Haha The Stupid Vice Presidential Debate

[bowflex 0]

My poor wife was watching it with me yesterday and I can't believe how easy it is to apparently a question with 20 other questions. My wife kept staring at the screen and muttering that she can't wait until she's allowed to vote

I was curious about how the Canadiens that live in the States now feel about the issues that are being discussed. I got incredibly frustrated when the topic of gay marriage came up and how they both stated that heterosexual couples shouldn't have any other rights than homosexual couples but then both stated that the "sanctitude" of marriage should not be changed.

I've been having trouble ever being able to wrap my head around why the government should have any control about who someone can marry (other than age and such of course) and it only made me feel worse about the state of this country when both candidates had no problem saying they didn't support it. It's so common sense to me that I don't think I'll ever understand the back-arsewords side of this country sometimes.

With neither candidate really stating differing opinions on ways to fix the economy or actually win or get out of the way, I just saw that one topic that they could be crystal clear on. Really pathetic in my opinion

[bowflex 0]

FYI No arguging haha! I spent a lot of time in Canada when my wife was living there so I'm just curious about the differences in how you guys think on things.

[SonoranSongbird 3]

I've been having trouble ever being able to wrap my head around why the government should have any control about who someone can marry (other than age and such of course)

According to Rick Santorem it's to make sure we don't marry our dogs.

[Emancipation 2]

I think for me it's the other issues that get raised by the media which are like Hollywood tabloid headlines.. which is the better parent (single father/mom of a special needs child), which has the better education, which tells better jokes, which looks better.. that stuff to me is not important and for me it ultimately comes down to who would do a better job. I think the entire process that takes years to get to this place is tedious and tiresome, and it doesn't allow "real" people to run for Presidential candidacy.. it takes so much flipping money to last this long how could any one of us "commoners" ever hope to rise to such a position? That's the sad thing about US politics I think. it's for the rich and the "haves", not for everyday people who actually have some fresh ideas (contrary to Ms. Palin's claims). My husband (USC) has already tuned out and I have to say the discussions that happen here in general OT have NOTHING to do with the issues at all half the time, most of the time it's trying to demonize or lambaste the opposing side. not very productive IMO. No one on either side is talking about immigration reform which is the most frustrating thing of all.. gah.. and they all seem to be saying the same thing about policy while pointing fingers at the other person, not very helpful at all. It's hard to imagine how any of this will lead to healing and unity in this country.

Edited October 3, 2008 by Emancipation

[ChloroPhil 0]

Well damn, I forgot the debate was last night. That would have been good to see.

On the topic of homosexual marriage I can understand the sentiment of the words both candidates spoke, if not the political BS that led them to say it. It gets my goat that the politicians are trying to say they really don't agree with it while attempting to appear in favor of it. Just say YES or NO. Seriously, the word marriage shouldn't even be used by government officials. Rather, they should discuss the issue in terms of civil unions or partnerships such as one gets when going to the Justice of the Peace.

I like to think I'm a decent representation of the average American man of my age. I feel strongly that all couples, regardless of sexual orientation, should be allowed the same legal and civil rights when it comes to those things traditionally under the umbrella of marriage. Things like joint healthcare, tax incentives, joint property, and other rights given to a spouse. Those are the things that a secular government has control over and are things unjustly denied to same sex couples.

Marriage? I'd say in this context they're talking more about the wedding cermony itself and that's something under the bailiwick of a religious institution. In that regard I fully agree with the statement about preserving the "sanctitude" of marriage. A religious ceremony should be under the complete control of the religious institution sanctioning the ceremony. It is not, nor should it ever, be the place of a secular government to dictate what a religious institution must do. Unless it condones behavior that is declared illegal, such as rape, theft, and murder. It's fully up to the institution to dictate what is and is not acceptable practice for itself, in this case, sanctioning a wedding ceremony for a couple that doctrine may say is not an acceptable couple to be wed.

Moral of the rant? Let every couple who desires to make a public profession of comittment to eachother have the same civil rights.

[thetreble 19]

Yeah here I think are some differences in the most general, basic form for me:

Canadians-Don't care who the Prime Minister is, who his wife is, where he lives, what his kids to, etc. We are more affiliated with the party's politics.

Americans-Have to get to know the President's personality and his family. His wife must be trophy like in manner and she will be involved greatly in many things during his presidency. Care more about what he thinks, then the actual basic party policies.

Canadians- It is more or less up to you what you do with your body, no matter what political party you associate yourself with. Who you marry and whether you live common law, etc. is not a big issue on the plate of most Canadians. My old fashioned parents never gave a damn and their political lines always went with who was going to give them the most money, the most breaks and the best person to make life easier on the normal Canadian.

Americans- Roe V. Wade is an important issue. Gay rights and gay marriage is an important issue which sparks division. Church V State is always a big problem.

Canadians- Don't care about the glamour or over sensationalist aspect of politics. We more often make fun of politicians then take them seriously.

Americans- Seem to think that raising close to 1 billion dollars to go from, state to state to talk BS is just the way it goes. Even if we are in an economic crises, the raising of millions of dollars so that someone can get flown from DC to FL to speak at a fundraiser is important and necessary. Canada's provincial budgets to run the various institutions and areas of a province are probably less than what some of these campaigns actually gather up in terms of funds.

At the end of the day, politicians are the same, greedy bastards every where in the world who often do not keep their word. But in America politics are completely sensationalized. I find it kind of bizarre and I really don't care about John McCain's military experience of if Obama is/was really a muslim. These things matter to Americans. They don't matter to Canadians.

[nowhereman 1]

I think for all future debates they should wire both candidates & when they go off topic or don't answer the question they should be shocked. That would end this issue once & for all!

[Marilyn. 340]

one major difference between Canadian politics and US politics is that the Canadian election is over in about 2 months.. so we don't have time to drag up every little piece of dirt we can find on each of the candidates...

[vanee 13]

I'm constantly comparing the differences between Canadian and American politics too.

My guess (?) is that Palin took the stance she did on gay marriage because the Republicans are a more conservative party and she's religious herself. Of course there are probably many religious people who are in favour of allowing gay people the right to marry each other, but overall, my impression is that the acceptance level for this is much lower in the US than in Canada. The Democrats were probably also afraid of alienating that large group of conservative evangelical Christians (as well as others who are uncomfortable with the idea) and so chose not to support gay marriage.

Didn't current Canadian PM Stephen Harper hold back on his views of gay marriage to get elected? In Canada, I think you'd lose more votes by opposing gay marriage.

Either I don't remember right, or the US commercials with political messages are quite different from Canadian ones. In the US, most of the focus is on making the other guy look bad rather than on what the candidate paying for the message will do. I noticed the same thing with a state election a year or 2 ago. What are the current political commercials in Canada like?

Another difference is that Americans as a whole are fairly resistant to change. My husband tells me that this is why the government couldn't get Americans to switch to the metric system and why the one-dollar coin hasn't caught on. When Hillary Clinton blamed the glass ceiling for her not getting the presidential nomination for her party, I thought she was putting blame where it didn't belong. C'mon, lady. Just about every other developed country in the world, as well as some developing countries, has had a female leader. It's a non-issue now. But according to my husband, her being a woman is still an issue to many people because women didn't even have the right to vote until 1920. Never mind that most Americans weren't even alive then; having a woman as the President is too much change for many Americans.

OTOH, Clinton did give Obama a good run, so maybe that change in thinking is happening.

A positive observation is that I find American politicians more polite and respectful when debating than Canadians are. Part of the difference may be that they're debating only one person instead of 2 or 3, so they don't have to talk over each other to be heard. On a related note, it sounds like more Americans vote based on the personality/likability of the candidate than Canadians do. I'm trying to remember the last Canadian PM that was popular as a person, but my memory is failing me.

[Krikit 1,164]

Another difference is that Americans as a whole are fairly resistant to change. My husband tells me that this is why the government couldn't get Americans to switch to the metric system and why the one-dollar coin hasn't caught on. When Hillary Clinton blamed the glass ceiling for her not getting the presidential nomination for her party, I thought she was putting blame where it didn't belong. C'mon, lady. Just about every other developed country in the world, as well as some developing countries, has had a female leader. It's a non-issue now. But according to my husband, her being a woman is still an issue to many people because women didn't even have the right to vote until 1920. Never mind that most Americans weren't even alive then; having a woman as the President is too much change for many Americans.

Canadian women weren't given full electoral franchise until 1919 so this is a good example of how the mindset of Americans and the mindset of Canadians is quite different, since both countries passed the law around the same time.