kallend 1,625 #1 November 3, 2010 I have never before heard so many disgusting attack ads - from all sides - in an election campaign. I'd like them ALL to lose.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #2 November 3, 2010 I like the way that the opponents look much older in the ads than they are shown in their own ads. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #3 November 3, 2010 Quote I have never before heard so many disgusting attack ads - from all sides - in an election campaign. I've been lucky...don't watch too much TV except for Pawn Stars, Detroit 187 and football...no ads that I've seen. Radio has sucked since 1996...don't listen. Newspappers are practically extinct. I only get my news from the internet and have managed to master the art of avoiding ads, except for that pesky hidden AdtechAd found above under the "search" drop-down menu on this website. Quote I'd like them ALL to lose. the sad thing is, as with most ads, they cater to the desires of the financial decision makers...primarily women 24 to 55.Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,387 #4 November 3, 2010 Quote I'd like them ALL to lose. We need an election system where the citizens get a yes/no vote on every candidate; - If a candidate gets more "no" votes than "yes" votes, he loses, even if he had the most "yes" votes. - If all candidates get more "no" than "yes" votes, a new election must be held."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 1 #5 November 3, 2010 QuoteQuote I'd like them ALL to lose. We need an election system where the citizens get a yes/no vote on every candidate; - If a candidate gets more "no" votes than "yes" votes, he loses, even if he had the most "yes" votes. - If all candidates get more "no" than "yes" votes, a new election must be held. Sounds like the prescription for a nasty infinite loop. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,387 #6 November 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote I'd like them ALL to lose. We need an election system where the citizens get a yes/no vote on every candidate; - If a candidate gets more "no" votes than "yes" votes, he loses, even if he had the most "yes" votes. - If all candidates get more "no" than "yes" votes, a new election must be held. Sounds like the prescription for a nasty infinite loop. The previous candidates are DQ'd from the second election. I didn't invent the concept, I just read about it."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #7 November 3, 2010 QuoteI have never before heard so many disgusting attack ads - from all sides - in an election campaign. I'd like them ALL to lose. It's what happened when the far left adopted "Rules for Radicals." When politicians started saying that the ends justify the means and that morals are for those that can afford them, this is what you get. I am all for congress's strict adherence to Robert's Rules of Order. Our founding fathers new that politics was an ugly business. The pomp and circumstance is needed to keep things civil. There should also be guidelines outside the congressional chambers for the ads they run. There is a fine line between free speech and slander. What do you think? Or will you attack my spelling and grammar and not engage in a discussion?"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beachbum 0 #8 November 3, 2010 Far left adopted?? ... Both sides have been doing it as long as I've been old enough to vote, and I'm 55 now. It's their best way to dodge actually addressing the issues that they SHOULD be talking about. Our esteemed (and I use that very sarcastically) governor here in Texas took it to new heights this time around, and he still won in spite of trying to push through the most unpopular single item I can ever remember down here (The Trans-Texas corridor) during his present term. The lack of sense of the voting populace long ago ceased to amaze me.As long as you are happy with yourself ... who cares what the rest of the world thinks? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #9 November 3, 2010 but at least he has good hair-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #10 November 3, 2010 QuoteI'd like them ALL to lose. Really? So you didn't vote for any of them ..."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #11 November 3, 2010 Quote Quote I'd like them ALL to lose. Really? So you didn't vote for any of them ... You didn'y know - He wants to phase government completely out, he's and anarchist.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #12 November 3, 2010 Yesterday, the Italian Mafia ruled. Today, it's the Russian Mafia. I'm so happy. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 0 #13 November 3, 2010 Quote I have never before heard so many disgusting attack ads - from all sides - in an election campaign. I'd like them ALL to lose. For the 2nd or 3rd time Kall we are on the same page. I totally agree! This election was crazy. My sister is lit about how bad both sides treated women candidates.Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Icon134 0 #14 November 3, 2010 I think negative advertising should be banned... now we just have to get that through congress, the politicians, etc... oh wait... nevermind that'll never happen... Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #15 November 3, 2010 Quote I think negative advertising should be banned... now we just have to get that through congress, the politicians, etc... oh wait... nevermind that'll never happen... I hate most negative political ads, too; but a ban would be unconstitutional. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #16 November 3, 2010 Quote Quote I have never before heard so many disgusting attack ads - from all sides - in an election campaign. I'd like them ALL to lose. For the 2nd or 3rd time Kall we are on the same page. I totally agree! This election was crazy. My sister is lit about how bad both sides treated women candidates. Unfortunately we're going to have to get used to it. I believe that about $4 billion was spent this election cycle in a concerted effort to make us stupid and angry. The media loves it, so it will continue. Coming up next, two more years of angry ignorance peddling. It's not likely to create many jobs but it will cost a lot. Anyone know of a campaign advertising index fund that I can buy into? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #17 November 3, 2010 Quote Yesterday, the Italian Mafia ruled. Today, it's the Russian Mafia. I'm so happy. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #18 November 3, 2010 QuoteI have never before heard so many disgusting attack ads - from all sides - in an election campaign. I'd like them ALL to lose. Could'nt agree more doc! "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Icon134 0 #19 November 3, 2010 Quote Quote I think negative advertising should be banned... now we just have to get that through congress, the politicians, etc... oh wait... nevermind that'll never happen... I hate most negative political ads, too; but a ban would be unconstitutional. I understand that... my commentary was mostly intended to be taken in jest...Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #20 November 3, 2010 I'm of two minds. I find I dislike the person who slurs the other candidate. I also suspect there is some truth to the slurs. That leaves me disliking both candidates. Since they are politicians, I was likely to end up there anyway. The negative ads just encourage the process.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #21 November 3, 2010 There is a lot of "anti-American" rhetoric being spewed today north of the border. Turns out that Liberals are pissed to the gill that "Big Government" was rejected and they are not afraid to tell the world how much hatred brews in their heads (go visit "www.cbc.ca" if you want to see this hatred). Who knows if the votes ever get properly counted in these elections. We as every day people are at the mercy of the media and the people controlling these elections to tell us that the election results were actually accurate. Isn't there a famous Stalin quote that goes something like "It's not the voters who decide the results of an election, it is the people who count the votes". Anyway the Canadian Peacock is pissed to the gill on this day telling the world how much of a joke American democracy is, but I will say there is one thing America does right with it's so called democracy that the Canadian Peacock will never accept and that is Americans get to vote on local issues through referendums. Up here, we lemmings do not have such democratic privileges. Here we must take whatever our Federal, Provincial and Municipal politicians throw at us. Case in point, my local municipal government is building a $25 million dollar designer pedestrian bridge two blocks away from an existing pedestrian bridge and 2.5 blocks away from another bridge pedestrians can use. If we had been given the right to decide whether this new bridge should have been built through a referendum, do you think it would ever have been approved? If it was, at least it would have been the public who decided to build the bridge, not some corrupt municipal politician with close ties to their construction contractor pals. No at least as far as your referendums are concerned, Americans should rejoice today that they got to have some say in how their country operates and just ignore the Canadian Peacock who continues to tell you how much better they are than you, for they do not know any better. I would give my left nut for more say in how my country, province and city is run through referendums. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #22 November 3, 2010 QuoteFar left adopted?? ... Both sides have been doing it as long as I've been old enough to vote, and I'm 55 now. It's their best way to dodge actually addressing the issues that they SHOULD be talking about. Our esteemed (and I use that very sarcastically) governor here in Texas took it to new heights this time around, and he still won in spite of trying to push through the most unpopular single item I can ever remember down here (The Trans-Texas corridor) during his present term. The lack of sense of the voting populace long ago ceased to amaze me. Out here, where I live, that 'Trans Texas Corridor' or 'La Entrada Al Pacifico' is a real 'hot button' issue. What really got me was, while all the meetings and studies were being done, work continued on the roadway. Up until the big recession, the plan was for thousands of Mexican trucks were to pass through small West Texas towns loaded-down with 'fineries from the Orient' to stock the shelves of Wal-Mart and the countless 'Dollar Stores'. There were a couple bought-off congressmen and one or two senators involved in 'pushing' the roadway through. I can't believe, like you, our bought-off governor won this election. Now, it'll be more of the same. The one commercial Bill White ran was true... our governor is in it for himself! Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #23 November 3, 2010 ...and the phone calls between 6PMand 9PM. When you answered the phone, there was a long pause then a recorded message or some pollster! You bet! Thank goodness it's over! Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,625 #24 November 3, 2010 QuoteQuoteI'd like them ALL to lose. Really? So you didn't vote for any of them ... Well, in IL for US Senator we had a choice between a failed and possibly crooked banker, and a proven pathological liar. Which one would you choose?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #25 November 3, 2010 Negative campaigning has been going on forever. Grover Cleveland was acused of having an illegitimate daughter adn opponents used the ditty "Ma, Ma, where's my Pa Gone to the White House, ha, ha, ha.""What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
