| Author | Post |
|---|
S. Smith
Moderator
|
Posted: Nov 9th, 2006 12:29 am |
|
| Are you satisfied with the outcome of the elections on a local, state and/or national level? Did you vote?
|
Jim Flynt
Member
| Joined: | Jul 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Bermuda Triangle |
| Posts: | 1372 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Nov 9th, 2006 02:13 am |
|
S. Smith wrote: Are you satisfied with the outcome of the elections on a local, state and/or national level? Did you vote?
Absolutely*. Yes.
*Although I was disappointed that both Ray Riffe and Susan Bray didn't win, I cling to the faith and belief that they both will have successful campaigns for higher office in their political futures.
As a dyed in the wool yellow dog Democrat it was about time that our party and our country has something to celebrate. Change is just around the corner and best is yet to come!
____________________
"Take no prisoners"
|
macca
Member
|
Posted: Nov 9th, 2006 03:36 am |
|
Wholeheartedly agree with you, Jimbo!!! ♥♥♥
I hope these Bushies out here realize that EVERYONE doesn't share their opinions about "W", Hillary, the war in Iraq, etc.
____________________
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. Herm Albright
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 9th, 2006 04:19 pm |
|
Nationally, Pappy is happy. Voter turnout was amazin'! I agree with Mr Jim and Macca, but would also add that I hope the tone o' reconciliation an' desire to work together I heard from several people doesn't fall apart before somethin' good can happen. I hope they can put the country first fer a change instead o' their parties, pacs or factions.
I'm real happy Rumsfeld is movin' on. Pappy'll take that as a good sign long overdue.
Locally, I'm glad BJ made it. I think it's only fair that he should have a few more years to try an' ketch me. Hee hee! Otherwise, looks like bidness as usual, more or less.
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
RayRiffe
Member
|
Posted: Nov 10th, 2006 03:45 am |
|
Of course I'm not 'completely' satisfied. I didn't win!
But I am very satisfied to have the honor of being a candidate, of getting to make many new friends and for being a part of the political process.
While my results weren't what I'd hoped for (I knew from the start that the odds were practically insurmountable for me to begin with), I am very satisfied with my campaign.
I am also very satisfied that I stayed true to myself and my beliefs. I looked forward to tough questions, and I answered them. I'm confident that people appreciated my honesty and integrity, eventhough some may have disagreed.
I don't mind disagreement, all I wanted to give and receive was respect. And for the most part I think my campaign was successful in that regard.
I am also very satisfied with the national results! I am a Democrat and there have been times that it was tough to say so, but I never denied it.
I guess a lot of Republicans now know how I've felt for the last 12 years. Perhaps now the word 'consensus', a word I was hoping to introduce to the Guilford County Commissioners, will be a word that will be introduced in the nation's capital.
It'll be fun watching how they get it done!
Last edited on Nov 10th, 2006 02:09 pm by RayRiffe
|
mstone
Member
| Joined: | Apr 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | Oak Ridge, USA |
| Posts: | 159 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 10th, 2006 02:00 pm |
|
Forgive me for taking this discussion in a different direction, but when did our political climate change so radically that respect for our leaders was cast aside? When did we decide that (just because we disagree with a policy or position) we can resort to name calling and rudeness?
When did we decide that is was acceptable to refer to the President as anything other than "Mr. President"? Why is is deemed acceptable to refer to Senator Clinton by her first name when discussing issues. Certainly President Kennedy had his faults and detractors, but he was always (to my feeble recollection) addressed by the media as "Mr. President". Lyndon Johnson was despised by many for the Vietnam war, but it didn't change the respect provided to the office he held.
I've seen the window stickers bashing one elected official or another - the most crude among them is the little boy "peeing" on the name or image of the individual or issue, and call it the right to free speech. That's simply sad that we cannot express ourselves any better than that.
I could go on, and on with obvious examples - as I'm sure everyone else could as well. I yearn for the days where we could disagree with others on important issues and even elected officials without degrading the office held.
|
S. Smith
Moderator
|
Posted: Nov 11th, 2006 02:13 am |
|
RayRiffe wrote: While my results weren't what I'd hoped for (I knew from the start that the odds were practically insurmountable for me to begin with), I am very satisfied with my campaign.
I am also very satisfied that I stayed true to myself and my beliefs. I looked forward to tough questions, and I answered them. I'm confident that people appreciated my honesty and integrity, eventhough some may have disagreed.
I don't mind disagreement, all I wanted to give and receive was respect. And for the most part I think my campaign was successful in that regard.
I believe you did run a very clean and acceptable campaign, Ray. You respectfully disagreed, but asked some pretty tough questions yourself. You also certainly did your best to get out and make yourself known to the voters. I saw you on many occasions in different locations. I think you pretty much did everything you could.
|
S. Smith
Moderator
|
Posted: Nov 11th, 2006 02:32 am |
|
mstone wrote: Forgive me for taking this discussion in a different direction, but when did our political climate change so radically that respect for our leaders was cast aside? When did we decide that (just because we disagree with a policy or position) we can resort to name calling and rudeness?
When did we decide that is was acceptable to refer to the President as anything other than "Mr. President"? Why is is deemed acceptable to refer to Senator Clinton by her first name when discussing issues. Certainly President Kennedy had his faults and detractors, but he was always (to my feeble recollection) addressed by the media as "Mr. President". Lyndon Johnson was despised by many for the Vietnam war, but it didn't change the respect provided to the office he held.
I've seen the window stickers bashing one elected official or another - the most crude among them is the little boy "peeing" on the name or image of the individual or issue, and call it the right to free speech. That's simply sad that we cannot express ourselves any better than that.
I could go on, and on with obvious examples - as I'm sure everyone else could as well. I yearn for the days where we could disagree with others on important issues and even elected officials without degrading the office held.
You've brought up some really good points, mstone. I think part of what you're saying has to do with the day and age in which we live. I think part of that is because of the media. While it is certainly easier to get information from all kinds of sources 24 hours a day, sometimes in an effort to "get the story," the media has delved into all kinds of issues. Years ago, personal issues were so much more so -- they stayed personal. Today nothing is off limits.
I also think people are ruder in general now than they used to be. People not only don't respect their leaders, they don't respect each other, generally speaking. Whether it's belching or cursing or calling the president by his first name, I think respect in general isn't what it used to be.
Last edited on Nov 11th, 2006 02:34 am by S. Smith
|
ff12
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 310 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 11th, 2006 02:31 pm |
|
I would say that as far as the political part of it , most politicians once they have had a little bit of power and " prestige" of holding office will do anything to get back. This can be shown by the former races between Jim Hunt and Jesse Helms. Glad I wasn't old enough to vote at that election,probably would not have ever vote again. We the people need to take back the goverment somehow, having people such as Howard Coble and Richard Burr and Elizabeth Dole and Mel Watt in office shows me that a nice guys can win. Of course then there are the Virginia Foxes and Jim Blacks who will do anything to maintain their perceived power. How did Jim Black get elected again, he is going to be indicted after the first of the year.
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 11th, 2006 02:34 pm |
|
Good points. The more confrontational attitude toward politicians by the press really got fired up because o' Watergate, didn't it? After that the press was less willin' to take a politician's answers at face value. Then, as news talk shows evolved, they began to more agressively exploit our differences for their own gain and we've been slidin' downhill since.
I agree we should show more respect for our leaders, or at least for the offices our leaders hold. That works both ways, though. Our leaders need to show more respect for us, dadgummit! That's right, I said dadgummit! I mean nationally and locally, too!
Look at some o' these disgraceful attack ads we've seen lately. These from the leaders who want our respect??!! Come on!
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
S. Smith
Moderator
|
Posted: Nov 11th, 2006 05:11 pm |
|
FatPappy wrote: Our leaders need to show more respect for us, dadgummit! That's right, I said dadgummit! I mean nationally and locally, too!
Look at some o' these disgraceful attack ads we've seen lately. These from the leaders who want our respect??!! Come on!
Whoa -- this has stirred Pappy up! Just watch those expletives. I don't want to have to edit and stick in "expletive deleted" (that's from Nixon's old tapes and the Watergate days, if anybody's old enough to remember besides me!)
I agree about the attack political ads. They are the worst!! They not only twist words, actions and their meanings, they out and out lie. I have no respect for anybody who runs this kind of campaign. Although local campaigns are generally pretty civil around here, they're certainly not immune. I think Ray Riffe did a great job of challenging his opponent, as did Susan Bray and Stuart Albright. I want to hear about the real issues, and I love a good debate -- but it can be done respectfully and professionally!
|
DOGGETTJA
Member
| Joined: | Oct 24th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield |
| Posts: | 1198 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 12th, 2006 06:00 pm |
|
| I think Vernon Robinson's ads were the most embarassing this year. They were so blatantly racist and inflammatory. I don't know what the answer is but I try not to vote for people who run ads like that.
|
mstone
Member
| Joined: | Apr 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | Oak Ridge, USA |
| Posts: | 159 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 13th, 2006 09:00 pm |
|
How about this for an idea... for any elected office you cannot spend any more money on campaigning than the job pays for an entire year. You can use your own money, or raise it from somebody else, but that's the limit.
You wouldn't see too many attack ads on TV 'cus they cost so much. You'd see candidates much more willing to meet for face-to-face debates to get their name out there. Old fashion door-to-door campaigning would become an absolute necessity.
Of course, I like the idea of term limits, too. It works great for the President. Nobody wants more than 8 years with any pres - no matter how popular or effective they are. Why shouldn't we send all the Raleigh and Washington clowns back home after the same period. That would absolutely hammer the lobyist group, but it would take the financial incentive out of staying in power for powert's sake
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Nov 14th, 2006 12:33 am |
|
mstone wrote:
How about this for an idea... for any elected office you cannot spend any more money on campaigning than the job pays for an entire year. You can use your own money, or raise it from somebody else, but that's the limit.
I like it!
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
S. Smith
Moderator
|
Posted: Nov 14th, 2006 01:32 am |
|
FatPappy wrote: mstone wrote:
How about this for an idea... for any elected office you cannot spend any more money on campaigning than the job pays for an entire year. You can use your own money, or raise it from somebody else, but that's the limit. I like it!
I like it too, but I don't think the idea will go over too well, especially in Washington.
How would it work in local elections where they make little or no money?
|
Current time is 02:44 pm | Page: 1 2   |
|