Forgot your password?

Re: the U.S. 2012 election campaign, I am:

Displaying poll results.
Uninterested or nearly so.
  7174 votes / 28%
Mildly, but not deeply, interested.
  4734 votes / 18%
Very interested, but not fanatical.
  4691 votes / 18%
Obsessed or nearly so.
  1034 votes / 4%
Ask me a year from now.
  7826 votes / 30%
25459 total votes.
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
  • Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
  • Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
  • This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Re: the U.S. 2012 election campaign, I am:

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Obvious (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @12:08PM (#36451728)

    Since when has that had any impact on how the US elections will affect you?

  • Re:Obvious (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CPTreese (2114124) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @12:08PM (#36451736) Journal

    Is it necessary to be an American to be interested in the American presidential elections?

  • by OutLawSuit (1107987) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @12:11PM (#36451768)

    Hard to ignore elections when you work in the public sector. It's real awkward when you have a political party that would like nothing more than see you out of work. So I have some morbid fascination in hopefully seeing the Tea Party implode.

  • Re:Obvious (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ACS Solver (1068112) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @12:14PM (#36451790)
    As a non-American, I'm interested. Well, not just yet as nothing is really happening, but I'll be interested once the primaries begin. Why? Because those are elections that determine the leader of the world's leading power, like it or not. And unlike, say, China or Russia, you don't actually know who's the next leader going to be well before the election.
  • by Tim the Gecko (745081) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @12:26PM (#36451958)
    The Onion [theonion.com] captured this scary fascination brilliantly with "Morbid Curiosity Leading Many Voters To Support Palin". They also did a great job with their Romney [theonion.com] story - "Mitt Romney Haunted By Past Of Trying To Help Uninsured Sick People". Life then imitated art with a serious story on much the same lines in the New Yorker [newyorker.com].
  • by Lord Lode (1290856) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @12:31PM (#36452046)

    There never are cowboy neal options anymore :(

  • by jmorris42 (1458) * <jmorris@[ ]u.org ['bea' in gap]> on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @12:39PM (#36452186)

    > that would like nothing more than see you out of work.

    So I take it you work for one of the useless parts of the government then? :)

    Reality check time. The country is broke. The days of get a job for the government because it is a job for life are over, one way or another. We in the Tea Party want to do the cutting while we still have choices, you apparently want to keep your gravy train rolling until it goes over the cliff.

    To close the budget gap we have now means everything gets cut some, some gets cut all the way out. Raising taxes is simply madness in this environment, especially since the problem is too much spending, not too low taxes. Taxes as percentage of GDP are plenty high already, it is spending as percentage of GDP that is way beyond WWII levels. It is very doubtful that any tax increase in this environment would actually increase net revenue to the government. So cutting spending is the only game in town since under Obama economic growth is improbable.

    But I'm looking for a candidate for POTUS that understands the right way out of this mess. We don't have any budget problems that a GDP 50% larger than we have now can't finance, especially since a growing economy means the govt's welfare state payments drop along with the rise in revenue from taxes. Getting to that happy place should be goal #1. Cuts in spending should be targeted to boosting economic growth. Regulations should be slashed in ways targeting growth. (#1, remove the EPA's ability to issue new regulations, #1 delete the entire NLRB as a warning to the rest of the regulatory morass of the risks of overreach) Create certainty in the regulatory environment to encourage investment.

    Didn't really care for T-Paw until he busted loose with that basic idea in the last week or so. Still would rather Santorum or Cain but would take T-Paw over Romney any day. But I'd take any of the current field over the current socialist, Ron Paul included.

  • by OutLawSuit (1107987) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @12:53PM (#36452370)

    "Useless" is completely subjective. What I happen to deal with is urban planning which some would consider unnecessary government regulations. I obviously disagree with that notion but I'll leave that for another time.

    The issue I have is when Tea Party groups around the country are trying to shut down planning and building codes departments which happen to push for sustainability. Some rather vocal Tea Party folks feel that sustainability is a vast conspiracy put forth by the United Nations to establish a one world government. The Agenda 21 stuff they're spouting is utterly bizarre and they can't be talked out of it. I have no problem if they have issues with building codes or urban planning but please stick with conventional lines of attack such as property rights instead of adhering to some conspiracy bullshit.

  • by monstermash161 (2232408) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @12:56PM (#36452410)

    > that would like nothing more than see you out of work.

    So I take it you work for one of the useless parts of the government then? :)

    Reality check time. The country is broke. The days of get a job for the government because it is a job for life are over, one way or another. We in the Tea Party want to do the cutting while we still have choices, you apparently want to keep your gravy train rolling until it goes over the cliff.

    To close the budget gap we have now means everything gets cut some, some gets cut all the way out. Raising taxes is simply madness in this environment, especially since the problem is too much spending, not too low taxes. Taxes as percentage of GDP are plenty high already, it is spending as percentage of GDP that is way beyond WWII levels. It is very doubtful that any tax increase in this environment would actually increase net revenue to the government. So cutting spending is the only game in town since under Obama economic growth is improbable.

    But I'm looking for a candidate for POTUS that understands the right way out of this mess. We don't have any budget problems that a GDP 50% larger than we have now can't finance, especially since a growing economy means the govt's welfare state payments drop along with the rise in revenue from taxes. Getting to that happy place should be goal #1. Cuts in spending should be targeted to boosting economic growth. Regulations should be slashed in ways targeting growth. (#1, remove the EPA's ability to issue new regulations, #1 delete the entire NLRB as a warning to the rest of the regulatory morass of the risks of overreach) Create certainty in the regulatory environment to encourage investment.

    Didn't really care for T-Paw until he busted loose with that basic idea in the last week or so. Still would rather Santorum or Cain but would take T-Paw over Romney any day. But I'd take any of the current field over the current socialist, Ron Paul included.

    A real life Tea Party-ist? On Slashdot? You make a good argument, and there is an argument for the tea party. But seriously, read a book. Look at the history of American economic success and American rise from economic trouble, and see what economic policies were pursued at those times. (Hint: erasing the NLRB and hoping that the economy grows 50% in the next four years is not a good idea. Get a clue)

  • by wintercolby (1117427) <winter@colby.gmail@com> on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @01:13PM (#36452626)

    Raising taxes is simply madness in this environment, especially since the problem is too much spending, not too low taxes.

    It's precisely the Bush era tax cuts, including the cuts to the capital gains tax that got us into this mess. We had a budget surplus going into the Bush years. While the middle class got $300 checks, Bush saved over $72k. Low capital gains tax means that the wealthy on Wallstreet pay the same tax rate as the poor. CEO's who get paid in stock options pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than their lower management. The entire problem is that the Republican Right pushed the middle class into the poor-house while unapologetically helping the rich get richer. It's the low capital gains tax thinking that causes all of the short sightedness in favor of short term gains in stock price.

    If you want to fix medicare and social security, the answer is obvious. Entitlement taxes need to be applied to all income, not just the poor and middle classes incomes.

    I'm looking for a new congressman in 2012, but keeping the POTUS.

  • GAAAAAH! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Thud457 (234763) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @01:20PM (#36452712) Homepage Journal
    This eighteen month campaign cycle is insane and counterproductive!

    It didn't take that long to have an election George Washington had to go town to town on horseback to campaign. It should be over sooner with all our modern electronic telecommunications fribfrab.
  • Re:Obvious (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Mikkeles (698461) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @01:30PM (#36452824)

    But, like China or Russia, it doesn't really matter who will be the next president (unless you're an American, of course).

  • by wintercolby (1117427) <winter@colby.gmail@com> on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @02:07PM (#36453264)
    I'll concede that we need to curb spending, but we also need to end the Bush era tax cuts on the wealthy, as well as increase the capital gains tax. Everyone with any sense says that the problem has to be handled from both directions.
  • Re:Obvious (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anrego (830717) * on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @04:13PM (#36454698)

    As a Canadian, I really hate this reality.

    People joke about British "control" over Canada.. but truth is that while British involvement in Canadian politics is mostly symbolic (no real power), US politics has an actual tangible effect on Canadian politics.

  • Re:Obvious (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nyctopterus (717502) on Wednesday June 15, 2011 @05:42PM (#36455684) Homepage

    I think most of the western world is watching in morbid fascination to see how far to the right the US will go (in its rhetoric at least). How crazy can it get? Tune in in 2012!

    It's like watching cringe-worth reality TV.

  • Re:Obvious (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Skarecrow77 (1714214) on Thursday June 16, 2011 @02:03PM (#36465940)

    I am glad people don't vote. most of them have no idea why they're there other than the famous musician on tv told them to go vote, don't know the issues, don't know how their vote affects them (let alone the rest of the country and the rest of the world), and are pretty much watering down the votes of people who actually care, are informed, and know what they're doing.

    take a look at this article if you want to be frighened.
    http://www.cracked.com/article_18847_6-things-you-wont-believe-can-brainwash-you-election-day.html [cracked.com]

"Someone's been mean to you! Tell me who it is, so I can punch him tastefully." -- Ralph Bakshi's Mighty Mouse

 



Forgot your password?
Working...