U.S. Presidental Election (Voting Only)

Cast your vote!

  • Hillary Clinton (D)

  • Joe Biden (D)

  • Chris Dodd (D)

  • John Edwards (D)

  • Mike Gravel (D)

  • Dennis Kucinich (D)

  • Barack Obama (D)

  • Bill Richardson (D)

  • Rudy Guiliani (R)

  • Mike Huckabee (R)

  • Duncan Hunter (R)

  • John McCain (R)

  • Ron Paul (R)

  • Mitt Romney (R)

  • Tom Tancredo (R)

  • Fred Thompson (R)


Results are only viewable after voting.
And where does a lot of Corporate America's interests lie? With politics. Think of how Bush gave the top 1% of America a HUGE tax break and he called it his "Trickle Down Theory."

What you are talking about is the government allowing corporate interests to dictate how the medical care industry is regulated (or rather, allowed to run rampant and unchecked with insurance companies screwing their policy holders and drug companies and medical facilities charging way more for their services than they should be allowed to). It's a problem of corruption both within government and within the corporate infrastructure, fueled by lobbyists and their dollars. It was something that should never have been allowed to be polluted by lobbyists or a privatized system that has nearly no checks and balances.

jag
 
What you are talking about is the government allowing corporate interests to dictate how the medical care industry is regulated (or rather, allowed to run rampant and unchecked with insurance companies screwing their policy holders and drug companies and medical facilities charging way more for their services than they should be allowed to). It's a problem of corruption both within government and within the corporate infrastructure, fueled by lobbyists and their dollars. It was something that should never have been allowed to be polluted by lobbyists or a privatized system that has nearly no checks and balances.

jag
Well, what is the answer to removing the Lobbyists?
 
What you are talking about is the government allowing corporate interests to dictate how the medical care industry is regulated (or rather, allowed to run rampant and unchecked with insurance companies screwing their policy holders and drug companies and medical facilities charging way more for their services than they should be allowed to). It's a problem of corruption both within government and within the corporate infrastructure, fueled by lobbyists and their dollars. It was something that should never have been allowed to be polluted by lobbyists or a privatized system that has nearly no checks and balances.

jag

So after all that, you still think a corrupt government should run your health care?
 
Actually, I was leading you to say "Fairtax!":yay:

I'm more keen on the napalm idea. It will send a clear message to anyone even thinking about engaging in lobbyist activities. We should melt a few congressmen in acid for kowtowing to the lobbyists, too, to make it clear we won't take that crap from our public office holders, either.

jag
 
What you are talking about is the government allowing corporate interests to dictate how the medical care industry is regulated (or rather, allowed to run rampant and unchecked with insurance companies screwing their policy holders and drug companies and medical facilities charging way more for their services than they should be allowed to). It's a problem of corruption both within government and within the corporate infrastructure, fueled by lobbyists and their dollars. It was something that should never have been allowed to be polluted by lobbyists or a privatized system that has nearly no checks and balances.

jag

Again, that's very true. The way I feel is that health care needs to remain privatized, but there has to be government regulation and intervention to allow it to be more affordable and accessable to Americans. We can't have the free reign going on for the exact reasons you stated.
 
Again, that's very true. The way I feel is that health care needs to remain privatized, but there has to be government regulation and intervention to allow it to be more affordable and accessable to Americans. We can't have the free reign going on for the exact reasons you stated.

The lobbyists are what is wrong with this country in general, to be honest. Policy and legislation is set and guided by them (hell, half the time it's WRITTEN by them) and pushed through congress by their back-pocket congressmen. Corporations get far more consideration than citizens when it comes to these things and that is WRONG. I believe lobbyists should be abolished and accepting ANY sort of funding from corporate interests at all a major crime for people within government. And, I agree with you that some very strict and concise regulations around health care, caps on medication and procedural costs, and some measures to make insurance companies provide the services to EVERYONE in the manner they are SUPPOSED to be doing so are necessary if the health care industry is to stay privatized. The same/similar measures apply to other industries as well. Outsourcing to offshore resources is another example of how our government has aided and abetted Corporate America and completely screwed over our country in the process, watching our core competencies, technologies and talents go elsewhere and leaving otherwise talented people with degrees in engineering and other disciplines working two or three jobs waiting tables just to make ends meet for their families. Ridiculous.

jag
 
I just ran a Google Trend report. If we looked at the results as a 3 person General Election bewteen Huckabee, Obama, and Halo 3. Halo 3 wins by a landslide.

viz


Master Chief for president :up:
 
really? i thought you were voting for someone like edwards? did matt and i convert you?
I like Edwards, but I like Richardson better. No, in fact, I didn't know you supported Richardson. I'm originally from Mass. but I recently moved to New Mexico. Seeing the man in action for myself is what converted me.
 
But then again after Romney, Satan would look more appealing to me.
Maybe Satan would pick you as his running mate, but I think that Hilliray has someone in mind. :oldrazz:

I was joking, don't flame me.
 
Maybe Satan would pick you as his running mate, but I think that Hilliray has someone in mind. :oldrazz:

I was joking, don't flame me.
There was some talk a while back that she was going to pick Richardson. I don't know if there was any truth to that or not though.
 
There was some talk a while back that she was going to pick Richardson. I don't know if there was any truth to that or not though.

either him or clark. he's done an awful lot of stumping for her.
 
I downright can't stand Obama.

He says he's outside the system, yet he is indeed a part of it as a Senator.

He has absolutely no experience in national politics or as an executive. Sorry, but 3 years in the Senate is not enough in my opinion. At least we have Richardson, Huckabee, Romney, and even Giuliani in some fashion with executive experience and Paul, Clinton, Tancredo, Hunter, Kucinich, Biden, Thomson, Dodd, McCain, Edwards, and crazy man Gravel who have much more experience than freaking Obama.

He acts as if he's above all this crap yet he mudslings Clinton because she was kicking his ass in the polls.

He attacked Clinton for her support and rejection of illegal immigrants having drivers licenses, yet he actually voted for it in Illinois.

He complains about how others voted for the Iraq War, yet he wasn't in Congress. I'd like to see how he would have voted if he weren't in Congress.

He complains how Clinton voted to label the Imperial Guard as a terrorist sponsoring group, yet he didn't even show up to Congress to vote no.

Granted that he's running for President, it's rather sad that Clinton, Biden, and Dodd show up for the job that they are being paid for twice as much as Obama does. Missing 80% of Senate votes is just plain sad.

And as Matt said, he doesn't go into detail on how he would go through with his damn plans.

:up: God I love reading your posts. In all honesty, he seems insincere to me. It seems to me he is just trying to tell people what they want to hear. Pander to the masses if you will
 
i like him a lot, too, but i prefer richardson.

Imagine a Richardson/Clark ticket. That would be brilliant.

I still wonder if Richardson has a chance in Iowa. He is showing 4th in the polls with about 12-15 %. Considering these polls are historically 95 % of the time wrong and Obama's base traditionally does not vote in primaries...I think he could place highly. The 12-15 % that support Richardson, probably will vote. If they pay enough attention to politics to familiarize themselves with Richardson (who doesn't get much attention from the media compared to the top 3)...I imagine they will actually vote. If Richardson can place in the top 3 in Iowa and upset one of the Big 3 Democrats, he suddenly gets a huge ammount of media attention and if played right his campaign could snowball. I hold out some hope...not much...but some.
 
Britain and France both seem to have made universal health care work very, very well and their medical professionals are compensated quite well.

jag


We actually lost a lot of specialized doctors, and the overall rate of specialized healthcare dropped in France. But it's not to say that it outright destroyed things. It just makes it a lot more expensive to run, and on fewer doctors.


I couldn't currently see the American economy taking such a blow while trying to somehow come out with Social Security here in twenty years or so.
 
I like Edwards, but I like Richardson better. No, in fact, I didn't know you supported Richardson. I'm originally from Mass. but I recently moved to New Mexico. Seeing the man in action for myself is what converted me.


He seems to have picked up more productivity in the past few years than he ever has before, from my personal view point.
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"