A Soldier

Go Kerry... Current results: Bush with 155 college votes Kerry with 112 college votes

you lost me ail The only critic I was giving to the college system is that it's impossible to have three serious party running for presidency because you need 271 out of 538 college votes. On the best case scenario, one party would win 271 electoral votes, leaving 268 to the two remaining parties. Simply pointing a flaw. I don't agree with the rest of your posts concerning primaries but I won't get into that. Anyways, re-read my first post on topic, and you'll see that yes, I was talking about the fact that having only two parties in the US could be a problem to democracy.

guest?

Funny how the video is out only a few days before the elections... surprise surprise...

Uhm..I don't really understand why you are comparing salaries because that was not my point... As of October 26th, republicans gathered 554.7 million dollars for their campain while the democrats had 451.8. Nader got ~1.5 million. Now, does the amount of money a party has can influence the campain? Of course.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html

Attacking a candidate has always been a popular form of getting votes. People who don't follow politics and/or news much base their opinion on what they hear and more than often, jump to conclusions easily. Concerning freedoms, I do agree on that point; it seems that our liberties are being curved in the name of fighting terrorism. One problem with US politics is that there are only the democrats and republicans that can run for presidency or other form of governing. They have an overwhelming budget, can influence the medias, and because of the electoral vote system: how many college votes do you need in order to be president? 271 out of ~530? If you do the maths, you'll realize it's impossible to have three serious parties running for presidency. So, is the US leaning toward an oligarchy? I don't know, and I wish not. But democracy will prevail IMO, as long as we have an educated population and good leaders. I sincerly hope we learned from history.

What are the pro-life arguments?

thanks vile

I didn't have the chance to see it Is there any place where I can watch it for free?

what about 15k+ civilians? and not counting the wounded

The Edwards-Cheney debate was... well, more boring than the first one. I would say it was tight. Edwards attacked Cheney with facts more than he did (he was almost always accusing Kerry and Edwards of changing their mind), but overall, I was expecting way more from both sides.

Sheesh. What about the matrix moves Kerry makes? Guns are useless man ;P

pfft. Kerry knows karate

Never said it was spam, in case that's what you were implying=)

There already has been a topic for that heh.

Who watched it? Before it started, I told myself I'd look at it from an objective point of view. My conclusion is, tonight, Kerry did a better job. One thing I'd reproach (sp?) him though, he should have tried to look at the camera once in a while. He defended himself well, had a good elocution and good gesture. Bush started on a good tone too, but as the debate was getting to an ending, it seemed to me he had difficulty defending himself - at some point he even diverted the discussion to something else - and he was taking way too many pauses to think about what he was going to say. An other thing I noticed, Kerry seemed in total control of himself while Bush was showing up his emotions maybe a bit too much. What did you think about the debate?

The one million dollars question: who created God? Who created the creator of God? Etc... To me, it is difficult to accept an argument based on what is said in the bible, since there are many contradictions. For exemple, in the Exodus, at one point they say you must take revenge (an eye for an eye), while in Matthew's, he says you should turn the other cheek. An other problem I believe is people who strongly think everything written in the Bible is correct, while, for exemple, most of us know that the story of Adam and Eve is a myth. You have strange teachers :/ heh. I would be more tempted to say many men and women need religion - not society as a whole necessarly. Why? They need to find a meaning to their life, and they think religion can give them the answer. Charity is a way to help the poorer population indeed. I trust social welfare more though.

Not really... Do you have a link, by any chance? I agree with the rest of your paragraph btw. Blah, my economic course is not going fast enough. We had 6 hours in class to learn what supply and demand and GDP was... ridiculous. <_< What is your opinon on the north american free trade agreement? More good than bad or the opposite? If it's an exemple of globalisation, well, personnally, I believe Canada had a good opportunity and took it. I'd really like to know more about the subject, so if you have some pointers (books, websites, etc.), it'd be cool to have some references:)

Correct me if I'm wrong, the WTO is responsible for writing the rules and guidelines of a freer market (aka globalization). But they only manage the economic part. So what we have left is the environnement, social issues, etc. to take care of. Wouldn't it be a government job? Since the market would be strictly regulated if we open the borders (at least I hope so...), would everyone have an equal opportunity (economically, again)? Last question: can there be a globalization process without having every country of the world joining it?

lmao.. 'sti!

http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/ib/2000/041200.htm ^Well explained

I've been reading on the subject lately (very broadly) and to me, it seems like a good idea to boost economy, if applicated correctly. What are your views on an economic globalization? Good or bad thing? (by the way, if you happen to have some good links about it, I wouldn't say no to having them - thanks )

Tabarnak (couldn't help it)=(

.... You see, when someone posts that Some of you need to work on refraining from flaming others and keeping things within the subject matter. while saying himself Ok you flaming gayb, -*BAD WORD*--sucking, monkey loving, flower-power groupie, sit there with your cold heart the day before, that's hypocrit. I could apply it to this too: Finally, to our foreign friends, seek knowledge of your own country so you can adequately defend it when questioned. It's a shame and you look like a fool when you don't even know history of your own country. Age is not an excuse. Read his posts about Canada and you'll understand. How can you not call that hypocritical? From a psycological point of view, this is what I call projection. Taking your blame, and saying it's the other guy's fault. Come on...jesus... Bye.