(November 26, 2014 at 10:03 am)Heywood Wrote: I can justify why we should have gone to war with Iraq.

Not sensibly. No achievement made in Iraq in the last eleven-and-a-half years justifies the waste in lives, money, and national strength.

(November 26, 2014 at 10:03 am)Heywood Wrote: The difference between you and I is you are willing to give Obama's lie a pass...and not Bush. You are making a special pleading because you are giving Obama's lie a pass because you think his blunder wasn't nearly as big of a mistake as Bush's was. That's not a good reason to give Obama's lie a pass.

You seem to think I'm a fan of Obamacare; I'm not. I think universal medical care should be a government program; because as it's written, Obamacare represents a massive shift of tax-dollars to the insurance industry, which is still a for-profit concern. I've said in several posts about the issue that I think the profit motive should not be harnessed to medical care.

As for Obama lying, I'm not giving him a pass for it. I'm simply not as interested because history and foreign policy are my fields of interest, and domestic policy is a distant third. I have only superficial knowledge of issues like health care and economics, so naturally I limit my posting in those areas.

You see, I'm not a big fan of running my mouth about things I don't know much about.

Alternative vote sounds nice in theory, but I have a feeling the practical result would be no change. There's no spoiler effect in the case of a large percentage of one candidate's votes being siphoned off by a popular sub-party, but only if the independents draw largely from only one candidate. I think in practice this effect would have negligible impact on the actual outcome of races and simply increase the complexity of the process.

(November 26, 2014 at 4:57 pm)rasetsu Wrote: Alternative vote sounds nice in theory, but I have a feeling the practical result would be no change. There's no spoiler effect in the case of a large percentage of one candidate's votes being siphoned off by a popular sub-party, but only if the independents draw largely from only one candidate. I think in practice this effect would have negligible impact on the actual outcome of races and simply increase the complexity of the process.

If the alternative vote were used, I think Clinton loses in 1992 as the Perot voters break toward Bush. I think Bush loses in 2000 as the Nader voters break toward Gore.

The world would be a significantly different place today if an Alternative vote system was used in America. Of course we really don't know and can't know but I find it to be intuitively true.

(November 26, 2014 at 11:28 am)Heywood Wrote: I'm sure there are people who vote democrat because they don't want to see a republican in office.

Hello.

Quote:Implement instant run off elections or alternative vote and my voting habits will change significantly.

That's nice.

Any chance you'll answer my question about the Iraq War? If you were president in 2003, would you have done it?

(November 26, 2014 at 5:58 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: That's nice.

Any chance you'll answer my question about the Iraq War? If you were president in 2003, would you have done it?

I didn't answer your question because this isn't a thread about Iraq.

(November 26, 2014 at 6:04 pm)Heywood Wrote: I didn't answer your question because this isn't a thread about Iraq.

(November 26, 2014 at 6:12 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(November 26, 2014 at 6:04 pm)Heywood Wrote: I didn't answer your question because this isn't a thread about Iraq.

You know I don't mind writing an off topic sentence or two.....like I did with the alternative vote. But to answer your question requires a lengthy essay. I'm sorry but I see no reason to contribute so much effort to your attempt to derail this thread.

(November 26, 2014 at 6:16 pm)Heywood Wrote: You know I don't mind writing an off topic sentence or two.....like I did with the alternative vote. But to answer your question requires a lengthy essay. I'm sorry but I see no reason to contribute so much effort to your attempt to derail this thread.

(November 26, 2014 at 10:03 am)Heywood Wrote:

(November 26, 2014 at 9:05 am)bennyboy Wrote: Hmmm.

Heywood is both a theist and a Republican. If there were only some connection between Biblican thinking and Republican thinking, we might learn something.

I don't fit in with the republicans Benny. I'm a real independent....not a nominal one like so many others.

---

(November 26, 2014 at 1:18 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: Indeed. But you and I were talking about Bush's shitty decision-making. All the democratic mistakes in the world don't justify Dubya's blunder ... something you don't seem to understand.

I can justify why we should have gone to war with Iraq. I cannot justify Bush lying about why we were going to war. I agree wholeheartedly that if you have to lie to implement a policy.....its probably a bad policy.

The difference between you and I is you are willing to give Obama's lie a pass...and not Bush. You are making a special pleading because you are giving Obama's lie a pass because you think his blunder wasn't nearly as big of a mistake as Bush's was. That's not a good reason to give Obama's lie a pass.

(November 26, 2014 at 6:04 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(November 26, 2014 at 5:58 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: That's nice.

Any chance you'll answer my question about the Iraq War? If you were president in 2003, would you have done it?

I didn't answer your question because this isn't a thread about Iraq.

lol

(November 26, 2014 at 1:07 am)Surgenator Wrote:

(November 26, 2014 at 12:42 am)Heywood Wrote: You are not the arbiter of sound domestic policy....the american people are....and the american people have spoken. Obamacare is a disaster.

Please point out how "Obamacare is a disaster." I see it as a success.

P.S. Just because a law can be better does NOT mean it is a disaster.

More patients flocking to Emergency rooms for primary care treatment because of Obamacare.