Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Obama vs Romney 2012 - CDC Election


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
2022 replies to this topic

Poll: Obama vs Romney (329 member(s) have cast votes)

Who would you vote for?

  1. Obama (279 votes [85.32%])

    Percentage of vote: 85.32%

  2. Romney (48 votes [14.68%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.68%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#931 aeromotacanucks

aeromotacanucks

    Real Person

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,098 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 07:43 PM

this is what I think. I´m not american but I lived in Canada and in USA for a while...

ok. USA is really developed, but they talk about "clean energy" and they use powerplants burnig oil/gas/coal to produce energy instead use the river to produce energy (hydroelectric plant), they can use the wind and solar energy too and they have money and tecnology to do it and working perfect. so what´s the obstacle to do it?

another thing. they complain about the gas price but they don´t try use Etanol, in USA you can produce it from corn (Brazil produces from sugar cane) and the octane is better than the gasoline. if they have some alternative for this they would be able to choose, if the gas is expensive, use etanol or even the natural gas. cmom! if here in Brazil we have flex fuel cars (Hybrid cars) since 1970s and it´s soo cheap and comom that we don´t even care anymore why USA is still use petrol only?

really. USA is extremely advanced. but for my surprise they don´t have cars powered by Etanol! and we have is since 1970! they can use the farms across the country to produce etanol and have a clean and powerful alternative fuel...


3rd. I´m not sure if this wars are getting some real results, ok it wasn´t Obama´s fault but these wars aren´t getting results. Afghanistan and Iraq were 09/11 answers but after Saddam got killed and Bin Laden also killed the problem is still there. What kind of “win” is this? The gas is still expensive, the insecurity is still high, angry muslins still want destroy USA and America used billions in high technology weapons against Soviet junkyard machines. And the terrorist still kill American soldiers? How is that possible?


4th. Would be nice if USA treat better his allies. Really. They send Air Carriers to all seas on this planet, build bases in Colombia, send weapons to Guerrilla groups in Syria, send weapons and money to the new government of Iraq. But when the South America say “no” to NAFTA because we have our MERCOSUL (looks like an European Union of South America) and it´s working well the United States can´t live with something that they don´t control. When Brazil ask them to “reduction of bureaucracy” for tourist visas they say “security reasons” and the White House goes mad when our Federal Police starts say “ok. So USA citizens will need a VISA to come here for anything”.

You know. Sometimes, just sometimes. Would be nice if USA treat his allies as real allies and not as “non dangerous countries”. Cmom! USA require passport for Canadians citizens but in South America an Argentinean can travel around the continent just with his ID. We have our differences with them but since Argentina is our ally we treat them as ally, it means, as a friend…


That´s my point of view…
Shup up and fly! you´re not payed to think, you´re payed to fly!

#932 White Goodman

White Goodman

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 145 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 12

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:08 AM



This is the reason that Bush was voted in. I feel stupider just watch this moron say why she likes Romney.
Posted Image

#933 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,027 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 18 October 2012 - 05:10 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bzvm7zd4Z-s&feature=g-vrec

This is the reason that Bush was voted in. I feel stupider just watch this moron say why she likes Romney.

Don't worry, watching Obama supporters is just as hazardous to brain cells as Romney supporters:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm1KOBMg1Y8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCXot2HQT00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbCiPi69e0A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uyJSXCZRpc

#934 mrawfull

mrawfull

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 107 posts
  • Joined: 13-November 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 07:24 AM

Obama can put on an act but he can't change his record. Moderators can try to help him out by giving him more speaking time, his wife can try to clap in the middle of the debate. But nobody, not even Jimmy Carter, would want to touch his record with a 10 foot pole. He's violated the Constitution numerous times, he is a demagogue, a fraud and a loser and which is why he will be gone come January. Thankfully.

#935 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,009 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 18 October 2012 - 09:21 AM

Obama can put on an act but he can't change his record. Moderators can try to help him out by giving him more speaking time, his wife can try to clap in the middle of the debate. But nobody, not even Jimmy Carter, would want to touch his record with a 10 foot pole. He's violated the Constitution numerous times, he is a demagogue, a fraud and a loser and which is why he will be gone come January. Thankfully.


"Dream on. little broomstick cowboy" .. :lol: .. your logic is as weak as Mitt the Myth's 5-point plan ..

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#936 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,940 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 09:47 AM

If Obama had a House majority, his 'record' might've been better, y'think?

Broken promises. Every president has 'em.

The big one is the Bush tax cuts for the rich. That was promised to be put to an end, but the House Republicans managed to stall enough to get them extended and Obama had to settle for extended unemployment benefits and a 1yr reduction in Soc. Security taxes instead. Hey, nevermind that Bush's Republicans installed them in the first place.

The other one is Guantanamo. Nevermind that Romney wants to double that facility, and nevermind that most Americans want terrorists not on their home soil, but Obama not shutting it down is a broken promise indeed. However, he shuts it down and he's soft on terror but if he keeps it open and he's anti-civil rights. No win situation.


But what of the biggest promise kept? Obamacare. That promise was a political minefield, but he pulled through.

And while Guantanamo is still open, the use of torture in that facility and others is gone. He turned around the Bush's pro-torture rulings and now prisoners are (mostly) treated humanely.

Oh, and the war in Iraq? Yeah that came to an end as well, as promised.


imo If Obama wins this election after installing a polarizing moneysucker like Obamacare during an economic crisis, then wow, Romney stinks. (And he does.)

The Dems must be focusing on gaining a House majority this time so Obama can finally start doing some real work. And this is something that the GOP must fear the most.
Posted Image

#937 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,027 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:27 AM

If Obama had a House majority, his 'record' might've been better, y'think?

Broken promises. Every president has 'em.

The big one is the Bush tax cuts for the rich. That was promised to be put to an end, but the House Republicans managed to stall enough to get them extended and Obama had to settle for extended unemployment benefits and a 1yr reduction in Soc. Security taxes instead. Hey, nevermind that Bush's Republicans installed them in the first place.

The other one is Guantanamo. Nevermind that Romney wants to double that facility, and nevermind that most Americans want terrorists not on their home soil, but Obama not shutting it down is a broken promise indeed. However, he shuts it down and he's soft on terror but if he keeps it open and he's anti-civil rights. No win situation.


But what of the biggest promise kept? Obamacare. That promise was a political minefield, but he pulled through.

And while Guantanamo is still open, the use of torture in that facility and others is gone. He turned around the Bush's pro-torture rulings and now prisoners are (mostly) treated humanely.

Oh, and the war in Iraq? Yeah that came to an end as well, as promised.


imo If Obama wins this election after installing a polarizing moneysucker like Obamacare during an economic crisis, then wow, Romney stinks. (And he does.)

The Dems must be focusing on gaining a House majority this time so Obama can finally start doing some real work. And this is something that the GOP must fear the most.

You forgot Obama's promises as a Senator to ensure people's fourth amendment rights were preserved with the NSA-AT&T spying thing, how much Obama lambasted Bush for this. This is what immediately put me off from him as soon as he supplanted Hillary, suddenly now that his prospects of being President were realistic, he'd continue the Bush policies of spying on Americans and copying all calls and data from AT&T in San Francisco to the NSA without a warrant. Right away I knew this guy was, to a high degree, going to be a Democrat Bush clone, and just like Bush, had more of an interest in protecting unconstitutional ventures and protecting his own authority than upholding the constitution and protecting people's rights and privacy.


Obama can put on an act but he can't change his record. Moderators can try to help him out by giving him more speaking time, his wife can try to clap in the middle of the debate. But nobody, not even Jimmy Carter, would want to touch his record with a 10 foot pole. He's violated the Constitution numerous times, he is a demagogue, a fraud and a loser and which is why he will be gone come January. Thankfully.

Presidents don't need to run on their record anymore. People voted for his personality (or his race) anyways. Successful marketing campaign is successful.

Of course, the populace couldn't tell a sh***y job with Bush, hence re-election, no surprise they can't tell a sh***y job with Obama either.

Edited by zaibatsu, 18 October 2012 - 11:28 AM.


#938 Spitfire_Spiky

Spitfire_Spiky

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 765 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 09

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:35 AM

Bottom line is when (not if because the American media is pushing its population to vote this way) Romney gets elected it will be the beginning of the downward spiral that will ruin the US. Here's hoping the American population can pull there heads out of their arses and think with common sense instead of succumbing to media propaganda and they vote for Obama.
Mess with the Best, Die like the Rest

#939 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,027 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:46 AM

Bottom line is when (not if because the American media is pushing its population to vote this way) Romney gets elected it will be the beginning of the downward spiral that will ruin the US. Here's hoping the American population can pull there heads out of their arses and think with common sense instead of succumbing to media propaganda and they vote for Obama.

+1 for the irony and dramatics. :lol:

#940 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,843 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:13 PM

If Obama had a House majority, his 'record' might've been better, y'think?

Broken promises. Every president has 'em.

The big one is the Bush tax cuts for the rich. That was promised to be put to an end, but the House Republicans managed to stall enough to get them extended and Obama had to settle for extended unemployment benefits and a 1yr reduction in Soc. Security taxes instead. Hey, nevermind that Bush's Republicans installed them in the first place.

The other one is Guantanamo. Nevermind that Romney wants to double that facility, and nevermind that most Americans want terrorists not on their home soil, but Obama not shutting it down is a broken promise indeed. However, he shuts it down and he's soft on terror but if he keeps it open and he's anti-civil rights. No win situation.


But what of the biggest promise kept? Obamacare. That promise was a political minefield, but he pulled through.

And while Guantanamo is still open, the use of torture in that facility and others is gone. He turned around the Bush's pro-torture rulings and now prisoners are (mostly) treated humanely.

Oh, and the war in Iraq? Yeah that came to an end as well, as promised.


imo If Obama wins this election after installing a polarizing moneysucker like Obamacare during an economic crisis, then wow, Romney stinks. (And he does.)

The Dems must be focusing on gaining a House majority this time so Obama can finally start doing some real work. And this is something that the GOP must fear the most.

You do remember that he had a majority in both the House and Senate for the first two years of his presidency. And it is because of the Administration's ineptness and agenda that the people threw our most of the House Democrats, and a hand full of Democrat Senators.

Edited by jmfaminoff, 18 October 2012 - 12:15 PM.


#941 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,843 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:17 PM

Bottom line is when (not if because the American media is pushing its population to vote this way) Romney gets elected it will be the beginning of the downward spiral that will ruin the US. Here's hoping the American population can pull there heads out of their arses and think with common sense instead of succumbing to media propaganda and they vote for Obama.

Are you sure it would be the beginning of a downward spiral? According to Obama, we have been in a downward spiral since 2008. That also means for almost four years, he has been at the helm of the ship. Things are already bad. After three losing seasons, maybe that is why some people want a new captain.

#942 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,843 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:31 PM

Are you kidding me? You think it was unfortunate that she didn't do what both sides want - to allow them to hear the question, give a vague answer, shoot of talking points for the rest of the 2 minutes, and not get challenged on anything? (Except for by the other candidate but they can say hey, it's the other candidate, what do you expect).

Presidential debates are a joke exactly because of the stupid "rules" that they pretend to have the authority to impose. Crowley did a great job. She was fair and unbiased, but she didn't just let them get away with turning the debate into 1.5 hours of campaign ads.

Are you kidding me? You think it was unfortunate that she didn't do what both sides want - to allow them to hear the question, give a vague answer, shoot of talking points for the rest of the 2 minutes, and not get challenged on anything? (Except for by the other candidate but they can say hey, it's the other candidate, what do you expect).

Presidential debates are a joke exactly because of the stupid "rules" that they pretend to have the authority to impose. Crowley did a great job. She was fair and unbiased, but she didn't just let them get away with turning the debate into 1.5 hours of campaign ads.

Two things: 1) A debate is not an interview. If she wanted to interview the candidates, she should have made an appointment. She was supposed to be a moderator, not a reporter or referee or mediator. 2) Polity, also known as rules of proceedure, is important. Without polity you lack civility, and then you get chaos. And yes, that debate was chaotic. The Commission on Presidential Debates, along with both campaigns, arranged the rules of the debate. Both campaigns followed the rules, the moderator ignored them. And her actions caused that debate to become antagonistic which it did not have to. That is why many in the media down here has considered that debate to be the worse moderation of a debate ever.

#943 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,009 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:50 PM

Since Mitt the Mannequin is a constantly-condescending-crock-of-crow-cooze, having rules are pointless, since he thinks they do not apply to him .. look up Ugly American in a pictionary and Mitt is right there with Donald Trump ..

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#944 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,892 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:01 PM

That is why many in the media down here has considered that debate to be the worse moderation of a debate ever.



Ah yes, just like a sports fan....

..when your team loses, blame the ref.

BTW: How many of those "many in the media" don't work for Fox News?
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#945 DonLever

DonLever

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,439 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 08

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:38 PM

Romney Leads Obama by 6 points according to lastest Gallup Poll. 51-45%. However, elections are won on swing state votes. Those show a virtual tie.

http://www.examiner....a-the-new-polls

The polls shows Romney leads by double digits among people age 30-49.

That should explain why this thread shows overwhelming support for Romney. How many of you guys are under 30? I bet most of you are.

#946 aeromotacanucks

aeromotacanucks

    Real Person

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,098 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 04:29 PM

honestly I don´t understand the USA election system. why the president isn´t elected by the number of votes and by "winning on the most important states". like. Florida is more important than the Washington state? why?

Edited by aeromotacanucks, 18 October 2012 - 04:37 PM.

Shup up and fly! you´re not payed to think, you´re payed to fly!

#947 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,009 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 18 October 2012 - 04:43 PM

honestly I don´t understand the USA election system. why the president isn´t elected by the number of votes and by "winning on the most important states". like. Florida is more important than the Washington state? why?


Population based as to electoral votes I believe .. a truly screwed up system, in that popular vote count does not matter
.. only in the USA could you have an electoral system designed to make a "profit" .. :lol: .. so proud of their democracy but it does not hold a candle to a Parliamentary system IMO ..

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#948 aeromotacanucks

aeromotacanucks

    Real Person

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,098 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 04:52 PM

that´s wierd dude. I always see the USA elections on my country and my friends and I always have the same 2 questions:

1) dellegates. so I pay more attention on Florida because they have more dellegates than North Carolina. so people from Florida are more important than people in NC? I would be pretty angry if I knew that my vote isn´t soo important as another state voters...



2) why they need 1 WEEK to see the results!? in Brazil we created the eletronic vote and we need only 5 hours to know the result of our presidential election. (each candidate receive a number soo on the election day we just "type" the number in something that looks like a notebook. (ok. will be the same dummy communist supported by Lula or some "Darth Vader" and our crapty politics).

I miss the military government. at least worked for something...

-like. If USA is soo advanced why they don´t use the eletronic vote system with biometrical ID? we have it and it´s simple...
Shup up and fly! you´re not payed to think, you´re payed to fly!

#949 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,843 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 07:26 PM

I think Obama did better, but I do not think Romney lost.

#950 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,009 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 18 October 2012 - 07:29 PM

I think Obama did better, but I do not think Romney lost.


It is all semantics .. we will know who "won" on November 6th hopefully .. my fear is it does not matter who "wins" .. the American people will not win anything .. both men are owned by the corporate elitist power structure .. only a revolution will solve this .. or a Chinese invasion .. B)

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#951 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,843 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 07:31 PM

Population based as to electoral votes I believe .. a truly screwed up system, in that popular vote count does not matter
.. only in the USA could you have an electoral system designed to make a "profit" .. :lol: .. so proud of their democracy but it does not hold a candle to a Parliamentary system IMO ..

Apples to oranges. They do not have a democracy in the United States; they never have. It is a representative form of governance co-balanced between the executive, legislative, and judicial systems. While people cast a ballot for President, they are actually voting for electors who represent the people, and whose perogative is to vote in the Electoral College for President.

#952 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,843 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 07:32 PM

It is all semantics .. we will know who "won" on November 6th hopefully .. my fear is it does not matter who "wins" .. the American people will not win anything .. both men are owned by the corporate elitist power structure .. only a revolution will solve this .. or a Chinese invasion .. B)

Romney up by 5-6 points in national polls. Up in Pennsylvania and Florida too. No matter what, it is going to be a tight race.

#953 jmfaminoff

jmfaminoff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,843 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 07:33 PM

honestly I don´t understand the USA election system. why the president isn´t elected by the number of votes and by "winning on the most important states". like. Florida is more important than the Washington state? why?

Population as determined by the Census Bureau, and apportioned by the individual states. Florida has more seats because they have a larger population than Washington state.

#954 aeromotacanucks

aeromotacanucks

    Real Person

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,098 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 07:46 PM

soo. more seats. honestly, it really makes a big difference? it creates that thing "elected with less votes than the other candidate" and that thing. Obama and Romney are trying to get more votes from states with more electors. however in USA you aren´t oblied to vote or to register as an elector, it means that the number of electors does not mach the number of people able to vote (teenagers and adults). soo in real terms the number of people able to vote must be considered and not the population (for political reasons).

I´m sorry for my insistence. but I think it´s much easier simply consider the number of votes and end of story. almost every country on earth do this. or put the same number of dellegates on each state. I´m surprised how the states with less seats in USA congress still didn´t get upset about it...

Edited by aeromotacanucks, 18 October 2012 - 07:49 PM.

Shup up and fly! you´re not payed to think, you´re payed to fly!

#955 Columbo

Columbo

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,912 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 18 October 2012 - 08:31 PM

Population as determined by the Census Bureau, and apportioned by the individual states. Florida has more seats because they have a larger population than Washington state.



Although, it is a pretty silly system. Florida IS more important than Washington, not just because it has more electoral votes, but because it's a swing state whereas Washington will definitely vote Obama. Florida is more important than California and Texas too, even though it's way smaller in population. Hell, Virginia (12 electoral votes) and N Carolina (18) and even New Hampshire (4) are all more important than California (55 votes), Texas (38) and about 35 other states combined.

Basically the whole election is going to be decided by about 20% of the country, and even among those most of the people are already decidedly Republican or Democrat. So probably less than 5% of the country really matters at all.

Edited by Columbo, 18 October 2012 - 08:37 PM.


#956 Columbo

Columbo

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,912 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 18 October 2012 - 08:31 PM

Obama can put on an act but he can't change his record. Moderators can try to help him out by giving him more speaking time, his wife can try to clap in the middle of the debate.


I didn't realize Michelle Obama had about 100 pairs of hands. But then again, I don't know much about black people.

#957 Columbo

Columbo

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,912 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 18 October 2012 - 08:41 PM

soo. more seats. honestly, it really makes a big difference? it creates that thing "elected with less votes than the other candidate" and that thing. Obama and Romney are trying to get more votes from states with more electors. however in USA you aren´t oblied to vote or to register as an elector, it means that the number of electors does not mach the number of people able to vote (teenagers and adults). soo in real terms the number of people able to vote must be considered and not the population (for political reasons).

I´m sorry for my insistence. but I think it´s much easier simply consider the number of votes and end of story. almost every country on earth do this. or put the same number of dellegates on each state. I´m surprised how the states with less seats in USA congress still didn´t get upset about it...


Well it wouldn't make sense for each state to have equal delegates. That would make Alaska and Hawaii as important as New York and California. I mean Canada's the same, imagine Nunavut getting the same electoral power as Ontario.

But everything else you say is correct. The election should definitely be decided by the popular vote, not this archaic electoral college system.

#958 Columbo

Columbo

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,912 posts
  • Joined: 04-May 04

Posted 18 October 2012 - 08:46 PM

Two things: 1) A debate is not an interview. If she wanted to interview the candidates, she should have made an appointment. She was supposed to be a moderator, not a reporter or referee or mediator. 2) Polity, also known as rules of proceedure, is important. Without polity you lack civility, and then you get chaos. And yes, that debate was chaotic. The Commission on Presidential Debates, along with both campaigns, arranged the rules of the debate. Both campaigns followed the rules, the moderator ignored them. And her actions caused that debate to become antagonistic which it did not have to. That is why many in the media down here has considered that debate to be the worse moderation of a debate ever.


You have way too much respect for those political committees. If you thought the debate was chaotic (and I disagree), it was only because for once the 2 candidates couldn't just rattle off talking points all night.

Yes she could just "schedule an interview" but then, even if the candidates agreed to come, they would probably pre-approve the questions, and certainly they wouldn't come on her show for an hour and a half and get viewed by 70 million people.

I'm sorry your robot of a candidate lost the debate, but quit blaming the ref.

Edited by Columbo, 18 October 2012 - 08:46 PM.


#959 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,830 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 18 October 2012 - 08:54 PM

LOL @ people who think Americans choose their leaders!

You know, by the time you become the leader of a country, someone else makes all the decisions. ... You may find you can get away with virtual presidents, virtual prime ministers, virtual everything. (Bill Clinton)


**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

11477626583_2368927097.jpg     49997_b70e6ae14ce1652fa11bd1dda624afd1.g   7649118508_ce3e8a74a1_o.jpg

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#960 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,022 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 09:58 PM

Say what you will about Romney but his speech tonight was hilarious:


Posted Image
Posted Image




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.