education, Environment, Foreign policy?

I have a controversial "Kick them out if they can't speak/read a lick of English" policy.

Are you a talented public speaker?

I'll find out next year.

Do you scare children? ( )

Yes, very much so.

Could you woo the voters?

I could woo the females and the pirokinetic mimes.

Would you run a smear campaign against a competitor?

No. I am actually the kind of person that would vote for the person that the first smear campaign is about just because I find smear campaigns to be unethical.

 

would you consider yourself an electable politician?

yes

If so, what party would you associate with

Either Communist or Republican. I'm not sure which would be more likely to get me elected.

[Dak]

Do you have good policy ideas? completely restructure the way the country is run. disolve parliments. re-establish monarchy and develope a competance test, so that when a monarch died a new suitable leader is empowered, giving him/her (ill use the male pronoun from now on cos i cant be arsed to keep typing /her) the power to make unpopular yet nessesary disisions, on for eg tax, without fear of not getting reelected, and also will be responsible for ensuring continuity: for example, britain has a history of labour selling off services, conservative buying them back, labour selling them off etc etc -- the monarch could say 'no -- we either buy it and keep it, or we sell it and leave it sold'.

 

restructure local govournment positions so its really heirachical, eg a couple of streets could be a 'ward' with one person as spokesman, several wards could band together and deside upon a leader between them, several of these 'ward-groups' would then band together etc and thered be someone to rule each city (and all the ward-groups within it), someone to coordinate all the citys and so on till you got to the level of one person to coordinate the country (who was subserviant to the monarch), so that no matter how big/small the area, theres someone to look after its needs, from military protection to why the bins dont always get collected on the same day.

 

replace peoples right to vote on who leads them with a right to vote on key issues (this seems more democratic to me anyway, as voting for one person is basically voting for a clump of policies together). surely with the internet, phones and the postal system, we could be voting left-right-and-center, rather than once every 5 years. also make it clear that not every issue will be voted on, as what people want isnt always what is good for people.

 

Fiscal? temporary legalise the following: cannabis, ecstacy, prostetution, corporate sponsership of govournmental divisions. the govournment are the only people allowed to sell ecstacy/set up brothels etc, thus resulting in a huge temporary increase in money to implament the changes. once the changes are implimented and the cash injection is no longer nessessary, corporate sponsership of the govournment will be made illegal, as it gives buisnesses too much sway. added bonus: with ecstacy for eg, its legalisation will probably annihalate the organised ecstasy smuggling gangs in the country, so when it is reillegalised it should be easyer to stop it being smuggled in (for a while at least)

 

long term: put tax up but shift it so that richer people/buisnesses pay more. abolish council tax. invest in/start up buisnesses on behalf of the govournment and exempt these buisnesses from tax (take the profit instead) with the intention of eventually being able to lower tax as it is directly subsadised by the economy. buy back key services, eg public transport, air-traffic control, royal mail etc so that the main aim of them is to provide decent public services, rather than to make a profit. disallow any buisnesses located in a tax haven from operating within the country.

 

Social?hire more police, and punish people who break the law more severely. try and mix up poor area and rich areas by building cheep and expensive houses nearer to each other, because 1/in poor areas, as the houses are smaller and jammed closer together (including on top of one-another), the ones who are thugs are in closer proximity and can find each other so its easyer to form gangs -- spreading them out would limit this, and 2/forsing rich people into close proximity with poor people might reduse snobbery and lower social boundries.

 

promote the idea that people dont nessesaraly have to accept people of different ethnicities/sexual orientations etc, but they do at the very least have to bite their toung and refrain from beating them up. enforse with legestature

 

integrate society more fully into govournment, and make it easier for citizens to contact the relevant branch of govournment to sujjest changes/complain etc. as part of this, any politition using unnesesaraly big words (or any big words once requested not to), saying 'well, that issue has many different sides' or 'theres no single answre to this' when its patently not true, or otherwize sidestepping a question, will be forsed to walk around his local juristiction naked with the words 'beurocratic pillock' painted on his torso (front and back). people whos juristictions are over a certain size will be provided transport between the majour population centers of their juristiction.

 

Education, abolish tuition fees. increase the loan, and only require the loan be payed back if the student fails to pass the course. require the loan for any years that had to be repeated be payed back.

 

schools:

 

hire more teachers.

 

start to prosecute bullies for any crimes they commit. eg, a bully who hits someone wil end up in court for ABH. name cauling would be assault, etc. after all, theyr being trained up to be adults, they should be shown what happens to adults who do that.

 

Environment,illegalise plastic bags, finansialy support hydrogen cars and set up hydrogen pumps in stations. introduce 'pollution tax' to dissuade buisnesses from opting for the cheap dirty method. introduce recycling bins alongside rubbish bins in public locations. introduce a slight additional tax (amount based on income) for people who dont bother to use their recycling bins. a few other small yet significant changes, like illegalising normal lite bulbs and only allowing those energy saving ones to be used.

 

Foreign policy?upold all treaties/policies our country has made, unless an honerable cancelation of the treaty is made. try and be nicer to foreighn countries, but if anyone asks for help with arguments with their neighbours, attempt to mediate conversations, and if one country is the clearly the agressor invade the buggery out of it if they dont calm down. invite foreighn contries to join an empire with us (once weve recovered from the radical changes). money to be transfered from the richer to the porer countries to accelerate their growth. offer to buy africa, but if they decline wipe out their debt so that they might actually be able to grow..

 

 

Are you a talented public speaker?hell no.

 

 

Do you scare children?im not sure. iv never tried

 

 

Could you woo the voters?probably not.

 

 

Do you cater to partisan interests?as long as it doesnt adversly affect the general populance, sure. id also be in favour of doing what is most effective taking all aspects of the issue into acount, rather than doing what most people want. general oppinion should be just one of the factors, not the only/main one.

 

 

Would you run a smear campaign against a competitor?no. people who do this should have every aspect of their life investigated, undergo a polygraph and asked embarasing questions, then all the less saubriouse aspects of their personal history published in a free book.

 

Overall, would you consider yourself an electable politician?i severely doubt it. you tell me would i get your vote?

 

If so, what party would you associate with,none/my own

 

what would you do once elected,to be honest, id probably unleash hell and hope that the country had inproved when the smoke had settled.

 

and how would you ensure another term when election time rolls around again? see above. id be king -- no more elections for me

 

What happens behind the publics eye, and should they know about it? with the exeption of certain issues (eg certain aspects of the military), i believe that everything should be open to public scrutany.

 

Would tabloid newspapers discover any scandals,i believe that iv been relatively discrete (ie, not gotten cought). nothing i couldnt shrug off. they could probably find out that i used to smoke a hell of a lot of pot and im bi, but its not as if i auto-erotically asphixiate myself whilst sucking on coke-lased oranges. most my 'scandals' simly place me firmly in the real world.

 

whilst were on the subject, the tabloids would feel my monarcical weight once im elected. i think that theyre a tad invasive.

 

could you expect to be on the cover of TIME? i have no idea what TIME is.

[Kylonicus]

I'd say that I would be a fairly good politician, due to the fact that I don't think for myself, and can bend to the will of corporate interest. Another thing about me is that I am extremely malible, I can be molded into whatever individual my group wants me to be. Unlike a chameleon which simply blends in, Malliblity is more of actually changing. Or it could just be I am extremely shallow.

 

I rely on other people to think for me, which makes me easily controlable.

I focus my thinking of very specialized topics, this way it produces the highest efficiency of thought.

 

 

Am I a good public speaker? Not exactly, but I can/am aggressive and dominant when speaking about important matters, can be opinated, and very argumentative, but that didn't stop Bush.

 

I am a white male, who is 6'7 feet tall, and statistically the taller candidate has the advantage. I am also a fundamentalist Christian who was raised by an Episicipal priest. Disadvantage is that I am diagnosed bipolar and with Asperger's syndrome(didn't stop Hitler!).

 

Do I scare children? Children have one of three reactions to me, intense and utter fear(I have a very masculine face, this the first response I get), protectionist adoration, or once I get to know them a strong connection to me(I am just good with kids I guess).

 

My ethics are extremely flexible, due to the medication I am on. I usually have a hyperactive sense of right and wrong, but along with abolishing mood swings, my medication seems to remove that as well. If I need to decrease my ethics more, I can just take more medication and or, use 5-HTP.

 

Could I woo the voters? Yes, I'd tell them what they wanted to hear, and figure out a way to get them what they want. I can be very convincing.

 

Can I cater to partisian interest? If the partisians have money for me to get re-elected then my ears are open, and if they are willing to do what is in the common good's interest.

 

Would you run a smear campaign against your competitor? You betcha! I would dig up every piece of dirt that my competitor

 

 

My Ideas for Policies-

 

Hypothetically the energy issue shouldn't be an issue if the device that I am interested in building works, and if it works, then we will never have to worry about an energy problem ever again. If I solved that problem that would automatically get me votes. Also, I would have a fantastic amount of wealth that I could draw on to let me when.

 

Neural regeneration- I would try and get it FDA approved, so that everyone could have access to altering their brain for performance enhancement, and to repair people's brains. I couldn't run unless I developed this completely(which I have, I am only lacking reagents now, and in fact, it may be possible to induce complete regeneration without the reagent that I am lacking, but I am still not sure, and I will have to try and get the reagent this summer), if I solved this problem, I would automatically get 75% of the old people's vote.

 

 

 

In order to eliminate the drug problem within the United States, I think the U.S should legalize illegal drugs to drug abusers only, this way we could control the damage and make all the money, meanwhile hurting terrorist in the process, and make a mandatory innoculation of everyone against drugs so no one will ever get hooked on drugs again. This may or may not hurt my conservative basis.

 

I would want to do research on the use of prenatal steroids such as progesterone, which in studies, have been shown to drastically improve people's cognitive abilities, their emotional stability, their IQ(by 30 points) and the rate at which they enter universities(7 times). I believe manipulation of progesterone and melatonin could make our offspring have an infinitely high degree of intelligence, which would eliminate most of our educational problems, meanwhile I believe that if we don't do this, it makes it where the people with genetic advantages will dominate and subjugate all of the other members of society. This may or may not hurt my conservative base, I know that it offends liberals. I would also like to do experiments with epigenetics in humans, to make people super intelligent by simply giving out free vitamins and supplements at birth.

 

I would want for education, to use acetylcholine agonist huperzine serrata, which would be given as freely as adderal to kids, in order that their memories would be super great. This would allow our students to learn at rapid rates, and because of their rapid learning, it would make them not need as much class time to learn basic subjects, which would in turn translate to increased educational performance, and decreased educational cost. I would also have all the kids in school take omega 3 fatty acids, which have been proven in a study done in England in twelve schools in Durham county that it drastically improves the performance of most students, and mainly the students with a high neural metabolism. It has been shown to have a neurotrophic influence on the brain, and to assist in brain development. I believe also giving students vitamins would drastically improve their performance.

 

 

I am sure I could get money from the supplement companies for this.

I would have children development/education occur at an earlier age, this would in turn increase their general intelligence. I would want to do this during their critical months of neurological development. I would also have problem solving and logic skills added to the list of academic curriculum. I feel that in this next century, we should have our creative engineering type problem solving heavily developed, for our economy is moving towards being an innovation based economy, as all the meanile task, and many of the left brained task are being sent overseas, or are being automated.

 

Creative innovative engineering type problem solving is something that is not heavily developed in schools.

 

When it comes to university education, something which has been proposed, is setting up skill sets. Essentially, instead of having a degree(which requires a general competence), I would have colleges and universities give out bare minimum degrees, which just include the skills necessary to do something, rather than a bunch of extra skills are aren't necessary(like foreign languages). Alot of times, the universities or colleges essentially want people to have a certain level of general education, but general education isn't always necessary, or even good. If you have an engineer who can speak foreign languages fluently, but is poor at engineering, you've got yourself a real problem. If you have an engineer, who is poor at languages, but does a spectactular job at engineering, then you've got yourself a good situation. In the situations that might require someone to be good at something that does not relate to their specialty, they may or may not be hired by a corporation based on that. Which means the marketplace decides which is the best decision, rather than having some arbitrary standard which has to be met because colleges want to have a good reputation.

 

I would also remove alot of this testing bias crap. I would make it where you can get graded on projects that you develop, rather than on how well you can manipulate words.

 

In my fiscal/monetary policy, I would strongly push for giving income credits to everyone(rich or poor) who has a family, depending on the number of kids, this way I could appeal to both conservatives and to mainly women voters, because this way, even if someone decides to go to work, and they are still on welfare, they can. However, the only way to prevent outright abuse of this system would be to give everyone an equal opportunity to this kind of welfare, which would in turn make the middle class very happy.

 

This would cost alot, and would mean that taxes would have to be raised, but it would get a huge number of women voters to vote for me.

 

I would have decreased government spending in the form of cutting public services(which would piss off the democrats a whole lot, but I am running on a conservative platform).

 

The main influx of cash into the economy would be through the Fed, and essentially the Fed would lower the discount rate drastically, and the reserve rate, which would in turn increase money available for investment, which would in turn greatly improve the aggregate supply, so that there wouldn't be a huge amount of inflation, yet the total amount of money would increase.

 

I would help pay the cost of importing raw materials(this would garner to the large oil companies, and many manufacturing companies) and increase the tarrifs on importing manufactured goods

I would also like to loosen up FDA restrictions. This would make a few mega corporations angry(drug companies tend to payout democratic), but it would garner support from smaller, more innovative drug companies, and it would allow if neural regeneration worked, it to be on the market for everyone. Also the use of gene upregulators, and gene downregulators, is far more effective, safe, and just better in the long run than chemo therapy, however we still use chemo. If you don't believe me, look up valproic acid in pubmed, and in many of the articles you'll find out how it kills brain cancer.

 

On the environment, I would generally stay away from the issue of the environment, because I would be unbelievably lax when it comes to regulations(because my backers are lax), but I would want to create the "gene library", a library containing the genetic information of every living species on the planet. I would also have the "planting project", which would be to plant a huge number of fruit producing trees and plants which are favorable to humans on natural lands. This would increase our potential food supply in case of war or invasion. It would also probably attract hobos from the city to want to live on the natural lands, instead of using public resources. Other than that, I would avoid the subject.

 

Foreign policy- I would be pro-military when it served our geopolitical interest, such as taking over foreign oil reserves, or knocking off a dictator we don't like and replacing him with another.

 

The countries which cause us problems(Iran, Syria and what not) I would finance Russian terrorist to literally terrorize them til their countries were so destabilized that we wouldn't have to worry about any form of threat from them. I would also go on a massive counterfeiting spree and counterfiet hundreds of billions of their dollars, til their money was worthless and their people furious.

 

With North Korea I would plant a virus which would kill millions of people. The virus, being lethal, would cause China to close it's borders with North Korea. China is North Korea's main supply line for food, without it, North Korea would probably starve. The only reason they continue to develop nuclear weapons is because China allows them to, and the reason China is helping them is so they can use them as a bargaining chip with the United States for trade policies. China would have to close it's border, lest it become infected with the virus, and possibly cause a widespread epidemic which could and if got loose probably would kill hundreds of millions of Chinese. Then I would blame it on the North Koreans trying to develop biological weapons, and use it as a justification for war.

 

 

 

 

I would be a fabulous politician, so long as

 

1) I developed neural regeneration, otherwise I wouldn't be competent

2) I eliminated all history of my insanity and my crazy plans

3) I develop the energy technology I was talking about, that would make me both an automatic hero, and unbelievably wealthy.

 

Neural regeneration I am sure about, and that's a matter of time, the energy technology I am 90% sure about, but that I have to see if it would work or not.

[PhDP]

If I was an American (Maybe I will be someday), I would maybe give my vote to In My Memory, but I'm not sure, I'm mostly voting for efficience, redistribution, environment, education. And I don't like the pro-gun ownership. I've never touched a real gun, don't know anybody who has a gun... and that's a good thing, vive le québec...

 

And on politicalcompass.org I got -7,38 Eco./ -5,38 Soc., I'm an atheist, worst, a student in evolutionary biology and maths, and I speak French so I'm not electable.

 

raise Taxes on gas

 

Good idea and I'm sure people will like it (BTW It's incredibly how cheap gas is in the U.S.)

 

With North Korea I would plant a virus which would kill millions of people.

 

haaaa, now I see cleary your christian side

[el bastardo]

Funny you should mention this. I really shouldn't be saying this so soon but I guess it's time I spilled the beans.

I've been the "Leader of the Whole Dadgum World" since the end of March. Since then I've come up with a few laws:

1. All elections can only be won by 99% unanamous decision. If I should ever lose an election, my wife (she helped think of this one) has total veto power to override any future laws made by future "Leaders of the Whole Dadgum World".

2. All persons who do not vote in an election have their default vote go to the encumbant. (that's me)

4. My main function (and only one up to now) is to double your net salary.

5. We also build houses designed to last 1000 years and finance them for 500 years interest free. The first one goes to the oldest person living... then the next oldest and so on.

 

There have been 23 elections to date. I always win by at least a 99% margin.

I'll tell you later where to send your income tax returns (to get your salary doubled)

Hey... no foolin'...

 

Kiss the baby for me,

e.b.

[Guest BlakeRocks]

Ok here's my platform.

 

Drug Law reform:

No more congressional hearings on drug use by athletes, that is a private matter between the players and team owners.

No more War on Drugs with the money diverted into hospital registration and compensation programs helping addicts to work and succeed with a law enforcement contingent around for out of control patients.

Hemp and Cannabis would be legal and taxable helping pay down our national debt.

 

Bio-mass fuel convertion:

An incentive to companies to find cheap ways to convert modern vehicle for bio-mass fuels if needed, and start tax funded fuel stations with free fueling with a valid taxpayer ID. The payments would be determined by mileage and upkeep of the vehicle through a service station checkup or certified tech every 3 -9 months.

 

War/pentagon reform:

The military would be under strict compliance with law meaning even if the president orders something, the pentagon can petition without reprise to stop an unjust action by an independent source being anyone in the upper ranks of government or military. The choices of war and allies would be more carefully considered than the current administration as well.

 

Free market reform:

Laws and tarrifs would be lifted by the enacting of the Hemp trade and food goods trade on an international scale. helping poor countries with militarily defended deliveries to get food in. Incetives for foreign civil wars to end.

 

Infighting reduction through policies and people who are understanding and not out for media attention but there to do there jobs.

 

More laws against cults and religions that have NO historical validation based on an independent board with religions that are proven to be valid through ages of scrutiny meaning: Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and rastafarianism, I may have missed other "peaceful" religions, this will crackdown on the david careshes of the world who are just out for power, money, and all other illegal activity under a guise of religion. This will have stop gap measures so the board doesn't get out of control.

 

Bush has one good idea about the small business incentives, this would be continued.

 

Social security would be taken care of through reform and not privitization. I cannot comment on that now though.

 

The above will reduce crime and promote growth over the next decade if enacted soon. Otherwise stay with bush and be doomed to his ignorance of you and love for the fascist corporation owners.

[-Demosthenes-]

The conservative in me screams against all the socialist ideas I see. Althought I am a little liberal compared to others where I live, I can's go back on the fundimentals. I can understand helping the poor and I'm all for that, but some stuff is just crazy.

 

Another thing, whats this with the UN? I don't know why the UN has so much power over our country now, I can't understand giving it more. I would never support anything that gives some foreign entity power over my country.

[reverse]

Hang on a second,

I'm not signing up until someone tells me what the pay and hours are like.

 

I'm just going to be a figurehead right...

Smile and wave... forget my lines...laugh at inappropriate moments. Sure...I can do that!

 

Do I get a body double for public assassinations and the like?

can I borrow him for practical jokes?

 

And I don't want that grey jet...(I hate grey)...

it's a blue jet or the deal is off.

 

As for my policies...I will just let the usual people make all the important decisions from their entrenched positions.

[atinymonkey]

Another thing' date=' whats this with the UN? I don't know why the UN has so much power over [i']our[/i] country now, I can't understand giving it more. I would never support anything that gives some foreign entity power over my country.

 

So, what you are saying is that you don't understand the UN's position in preventing War? Nobody taught you about the 1st and 2nd World War, and you have no concept of methods of prevention put in place?

 

Perhaps you aught to start a thread to ask what the purpose of the UN is, rather than assuming you don't need it.

[Dak]

Another thing, whats this with the UN? I don't know why the UN has so much power over our country now, I can't understand giving it more. I would never support anything that gives some foreign entity power over my country.

I'll never understand why americans, whos country is made up of states who have yielded some of their individual power to create a co-operative unity with (in certain areas) power over every member state (and for the good of every member state) have so much difficulty conscieving of organisations made up of contries who have yielded some of their individual power to create a co-operative unity with (in certain areas) power over every member contry (and for the good of every member contry)

 

also, because america is part of the un, and has a say in un matters, the un isnt technically a foreighn entity to america -- atleast anymore than the us is a foreighn entity to the state of mississippi, what with mississippi having a say in us matters, just one voice amongst many yes but still a voice.

[YT2095]

Are you electable?

 

Probably

[reverse]

Funny you should mention this. I really shouldn't be saying this so soon but I guess it's time I spilled the beans.

e.b.

 

Oh so it's you.

 

look, I want to complain.

 

There are too many advertisements on TV, can you do something about that please.

 

Also people seem to be totally distracted by acquiring more and more material possessions.

it's chewing up a great deal of oil.

and computers, they are being used by children for entertainment rather than education...can you make the little monsters play outside with dirt or something.

 

S.P.Q.R.

[-Demosthenes-]

So, what you are saying is that you don't understand the UN's position in preventing War? Nobody taught you about the 1st and 2nd World War, and you have no concept of methods of prevention put in place?

I hate it when people assume. I didn't say that the UN should be abolished or anything, I just don't want to give it any power.

Perhaps you aught to start a thread to ask what the purpose of the UN is, rather than assuming you don't need it.

When did I say that we didn't need it? I don't fit into any of your stereotypes buddy, I'm far from some "Christain Conservative" even though I am Christian and conservative.

I'll never understand why americans, whos country is made up of states who have yielded some of their individual power to create a co-operative unity with (in certain areas) power over every member state (and for the good of every member state) have so much difficulty conscieving of organisations made up of contries who have yielded some of their individual power to create a co-operative unity with (in certain areas) power over every member contry (and for the good of every member contry)

Would you be surprised that an American, someone with the heritage of the American Revolution where we fought and repelled the largest world power just so we could govern ourselves. I will not give that up, I will not suck up to some frick UN. Dude, I don't want to be governed someone else, I'm live in the USA, I will be governed by my elected leaders and not by the rest of the world.

 

We can make agreements, but I won't for a minute expect that some organization that I don't elect to have power over my country.

[atinymonkey]

Although I don't respect or agree with your position, based as it is on misplaced patriotic idiocy, it's a discussion for a separate thread.

[reverse]

Hey don’t underestimate the value of misplaced patriotic idiocy, it keeps the taxes rolling in form those 52 states.....

[In My Memory]

Demosthenes,

 

Dude, I don't want to be governed someone else, I'm live in the USA, I will be governed by my elected leaders and not by the rest of the world.

The multilateralist in me is banging against the wall

 

Almost all of the international institutions, such as the United Nations, originated in the US, because the institutions do much much more to amplify US influence and power abroad than US unilateralism could ever accomplish.

 

Unilateralism is chaotic and unstable. And the other alternative, US isolationism, is absurd - two world wars, dependence on international trade, and militaristic initiatives on foreign soil put the US squarely in the center of the "world stage" and as a functioning cog of the international machine. The UN is just part of the evolution of foreign policy, its meant to enhance America's role as a global stabilizer, not impede it.

[-Demosthenes-]

And the other alternative, US isolationism, is absurd

The only alternative? So if I don't support giving more power to the UN, then I support isolationism?? Yeah, I don't think I quite agree with that.

[In My Memory]

Demosthenes,

 

The only alternative? So if I don't support giving more power to the UN, then I support isolationism?? Yeah, I don't think I quite agree with that.

I dont remember saying quite all of that.

 

*sweeps burned straw away*

[Hellbender]

Electable?

 

Pros:

White

Straight

Attractive

 

Cons:

Athiest

Too smart

Green Party supporter

Honest (means a lot more than it seems)

Anti-fundie

Drinks

Supprts science too much (most people don't give a damn about science)

 

Yeah my chances are slim to no f-ing way.

[-Demosthenes-]

The UN is just part of the evolution of foreign policy, its meant to enhance America's role as a global stabilizer, not impede it.

It will enhance the U.S.'s influence in the world only if other countries share it's view. There's nothing wrong with working together, but he UN is overly buearucratic and doesn't enforce anything anyways.

All I'm saying is that they shouldn't have power over the U.S.

[atinymonkey]

It will enhance the U.S.'s influence in the world only if other countries share it's view. There's nothing wrong with working together' date=' but he UN is overly buearucratic and doesn't enforce anything anyways.

All I'm saying is that they shouldn't have power over the U.S.[/quote']

No, all you are doing is exposing your gross ignorance and nationalist propaganda. If you want to spit in the face of democracy, fine, but I rather suspect you'd have a different opinion of the UN if you understood what its function is. Your opinion is based on pride, not rationality or understanding.

 

No country, no matter what state they are in, should have independent power. Every country must be answerable for it's actions. If 9/11 was anything, it was a reminder that America cannot have an isolationist policy.