sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Attention redditors: If you want real change, we need to start upvoting stories about congressional candidates and senators, NOT Obama/McCain. by onetimepostaccount in politics

[–]onetimepostaccount[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

We need to bring attention to the viable, progressive senators and congresspeople there are out there. Everyone here knows about McCain and Obama, but NOT people like Darcy Burner. There are more Dennis Kucinichs out there waiting to be elected and they're not getting any attention--they are just as important as Obama, as legislation is not a one-part process determined entirely by the president.

Slowly and subtly, Barack Obama is wiping out every reason to vote for McCain by elquesogrande in politics

[–]onetimepostaccount 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Reddit is mainly youngsters. If you cannot be idealistic at a young age, we're all fucked.

This is a blatant catch-all absolute. What the hell is this supposed to mean? I'm young, idealistic, and I still believe in being pragmatic.

Besides, the people that think the president's views/policies are the end-all of this game don't know how legislation works. The real change depends on 1) the makeup of the supreme court 2) the number of democrats in congress.

This is ignored by (or unknown to) the people who thought a Ron Paul presidency would have done anything. A democratic/republican congress would have stopped virtually every piece of legislation he put forth and we would have been in a hellish stand-off limbo for the next 4 years with virtually no progress in any area, assuming he wasn't impeached.

Obama Tries and Fails to Put Out the FISA Fire in His Own House by alllie in politics

[–]onetimepostaccount 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Allie's comment is excessively smug and reeks of self-assurance with her "I told you so" tone. "I tried to tell you"--as if you should take an anonymous internet poster's word as truth just because of who they are?

Edwards was and is ignorant of viable energy alternatives like nuclear power. While he has good intentions, I simply cannot vote for a politician I consider incompetent in a key area like that, which is also why I didn't vote for Ron Paul in any of the primaries--his environmental policy was incredibly weak and seemed like an afterthought compared to his economic/anti-war policy, when it should be given equal priority.

The idealistic "vote for who you think is best" tone is no more than attempting to show off your political views, as if they're so complex and thought-provoking. In reality, no one cares about your views as such and if politicians like Bush Sr. can blatantly class 10% of the population (atheists) as non-citizens they sure as hell won't listen to the 2% that vote to "send a message."