Do people who have already decided to vote for Obama spite the Republican party?
yes
Side Score: 23
|
 |
no
Side Score: 59
|
|
|
|
|
-1
points
1
point
-3
points
No one has voted for him outside of primaries. The election has not happened yet, so the answer is clearly NO! People only voted to choose the Democratic nominee, which doesn't necessarily mean he'll win the election. He may be popular, but that doesn't mean its out of spite to the Republicans. Spite would not be an appropriate word either, people probably voice problems with the Republicans because their form of governance isn't doing the US any favours at the moment. Definition of spite:Malicious ill will prompting an urge to hurt or humiliate. You also make the mistake of assuming that Obama supporters don't know much about him. I think people know more of him than when the Cocaine-snorting, drunk-driving, national service-avoiding, bible-thumping, human rights-violating warmonger Dubya came into power. Side: no
1
point
0
points
Aren't the Republicans deserving of spite at this point? I mean, lets assume for a second that people would be voting for Obama out of spite. So? The Bush administration has been one monumental f*ck-up after another, and never once claiming responsibility for any mistakes. I think that has earned the Republicans a little spite. You can argue that people aren't making a sound political decision by voting out of spite and there's some merit to that, but really people are just showing their extreme dissatisfaction with the Republican party, and that's democracy my friends. Side: no
0
points
Are there currently any world events that make you want to chose a leader that can handle it? Or are the spiteful people so focused on getting the Republican party out that they don't care about the qualifications of the leader they are choosing? Can a political party screw up so much that it warrants dismissing anyone they offer up without first trying to determine if that person can do a better job than the alternative? Is it perfectly fine to cut your nose off to spite your face? Side: yes
|
Q: Are people voting for Obama to spite the Republican party? The only people who have voted for Obama are those who voted in primaries. If by "people," we mean "democrats," then I think the answer to that is obviously not. Democrats vote within the party, not to spite their rivals, but because of corresponding ideology, right? If we're talking about independents and republicans supporting Obama, sure. Negative feelings about the GOP might come into play. I'd say disillusionment rather than spite. Side: no
0
points
OK, I see your point. The question is very misleading. What I meant to ask is, are the people who have already decided that they are going to vote for Obama doing so to spite the Republican party. The reason I say spite is because I don't believe that the public knows enough about Obama at this point to make that decision. Side: no
There is enough information out there on both candidates if you know where to look and don't just watch fox news. We all know what spite means, and I know that part of this process (if not in most cases) involves trying to keep certain people out of office... but what point does it make if people do? If they are voting dem. to spite the republicans, isn't it obvious that they don't like anything the republicans are dishing out anyway? What I mean is, if there were a candidate on an opposing party, that you would like to spite, but the candidate was way better than the one in your party, would you still be so spiteful? Probably not, if you're a level headed voter. Question should be: "Do idiots vote for particular parties rather than the candidates?" Side: yes
Let's try it this way: Are the people who have already decided to vote for McCain doing so to spite the Democrats? I certainly hope not. I hope that people vote for McCain because they agree with his policies. We live in a two-party system, people disagree, and sure, they dislike the other party. Part of voting for who you want involves voting against who you don't. Also, how much does the public need to know about Barack Obama or John McCain other than what is already available in the media and on the net? Their flossing habits? The information is there, so I'm wondering if you posed this question to prove a pet idea that Obama supporters are ill-informed and angry with Republicans. It's sort of a leading question, you know? Side: yes
I think, sadly, there are people who will vote Obama simply to spite the republican party. I say this is sad because some will never bother to look at the other side candidate simply because of their political affiliation. It's the same as rooting for the Marlins instead of the Yankees. People need to understand that politics isn't about what team you're on. It's about the person you feel is going to handle the presidency best. Side: no
I think people are voting for Obama because of the Republican's primary argument against him... that he's too inexperienced. The last thing we need in the White House at the moment is another seasoned bureaucrat. What experience is he lacking? What do we as taxpayers believe he should have learned from the last 8 years other than what not to do? I don't think people vote out of spite, hell people hardly show up to vote out of duty and privilege. It's time to wake up and start making our elected officials accountable again. Their actions should put the best interest of the nation before their interest in making money for themselves and their buddies. Who wants to bet that George W takes a fat salary job with a major oil company and that Cheney goes back to work for Halliburton almost immediately after the inauguration? Side: no
1
point
Well, you can't assume that the next president of the U.S. will not take a fat salary job after office nor that he will put the best interest of the nation before his interest in making money for himself and his buddies. We have to pass judgment after the fact. As far as not needing another seasoned bureaucrat.... It looks like Iran may be building an atomic bomb. Does that concern you? Side: yes
1
point
To be honest? No it really doesn't concern me. The U.S, England, France, Russia, Germany, China, India, Pakistan and North FREAKING Korea all have confirmed nuclear weapons! Dozens more countries like Canada, Australia and etc. have the technology to create one if they want. With all these countries having atomic weapons, shouldn't we be living in bomb shelters? They could go off any minute!? No. It's called mutual assured destruction and no one wants that. Only 1 country - the good ole USA - every used them in conflict and that was over 60 years ago. No one who obtains these weapons does so with the purpose of actually using one because it is akin to committing global suicide. So why does Iran want one? Hmm . . . maybe because they are under contact threat of attack from the United States and want to have the ultimate fuck off or else threat! If they had an A bomb, the republicans would have to reconsider invading, because an atomic assault is just too high a price to pay for increased Haliburton profits. Side: no
You might as well say that they're voting for Obama to spite the DEMOCRATS! Look at who is following Obama... the neutrals, moderates, and new-era Dems as well as disgruntled Reps. By putting Obama on the Dem ticket they've made a solid point to the Democratic party that there are more voters out there wanting more change than either the Reps or (old school) Dems are prepared for. It's the "traditional" Democratic following that Obama now has to win over. Besides, if you wanna spite the Republican party, you're better off voting for a truly liberal group--like the Green Party. Side: no
0
points
Yeah, everyone seems to want change but no one is defining what that change should be. Here's what some one else has to say about it. Side: no
I've heard a lot of people trying to write off Obama's success. Sure there are some contributing factors, but I think what it comes down to is that people know a good leader when they see one. He is intelligent and charismatic and genuinely cares about what is right for America, rather than what will benefit himself. I think people recognize this and are supporting him for this reason. Side: no
0
points
OK, I'm not opposing you because I don't like Obama. I'm opposing you because I don't believe that we can ever know a good leader when we see one. We know a good leader when we see his track record. I agree that Obama is intelligent and charismatic. I also tend to believe that Obama honestly believes that he will do the right thing for America. But what he believes is right may not line up with what you believe is right. That is why we have to question any politician's track record. We need to discern their agenda, motives, and intentions. Obama and McCain have both done things that can be construed as political expediency. That doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. Side: yes
2
points
2
points
Usually people vote for people who most agree with their viewpoints. I would venture a guess that people who have already made up their minds about Obama do not agree with the conservative viewpoint. It doesn't matter who McCain is and what he stands for, as long as it is conservative or more conservative than Obama people who are more on the left side of the spectrum are going to go with the left choice. People who are not on the left of the spectrum but are disgruntled with how the Republican party operates or find their specific policies to be failures or amoral usually will just stay home in November. Most people don't vote against their principles to spite someone who isn't faithfully serving them, as far as I know anyways. Side: no
1
point
Well put. I voted you up. I really don't see McCain as being conservative per say. I would categorize him as closer to center than Obama. Even though his stance on the war is to the right, he has a lot of left leaning ideas. I think that the Republican party chose McCain for this reason. The GOP sees the country leaning left and they want to capture some of those votes so they nominated someone who (they consider to be) is close to the center. Now, I don't know much about Obama but I think he's going to win the presidency. As other people have pointed out, I'm lazy for not doing my research on line. But I don't have the time. I spend all my time here arguing with people over stuff that I have no control over and ultimately wont matter in the grand scheme of things ;) But I digress. My impression is that Obama is further left than Hillary. Far away from center. So either the far left just acquired a large number of new young voters or people who normally have centrist views have moved far left which made me wonder if the centrist were being spiteful. Side: no
1
point
Spite the Republican party? No, not necessarily. The Republican party as an entity doesn't occupy enough of my thought, for example, to be important in the decision. To spite what the Republicans did with the power they possessed for the last eight years? That might be a bit closer. It's not personal, it's business. The Republicans abused the power they had, and have done things to American liberties that would make the founding fathers shudder, and that's only what we know about so far. No, the Republicans did a bad job and will be rightfully tossed, I believe, in November. It's not personal, it's business. Side: no
I don't think that people who vote for Obama spite the Republican party, but they are just flat out retarded! Obama uses fancy-shmancy words with little meaning to win over his audience, and while they are in some sort of retarded trance he hits them with how bad he will be as a president. He even said he was planning on getting rid of all of our powerful weapons because the reason we are being attacked is that we are too much of a threat! If we are such a threat, people should stay away from us! Getting rid of our defense weapons will make us vulnerable and we will be attacked more! So, ya, I don't think Obama fans spite the republican party, they are just F*ING RETARDS! Side: no
1
point
1
point
1
point
-3
points
|
