Member Presidential Stumping Thread (Again)

[mischief]

A while back we had a little mock- presidential series of threads. We debated which member would be the best candidate if we, the members of Macrumors were a Party. We had members posting their positions on key issues, we refined the field, we determined a common stance, we agreed that a multiparty ticket was essential.

I'd like to do that again in light of all this debate over the elections. It will be a good exercise in realizing where we all really stand.

So let's start things off with nominations and opening platform positions per candidate. If a given nominee gets enough conversation in this thread to justify a thread of their own as a running "candidate", that member should start an "official" platform debate thread for themself. Please post who you'd like to see outline their positions on various issues and PM your nominee so they can post a response, either accepting and outlining a brief stance on "the issues" or declining.

Mods: Please feel free to kill this if you think it'll go south before it even gets started. I've been away from MR for a while and I don't know the current Trolling threshold.

[mischief]

I Nominate B2TM. He's consistently forced me to clarify my positions and I'm a better Patriot for it. He's managed to express Conservative idology in a manner that I can at least see the reason in, even when I disagree with the outcome.

I'll be PMing him.... :D

[pseudobrit]

I Nominate B2TM. He's consistently forced me to clarify my positions and I'm a better Patriot for it. He's managed to express Conservative idology in a manner that I can at least see the reason in, even when I disagree with the outcome.

I'll be PMing him.... :D

I'll second him, but only if he puts a few of us in his cabinet to keep tabs ;).

He's often smack dab in the middle of reasonable and practical American ideology and usually aware of where the civil rights that are untouchable lie.

It's just everynowandthen when his political filter clogs and he goes off on a tirade against a particular group or idea that is generally insignificant (like welfare recipients or federal taxes) that he'd need a good balanced cabinet to keep him steady and on course. ;)

[Backtothemac]

Wow, I am flattered. I am very flattered. Well, I am conservative, but, I am a social liberal. I believe in common sense. I believe in government by the people, and without the fat cats of Washington getting richer.

I will field and answer any questions that arise. :p

[Backtothemac]

I'll second him, but only if he puts a few of us in his cabinet to keep tabs ;).

He's often smack dab in the middle of reasonable and practical American ideology and usually aware of where the civil rights that are untouchable lie.

It's just everynowandthen when his political filter clogs and he goes off on a tirade against a particular group or idea that is generally insignificant (like welfare recipients or federal taxes) that he'd need a good balanced cabinet to keep him steady and on course. ;)


You, you will be the Secretary of State. You have the ability to talk to people, and can pressure when you need to, and be very politie when needed.

[IJ Reilly]

Okay, I'll nominate Sayhey, our resident policy wonk and scholar, if only because I'm not old enough to have voted for Adlai Stevenson.

(In the name of party unity I am willing to overlook the SF Giants issue.)

[pseudobrit]

You, you will be the Secretary of State. You have the ability to talk to people, and can pressure when you need to, and be very politie when needed.

"When needed." Ha! I love it! ;)

[skunk]

I'll just be an impartial foreign observer...

[blackfox]

Although tempted to endorse BTTM, despite party differences...I nominate Jef.
I believe everyone is familiar with his qualifications...

[Sayhey]

Okay, I'll nominate Sayhey, our resident policy wonk and scholar, if only because I'm not old enough to have voted for Adlai Stevenson.

(In the name of party unity I am willing to overlook the SF Giants issue.)

Thank you, IJ for your kind nomination. However, my previous commitments to the support of the hometown nine make it impossible to commit the mock resources necessary to carry out the enormous responsibilities of mock office. I must therefore respectfully decline and say "if nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve."

How's that for a political speech? Complete with stealing another politician's words! Besides if I try to move beyond the timetable of the PPP the personal risks are too terrible to contemplate.


PS - the first Presidential election I voted in was 1976. How old do you think I am, IJ? :eek:

[IJ Reilly]

PS - the first Presidential election I voted in was 1976. How old do you think I am, IJ? :eek:

Probably the same as myself, ±1 year. Neither one of us are old enough to have voted for Stevenson. Now 'Rat OTOH hand probably is old enough, but I'd wager he didn't!

[Sayhey]

Probably the same as myself, ±1 year. Neither one of us are old enough to have voted for Stevenson. Now 'Rat OTOH hand probably is old enough, but I'd wager he didn't!

Sorry, I won't take that wager. I don't know with any certainty, but I'm with you - I'd bet on Ike. You are right about the age by the way.

[pseudobrit]

I'll just be an impartial foreign observer...

Oh, we know all about you, Olde Europe. ;)

[themadchemist]

Hmmm...I would nominate wdlove, but he's too damn nice for the job. ;)
I would nominate Jef, but he's yet to clarify his support for Billy Graham. ;)
I would nominate Voltron, but unfortunately, he won't be unable to accept. ;)

I think blackfox has clearly and intelligently defended the liberal perspective around here, so I'll go ahead and nominate him/her.

[skunk]

Oh, we know all about you, Olde Europe. ;)
Not as Olde as some... :rolleyes:

[mactastic]

Can I have the Ministry of Silly Walks?

[themadchemist]

Can I have the Ministry of Silly Walks?

Chill guys...Appointments are made to the cabinet AFTER someone wins, no? Let's get a nominee first! ;)

(no, I'm not actually taking it seriously)

[blackfox]

Well, although it is early in the game, it seems that BTTM is a favored choice for nominee, further solidified by his nomination of Jef as his VP (no word on acceptance), which co-opts my choice.

So the question remains, who can be nominated in opposition to this mighty juggernaught (spelling error or play on words?)?

I thank madchemist for the endorsement, although it would appear I am his fourth choice after some questionable company *ahem* . I would be happy to give it a shot, but franky, I feel I might be outgunned...still, it would be an interesting exercise, and I would give it serious thought...(oh, BTW, I am a "he")

I have also been throwing around the idea of IJ for nomination, as his arguments are well-reasoned and non-inflammatory, although perhaps he is too intellectual for the job... :D. Still, an opinion and person I deeply respect in these forums...Ugg is also someone in my mind.

To make things interesting as yet another candidate, perhaps Frohicky, fresh off his time-out might prove a viable candidate...

What say you?

[vniow]

Can I have the Ministry of Silly Walks?

I thought that was pseudobrit's position?

[Backtothemac]

Honestly, if you can get him into it. I would nominate Rower. He is very intelligent, a very dear friend to me. Someone I know, and trust.

Unless of course I am the other candidate, and then the mud slingging will commense ;)

Just kidding. I think Rower, or Jef would be great, and guys, I know this is for fun, but I have to say that I am very flattered by the support from those that disagree with me. That is very flattering. My wife nearly died when she read this thread tonight.

Thanks to you all it means we listen to each other because I know I have changed my opinion on some issues. So when people say these threads are bogus, nope. I have changed things in my life because of macrumors.

[blackfox]

Spoken like a true candidate BTTM...diplomatic, heartfelt and humble (w/ a sense of humor to boot).

BTW, I mean how I think a candidate should be...so I was not trying to insult you. :D I also think Rower would be a good candidate, although I do not know him very well, but figured his duties to this site would preclude him from the running...

[mactastic]

I thought that was pseudobrit's position?

Has that decision been ratified at the special bi-weekly meeting by the simple majority required in the case of purely internal affairs?

Help help! I'm being repressed! <looks around> Did you see her repressing me?

[vniow]

Did you see her repressing me?

Ooh, dirty.

[jelloshotsrule]

this will all be moot in 2k16.............

[blackfox]

this will all be moot in 2k16.............
Feeling cryptic today are we?...

[Neserk]

Feeling cryptic today are we?...


2016...

[blackfox]

2016...
Yeah...I got that. I meant what is that supposed to mean. As in what exactly will be moot in 2016, and why then exactly?

[Neserk]

Yeah...I got that. I meant what is that supposed to mean. As in what exactly will be moot in 2016, and why then exactly?

Oh. I see what you mean. Perhaps you were being to cryptic for me :p :D

Good Question.

[Sayhey]

Feeling cryptic today are we?...

It is a reference to the secret plan of the PPP to take power in 2016.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=23053

Its a very long read.

[blackfox]

It is a reference to the secret plan of the PPP to take power in 2016.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=23053

Its a very long read.
I see. Sort of.

[Sayhey]

I see. Sort of.

LOL, exactly - if it makes sense you are missing something. :p

[mischief]

Go away for 24 hours and my little experiment is taken over by PPP Capuchins!

Back! Back! Silly Monkeys, Don't make me call in your Overlord Winky!! :eek:

In an effort to steer this rapidly decaying morass back to it's original course.... Has anyone actually PM'd Rower with the nomination or is B2TM the only nominee?

We can't really do the process without at least another candidate (who isn't using their bladder-voiding skills as their main qualification :rolleyes: ).

Last time we did this there was some good discussion across the whole gamut of domestic and world politics... Perhaps I misjudged my timing.. :confused:

[jelloshotsrule]

i nominate myself

supporters?

(and i'm serious, not simply going to piss my pants)

[mischief]

i nominate myself

supporters?

(and i'm serious, not simply going to piss my pants)

WTH...

Tell you what....

I'll second you're self-nom if you second mine. Can't be taking this thing too seriously after all.... ;) :rolleyes: :p

[jelloshotsrule]

WTH...

Tell you what....

I'll second you're self-nom if you second mine. Can't be taking this thing too seriously after all.... ;) :rolleyes: :p

ok, deal

[mischief]

So B2TM has outlined his basic stance.... Let's hear yours Jello...

Domestic policy?

Foreign Policy?

Radical changes or other interesting tidbits?

[jelloshotsrule]

i'm not brilliant, that's why i'd first and foremost surround myself with brilliant people

DOMESTIC

taxes- tax industries higher that are harmful/addictive/high luxury... tobacco, alcohol, gambling, etc. reduce taxes on essentials- food, clothing, books, etc.

use taxes to regulate industries in such a way that they have to evaluate and account for the entire life of their product. how much resources does it use to create? does it pollute? can it be recycled? how long does it last? etc. computer companies would have to fund projects to recycle, etc...

tax very minimally stock, bond, etc transactions. a small amount on each would add up to huge bucks.

income tax- tax earned and unearned income the same. stop giving huge tax breaks to corporations. possibly start income taxes at a level of 30-50k/year... ie, people earning under that pay no income tax.

just by cutting corporate tax breaks, we could more than make up for lower taxes on low income folks.

keep the estate tax, and tax other wealth that's just sitting, accumulating interest for the rich.

education - actually spend money on it first of all. introduce gov't based, interest free loans to college students. get rid of standardized testing as the sole means for measuring "success". get corporate ads, fast food, soda OUT of schools! work to increase teachers' pay, to give people more incentive to want to become teachers

rights of citizens- get rid of the patriot act. stop legislators from capping max settlements in lawsuits against big corporations. stop mandatory sentencing

drug war - end it. take the money from that and put it towards all the other stuff that needs it. education, health care, etc. end the criminalization of medicinal marijuana smokers. possibly make pot legal (that would take a lot of course)... heavily tax it if so, and regulate it so that it is not dangerous.

prisons - already touched on in mandatory sentencing and drug war... which should have a huge impact. increase rehab programs

health care - universal, single payer program. gov't paid, run by private sector. it will cost the same as the bloated system of today, but the amount paid by employees and companies will have to be paid by gov't... monies for this will come from taxing corporations that pollute, etc. cigarette industry is responsible for so much of the health care costs in the usa that it's sick...

*everyone gets health care*

budget- slash the defense budget and in doing so, reduce bloat and excess spending on contracts that are overpaying companies such as halliburton, lockheed, boeing, etc.. in doing so, once again free up cash for other things.

environment- give the epa some power. get rid of corrupt epa officials who are in the companies' pockets. seek development of renewable energy (far beyond what is spent now on it)... look into wind and solar farms. increase minimum mpg over time, but much more quickly than current regulations. invest in more efficient factories. end plans to drill in alaska. actually do something to restore wetlands, rather than just talking about it

electoral reform - introduce instant runoff voting, "none of the above" options, and publicly financed elections free of corporate money. make election day a holiday so people who work far from home can easily have time to vote.

public transit - work on creating more public transportation programs to increase use and efficiency, and decrease reliance on personal cars, etc. in doing so, create many jobs in public works projects


FOREIGN

get out of iraq. set a date and then get out. the date should be within 3-6 months of when i take office (;)). replace our troops with un peacekeeping troops, and countries near iraq.... the ones that actually care about a free, stable neighboring country. get free, democratic elections set up there asap (though how can we do that when we can't do it here??)

open gitmo to international inspectors after releasing prisoners that can't be charged with crimes. return any prisoners who should be returned to their country of origin (assuming that country is fit to try them). decrease military presence in afghanistan, again seeking un help to set up elections, etc.

replace nafta with an open trade agreement that promotes workers' rights, environmental protection, and gives incentives to small businesses, rather than just huge multinational companies.

work to get the wto and imf to stop screwing 3rd world countries with unfair requirements on loans, etc. work to free africa from the bonds of corporations taking advantage of the people. crack down on china and other serious human rights violators.

work with other nuclear capable countries to destroy arsenals, quickly. no more "nonproliferation for you, but superproliferation for us"



i think that's enough for now :)

[mischief]

Let me see here....

Domestic:

I'll post what I'd like to see under ideal circumstances. I find it hard to believe that I'd get much of this to fly but here it is:

Taxation:

I'd do away with the IRS entirely in it's present form. Ditch the Tax Code too. I'd institute a flat 1% tax lien against net worth. This applies to Companies and to persons. Every month your net worth is calc'd and 1% is transferred to your Federal Bond Account. The Budget is then borrowed against the total of all Bond Accounts. Through this system the Federal Budget is tied directly to GNP and GDP.

The whole shebang would be done via stupidly secure Treasury Networks. These networks would encorporate and suplant the existing VPN's and Private Networks owned by the Banks. The system would be independant of existing Internet Infrastructure. Interfacing between the Internet and Financial institutions would be done via "double blind" reconcilliation of accounts.

There's a whole other set of things I would want to institute to make this flow smoothly. There's more to explain than I can really do here... suffice to say that every citizen gets to behave as a financial institution via a free opensource client.

Education:

The system needs to be updated. We're attempting to use a Victorian model of education in an age of instant information. I'd want to streamline the whole model from start to finish. There'd be a lot of research and several special committees on this one.

Campaign contributions, soft money and accountability:

I believe that if there's a need to contribute to win favours, fine. I want it out in the open though. You have to contribute to ONE candidate and the list of contributions, whewre they came from and to what purpose have to go on the official website assigned for free to that candidate from the time the begin their run to the time they exit politics.

I'd also want the company logos displayed on the clothing, seat and paraphinaglia of the given politician. Prominance proportionate to contribution size. The NFL/NHL/NBA can be consulted for some good rules on this one.


Legalities:

I want to see the Judicial with more bite. I'd want to increase the efficiency of the Supreme Court to make their ability to chew through the mountains of (Bovine Fecal Matter) that passes for Federal and State Laws.

Elections:

There's only one system that everybody seems to trust implicitly and uses enough to be the logical choice for such an essential Government service: ATM's.

Think about it before panicking: I've already secured and federalized the Banking system's networks. Adding Voting to a secure system that everybody uses makes sense. I think it'd improve voter turnout greatly by making it so that you can't manipulate finances on voting day until you've voted.

I also feel that it should be mandatory for businesses to be CLOSED on voting day.

Millitary and Gun Control:

I feel that we need to go back to the Constitution for this one. Everybody who wants a Firearm can have one. There are conditions for the sake of sanity however. You MUST be trained and licensed for that particular class of Firearm. Violent Felony background checks and psyche profiles are still a must. Contingent to the Constitution, anyone owning a firearm classifyable as non-hunting and non-handgun has to register as a National Guard reservist. These reservists CANNOT be deployed without an act of Congress seperate from the existing statutes.

I believe that the USA is in too deep in too many places to do without a big, nasty millitary... though I feel that the most effective kind of warfare is being ignored. We need to encorporate more Millitary style Intelligence into our State Department and Treasury. There's better results to be had with treaties and money deals than with bombs and guns.

We also need to get back to Congress holding the leash on the Pentagon. The Executive is WAY too independant right now.

Medical and Insurance:

Tax the things that cost you money for the relevant services. Booze, Mind Altering Substances and Cigarrettes get taxed for paying Liability and Medical Insurance. Gas and Vehicles get taxed to pay for roads. Lumber and Paper get taxed to pay for reforestation, etc.

We go to a single payer no-fault insurance structure for Medical, car insurance,ALL OF IT.

I'd implement a Constitutional Shakedown of Federal and State laws. Equal Protection Dammit!

Ah yes... the Prison System:

Has to go. It's a sickening anachronism. We ditch the Vice Laws in favor of legalizing, regulating and taxing the bejezuz out of all of it. Prostitution, Gambling, Drugs, the whole mess. Corrections becomes exactly that: correction.. NOT encarceration. There's plenty that can be done without using a huge industrial warehouse style detention system.

Implementation of procedures to correct behavioural issues with individuals based on sound Psychological and Mdical practice. Long term studies to determine and counter the social, economic and famillial triggers for criminal behaviour.

For the truly violent sociopaths; we need them isolated, studied and documented. Options should be offered to these individuals for voluntary humane euthanasia.

I want to add Firearm training, sociology, psychology and economics to the educational system as required. Students need better context on life before they exit high school.

[mischief]

I'd love to see Congressional seats' rules changed:

Pay is determined by the adjusted average wage in their constituency.

Service in the House is required before you can be in the Senate.

Both House and Senate Candidates are drafted. No volunteers please. They get drafted, accept or refuse and have public funding and resources to run a multimedia campaign.

This would be an effort to combat the tangled mess of legalese that typify's the bills passed right now.

I want a plain language clause in the Constitution. Either you educate kids to speak legalese as part of the public schools or you make the laws concise and comprehensible.

[zimv20]

I want a plain language clause in the Constitution. Either you educate kids to speak legalese as part of the public schools or you make the laws concise and comprehensible.
legalese exists for a reason. believe it or not, it's actually more concise than 'regular' english, just like any kind of specialty language. consider IT: yeah, a lot of people don't know the jargon, but today i had a 1/2 hour conversation w/ the tech guy of a website development firm in which we covered more than would have been covered in 8 hours w/ the sales guy. it was exactly that language of precision (and the accompanying lack of BS and vagueries) that allowed that.

if laws were written in plain english, there'd be even more loopholes.

[mischief]

legalese exists for a reason. believe it or not, it's actually more concise than 'regular' english, just like any kind of specialty language. consider IT: yeah, a lot of people don't know the jargon, but today i had a 1/2 hour conversation w/ the tech guy of a website development firm in which we covered more than would have been covered in 8 hours w/ the sales guy. it was exactly that language of precision (and the accompanying lack of BS and vagueries) that allowed that.

if laws were written in plain english, there'd be even more loopholes.

This is of course only true to a point. I prefer the educational model. Any Jargon has it's purpose but the Legalese that's used in writing legislation is often overused to the purpose of obscuring or otherwise obfuscating the thrust of the bill or loophole.

How about this: No specific lexicons beyond the industry standards. A State is a State, period. Likewise a Citizen is a Citizen, etc.

[zimv20]

A State is a State, period. Likewise a Citizen is a Citizen, etc.
how are these being obfuscated now?

[skunk]

it was exactly that language of precision (and the accompanying lack of BS and vagueries) that allowed that.

if laws were written in plain english, there'd be even more loopholes.
Vagaries=flight of fancy, shooting off at a tangent
Vagueries=non-existent word, presumably standing in for "vagueness"

You have been booked by the Language Police. :D

[blackfox]

Skunk, I am not sure you have the proper authority or jurisdiction...

afterall, you all have that habit of putting unnecessary "u's" in all manner of words...
and don't even get me started on the "aluminum" debacle... :D

[zimv20]

Vagaries=flight of fancy, shooting off at a tangent
Vaguer
vaguer -- more vague, adjective
vagueries -- more vagues, adjectives pl.

:-)

[skunk]

vaguer -- more vague, adjective
vagueries -- more vagues, adjectives pl.

:-)
Etymologically inventive, I grant you. :)

[skunk]

Let me see here....

Nicely radical solutions. I like it! :)

[mischief]

how are these being obfuscated now?

Sometimes in bills that get really inrticate, with a lot to hide there are specific lexicons written specific to that Bill. Oftentimes the use of Bill-specific jargon creates meanings entirely different than their intended thrust.

The most infamous example of this is the US Tax Code. The original bills that drew up the Franchise Tax Code were intended for taxation of Businesses that had interstate commerce and those living or working in Federal territory or jobs. Because the word "State" was described in the Bill it was assumed by the majority of IRS staff that the Bill applied to everyone in the USA living in a State of the Union. The definition in the origina Bill-specific Lexicon was quite explicitly: Any Federal Territory, Land, Service or Office.

The Code has since been revised to bring the letter of the law into line with the practice of universal double taxation (Is that not Unconstitutional?).

Originally the Fed was a much weaker agency, it was never intended to be more powerful than the combined power of the individual States. There is no Constitutional basis for the IRS or the Millitary Industrial Complex but without the confusion of the original Tax Code's lexicon there would be no budget for one nor real power for the other.

[mischief]

Nicely radical solutions. I like it! :)

It's funny cuz I combine Constitutional preference with Populist ideology in a way that really confuses most party-oriented zealots. I really believe that if the Constitution has ANYTHING to say about something, it should be observed in writing and enforcing Law.

I'll add another little tidbit here: I want the Judiciary to have sitting representation in Congress. Like a Constitutional Referee. Complete with the ability to publish a Constitutionality Record for each Senator and House Rep.

It'd probably have to be several folks that cycle through to keep there from being a hegemony of the Judiciary.

[mouchoir]

If btm is elected, i'm going to take the role of the 'leftie bias' media.

Can't let him invade Iran without having a good argument! :eek: