Poll: How politically active are you?

[Rekonn]

Originally posted by: Freshgeardude
where is the poal choice for "too young to vote"

when i turn 18 tho, i'll be registering asap.

I'd select the just getting started option then.

 

[Rekonn]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Rekonn
A couple people have brought up the need for finance reform, but doesn't that law already exist? (McCain/Feingold) Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that limit an individual contribution to $2400 per primary and $2400 per general election? What more should be done?

For those that think elections should only be funded through public financing - would your ideal reform prevent a candidate from refusing the public money and raising funds on his/her own?

Yes. The elections should be TIGHTLY controlled as a public function, and NOT a popularity contest or marketing campaign. It should be COMPLETELY restricted to factual debate and ideological comparisons. The ONLY 'campaigning' should be equal, and public.

Can I assume then that you are against the 1st Amendment? That would explain not finding any candidates that represent your views.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: evident
i will never contribute money to any candidate, but i try to vote as much as possible.

This, yet they still call and ask for money.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It costs me about 45 bucks to fill up a tank of gas.

For eight years we suffered under one of the worst administrations ever. The partisans backed him all the way even when there was no evidence to support their claims about Iraq. In effect they handed us a plate of crap and blamed everyone else for their stupidity.

Fast forward.

We now have an administration and Congress which comes up with "health care" meaning that someone decided it would be a cool ploy to ram something through so they can get reelected, never mind that they have no idea what they are doing. Never mind that many of their supporters look down on the public who may be idiots, but citizen idiots nonetheless. Don't show them what's behind the curtain. Gitmo? Status quo. Holding people indefinitely? Status quo. Oh sure some object, but the majority either ignores or apologizes and comes up with how bad the last admin was as some justification for all this. In effect they hand us a plate of crap and amazingly they don't just blame it on the other side, but some pretend it's good for us, or even that it's not there despite it's smell.

What's that have to do with the price of gas?
Since my choice is either a plate of crap or a plate of crap, I see no need to waste my money burning gas to pick shit. I'm out.

 

[PokerGuy]

I've never been very involved in politics, but with the way things are going, I'm getting more and more involved. I can't stand by and watch the country get worked over, so I've become active, donating money to PACs, and I'm planning to get very involved next year.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: Rekonn

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: Rekonn
A couple people have brought up the need for finance reform, but doesn't that law already exist? (McCain/Feingold) Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that limit an individual contribution to $2400 per primary and $2400 per general election? What more should be done?

For those that think elections should only be funded through public financing - would your ideal reform prevent a candidate from refusing the public money and raising funds on his/her own?

Yes. The elections should be TIGHTLY controlled as a public function, and NOT a popularity contest or marketing campaign. It should be COMPLETELY restricted to factual debate and ideological comparisons. The ONLY 'campaigning' should be equal, and public.

Can I assume then that you are against the 1st Amendment? That would explain not finding any candidates that represent your views.

Elections are not, or should not be, a 1st Amendment issue. They're a function of government, NOT a personal expression. If individuals want to express their personal preferences, that's up to them to do on their own...but they should not be allowed to do it THROUGH the candidate or party, and NOT as a part of a government process (ie elections).

 

[Blackjack200]

I was quite active for a while. I went to several marches and protests in 2003, 2004, and 2005 to protest the Iraq war.

But it's obvious that they had no effect. Marches and demonstrations were probably a lot more effective a hundred years ago when a big angry crowd was a legitimate physical threat. Not that I advocate actually using force, but who cares about a march today when you know that people will politely pay their subway fares to take a 90 minute stroll down main street before chowing down their panini and soy milk and heading home for the day? 'Thank you, come again!'

Also, it's pretty obvious that we have no choices in the voting booth. Why did we elect Obama? UHC, get out of Iraq, address global warming, get out of Afghanistan, close Gitmo, stop torturing, etc. etc. etc.

And he's done? All the same things that Bush did. I hope someone mounts a legitimate challange in the primaries in 3 years. (Will never happen.)

So what do I do? Hold my nose and keep voting for Democrats? Vote for Republicans to punish the corrupt Democrats, but in doing so vote against my own ideals?

Wow, what a shitty system we have. I'm almost to the point of voting 3rd party, but that's basically the same thing as not voting at all, and I can't even remember the last time there was a decent third party candidate to vote.