• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

How interested in the US elections are you?

Discussion in 'UK and Ireland' started by GreenMunchkin, Sep 8, 2008.

Do the US elections matter to you?

  1. Hugely important

  2. Taking a casual interest

  3. Meh...

  4. There's an election?

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. GreenMunchkin

    GreenMunchkin Likes things. And stuff. But mostly things. Supporter

    +6,771
    Christian
    Married
    Honestly, for the first time ever, I think it's actually lose lose. The idea of either of them in office is unconscionable. It highlights how dreadful America's 2-party system is.
     
  2. artybloke

    artybloke Well-Known Member

    +427
    Christian Seeker
    UK-Labour
    Except that one is supported by evidence, and the other is just fantasy.

    Why can't God use random mutation and natural selection anyway?
     
  3. Kel_ee

    Kel_ee New Member

    87
    +10
    Christian
    Private

    Being from the US, I would have to agree with you. This past weekend I attended a family gathering. Politics was one issue everyone promised not to discuss... didn't not happen. Of course, we got into this big debate on who was best to run this country. In the end I think we we're all a bit clueless. Personally I think both are full of bologna. They say what you want to hear and do what they want after elected. Being as they have only 1/3 vote, I think we Americans should worry more on who is in the congress.


    There are so many things wrong with how are country is ran by our government. I fear that nothing will change. BUT, doesn't the bible mention that at some point, it won't get better?

    2 Timothy 3:1-5 "Men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, self-assuming, haughty, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, disloyal, having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, slanderers, without-self control, fierce, without love of goodness, betrayers, headstrong, puffed up with pride, lovers of pleasures rather than lovers of God, having a form of godly devotion but proving false to it's power."



    I think that having structure with a government is needed, otherwise we would have complete kaos. On the other hand, I don't feel getting to wrapped up in the elections is needed. In the end, which ever one is elected, I don't think the outcome of their decisions will be much different.

     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2008
  4. Judy02

    Judy02 Well-Known Member

    +470
    Christian
    Single
    Well from what I've read (which isn't loads but enough to give me a basic summerised idea of their policies) I think I'd say Obama. Even though I don't agree with all of his policies, I think I prefer his policies over Mccain's overall. Lets hope some of his ideas are actually lived out in practice.
     
  5. huldah153

    huldah153 Active Member

    501
    +12
    edit: double post
     
  6. huldah153

    huldah153 Active Member

    501
    +12
    Both candidates stink, but Americans should vote for Obama for a number of reasons. One, McCain is a traitor who puts the interests of Israel before that of his own country.

    "Bomb bomb bomb Iran." - John McCain
     
  7. AllTalkNoAction

    AllTalkNoAction Potentially Wonderful

    +70
    Pentecostal
    Single
    Today the US were justifiably branded Terrorists by Syria because they attacked and killed innocent civilians.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7693583.stm

    Even if they did kill an insurgent or two they have put the battle for minds back a long way today.

    Did either of the condidates mention this?

    Of did they just keep repeating their platitudes?

    It's on days like this that you see how sick, insular (US-concern-based), insensitive and self-serving the American political system is.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2008
  8. Minty

    Minty S.O.P.H.I.E

    +632
    Pagan
    Single
    UK-Greens
    I voted Meh...I hate politics...it always gives me a bad headache, I suppose because along with religion and sport it's one of the subjects that always gets the most extreme and unbending followers and complete lack of agreement.

    I can't wait for this election to be over, I really can't...and I can honestly say that I'm so glad that we here in the UK don't get so worked up about general elections (some may, but for the majority it's not the life or death scenario it seems to be Stateside).

    I think that most politicans are the biggest hucksters on the planet...when I think of all of the promises that they all make and then break...I wonder if it's worth voting for any of them ^_^

    Although my icon says UK-Greens, I truly only vote for them most of the time because they tend to put the planet first (not always, but mostly and I think that protecting our planet is an important issue), anyway...as to who would I like to win? Hmmm.....probably Obama, McCain and Palin just give me the creeps **shudder** (also anyone that can stand being in the company of Oprah Winfrey gets my sympathy ;) ^_^ joke).
     
  9. Kel_ee

    Kel_ee New Member

    87
    +10
    Christian
    Private

    DID YOU REALLY THINK THEY WOULD MENTION THIS??? To answer truthfully would be campaign suicide!! lol

    When 911 happened the media portrayed the American people as being "united we stand" and 100% behind the decision to go to war. I can honestly say that most Americans did not think that war was the answer, that making the decision to go to war made us no better than the terrorists that caught us off guard. The government themselves, on national television, called us unpatriotic if we did not agree with the decisions they were making at the time.

    I hope that countries do know that there are decent, loving, INTELLIGENT, well balance people whom live in the US.
     
  10. Minty

    Minty S.O.P.H.I.E

    +632
    Pagan
    Single
    UK-Greens
    This is awful :(
     
  11. AllTalkNoAction

    AllTalkNoAction Potentially Wonderful

    +70
    Pentecostal
    Single
    So you applaud what happened in Syria?
    You want it to keep happening?

    Yes, the US has helped a lot of people, my post concentrated on a poorer aspect of their policy.
     
  12. huldah153

    huldah153 Active Member

    501
    +12
    Americans are NOT intelligent. You people elected Bush to office, not once, but twice.

    You complain about this and that; the Iraq war, gas prices, taxes etc... But when a politician like Ron Paul, who would actually work in the direction you supposedly want, presents himself, he garners about one percent of the vote.
     
  13. MarcusHill

    MarcusHill Educator and learner

    976
    +73
    Atheist
    Married
    UK-Liberal-Democrats
    Nonsequitur. We kept Thatcher in power for nearly two decades, that doesn't make all of us Thatcherites.

    I still don't think many ordinary Americans realise quite how far out of whack with the rest of the civilised world their politics are. Obama would be unelectable in most of Europe sice he's too right wing.
     
  14. huldah153

    huldah153 Active Member

    501
    +12
    Thatcher was a political opportunist of the worst kind. She exploited the parochial and avaricious nature of the British.
     
  15. Kel_ee

    Kel_ee New Member

    87
    +10
    Christian
    Private
    Even if we voted for Ron Paul, the president only gets 1/3 vote. He would only work if enough of the 535 in congress agreed with him. I don't think we have that many ones in congress who would "actually work in the direction that we would supposedly want" or they would have over-ruled Bush on some of his awful decisions.



     
  16. ScottishJohn

    ScottishJohn Contributor

    +444
    Presbyterian
    Married
    Doesn't the President have the right to veto bills and certain parts of bills?
     
  17. Kel_ee

    Kel_ee New Member

    87
    +10
    Christian
    Private

    Yes the president can veto a bill, but it doesn't just stop there. The bill is then sent back into congress. Congress can either revise the bill or vote to override the veto, but both the House and the Senate are required to override the veto by 2/3 vote. If the congress overrides the veto, the bill becomes law without the presidents signature. (keep in mind that the bill has already been passed by congress before it went to the president the first time.)

    As of what I know the president is not allowed to veto certain parts of the bills, but has to veto the entire bill. I will have to look into that to see if it has changed.


    Now, there is a "pocket veto" in which the president can reject a bill by simply refusing to sign it. (putting it in his pocket and simply forgetting about it.) BUT, this can only happen when the congress is adjourned, in which they have no opportunity to override the pocket veto.


     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2008
  18. AllTalkNoAction

    AllTalkNoAction Potentially Wonderful

    +70
    Pentecostal
    Single
    So she should have let the European Union control us
    and she should have just let Galtieri take the Falkland Islands against the wishes of it's people?

    Is that what you think?

    If the British are avaricious, why have we given many former colonies independance because they wanted it?
     
  19. Minty

    Minty S.O.P.H.I.E

    +632
    Pagan
    Single
    UK-Greens
    I meant that the attack on Syria was awful! Of course I don't agree with it...that is a monstrous thing to say. The killing of innocent people disgusts me...I would rather the insurgents go free than have innocent civilians killed in the crossfire.
     
  20. ScottishJohn

    ScottishJohn Contributor

    +444
    Presbyterian
    Married
    Because we could no longer afford the size of military required to do anything about colonies who wanted to break away.

    After WWII we were in hock to the US and they wanted the influence we had. Anything they disagreed with, they threatened to cut off the money.

    We didn't hand back colonies out of generosity, but out of a complete impotence to do anything other than let them have their way.

    The reason we had the colonies in the first place, now that was avarice, plain and simple.
     
Loading...