Election 2008, United States

[maddog]

The idea that "if we don't benefit it, eliminate it" is completely against true Christian ideals, and is morally repulsive. No one said that they necessarily need to be jailed for life. That may often be the case, but I feel that in cases of truly rehabilitated criminals, they should still be paroled.

Not to mention that the taxpayers are still being charged if we're killing the criminals. Lethal injections aren't cheap. (This is assuming we're not just using a noose tied to a tree branch)

obviously, this situation of if we don't benefit from it, eliminate it, is in the criminal world for the most terrible of criminals. the majority of people dont benefit from prisions rehibilation programs, old people dont benefit from schools, young people dont benefit from medicare but they still exist. for criminals have had truely commited the worst crimes, death is a fitting punishment for them. this logic i am using really only applies to those dangerous criminals; applying it to other place doesn't make since as you pointed out.

the lethal injections are mostly potiassium, thats just a simple chemical.

 

[DM]

From the point of view of a guy with a BS in Criminal Justice:

The death penalty is in place to act as a deterrent. It has failed in this regard because it is not being utilized in the proper way TO BE a deterrent. Last I checked our prison system was based on rehabilitation, and it has failed in that stead as well.

This is kinda rambling and pointless, but what I'm trying to get across is our entire prison system needs to be overhauled and rethought.

 

[Surgo]

Depends on the regulations in place...(which is why I hate the minimum wage - with a minimum wage a company that would not pay 5.75/hr to hire poor people in an urban area simply chooses not to hire them - but if they're willing to pay 4.75/hr they may get hired. Income disparity > no income at all).

I can't believe this quote went all this time without being responded to. Minimum wage is great, because the free market sucks at placing value on things like labor. It's not necessarily horrible at it, but it's not great at it either.

Companies wouldn't be paying that little less for the kind of labor you're talking about. They'd be paying a lot less. One merely needs to look at the history of a place like East Harlem, 1970s and prior, to see why the minimum wage is a good idea.

And it's not like anyone can even live on today's minimum wage in most places. Which is why places like East Harlem end up the way they do: residents look for a more profitable enterprise than legal work, like pushing and smuggling drugs.


As far as the death penalty goes, my opinion is that I don't care whether or not it's a deterrent. What it's really doing is taking out the trash.

 

[Syberia]

I don't care whether or not it's a deterrent. What it's really doing is taking out the trash.

It's only not a deterrent because the kind of people who go out and commit capital crimes are the kinds of people who either (a) don't think, (b) are overcome with emotion, usually rage, leading to the commission of the crime and then you get (a), or (c) don't ever expect to get caught. All three of these situations lead to a criminal who's in no position to be deterred by any type of punishment, because they're either not thinking straight, or don't ever plan to be punished. Does that mean we shouldn't punish criminals? Of course not.

Also, people sit on death row way too long to ever be deterred by the death penalty, even if they do consider it. If you're going to kill someone today, what does it matter if you might get a needle in your arm 20 years from now?

 

[Luduan]

obviously, this situation of if we don't benefit from it, eliminate it, is in the criminal world for the most terrible of criminals. the majority of people dont benefit from prisions rehibilation programs, old people dont benefit from schools, young people dont benefit from medicare but they still exist. for criminals have had truely commited the worst crimes, death is a fitting punishment for them. this logic i am using really only applies to those dangerous criminals; applying it to other place doesn't make since as you pointed out.

the lethal injections are mostly potiassium, thats just a simple chemical.

Those criminals are not dangerous once they are in prison (aside from attacking other inmates, which in your logic would be a good thing as it lessens the taxpayers' burdern). Extreme mental patients also do not benefit society and can be dangerous. Should we kill them as well? As Syberia noted, most murderers are not deterred by the death penalty anyway.

By the way, the death penalty is NOT cheap:

388 Florida inmates now on death row

0 Florida executions in 2007 and 2008

$51-million Annual cost of Florida's death penalty, according to 2000 newspaper analysis.

$24-million Cost per execution

Dec. 12, 2006*​

*Source: http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/article460255.ece

If we wanted a really tangible way of saving taxpayer dollars, we would not punish people for victimless crimes.

 

[God.]

ah, if only social progams weren't by and large spectacular failures

I mean, seriously, who the fuck gets OFF welfare for example

Seriously has political liberalism done ANYTHING for poor people or for minorities?

has it ever tried to? even "left-wing" american politicians are still in the pockets of capitalism's lovely inherited-wealth psuedo-aristocracies, social programs aren't as much meant to help poor people, just to keep them barely content enough so they don't take any radical mass action to change things. capitalism's learned a thing or two.

the thing that would most likely lead to free market capitalism's ultimate demise, is if free market capitalism were truly put into place on a large scale. social welfare programs were created to curtail the appeal of socialism. the capitalists will give a little bit of their money so poor people can eat and live relatively well as long as they can still exploit them.

 

[CaptKirby]

Not to mini-mod or anything, but what is the point of having a political thoughts/viewpoints/philosophy thread and an election thread if the election thread just ends up being a thread about political/philosophical ideology?

Does anyone else think that the Obama thirty minute political advertisement was the death knell for McCain? I think the election was already lost, but this served to incredibly energize the Democratic party base and to portray Obama highly positively at the same time that McCain continues to negatively polemicize Obama as a sketchy guy (and Palin even more overtly so). I think the election was already wrapped up, but that this put it even further out of reach for McCain.

 

[Mekkah]

Not to mini-mod or anything, but what is the point of having a political thoughts/viewpoints/philosophy thread and an election thread if the election thread just ends up being a thread about political/philosophical ideology?

The point of the first one was to prevent its content to be in the second one...so yeah...

 

[DM]

If we wanted a really tangible way of saving taxpayer dollars, we would not punish people for victimless crimes.

Dude, don't even get me started on that shit. That is a whole new thread in and of itself.

And I'm sorry, I didn't even realize this wasn't the election thread! Yeah, so back to the election: I'm applying for the free 2 hours paid voting leave from work. Company policy, woohoo!

 

[Misty]

Not to mini-mod or anything, but what is the point of having a political thoughts/viewpoints/philosophy thread and an election thread if the election thread just ends up being a thread about political/philosophical ideology?

Does anyone else think that the Obama thirty minute political advertisement was the death knell for McCain? I think the election was already lost, but this served to incredibly energize the Democratic party base and to portray Obama highly positively at the same time that McCain continues to negatively polemicize Obama as a sketchy guy (and Palin even more overtly so). I think the election was already wrapped up, but that this put it even further out of reach for McCain.

Rasmussen did some polling on the ad. It was a wash with independents; 36% of them said it was good, 33% said it wasn't. On the other hand, 21% of Republicans approved, so it may help him get some Republican support.

To be fair, this ad is nothing new - it was common to see this kind of thing in the 50s and 60s - but nowadays I think a lot of people may see this as seriously pretentious. I know Ross Perot did it, but Perot needed anything he could get. Obama, on the other hand, is pretty much universally known, and the ad really didn't say much of anything new. It was a major risk, and it may have paid off, but I dunno.

 

[DT]

Just a little election facts:

In last 3 elections, mock elections held at elementary, middle, and high schools have called elections rights

1997 Bill Clinton

2001-2008 George Bush

so far kids have been right mock elections now are showing Obama, but then again this Election is alot of popularity Between obama, and palin (tina fey), 4 days will show.

 

[Surgo]

So uh, where are those "facts" from?

 

[Luduan]

In local election news, Kay Hagan is suing incumbent North Carolina Senator Elizabeth Dole for defamation because of an ad claiming Hagan has ties to an atheist group. I am quite embarrassed for my state that this is considered even a remotely relevant issue. Hagan could have taken the high road and used this as an opportunity to promote tolerance and separation of church and state, but instead chose to declare the ad "despicable" (which it is, but not for the reason she indicates). Jesse Helms is reaching from the grave, I suppose. At least Hagan maintains a 6-point lead according to Rasmussen.

 

[Steeler]

i don't really think the ad could hurt obama's chances in any way, because obama would have to make some really big screw up to lose the massive lead he has right now.

mccain has been screwed ever since the financial crisis started, its a big reason for obama's massive lead right now. seriously, states where obama is expected to "safely" (read: by a large majority) win give him like 272 electoral college votes. this is not including states that are "slightly" in obama's favor, or toss-up states. and mccain is losing ground in most close states thanks to obama's massive ground game...

gg mccain

 

[Misty]

Obama's lead is hardly "massive" - it's only about 5-6 points and that could evaporate quickly if something happens.

Also I'm curious about the 272 figure. I think you mean 273 (Kerry states + Iowa + Colorado + New Mexico), although I'd throw Virginia into the mix for a nice 286.

 

[hsb39]

your vote will make the most difference if its for a 3rd party just cause the total votes are smaller. if you get a million more people to vote for barr let's say, it will be much more noticable than a million more to vote for mccain or obama and you are the same proportion of that million either way, if that makes any sense (probably doesnt but oh well)

still voting for nader, and yes I really do think he'd do a better job than the two main candidates. :)

My problem with voting Nader (and others third party nominees) is that it is essentially taking a vote away from the candidate that you would have voted for otherwise. I don't think that there is a preferential voting system in America, it makes those things a lot easier. If you would not have voted in the situation of those third party candidates not existing, than it doesn't really effect much.

 

[CaptKirby]

Wow, paid leave, that is nice DM.

I know it was common in the past, but the timing was what I found the best. I really think the live rally it shifted to at the end was incredible too. I guess maybe I am overrating it, however.

 

[Deck Knight]

Depressing Obammercial was depressing: America sucks, so elect me. Hope Change blah blah "I am impressed that Obama is a father and happened to be in a confirmation hearing for Condoleeza Rice" blah.

Obama calls keeping the money you earned through your work selfish. Demands we elect him grand redistributor because only he knows how best to spend everyone else's money, etc. Has not commented on Rashid Khalidi tape the LATimes is holding from the public.

Still a fraudulent, duplicitous douchebag, etc.

My prediction: Obama can't seal the deal, loses by around 10 electoral votes but wins popular vote, Obots riot in the street, proceed to call every inanimate object around them racist, AlGore demands recount.

 

[Mario With Lasers]

My prediction: Obama can't seal the deal, loses by around 10 electoral votes but wins popular vote, Obots riot in the street, proceed to call every inanimate object around them racist, AlGore demands recount.

And then, Civil War.

 

[moot]

Mock election at my school today had most people I knew voting for Obama, whilst I myself voted for La Riva (I'm an Obama supporter but the fact they had a Socialist Workers Party candidate on the ballot in this school just made me laugh so hard).
It was pretty interesting at least, I'll post the results as soon as I know them (Monday probably).

 

[Deck Knight]

And then, Civil War.

Most of the places people vote liberal have gun bans. Most of the places that grow food trend conservative. Liberal cities are literally surrounded by a sea of Red counties.

Shortest civil war ever. Conservatives have the food, the guns, and the thoroughfares. You can shut down New York City overnight just by barricading the bridges.

 

[hsb39]

Most of the places people vote liberal have gun bans. Most of the places that grow food trend conservative. Liberal cities are literally surrounded by a sea of Red counties.

Shortest civil war ever. Conservatives have the food, the guns, and the thoroughfares. You can shut down New York City overnight just by barricading the bridges.

Don't forget about foreign support...

 

[SAN DIEGO SUPER CHARGERS!]

I think the only question now is if it will be a landslide. Obama might even pick up Arizona.

I find the Senate races more interesting at this point. I don't think the Democrats will get the 60 seat filibuster proof senate. 58 or 59 is my best guess.

I do think Franken can win in Minnesota though. Its a three way race there. All he has to do is get all the Democrats to vote and he wins.

 

[Deck Knight]

Don't forget about foreign support...

I greatly fear Canadian insurgents and Mexican gangsters in a Civil War fought over not electing a black guy president. The Mexicans would probably just use it to bolster gangs, and Canada doesn't have an army worth talking about or a compelling interest to shed blood over Barack Obama. No other nation would waste the air power. Quebec wouldn't care unless Obama called himself French so the Northeast corridor couldn't really count on reinforcements.

Professors make horrible soldiers and the more radical they are, generally the more craven. Europeans depend on the US for their defense. They stay neutral at best or suppress the libs to get it over with.

And this is assuming that the war will be split amongst every person who voted for Obama and not just African Americans. There's the small matter of the apathy of nonvoters, and in the case of African Americans only, The KKK and JimCrowecrats leftover from when the Democratic founders started the vile organization wouldn't jump for that anyway.

Honestly, the thought of a liberal Civil War is ridiculous on its face, but if it were to occur any honest reading of geographic resources and behavior has the libs at an insurmountable disadvantage. At best they can well up in the cities using them as fortresses until the sea and airports are taken over. They have no winning strategy to take over the vast tracts of land and infrastructure, and a large base of the libs that would be able to use a gun would rather loot in the chaos.

Re: Franken

Franken hasn't a shot in hell of winning Minnesota. Even the lib papers endorsed Coleman. Franken is a vulgar pile of dog excrement. He'd appreciate me calling him that since he prefers the crudest humor possible.

 

[umbarsc]

I haven't really researched Franken or Coleman enough to have a good decision. I'm probably voting Franken, though, just because I'm very Liberal person. Also, I'm rather bored with all the attack ads against Franken, I see about three of them at every commercial break when I'm watching TV. That's not to say that there aren't a fair share of attack ads against Coleman, though (nearly all of which convey the message that Coleman = Bush), but I find many of the attacks against Franken simply ridiculous.

Perfect example: as I was typing this, I saw a commercial saying "Franken demeans women, humiliates minorities, writes pornography, and laughs at the disabled."