Advertisement

Herald-Mail Forums

October 27, 2008

Last week's question:



Assuming that you watched one or more of the presidential debates, what did you learn that affected your desire to vote for one or the other candidate?

o Their positions on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars -- 6 votes (29 percent).

o Their positions on the U.S. economy -- 11 votes (52 percent).

o Their positions on abortion -- 2 votes (10 percent).

o I missed the debates. Will there be repeats? -- 2 votes (10 percent).

Comments

o Posted by notlaffen, Oct. 23:

I watched all three of the presidential debates and the vice presidential debate. I learned that John S. McCain should never be the president of this country.

Advertisement

I believe that what he lacks in intelligence, judgement and temperament is reinforced by his belligerence, impetuosity and gullibility.

For proof, just look at his campaign advisers, his choice for vice president and his former senior economics advisor, Phil Gramm, the person who said that "we have sort of become a nation of whiners."

Of course, Mr. Gramm, like Mr. McCain, is a multi-millionaire and has nothing to whine about.

o Posted by oupa, Oct. 23:

Well, I watched also and seem to have come away with quite another opinion. McCain may not be the best choice for the job but I feel he is the best of what we have to choose from! Personally, I tend to agree with Sen. Gramm.

So much in this debate is about jealousy. Constant references to "the rich" and "millionaires." Wake up, people. Who do you think owns those companies most of us work for?

Where do you think you'll work if we tax those people out of business? Guess what, business people are in business to make money. If they can't make money, neither will we!




Next week's question



During this election season, especially on the national level, many citizens have expressed the feeling that the candidate they oppose is not only unsuitable, but downright evil. What accounts for this excess of ill feelings?

o The media whipping up frenzies on issues that really amount to nothing.

o The candidates themselves, who have decided that if they have to be nasty to win, then that's what they will do.

o Voters who lack the patience to explore the issues and who instead latch on to superficial aspects of the campaigns.

o Political parties, whose leaders realize that if the voters ever looked closely at what they're offering, they would toss all of them out.

o People who get all excited because they believe the results of a single election will either save or destroy the world.

The Herald-Mail Articles
|
|
|