Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Time)   New Time poll shows that Republicans are more unpopular in America than anyone else... except, of course, for Democrats   (time.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

12917 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Mar 2007 at 12:16 PM (9 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



276 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-03-29 01:52:44 PM  
albo:
It's hard to know exactly why respondents who are generally unhappy towards --and in many cases fed up with -- the GOP might still prefer a Republican for president over a Democrat

Oh, that's easy! If the congress is dominated by one party, put the other party into the white house. That way they spend more time messing with each other and less time messing with the american public.
 
2007-03-29 01:53:35 PM  
Here's an idea: How about we stop identifying with political parties, and start thinking rationally and objectively? The reason we have an idiot in office is because we have a country full of idiots.
 
2007-03-29 01:55:16 PM  
and enough with the ani.gifs of candidates. It's already hard enough to Fark discreetly at work without a bunch of flashing pictures.
 
2007-03-29 01:55:16 PM  
Yes, and since it's a TIME poll, we all know it's very accurate and unbiased in any way.
 
2007-03-29 01:55:23 PM  
The major problem with Gov. Richardson is not that he is supported by many of the poor/uneducated Hispanics, it's that those are the people who are not a legal citizens of the U.S. to begin with. Therefore, they cannot vote him in even if they wanted to.

/Of course that's never stopped either party from trying to count their vote.
 
2007-03-29 01:55:50 PM  
kab: prediction: 2008 will have the lowest turn out of voters in recent history.

I like that. I hope the following election has even less turn out.

And I really hope more people takl about how useless all of these career politicians are.

Pretty sure I won't be voting. A lot of the people here scare the hell out of me with who they support with such a passion.

"Hillary will save us!" "Only the Dems can save us!" "Bush is still right!"

/Gimme a friggin' break!
 
2007-03-29 01:57:06 PM  
xen0blue: My requirements for a presidential candidate:
+ must not support gay marriage


That's seriously an important issue to you?

You left out + must support the troops with a magnet on their SUV
 
2007-03-29 01:57:23 PM  
GodsTumor: I wouldn't call him a slave but again I think his stand on major issues favor Israel.

My stand on major issues favor Israel and I'm not even a Joo. Does that make me a gentile slave to Israel?
 
2007-03-29 01:58:51 PM  
AstroMech
Pretty sure I won't be voting. A lot of the people here scare the hell out of me with who they support with such a passion.


What's even scarier is that most of these people don't actually know what their candidate's stances are on most issues, they just see the big R or D and automatically go for them.
 
2007-03-29 02:01:11 PM  
2007-03-29 01:57:06 PM cthu1hu
That's seriously an important issue to you?

Its not to you? i mean cmon, its not like we're fighting a war or anything. We've got a great budget surplus, a lean efficient and fair government, the world environment is in great shape, we have a great perception around the world and its all puppies and kittens at this point.

What's more important than denying rights to people who do things we're not interested in sexually?

Forget bin laden and iraq. its all about guys kissing.
 
2007-03-29 02:03:02 PM  
elchip

Hey, did you see your boy Richardson on Daily Show last night? I like his policies, but as other people have said, he just doesn't seem to have that charisma that the American people feed off of.

/unfortunately
 
2007-03-29 02:03:09 PM  
ShillinTheVillain: What's even scarier is that most of these people don't actually know what their candidate's stances are on most issues, they just see the big R or D and automatically go for them.

Indeed. Most of the country seems to function this way. Like it's Team Good Vs. Team Evil.

I would vote for either party, if I had the least bit of faith in one of their candidates.

Sad state of affairs.
 
2007-03-29 02:03:34 PM  
Ron Paul looks like someone grom the Andy Griffith Show. Can't put my finger on it, but it's someone retarded.
 
2007-03-29 02:04:52 PM  
cthu1hu - Some people have nothing better to live for then to follow party dogma.
Remember, people in this country vote as their told.

/Zig Heil
 
2007-03-29 02:07:36 PM  
There needs to be a most anoying animated political gif contest.

+1 on Ron Paul
 
2007-03-29 02:07:37 PM  
This deserves the obvious tag? Democrats have adopted the culture of SWINE. You see, they wallow around in fecal matter all day long, and when they get hungry, they squeel, kick, whine, cry in protest until they get what they want then they completely shut up and return to their fecal matters. In conclusion, democrats are swine.
 
2007-03-29 02:08:21 PM  
They just don't want a black or female to be president. What did I say that out loud?
 
2007-03-29 02:09:04 PM  
Excellent, xen0blue managed to bring america's newest "oppressed minority" into the fray. It's his opinion assholes, he's not trying to round you up and put you in concetration camps and it pretty farking sad and pathetic that you dare compare yourselves to holocaust victims you stupid farks.

/supports gay marriage
//doesn't support whiny drama queen dicks
 
2007-03-29 02:09:06 PM  
Current political status is of no concern,

General Secretary Bush will announce a new party today, the Deciders Party of the States of America.

All current members of existing parties are to report to one of the 8 newly appointed zampolits at the newly created Fifth Directorate of the Department of Justice. There is no need to pack your things.
 
2007-03-29 02:09:31 PM  
The money quote FTFA:

It's hard to know exactly why respondents who are generally unhappy towards - and in many cases fed up with - the GOP might still prefer a Republican for president over a Democrat.


It's hard to know if you're a liberal writer for Time magazine.
 
kab
2007-03-29 02:09:49 PM  
Smellvin

And now for an image to grab your attention while scrolling down the page:

Pics of hot chicks are far more effective.
 
2007-03-29 02:11:17 PM  
Fred Thompson '08. I doubt I could vote for Newt though. Maybe Powell as v.p.
 
2007-03-29 02:14:56 PM  
SkepticalBeliever: Hey, did you see your boy Richardson on Daily Show last night? I like his policies, but as other people have said, he just doesn't seem to have that charisma that the American people feed off of.

Yeah, I don't usually watch The Daily Show, but I tuned in for that. You're right he lacks in the charisma department, but John Kerry, Al Gore, and George W. Bush fought off primary opponents with more charisma than them...

/He also has a deep, rich voice
 
2007-03-29 02:16:18 PM  
SkepticalBeliever
Hey, did you see your boy Richardson on Daily Show last night? I like his policies, but as other people have said, he just doesn't seem to have that charisma that the American people feed off of.

Ooh, shiny! Him talk gud and look purty, me pick him!

/sometimes I hate the general populace
 
2007-03-29 02:17:26 PM  
elchip

Yeah, I don't usually watch The Daily Show, but I tuned in for that. You're right he lacks in the charisma department, but John Kerry, Al Gore, and George W. Bush fought off primary opponents with more charisma than them...

/He also has a deep, rich voice


True, but those guys were kinda on the fringe of their respective spectrum. Richardson seems to be moderate, which is why i like him so much. The above guys had the support of their parties, i just don't see that happening with Richardson because hes more middle of the road.

/again, unfortunately
 
2007-03-29 02:22:34 PM  
SkepticalBeliever: True, but those guys were kinda on the fringe of their respective spectrum. Richardson seems to be moderate, which is why i like him so much. The above guys had the support of their parties, i just don't see that happening with Richardson because hes more middle of the road.

/again, unfortunately


Clinton was more middle-of-the-road.

/Democrats are going to miss yet another golden opportunity
//I have a ton of patches of missing paint on my car, maybe I'll cover them with "Bill Richardson" stickers... hmm...
 
2007-03-29 02:23:12 PM  
My requirements for a presidential candidate:
+Must not be a Democrat or Republican.

+Must acknowledge the fact that we're at war with radical muslims and not play cutesy with the language. We're not at war with Islam. We're at war with it's radical elements, if Islam in general would control it's radical, violent elements we would not be in this situation. Stop kissing the Saudis asses and tell them to end the support of violence exspousing imams or they'll wish they had never started it.

+Must acknowledge that the Federal Government has far overstepped it's bounds when it comes to law enforcement. The Federal Government is there to police the people, it's there to protect them from outside forces and corruption in local governments. All crime not involving state and local governments should be handled by the state and and local governments. We waste too much time prosecuting crimes on the Federal level that can and should be prosecuted on the state and local level.

+Abolish the DEA and put those resources to work protecting the borders.

+Must support the decriminalization of all currently illegal drugs and the release and pardon of all non violent drug offenders.

+Must end the War On Personal Freedom(AKA the "Drug War")

+Must end all discretionary pork barrel spending, and pass a law that removes the names of living politicians from public buildings. This self aggrandizing backslapping waste of money as ego boosts for crooks must end.

+Make it clear that the Federal Government has no interest in the personal lives of private citizens, marriage of any kind is NOT a Federal issue. Neither is drug use. If states want to legalize gay marriage, they can. No marriage license from ANY state should cross any border anyway. Going to Vegas to get married is idiotic. You get married at home, you dumb farks.

+Call all American billionaires to the White House for a private meeting which will consist of this short speech "You people have too much farking money, do something with it - here in the US - or we will. You have been warned. If you continue to sit on more than 500 million dollars we will pass a law that takes that money. No man on earth needs a billion dollars. Ever. You stupid hoarding farks. Get out of my sight before I kick Bill Gates in the coont."
 
2007-03-29 02:24:06 PM  
I am beginning to suspect that though many Americans say they will vote for a qualified female or African-American candidate, when actually confronted with one, they go "eeeek" and go for the alternative- *any* white man, preferably anglo-saxon.

I would be thrilled to be proven wrong, because I truly believe Americans are better than that.
 
2007-03-29 02:24:53 PM  
DrunkJack: My requirements for a presidential candidate:
+Must not be a Democrat or Republican.


You must become massively depressed every four years.
 
2007-03-29 02:25:24 PM  
Excellent, xen0blue managed to bring america's newest "oppressed minority" into the fray. It's his opinion assholes, he's not trying to round you up and put you in concetration camps and it pretty farking sad and pathetic that you dare compare yourselves to holocaust victims you stupid farks.

/supports gay marriage
//doesn't support whiny drama queen dicks


You seriously got all that from one /Zig Heil? Who the hell said they were gay?

Jesus
 
2007-03-29 02:25:58 PM  
Note to politicians. This is your agenda for 2008 if you want to win:

1)Create a system where a greater number of Americans will be provided with (or can at least afford to provide their own) insurance.
2) Stop putting money and people through the Iraq shredder.
3) Keep the farking goverment out of our private lives.
4) Leave our guns alone
5) Take care of veterans
6) Tax us and spend our money RESPONSIBLY
7) Do something for the environment

That all you have to do.
 
2007-03-29 02:27:19 PM  
I'd like to see Kerry take another run at it. Every 4 years....


I voted for Bush. Twice. If there weren't term limits I'd vote for him again.

I will not vote for Giuliani. I will not vote for McCain.

I'd vote for Richardson.

Go figure.
 
2007-03-29 02:29:34 PM  
I voted for Bush. Twice. If there weren't term limits I'd vote for him again.

It's always nice when someone hangs the giant "I'm a MORON" sign over their head right off the bat. Keeps you from wasting your time reading the rest of it.
 
2007-03-29 02:29:43 PM  
Saiga410

I would totally vote that ticket (Thompson/Gingrich). BTW, great username! Best firearms in the world. I've got a 410, -12, -20, and 2 308s. Love 'em!
 
2007-03-29 02:30:49 PM  
Vote for Fred!
 
2007-03-29 02:31:11 PM  
Republicans may be unpopular. Democrats may be unpopular. But the only group of people I would like to drive into the sea are the apathetic idiots who think that evangelizing their non-vote strategy will somehow have an effect on the government.

Who are these fantastically immature little princesses? Do they honestly expect their own personal Jesus Christ to descend from on high, support all their personal pet issues to the tee, and still have enough charisma and general support to get elected?

Democracy is not about immediate personal gratification. It's about working together and compromising toward a goal. How did these selfish idiots get out of school without knowing this?
 
2007-03-29 02:33:06 PM  
With both the Pres and VP not running this round, how much of that administration will be left intact if a Republican wins the election? I can't vote for anyone who'd leave the existing corruption in place.
 
2007-03-29 02:33:10 PM  
Funny in a way that while the conservatives hate Hillary and would never want to see her as President, they've almost assured that is going to happen.

/would rather have Edwards as Prez
 
2007-03-29 02:33:17 PM  
cthu1hu
Yeah, I'm sure the nazi terminology was meant to signify something entirely different. I'm sure it had nothing at all to do with the typical "I'm so oppressed, grant me special status" piss and moan show certain people put on everytime someone isn't 100% behind their "lifestyle choices". Since you seem to know what the nazi terminology meant, why don't you share.
 
2007-03-29 02:33:45 PM  
parkthebus

My stand on major issues favor Israel and I'm not even a Joo. Does that make me a gentile slave to Israel?


First I never used the word slave it was injected in a response to me and I refuted it!
Second even if you were a (gentile slave to Israel) as you call it you don't have the power like Lieberman has to shape laws and vote on us going to or staying in a farked-up war!
 
2007-03-29 02:34:42 PM  
Hmmm... Ya, lets put the reigns of the most powerful nation on earth, at one of the most critical juncture in history into the hands of... Obama.

OR, ya, let history record: BUSH, CLINTON, CLINTON, BUSH, BUSH, CLINTON

These are what 'dreams' are made of... wont happen.
 
2007-03-29 02:35:10 PM  
DrunkJack

Abolishing of all illegal drugs? Then how the hell can we keep the inner city ovens on the "self-cleaning" cycle?!
 
2007-03-29 02:36:33 PM  
I don't give a fark how good or bad Hillary would be (I tend to believe she'd be bad) -- I don't want her in the White House because this country has no place for political dynasties. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton is no way for an ostensibly egalitarian, republican nation to be governed for 24+ years. We need new voices in the White House, period.
 
2007-03-29 02:37:48 PM  
BEFUDDLED
Funny in a way that while the conservatives hate Hillary and would never want to see her as President, they've almost assured that is going to happen.


I'm an Indie, and I hate Hillary too!

Their ya go Dems Cons and Indies hate Hillary.
 
2007-03-29 02:38:22 PM  
Hmmm... Ya, lets put the reigns of the most powerful nation on earth, at one of the most critical juncture in history into the hands of... Obama.

Tell me, what is it about his platform that makes you think he's unqualified to lead?
 
2007-03-29 02:44:30 PM  
Poopspasm [TotalFark]:


Note to politicians. This is your agenda for 2008 if you want to win:

1)Create a system where a greater number of Americans will be provided with (or can at least afford to provide their own) insurance.
2) Stop putting money and people through the Iraq shredder.
3) Keep the farking goverment out of our private lives.
4) Leave our guns alone
5) Take care of veterans
6) Tax us and spend our money RESPONSIBLY
7) Do something for the environment


The only problem is how they accomplish those things. As far as guns, the environment, tax and insurance there are several ways to go. Both the Republicans and Democrats can't seem to keep out of people's lives. As much of a farkup as Bush has created, he's actually set the wheels in motion to do quite a bit to get people health insurance who can't get it right now.
 
2007-03-29 02:45:24 PM  
elchip: You must become massively depressed every four years.

He probably does, but judging by this:

+Abolish the DEA and put those resources to work protecting the borders.

+Must support the decriminalization of all currently illegal drugs and the release and pardon of all non violent drug offenders.

+Must end the War On Personal Freedom(AKA the "Drug War")


...he typically finds a way to deal with it.
 
2007-03-29 02:46:59 PM  
Wow...I said about the same thing Time is saying...except I said it exactly a week earlier:

2007-03-22 11:14:31 AM craig328

2007-03-22 11:00:49 AM Fizpez

Oh, I don't know. I think I heard the other day that Lieberman was making noises that he might go Republican. Now THAT would make for some interesting dynamics. Consider a Giuliani/Lieberman ticket. Not that it will happen but it does make interesting politics.

I'd like that ticket, or even that ticket reversed. Obviously as the sicko right wing neocon that I am I want to R to win, but I'd even consider Liberman as D or an I if the republicans cant come up with someone interesting.



Well, Lieberman won't be the top guy, no matter what. You can change parties (or more accurately, have your party abandon you so you have to switch) but once you do, nobody is going to trust you with the top job. However, that said, I agree that I could support a guy like Lieberman. He's what, I think, a lot of Americans would like: a centrist. Not a hard core conservative nor a loony socialist liberal.

The only electable guys that stand closest to that concept are Obama and McCain. The thing with Obama is his lack of experience (no, it's not a plus no matter how hard you try to spin it) and the fact that he won't win the south...particularly if he finds himself running against either McCain or Giuliani. I know I'll get prolly a dozen people to point out that technically, you don't have to win a single southern state to be president...and that had Kerry won Ohio the entire notion would be crap...but every political pundit, on both sides of the aisle, agrees that in order to be president you have to win the south...and, I'm sorry, but Obama won't be the guy to do that.

It's not a nice thing to say but it is reality.

What ought to truly disturb people is that it appears that the best the Dems are considering pushing forward in 2008 is a one term junior senator from NY or a rookie senator from Illinois. Neither one has executive experience (or much experience at all for that matter) and both have large contrary considerations attached to them (Barack is black, Hillary is polarizing, carpet-bagging, power-hungry, liberal woman...no, I don't much care for her).

The presidency is about winning the vote...and if either of these are the candidate the DNC pushes out for the general election, they'll get yet another lesson in losing.

All of which is bad for America in general. Surely the Democrats have someone they can support that has experience, is competent and that doesn't have the big downside considerations that will prevent them from winning...I mean, c'mon...there has to be someone.

The country needs that someone.



It is as it has always been. Democrats, as a collective group, push forward candidates based on ideology with scant consideration as to whether they can win. I mean, it's nice to stand for your principles and such...but if you never get to be in power and enact those ideas, what the hell good are they?

I generally do not vote Democrat due to their stances on taxes (yes, lowering taxes has now worked BOTH times it's been done...so stop the class baiting please) but I can get behind some of their social policies and so, want to see them as active, vibrant participants in the government. It is good for America to have two viable and differing political viewpoints on some matters...but increasingly, voting Democrats seems (to me anyway) to be voting AGAINST something/someone and not for something.

The reason Obama has the support he does is because he seems to stand for something other than "I'm-not-Republican" which is pretty much what you hear from what constitutes "the Left" these days. It's tough for people to vote for a campaign based on negatives. Period.

But it's nice to see, despite all the press about how literally everything Republicans do is evil and twisted and motivated by some insidious design that most folks see through that crap. Are the Republicans doing a bad job these days? Of course...but what's obvious is that a lot of people also recall how badly the Democrats did as well and haven't forgotten it. Keep in mind, it's why the Republicans won the Congress in the middle of Clinton's first term...the Democrats were that bad at the time.

Democrats need to get together and find a candidate that has executive experience and can deliver a speech that describes new ideas and has a realistic vision for the country's future. Not some asinine crap about "reporting for duty" or "lawk-bawkses".

I've been saying it for awhile: Hillary is unelectable and Obama, not that it's PC to say but the truth is like that sometimes, is inexperienced and black. At least a poll comes out that reflects, what I consider to be, common sense.

/YMMV
 
2007-03-29 02:48:52 PM  
Bender The Offender: cthu1hu
Yeah, I'm sure the nazi terminology was meant to signify something entirely different. I'm sure it had nothing at all to do with the typical "I'm so oppressed, grant me special status" piss and moan show certain people put on everytime someone isn't 100% behind their "lifestyle choices". Since you seem to know what the nazi terminology meant, why don't you share.


It was a reference to the authoritarianism of "following party dogma." Pretty obvious.

I only know one openly gay farker, and I've never heard him mention anything even remotely related to that in the last four years.

Do you make this shiat up as you go along just to have something to jam on the keyboard with your greasy sausage fingers?
 
2007-03-29 02:49:28 PM  
Harry Pooter Democracy is not about immediate personal gratification. It's about working together and compromising toward a goal.

WHAT?! Says who? Your statements anger and confuse me!
 
Displayed 50 of 276 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report