I've studied politics and i still find it difficult to understand the american voting system of choosing the party leader. There is a major difference between prime minister and president. But it just seems less corruptable to choose the party not the leader because the voter is less likely to be swung by race or sex. It just seems odd to me.
What do you mean? We pick both... we not only pick the political party but the particular candidate who we want to represent that party. I mean, there is a big difference between the various republicans and democrats running for president, I'd be pissed if I could only pick the party.
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 37 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
January 10th, 2008 at 06:59am
Kurtni:
NeoSteph:
I've studied politics and i still find it difficult to understand the american voting system of choosing the party leader. There is a major difference between prime minister and president. But it just seems less corruptable to choose the party not the leader because the voter is less likely to be swung by race or sex. It just seems odd to me.
What do you mean? We pick both... we not only pick the political party but the particular candidate who we want to represent that party. I mean, there is a big difference between the various republicans and democrats running for president, I'd be pissed if I could only pick the party.
Well it makes sense because its a president so more absolute power. Where as a prime minister every law he wants to pass has to win by majority vote so we vote for the party because he's our spokesman. As it is the part who picks him/her their not going to choose someone who doesn't represent the majority view.
The problem with presidency is its too much power for one person and thats shown in the voting system. The whole button under the desk thing is a little freaky It's still very much seems like a monarchy rule especially as you for the most part have the same family's taking office and other candidates are majority wise going to come from an upper class background.
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 37 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
January 10th, 2008 at 07:00am
Mother Mary:
.:
Does anyone think that Hilary's "breakdown" was faked so that she would get more people to vote for her? Or is it just me?
YES. I've been wondering if anyone else would bring that up. If anyone watched the debate on Saturday, it was mentioned that Obama was much more "likable" than Hillary. She she seemed really pissed at that. I think the breakdown was just a ploy to make her seem more down-to-earth. I was actually surprised she won in NH. I didn't think people would think someone that sensitive could be a good President.
sensitivity shows your not cold to touch, you don't want a president who thinks their untouchable because then one word
I've studied politics and i still find it difficult to understand the american voting system of choosing the party leader. There is a major difference between prime minister and president. But it just seems less corruptable to choose the party not the leader because the voter is less likely to be swung by race or sex. It just seems odd to me.
What do you mean? We pick both... we not only pick the political party but the particular candidate who we want to represent that party. I mean, there is a big difference between the various republicans and democrats running for president, I'd be pissed if I could only pick the party.
Well it makes sense because its a president so more absolute power. Where as a prime minister every law he wants to pass has to win by majority vote so we vote for the party because he's our spokesman. As it is the part who picks him/her their not going to choose someone who doesn't represent the majority view.
The problem with presidency is its too much power for one person and thats shown in the voting system. The whole button under the desk thing is a little freaky It's still very much seems like a monarchy rule especially as you for the most part have the same family's taking office and other candidates are majority wise going to come from an upper class background.
The president isn't absolute power He doesn't have any more power over the other branches of government than they do over him.
The president can't even pass laws on his own, congress votes on laws. Then he can sign them in if they approve, if they don't he can veto their descision, but then they can turn around again and tell him no. The judicial branch can override any law he passes if they find it to be unconstitutional. For some reason, people seem to think the president is the only member of the legislative branch, he isn't. They think he has more power than any other branch, he doesn't. No one understands how the government works. They just see the president alot, and assume he has all the power. It doesn't work like that at all. That's why it pisses me off so much when people automatically blame the president for every problem we have. There are many people to blame, not just one.
... for the most part? We've had very few presidents that were related, and the majority of them were distant cousins 100 years ago. It doesn't happen all the time, and the same families don't take office all the time, that's quite an exaggeration.
John Entwistle Great Success! Age: 36 Gender: Female Posts: 55036
January 10th, 2008 at 03:00pm
NeoSteph:
Mother Mary:
Does anyone think that Hilary's "breakdown" was faked so that she would get more people to vote for her? Or is it just me?
YES. I've been wondering if anyone else would bring that up. If anyone watched the debate on Saturday, it was mentioned that Obama was much more "likable" than Hillary. She she seemed really pissed at that. I think the breakdown was just a ploy to make her seem more down-to-earth. I was actually surprised she won in NH. I didn't think people would think someone that sensitive could be a good President.
Yeah, I agree. I like it was fake. I think women are too sensitive to be president. That's not to say that I think we should never have a woman president. But we need someone strong, a president can cry...Bush cried after 9/11. I think that was justified. Plus, at the same time he was showing strength. He was determined to stop the terrorists. He made sure it didn't happen again. It would have way different if we would have had a women president. The terrorist would have probably tried it again. Atleast that's what I think.
I think women are too sensitive to be president. .
..How is it fair to judge an entire gender based on what Hilary did? O_O
Personally, I don't think sensitivity was her problem at all, I think her little break down was a bunch of fake crap to get people to vote for her, and it worked. She isn't sensitive, she's just manipulative.
Franny. Falling In Love With The Board Age: - Gender: Female Posts: 5246
January 10th, 2008 at 06:56pm
Kurtni:
Shadow of a Doubt:
I think women are too sensitive to be president. .
..How is it fair to judge an entire gender based on what Hilary did? O_O
Personally, I don't think sensitivity was her problem at all, I think her little break down was a bunch of fake crap to get people to vote for her, and it worked. She isn't sensitive, she's just manipulative.
I wouldn't say all women, but a majority of women are too sensitive to lead a large and developed country such as the United States.
I thought her breakdown was fake as well, but it seemed to have worked. Not to over use this word like everywhere else, but it did humanize her. My friend and I have an ongoing thing about her being an android...
John Kerry is endorsing..no, not Edwards, but Obama. I was shocked as well. Total slap in the face to Edwards and I really disagree with this move. If Obama were to surge in the polls, I really hope it's not because of this endorsement. Although Edwards is a likely VP, it's still like an act of betrayal.
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 37 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
January 10th, 2008 at 08:22pm
Feminism is different these days, before the movement was about empowering women by becoming more like men when moving into the work place and there are advantages to this. A 'man' approach would be to take in the facts and the figures, to achieve goals in a straight line by focusing all of your attention on one problem at a time, however this leads to neglect of other area's that need attention
Every person who takes first grade biology has it droned into their heads that women are better at multi tasking then men. Please give me an example of a job that would need more multi tasking than the running of multi cultural, multi everything country?
Now if your too sensitive its another way of saying your over emotional and in a more diluted way i see your point, you need someone who will not collapse under pressure, who will not become emotionall involved when there is a job to be done. So your conclusion is that women who as a sex are known to be over emotional because of the media expansion of a small difference in statistic are majority wise not going to be good leaders.
Now i could drone on and on, on my british experiance about how in the 600 years of monarchy the three strongest leaders were all women. Or that in the modern era Britains greatest accomplishments happened under the rule of a female prime minister and that she did so under great great pressure.
How in history there are so many uncredited women who helped achieved humanity's greatest accomplishments but they are not recognised because of the sexist society that is heard but not spoken. How even though you yourself are female you see what can be women's greatest weapon in the office as a weakness is frankly disgraceful but show's that even women born as late as the 90's still rate themselves lower.
In the times we live in when there are so many problems and because of globalisation, the need to enhance everything and how you can live in your boxed house for the rest of your life and not ever have to socialise with anyone more than the delivery man, maybe you need someone who is more sensitive to change more likely to listen more in touch with their emotions because it is an emotional time.
Now for many other reasons Clinton can be not right for the job, but it is not because she's a women
Humanity needs help. It needs a mother.
spill_no_sick Falling In Love With The Board Age: 31 Gender: - Posts: 8588
January 10th, 2008 at 08:26pm
lol, NeoSteph. You called Clinton a woman.
Anyway, I do agree that we need a woman president. But I think that Romney is the closest thing to a woman in the '08 election.
Anyway, I do agree that we need a woman president. But I think that Romney is the closest thing to a woman in the '08 election.
OISJHDGIJHGUEUGOIEIUGHQUIHGUIQRG
NICK
OUSIRYIOSUGIOEQGIOOIH
If you were a woman, you would so be my choice for our first woman president
Anji Basket Case Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 15914
January 11th, 2008 at 09:07am
Nick's back! Woohoo! We knew you wouldn't stay away for too long.
newagecarny Was Here Two Weeks Ago Age: 33 Gender: Female Posts: 42495
January 11th, 2008 at 11:25am
Kurtni:
If you were a woman, you would so be my choice for our first woman president
...
he's not?
Barney Stinson Basket Case Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 17567
January 12th, 2008 at 07:58pm
I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings on politics/2008 elections/ women in presidency. But, i just can't see Hilary Clinton as the first woman president, she doesn't seem to be as fit for the role of president as Romney is. Sorry, just my opinion and again i don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.
Mycophobia Basket Case Age: 30 Gender: Female Posts: 15581
January 12th, 2008 at 11:19pm
We had a fake census at school, about 85% of the kids voted for Obama, I wasn't sure so i voted for Hillary just to piss them off, I was the only one in my class
If you were a woman, you would so be my choice for our first woman president
...
he's not?
..
DaschundPup2007:
she doesn't seem to be as fit for the role of president as Romney is.
Why do you think he is suited for the job?
Franny. Falling In Love With The Board Age: - Gender: Female Posts: 5246
January 13th, 2008 at 02:34am
Kurtni:
DaschundPup2007:
she doesn't seem to be as fit for the role of president as Romney is.
Why do you think he is suited for the job?
He's the best choice for the Republicans =)
I was talking to my friends about this in a very simple way. Many voters really don't know a thing about politics or follow the candidate's campaigns at all. So if a clueless citizen receives pamphlets from the candidates and they just look at the picture, the best choice would be Romney. I'm not saying it's a beauty contest [because Edwards would win] but Mitt Romney does look like a president. And, he has the most money to keep his campaign alive throughout the primaries [McCain doesn't have too much left nor does Giuliani].
she doesn't seem to be as fit for the role of president as Romney is.
Why do you think he is suited for the job?
He's the best choice for the Republicans =)
I was talking to my friends about this in a very simple way. Many voters really don't know a thing about politics or follow the candidate's campaigns at all. So if a clueless citizen receives pamphlets from the candidates and they just look at the picture, the best choice would be Romney. I'm not saying it's a beauty contest [because Edwards would win] but Mitt Romney does look like a president. And, he has the most money to keep his campaign alive throughout the primaries [McCain doesn't have too much left nor does Giuliani].
How does that make him the best choice?
Barney Stinson Basket Case Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 17567
January 13th, 2008 at 12:20pm
Kurtni:
Franny.:
Kurtni:
DaschundPup2007:
she doesn't seem to be as fit for the role of president as Romney is.
Why do you think he is suited for the job?
He's the best choice for the Republicans =)
I was talking to my friends about this in a very simple way. Many voters really don't know a thing about politics or follow the candidate's campaigns at all. So if a clueless citizen receives pamphlets from the candidates and they just look at the picture, the best choice would be Romney. I'm not saying it's a beauty contest [because Edwards would win] but Mitt Romney does look like a president. And, he has the most money to keep his campaign alive throughout the primaries [McCain doesn't have too much left nor does Giuliani].
How does that make him the best choice?
I honestly don't know a whole lot about politics. But after researching some stuff on Mitt Romney, i found his site the most helpful. http://www.mittromney.com
I honestly don't know a whole lot about politics. But after researching some stuff on Mitt Romney, i found his site the most helpful. http://www.mittromney.com
We pick both... we not only pick the political party but the particular candidate who we want to represent that party. I mean, there is a big difference between the various republicans and democrats running for president, I'd be pissed if I could only pick the party.
It's still very much seems like a monarchy rule especially as you for the most part have the same family's taking office and other candidates are majority wise going to come from an upper class background.
He doesn't have any more power over the other branches of government than they do over him. 
