If the world could vote....

Interesting site on how the world would vote for the US election... still don't understand Macedonia though.. any ideas?

If the world could vote?
«1

Comments

  • If the world could vote it would be Barack facing off against Ron Paul.
    And then Ron Paul would win.
    As it is, the world will simply be choosing between the socialist warmonger and the warmongering socialist, so it hardly matters. :(
  • Macedonia is easy - 11 guys voted McCain, 2 guys went with Obama.

    I agree with Big Mike. Ron Paul, FTW.
  • Pretty meaningless, if you ask me.
    It's only about who he rest of the world knows.
  • The Republicans will win because they cheat.
  • JohnnieH wrote: »
    The Republicans will win because they cheat.

    Hmm, I don't doubt that they do. But Dems are almost certainly worse. See: Chicago politics.
  • Big Mike wrote: »
    Hmm, I don't doubt that they do. But Dems are almost certainly worse. See: Chicago politics.

    Why go that far. Just look at Quebec politics. Or the federal Liberal party.:D
  • Big Mike wrote: »
    Hmm, I don't doubt that they do. But Dems are almost certainly worse. See: Chicago politics.

    Ok..The Republicans will win because they cheat more. See 2000 Election results from Florida.
  • I definitely agree with you on Ron Paul Mike... but that would be too obvious. I have met a few Americans recently and the scary thing is some of them are still undecided. I even met one girl that was a huge McCain supporter... I just don't get it.
  • What is truly scary is that some (not all I admit) McCain supporters are racist and will not vote for Barrack Obama because he is black.

    I thought this was 2008!
  • I thought this was 2008!

    Yes but it's about 400 years earler than anyone would have expected.
  • JohnnieH wrote: »
    What is truly scary is that some (not all I admit) McCain supporters are racist and will not vote for Barrack Obama because he is black.

    I thought this was 2008!

    Is it any less racist than those citizens who will vote for Obama because he is black? I call that one a wash, personally. At least in terms of it's repugnance, anyway . . .

    If you really want to talk racism in 2008, you should look more closely at the Far East, and South Asia, imo.
  • Milo wrote: »
    Is it any less racist than those citizens who will vote for Obama because he is black?

    I don't see how voting for someone who is black because he is black is the same as not voting for someone because they are black. One is stupid. The other is racist.
  • It is racist on it's face (no pun intended) if your sole reason, for or against, is based on his skin colour. Is reverse racism really so hard a concept to grasp?
  • 800OVER wrote: »
    I see how voting for someone who is black because he is black is the same as voting for someone because they are white. One is stupid. The other is racist.

    FYP.
    Either one is racist since you are voting for one or the other based on race.
    Either way it's stupid
    Racism exists in may forms, some are just more politically accepted
  • 800OVER wrote: »
    I don't see how voting for someone who is black because he is black is the same as not voting for someone because they are black. One is stupid. The other is racist.

    I agree with 800. If you DON'T vote for someone because they are *insert race* then that's racist.
    Think about what you're saying - that "I like black people" is a racist statement!??!
  • Big Mike wrote: »
    I agree with 800. If you DON'T vote for someone because they are *insert race* then that's racist.
    Think about what you're saying - that "I like black people" is a racist statement!??!
    FAIL.

    What I am saying is that "I'm voting for the purple guy instead of the green guy because I am purple," is just as racist as saying, "I will not vote for the purple guy, because he is purple."

    Voting based on skin tone, regardless of which way it swings your vote (either pro or con), is a racist act. It is also, as has been pointed out, incredibly stupid. But what do you expect when you begin to mix race, politics, and just a dash of religion?
  • Milo wrote: »
    FAIL.

    What I am saying is that "I'm voting for the purple guy instead of the green guy because I am purple," is just as racist as saying, "I will not vote for the purple guy, because he is purple."

    Voting based on skin tone, regardless of which way it swings your vote (either pro or con), is a racist act. It is also, as has been pointed out, incredibly stupid. But what do you expect when you begin to mix race, politics, and just a dash of religion?

    Because your choice has nothing to do with the green guy - it's not racist. You don't care whether he's green or red or orange. You just like purple guys. If you vote for someone because they're from Spain and not the guy from Lichtenstein are you prejudiced against Lichtensteinians?

    Choosing to vote FOR someone based on skin color IS discriminatory, but not racist. Discrimination is not necessarily 'wrong' or 'immoral'. I do agree that basing your vote SOLELY on color IS stupid.
  • Big Mike wrote: »
    Because your choice has nothing to do with the green guy - it's not racist. You don't care whether he's green or red or orange. You just like purple guys. If you vote for someone because they're from Spain and not the guy from Lichtenstein are you prejudiced against Lichtensteinians?

    Choosing to vote FOR someone based on skin color IS discriminatory, but not racist. Discrimination is not necessarily 'wrong' or 'immoral'. I do agree that basing your vote SOLELY on color IS stupid.


    you're hot, just wanted to make sure you knew that.
  • Big Mike wrote: »
    Because your choice has nothing to do with the green guy - it's not racist. You don't care whether he's green or red or orange. You just like purple guys because they are purple. If you vote for someone because they're from Spain and not the guy from Lichtenstein are you prejudiced against Lichtensteinians?

    Choosing to vote FOR someone based on skin color IS discriminatory, but not racist. Discrimination is not necessarily 'wrong' or 'immoral'. I do agree that basing your vote SOLELY on color IS stupid.

    Please not the bolded addition/correction.

    Racism is a form of discrimination, no? I think we are devolving ionto a battle of semantics, now.
  • Big Mike wrote: »
    Because your choice has nothing to do with the green guy - it's not racist. You don't care whether he's green or red or orange. You just like purple guys. If you vote for someone because they're from Spain and not the guy from Lichtenstein are you prejudiced against Lichtensteinians?

    Choosing to vote FOR someone based on skin color IS discriminatory, but not racist. Discrimination is not necessarily 'wrong' or 'immoral'. I do agree that basing your vote SOLELY on color IS stupid.

    So as long as I can put a positive spin on it it's not racism.
  • Hobbes wrote: »
    So as long as I can put a positive spin on it it's not racism.

    Well, if you want to define my scenario as racism, i have no problem with that. If that is the case, it's not always bad to be racist, i guess.
  • Milo wrote: »
    Please not the bolded addition/correction.

    Racism is a form of discrimination, no? I think we are devolving ionto a battle of semantics, now.


    Noted. I agree about the semantics. Racism is a particular form of discrimination. All discrimination is not negative.
    Describing a black persons decision to vote for someone like them as racist, seems pretty uh, racist to me.:biggrin:
  • Milo wrote: »
    FAIL.

    What I am saying is that "I'm voting for the purple guy instead of the green guy because I am purple,"

    You're twisting the argument by adding that the person voting is ALSO of the same race/colour creed. That wasn't part of your original point.

    If I LOVE the Montreal Canadians and therefore vote for Ken Dryden how is that wrong other than being a stupid reason to vote for someone? People vote for millions of reasons.

    "I'm voting for Obama because he plays poker". =Stupid.

    "I'm won't vote for Obama because he is black" = racist.

    "I'm voting for her because I like boobies" =stupid

    "I like purple guys" = gay
  • 800OVER wrote: »
    You're twisting the argument by adding that the person voting is ALSO of the same race/colour creed. That wasn't part of your original point.

    My apologies. I thought I was pretty clear about that in my postings. That is the crux of what I'm getting at, though.

    And I do not think it racist to call someone a racist for voting strictly based on their ethnic/racial biases (ie a purple guy voting for a purple guy solely because they are both purple guys).

    Anyway, the Pecan pie is finished. Who wants some Devil's Food cake?
  • Why is it that the debates on Canada's Poker Forum never ever involve poker?
  • BBC Z wrote: »
    Why is it that the debates on Canada's Poker Forum never ever involve poker?

    Well, it depends . . . "cheers:
  • Back on the topic of voting - here's a good article I just read.
    This is the position I took in the Canadian election as well, fwiw.

    The American Conservative -- <font color="#000066">Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.</font>
  • BBC Z wrote: »
    Why is it that the debates on Canada's Poker Forum never ever involve poker?

    I hate ALL 4 colour decks. That better?
  • 800OVER wrote: »
    I hate ALL 4 colour decks. That better?

    JUST because of their COLOUR!???!
  • 800OVER wrote: »
    I hate ALL 4 colour decks. That better?
    So do I. Why no purple?!? Pigmentally biased cardmakers . . .
Sign In or Register to comment.