Forums → WEPR → Regular's Lounge III
| 94 | 18541 |
This thread is for non-serious discussion for people who are devoted to Armor Games and make a point to come here often. There's no rules to how many Armor Points you need or how many posts, it's just about being a Flash Gamer and wanting to chat with others. I do ask, however, that you follow these rules as well as the TOS that Armor Games requires.
1. No Flaming (Remand Kind!)
2. No Asking For Help/Support.
3. Don't curse more than acceptable.
4. Respect all modserators/admins if they post.
5. No page stretching, random bumps, or posts with little to no point.
6. HAVE FUN!
Reminder: Just because we all play Flash games doesn't mean that's the only thing that should be discussed in this thread. This is more of a "lounge" (as the name suggest) and all topics are welcome. If more than one topic is being discussed at once, feel free to post a "RE: Topic X" header in bold. It's entirely optional, but it will help to make a cleaner thread.
- 94 Replies
Okay, I'm not even going to try to answer that panda/monkey/banana question. All my answers are way too inappropriate for this forum.
As for the Clinton/Obama issue...why would there be such a barrier to a woman running for president? There are a number of precedents being set here, including Obama's "race" card...but perhaps you're suggesting that gender is a bigger barrier than race?
In a parallel (in the spirit of introducing new things), the federal government in Australia is definitely one of change. First, after several decades of campaigning, new PM Kevin Rudd unequivocally said "sorry" to the generations of Aboriginal people for the century-long attempt by Australia's colonisers to commit genocide against the indigenous peoples of the land. Also, the gender barrier is already being trampled on with wild abandon: after becoming PM, Rudd almost immediately left on international business, leaving Julia Gillard as the first woman to perform Australia's PM duties. Also, notable feminist (and Sex-discrimination Commissioner) Quentin Bryce will be the first woman Governor-General of Australia in the history of the role. Finally, the government is finally introducing stronger g@y rights laws that go one step further towards equality (though they stop short of treading on the 'g@y marriage' line, for now).
In 2007, Australia voted in the new government because they figured it was time for a change. I'm wondering if the US will see similar changes in such an event that a pro-change president is sworn in.
No, but I think woman will be discouraged if Clinton loses.
Yes, it would be cool if Obama or Clinton changed around the govt. but it would be hard, with all the conspiracy in modern USA.
What if Clinton+Obama teamed up? I know this has been on news, but I would like to hear from you guys what you think.
They have indeed mentioned that. Whoever wins the democratic vote would run for president, with the other as VP. I think this might be a problem, considering all the bickering there has been between the two as the race goes on. Would not the American people see this as discouraging, and possibly choose the presidential candidate who agrees with his VP, rather than disagrees? I don't know, I would still vote for them, but I think that it would make people uneasy.
If that's the case, I think the true pivotal moment in the Democratic campaign will be the days immediately following the end of the primaries, when the results are revealed.
Will they be able to leave aside the past acrimony and work together? If they can be convincingly united, this might make the campaign stronger than ever. If it doesn't work, then...well yes you get the idea.
It's a risky gambit.
I wonder if there is really so much division between the two, or if they are just disagreeing to make the other look worse, now. Mayhap when the scores are settled, they agree on more than they wish to make it seem, now.
The thing about directly running against opposition in politics is that the opposition actually dictates your policy releases...you have to play yourself so that you're presenting the image of a person who has a distinct policy and distinct emphasis, compared to the other person.
This can wildly distort what you actually stand for, so it's a fine line to tread. In the Aus 07 elections, newcomer Rudd managed to dance it so well that most media commentators and myself started wondering who the real Rudd was- all I knew was that he was playing the "olicy musical chairs" really well to shadow the incumbents on certain issues but present himself as "a fresh alternative" enough to stop people short of calling him an outright "me too man".
All I can say for *that* is thank god he turned out to be the real deal, and quick smart too. During and after the fact makes a huge difference.
I personally think it would great if Clinton and Obama teamed up as Pres and VicePres. But I just do not seeing happening. I think that there is just to much ego involved at this point. Which is sad because American and it's people should be what matters most.
I personally think it would great if Clinton and Obama teamed up as Pres and VicePres. But I just do not seeing happening. I think that there is just to much ego involved at this point. Which is sad because American and it's people should be what matters most
Well why would Clinton & Obama team up?The wopuld vote fight for being the offical President so there really should only be one President and no vice presidents that would be kinda stupid who would got to the Press Confereances and which would do speeches?So I clearly think only one President by vote.
Crazynaitor, are you saying we should rearrange the whole system of gov't so we do not have a VP anymore? I don't think this is really an issue as of right now, although our current VP has accidentally shot some people (^.^) that is a bit of an anomaly. The president is basically in charge, but there are specific duties assigned to the VP, as well as taking over presidential duties if anything happens to the president.
No but if Clinton and Obama wanted to be President both wanted to be President.Why would one want to be Vice President DragonMistress?
No, what we were saying is that after one of them gets the democratic nomination, the other one may become the winner's runningmate, and ultimately the VP if the winner wins the presidency.
I had thought that would be a great ticket, but I just really don't think either candidate would actually go for it.
Since Obama is all but assured of clenching the nomination, I don't see Clinton in the "back seat" so to speak. I think if the Democrats are really worried about his electability, he's going to need someone other than Clinton.
But if clinton does accept the back seat as you said then they would be a stronger party all together, if they can put aside there differences.
Obama has the race card to play while clinton has the gender. What does McCain have? The elderly? Together the two of them, Clinton and Obama, would be a very strong force. Also I like some ideas from both of them so if they could take the best out of both it would be perfect for me.
as i am i republican i have to support McCain. he is a war veteran and i think he can turn the war in Iraq around.
What will the Democrats do, they will pull us out and let the terrorist reqroup and become an even bigger threat
You must be logged in to post a reply!