|
|
On April 21 2012 14:32 CajunMan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 13:44 CaucasianAsian wrote:
??????/
The Philippines are a sovereign nation We did own the Philippines from the 1800s till the 1940s and we still own Guam. Close enough lol its 1:30 am.
We don't "own" Guam. It's a territory of the United States with it's own democratically elected government and representation in the US Congress. If they wanted independence, it's unlikely that the US government would stop them; though it's equally unlikely that they would choose that option. They pay no federal taxes of any kind and in return get defense from the world's strongest military, US financial aid, and ties to the world's largest economy. In short: the world's sweetest deal ever.
|
On April 21 2012 14:46 TheToast wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 14:32 CajunMan wrote:On April 21 2012 13:44 CaucasianAsian wrote:
??????/
The Philippines are a sovereign nation We did own the Philippines from the 1800s till the 1940s and we still own Guam. Close enough lol its 1:30 am. We don't "own" Guam. It's a territory of the United States with it's own democratically elected government and representation in the US Congress. If they wanted independence, it's unlikely that the US government would stop them; though it's equally unlikely that they would choose that option. They pay no federal taxes of any kind and in return get defense from the world's strongest military, US financial aid, and ties to the world's largest economy. In short: the world's sweetest deal ever.
I don't think Guam has reps in the U.S. congress. Porte Rico is also a territory and they do not have reps either.
They do not get to vote in exchange for not paying taxes is the deal they have made. Other then that they are a U.S. Territory and can become a state at any time.
|
In 2008 independents voted for Obama because they were disgusted with the republicans, That support helped him win states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida. In 2010 however, all three of those states elected republican governors and senators with the help from that same independent vote.
I am of the opinion that many Americans voted for Obama because they felt guilty and a little embarrassed about the Bush administration. That same sentiment wont exist this time around.
The world favoring Obama had some influence in 2008, but it will have ZERO impact this time around imo. In fact i think it could actually hurt Obama, simply because Americans are proud like that, and that pride was missing in 2008. The novelty of Obama has worn off, people see him for who he truly is, and he is in more trouble than people think imo.
|
In my life, I've gone from social conservative to plain conservative to libertarian. I've clearly never even really thought that I'd ever vote for a democrat, but this election is such a mess that I have no idea what I'm going to end up doing. What's Romney going to do? I have no clue. Not even a clue of a clue. I think the man is so desperate to become President that he has no idea of what he'd do once he got in office. What's Obama going to do? I have no fucking clue. The only things he's really done is pass the new health-care law and the Wall St. regulating bill, as well as the buck. I had high hopes he would bring some new freedoms to our personal lives, but the only thing he's done even remotely like that was saying that he would not pass SOPA. I really wish I could vote for someone else, but the only people who would even think about running against them would be even more crazy. TT
|
On April 21 2012 11:50 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 11:40 CajunMan wrote:On April 21 2012 11:03 Silidons wrote:
For me, the second an Atheist person runs for President they will likely insta-get my vote. Kind of shitty having 0% representation in gov't. The problem with that is only about 8% of the US don't believe in a god of some kid and even more believe in other stuff (voodoo, etc) So really your stuck in the same boat as a lot of people I wish there was a viable Libertarian and fiscal conservative but it ain't gonna happen. I'm trying to find the article that was posted a couple of days ago about Atheism is risisng in the U.S. faster than those being converted. Show nested quote +This group, sometimes collectively labeled the "Nones," is growing faster than any religious faith in the U.S. About two thirds of Nones say they are former believers; 24 percent are lapsed Catholics and 29 percent once identified with other Christian denominations. Show nested quote +If growth continues at the current rate, one in four Americans will profess no religious faith within 20 years. Silverman hopes that as nonbelief spreads, atheists can become a "legitimate political segment of the American population," afforded the same protections as religious groups and ethnic minorities. But he's not advocating a complete secular takeover of the U.S. — nor would he be likely to achieve one, given the abiding religious faith of most Americans. SourceEDIT: Found it.
Someone please correct me if I am wrong because it is late, but isn't one of the indicators that the end of the world is imminent when a non-believer is elected into office? Seems like the religious right is already armed against an atheist president if their holy book tells them that it will signal the end of the world. I may be wrong, it is late and I am tired.
|
On April 21 2012 16:40 Vessel wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 11:50 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On April 21 2012 11:40 CajunMan wrote:On April 21 2012 11:03 Silidons wrote:
For me, the second an Atheist person runs for President they will likely insta-get my vote. Kind of shitty having 0% representation in gov't. The problem with that is only about 8% of the US don't believe in a god of some kid and even more believe in other stuff (voodoo, etc) So really your stuck in the same boat as a lot of people I wish there was a viable Libertarian and fiscal conservative but it ain't gonna happen. I'm trying to find the article that was posted a couple of days ago about Atheism is risisng in the U.S. faster than those being converted. This group, sometimes collectively labeled the "Nones," is growing faster than any religious faith in the U.S. About two thirds of Nones say they are former believers; 24 percent are lapsed Catholics and 29 percent once identified with other Christian denominations. If growth continues at the current rate, one in four Americans will profess no religious faith within 20 years. Silverman hopes that as nonbelief spreads, atheists can become a "legitimate political segment of the American population," afforded the same protections as religious groups and ethnic minorities. But he's not advocating a complete secular takeover of the U.S. — nor would he be likely to achieve one, given the abiding religious faith of most Americans. SourceEDIT: Found it. Someone please correct me if I am wrong because it is late, but isn't one of the indicators that the end of the world is imminent when a non-believer is elected into office? Seems like the religious right is already armed against an atheist president if their holy book tells them that it will signal the end of the world. I may be wrong, it is late and I am tired.
I would think that if an Atheist President was elected the majority of the country would be secular, nonbeliever etc. and rightfully view those that aren't as nut jobs.
|
On April 21 2012 16:43 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 16:40 Vessel wrote:On April 21 2012 11:50 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On April 21 2012 11:40 CajunMan wrote:On April 21 2012 11:03 Silidons wrote:
For me, the second an Atheist person runs for President they will likely insta-get my vote. Kind of shitty having 0% representation in gov't. The problem with that is only about 8% of the US don't believe in a god of some kid and even more believe in other stuff (voodoo, etc) So really your stuck in the same boat as a lot of people I wish there was a viable Libertarian and fiscal conservative but it ain't gonna happen. I'm trying to find the article that was posted a couple of days ago about Atheism is risisng in the U.S. faster than those being converted. This group, sometimes collectively labeled the "Nones," is growing faster than any religious faith in the U.S. About two thirds of Nones say they are former believers; 24 percent are lapsed Catholics and 29 percent once identified with other Christian denominations. If growth continues at the current rate, one in four Americans will profess no religious faith within 20 years. Silverman hopes that as nonbelief spreads, atheists can become a "legitimate political segment of the American population," afforded the same protections as religious groups and ethnic minorities. But he's not advocating a complete secular takeover of the U.S. — nor would he be likely to achieve one, given the abiding religious faith of most Americans. SourceEDIT: Found it. Someone please correct me if I am wrong because it is late, but isn't one of the indicators that the end of the world is imminent when a non-believer is elected into office? Seems like the religious right is already armed against an atheist president if their holy book tells them that it will signal the end of the world. I may be wrong, it is late and I am tired. I would think that if an Atheist President was elected the majority of the country would be secular, nonbeliever etc. and rightfully view those that aren't as nut jobs.
I suppose that is true, either way, does not look likely in our lifetime 
|
On April 21 2012 16:19 daylu wrote:
In 2008 independents voted for Obama because they were disgusted with the republicans, That support helped him win states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida. In 2010 however, all three of those states elected republican governors and senators with the help from that same independent vote.
I am of the opinion that many Americans voted for Obama because they felt guilty and a little embarrassed about the Bush administration. That same sentiment wont exist this time around.
The world favoring Obama had some influence in 2008, but it will have ZERO impact this time around imo. In fact i think it could actually hurt Obama, simply because Americans are proud like that, and that pride was missing in 2008. The novelty of Obama has worn off, people see him for who he truly is, and he is in more trouble than people think imo.
Still better than Romney and I will vote for him regardless. Thats all that really matters isn't it? Who you think is going to do a better job and represent what you believe in. To me that answer is 100% without a thought Obama.
|
On April 21 2012 07:52 Voltaire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2012 20:34 Papulatus wrote:On April 20 2012 18:54 Voltaire wrote:On April 20 2012 18:47 Velr wrote:On April 20 2012 15:02 Rossen wrote:Wait why is everyone who isent from America wanting Obama to win ? Cant handle someone who isent a socialist ? omg.  . I know he will win, but I'd still vote for Romney if I could. (We dont need american to become as socialistic as EU.) T_T Every 7th american gets food stamps allready... So as it seems theire actually quite socialist  .. But don't tell em, else they might stop lieing to themselevs and start to restructure their welfare system.... ... ... . I'm jealous of you. In my opinion, Switzerland is the best country in Europe. No EU, high standard of living, democracy, freedom, neutrality, etc. I think the US government should definitely try to learn from Switzerland. If you were to take a moment to compare the size and scope of the United States to Switzerland, you would realize just how absurd this statement is. I'm aware of the vast difference in territory. I still think my statement stands, though. I never said the US should copy everything Switzerland does, just that it could learn a few things. Especially things like neutrality.
With this I agree wholeheartedly. For some strange reason, the swiss system works really well; and while the point in difference of size is still true, I don't advocate copying everything. Maybe just having more than 2 relevant parties (switzerland has, I believe, 8 relevant parties in the equivalent of the house of representatives)
On April 21 2012 08:02 Papulatus wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 07:45 Zoesan wrote:
I could never vote for someone batshit crazy enough to be a mormon. If you're that dumb, you sure as hell aren't fit to run a country. And yet I'm sure you advocate not judging minorities. Anyone who is dumb enough to form an opinion based on someones personal beliefs is sure as hell not fit to post in this thread.
Really am I?
Ok, the way I put it was unsensitive, but have you ever read what mormons believe? I don't mind mild religiosity, or not much, but mormonism is more of a sect than anything else. And yes I do judge on personal beliefs, because often they are, to a certain extent, highly relevant to a persons personality. Could you vote for an islamic extremist? I couldn't.
I get the belief, that there's "something there", but the belief in a god that actually has influence on the world or the belief in a ancient book (and the book of mormon) for me is a dealbreaker, because it makes me seriously doubt that persons ability to think logically.
|
|
|
On April 21 2012 16:19 daylu wrote:
In 2008 independents voted for Obama because they were disgusted with the republicans, That support helped him win states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida. In 2010 however, all three of those states elected republican governors and senators with the help from that same independent vote.
I am of the opinion that many Americans voted for Obama because they felt guilty and a little embarrassed about the Bush administration. That same sentiment wont exist this time around.
The world favoring Obama had some influence in 2008, but it will have ZERO impact this time around imo. In fact i think it could actually hurt Obama, simply because Americans are proud like that, and that pride was missing in 2008. The novelty of Obama has worn off, people see him for who he truly is, and he is in more trouble than people think imo.
And now we have batshit crazy Republican governors.
While the illusion of "hope" has faded, we're still left with a President that has handled himself alright. Beyond some stuff regarding Guantanamo, he hasn't done much to win the ire of the people. In America, that's what 2nd term elections are about, did you screw up REALLY badly and does everybody know. Without some scandal, or the economy collapsing again, Obama will win a 2nd term because that's how incumbency works. Kinda like the 2nd place guy in the GOP nomination becomes the nominee next time.
|
On April 21 2012 18:19 GT3 wrote:
Ron Paul
thats original. thank you.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On April 21 2012 17:26 Zoesan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 07:52 Voltaire wrote:On April 20 2012 20:34 Papulatus wrote:On April 20 2012 18:54 Voltaire wrote:On April 20 2012 18:47 Velr wrote:On April 20 2012 15:02 Rossen wrote:Wait why is everyone who isent from America wanting Obama to win ? Cant handle someone who isent a socialist ? omg. . I know he will win, but I'd still vote for Romney if I could. (We dont need american to become as socialistic as EU.) T_T Every 7th american gets food stamps allready... So as it seems theire actually quite socialist .. But don't tell em, else they might stop lieing to themselevs and start to restructure their welfare system.... ... ... . I'm jealous of you. In my opinion, Switzerland is the best country in Europe. No EU, high standard of living, democracy, freedom, neutrality, etc. I think the US government should definitely try to learn from Switzerland. If you were to take a moment to compare the size and scope of the United States to Switzerland, you would realize just how absurd this statement is. I'm aware of the vast difference in territory. I still think my statement stands, though. I never said the US should copy everything Switzerland does, just that it could learn a few things. Especially things like neutrality. With this I agree wholeheartedly. For some strange reason, the swiss system works really well; and while the point in difference of size is still true, I don't advocate copying everything. Maybe just having more than 2 relevant parties (switzerland has, I believe, 8 relevant parties in the equivalent of the house of representatives) Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 08:02 Papulatus wrote:On April 21 2012 07:45 Zoesan wrote:
I could never vote for someone batshit crazy enough to be a mormon. If you're that dumb, you sure as hell aren't fit to run a country. And yet I'm sure you advocate not judging minorities. Anyone who is dumb enough to form an opinion based on someones personal beliefs is sure as hell not fit to post in this thread. Really am I? Ok, the way I put it was unsensitive, but have you ever read what mormons believe? I don't mind mild religiosity, or not much, but mormonism is more of a sect than anything else. And yes I do judge on personal beliefs, because often they are, to a certain extent, highly relevant to a persons personality. Could you vote for an islamic extremist? I couldn't. I get the belief, that there's "something there", but the belief in a god that actually has influence on the world or the belief in a ancient book (and the book of mormon) for me is a dealbreaker, because it makes me seriously doubt that persons ability to think logically. romney doesn't believe in mormonism. if you take away anything from the mormon idea it is that he is bound by clan/social loyalties, whcih is what holds mormonism togehter.
|
That's why he was a pastor for years.
|
On April 21 2012 21:05 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 17:26 Zoesan wrote:On April 21 2012 07:52 Voltaire wrote:On April 20 2012 20:34 Papulatus wrote:On April 20 2012 18:54 Voltaire wrote:On April 20 2012 18:47 Velr wrote:On April 20 2012 15:02 Rossen wrote:Wait why is everyone who isent from America wanting Obama to win ? Cant handle someone who isent a socialist ? omg. . I know he will win, but I'd still vote for Romney if I could. (We dont need american to become as socialistic as EU.) T_T Every 7th american gets food stamps allready... So as it seems theire actually quite socialist .. But don't tell em, else they might stop lieing to themselevs and start to restructure their welfare system.... ... ... . I'm jealous of you. In my opinion, Switzerland is the best country in Europe. No EU, high standard of living, democracy, freedom, neutrality, etc. I think the US government should definitely try to learn from Switzerland. If you were to take a moment to compare the size and scope of the United States to Switzerland, you would realize just how absurd this statement is. I'm aware of the vast difference in territory. I still think my statement stands, though. I never said the US should copy everything Switzerland does, just that it could learn a few things. Especially things like neutrality. With this I agree wholeheartedly. For some strange reason, the swiss system works really well; and while the point in difference of size is still true, I don't advocate copying everything. Maybe just having more than 2 relevant parties (switzerland has, I believe, 8 relevant parties in the equivalent of the house of representatives) On April 21 2012 08:02 Papulatus wrote:On April 21 2012 07:45 Zoesan wrote:
I could never vote for someone batshit crazy enough to be a mormon. If you're that dumb, you sure as hell aren't fit to run a country. And yet I'm sure you advocate not judging minorities. Anyone who is dumb enough to form an opinion based on someones personal beliefs is sure as hell not fit to post in this thread. Really am I? Ok, the way I put it was unsensitive, but have you ever read what mormons believe? I don't mind mild religiosity, or not much, but mormonism is more of a sect than anything else. And yes I do judge on personal beliefs, because often they are, to a certain extent, highly relevant to a persons personality. Could you vote for an islamic extremist? I couldn't. I get the belief, that there's "something there", but the belief in a god that actually has influence on the world or the belief in a ancient book (and the book of mormon) for me is a dealbreaker, because it makes me seriously doubt that persons ability to think logically. romney doesn't believe in mormonism. if you take away anything from the mormon idea it is that he is bound by clan/social loyalties, whcih is what holds mormonism togehter.
1- He was a bishop for several years, which means he presides and is the religious authority figure for about 3-400 people for that time.
2- As a practicing mormon, he has paid tithing (10% of his gross income) to the church for his entire life.
3- He, his wife, and his children were all baptized in the church.
4- If you're going to say something stupid like 'he doesn't believe in mormonism' please back it up with some sort of evidence.
|
I vote Dr. Ron Paul, im suprised with us all on the internet it should be really easy for everyone to do a lil research and see that he is the best candidate. Oh yeah, and get off some of those mainstream websites  you might have heard of the black out of ron paul. plus he has some of the most amazing youtube vids lol.
www.dailypaul.com
|
Ron Paul is irrelevant at this stage.
|
On April 21 2012 16:43 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +On April 21 2012 16:40 Vessel wrote:On April 21 2012 11:50 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On April 21 2012 11:40 CajunMan wrote:On April 21 2012 11:03 Silidons wrote:
For me, the second an Atheist person runs for President they will likely insta-get my vote. Kind of shitty having 0% representation in gov't. The problem with that is only about 8% of the US don't believe in a god of some kid and even more believe in other stuff (voodoo, etc) So really your stuck in the same boat as a lot of people I wish there was a viable Libertarian and fiscal conservative but it ain't gonna happen. I'm trying to find the article that was posted a couple of days ago about Atheism is risisng in the U.S. faster than those being converted. This group, sometimes collectively labeled the "Nones," is growing faster than any religious faith in the U.S. About two thirds of Nones say they are former believers; 24 percent are lapsed Catholics and 29 percent once identified with other Christian denominations. If growth continues at the current rate, one in four Americans will profess no religious faith within 20 years. Silverman hopes that as nonbelief spreads, atheists can become a "legitimate political segment of the American population," afforded the same protections as religious groups and ethnic minorities. But he's not advocating a complete secular takeover of the U.S. — nor would he be likely to achieve one, given the abiding religious faith of most Americans. SourceEDIT: Found it. Someone please correct me if I am wrong because it is late, but isn't one of the indicators that the end of the world is imminent when a non-believer is elected into office? Seems like the religious right is already armed against an atheist president if their holy book tells them that it will signal the end of the world. I may be wrong, it is late and I am tired. I would think that if an Atheist President was elected the majority of the country would be secular, nonbeliever etc. and rightfully view those that aren't as nut jobs.
So everyone who is religious is a nutjob? Nice.
|
Teamliquid is home to 90% of all Ron Paul support apparently, considering he never even registered in real voting.
|
@xDaunt: I regard most people that firmly believe in something with no scientific evidence at all to be somewhat questionable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
