kombat wrote:With each passing day, Romney offers up ever more outlandish gaffes and soundbites... It's all but over, folks.
Agreed. Out of curiosity, are many Canadians as perceptive of American politics as you are? I have to admit that, as an American, I am completely ignorant of Canadian political affairs (i.e. I have to reference Wikipedia for the name of your elected leader, let alone his philosophy) despite being an avid reader of ForeignPolicy.com, as well as having some family actually living up there.
DoingHomework wrote:Wow, and her vote counts as much as mine...
Yes, "man on the street" interviews are always horrifying. I truly think we need to reconsider some test of knowledge to be eligible to vote. People should at least be capable of identifying one or two distinct policy proposals (e.g. "Raise taxes on people earning $250k/year" or "Lower the corporate tax rate," but not simply "Create jobs" or "Fix the deficit") associated with each major candidate. Maybe this would encourage candidates to spend more time proposing ideas instead of just trying to discredit each other. Being able to identify sitting elected officials (e.g. your senators and house rep) would be a good start too. I don't know that this would hurt one party more than the other. A lot of people will vote for Obama just because they know his skin color is black. A lot of people will vote for Romney just because they "know" that Obama is a Muslim.
DoingHomework wrote:I'd probably be a libertarian if the members of that party were not a bunch of...well...I digress.
I voted for the Libertarian ticket last time and will probably do so again because (1) they are more consistent with my philosophy than either Democrats or Republicans and (2) it is sort of a protest vote - kind of a waste, but if Libertarians get an increasing share of the vote then maybe there will be some long-term impact on American politics.