Political Crossfire Forums

american_true · Joined: 13 Sep 2004 Posts: 7

Is it be Kerry or Bush. Who is your choice? I have seen a site which offers free ballot for US presidential poll. They say that any person from any UN country can request for a ballot for free . Is it allowed for citizens for other countries to vote in US presidential elections?. Their website is http://www.voteinusa.com . Awaiting your comments....[/b]

Reluctant Prophet · Joined: 13 Aug 2004 Posts: 289

Nope, US citizens only. But as screwed up as things get there, I wouldn't be surprised if some slipped through.

eynon · Posted: Mon Sep 13, 2004 10:48 am Post subject:

"shudder"

BlueEmperor1 · Joined: 13 Sep 2004 Posts: 15 Location: Essex, England

We have enough trouble getting Brits to vote in their own elections, never mind yours as well.

B.E.

eynon · Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2004 10:35 am Post subject:

hahahaha...you know I wouldn't mind brits voting in our elections one bit

thorn · Joined: 25 Jun 2004 Posts: 2743 Location: some rainy place

Eynon81 wrote: hahahaha...you know I wouldn't mind brits voting in our elections one bit

you know that's the kind of remark that leads to i.e. FCTE having a major heart-attack plus stroke?

Fist in the air · Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 12:29 am Post subject:

Considering the Global impact of US policies it seems only right that those affected (the whole world) should have a say in the U.S elections.

Think of Iraqi's. The policies of the U.S government directly affect their lives as much as U.S policies affect U.S citizens, there is no valid reason they therefore should not be able to vote in US elections.

But elections are all but a scam anyway to spread the democratic illusion.

eynon · Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:39 am Post subject:

thorn wrote: Eynon81 wrote: hahahaha...you know I wouldn't mind brits voting in our elections one bit

you know that's the kind of remark that leads to i.e. FCTE having a major heart-attack plus stroke?

(spraying coke onto keyboard) :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ....I think Blair would make a great prez :-D

eynon · Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:41 am Post subject:

Fist in the air wrote: Considering the Global impact of US policies it seems only right that those affected (the whole world) should have a say in the U.S elections.

Think of Iraqi's. The policies of the U.S government directly affect their lives as much as U.S policies affect U.S citizens, there is no valid reason they therefore should not be able to vote in US elections.

But elections are all but a scam anyway to spread the democratic illusion.

half of what you say would give our conspiracy wanks on this board s**t a brick..the other half would make them wanna buy you a beer :-D

So if you can vote in our elections can I vote for John Howard?

eynon · Posted: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:42 am Post subject:

em...I meant *make...not give...wow and I'm an english teacher...

Fist in the air · Posted: Thu Sep 16, 2004 2:15 am Post subject:

The Australian state generally follows US policy so the same argument doesn't apply very well..

And the US can get rid of Our Leaders (CIA's involvement in the Whitlam disminsall in '73) while i dont think the Aust. Gov could get Bush impeached.

thorn · Joined: 25 Jun 2004 Posts: 2743 Location: some rainy place

Eynon81 wrote: I think Blair would make a great prez :-D

eh?!? :shock: :-o
Imagine, poodling for a foreign power AND ignoring the wishes of his constituency AND going to a war his constituency does not want or deem necessary in the first place. Even the Democrats would go bananas over that one. Besides, technically he's one of "them pinko all warm and fuzzy inside bleedin' heart anti-gun liberal socialist UN lovers", which wouldn't go too well with the right-wing. (Come to think of it, why do some right-wingers in this forum rout for him at all???)
He'd make a great US Prez. Aye, mon. Beloved by the people like an itchy-weepy rash on your foreskin. (Sorry Mods :!oops: )

Well, at least he knows English (unlike Dubya)... :1lol:

Vero · Joined: 17 Sep 2004 Posts: 146 Location: Vancouver, Canada

american_true wrote: Is it be Kerry or Bush. Who is your choice? I have seen a site which offers free ballot for US presidential poll. They say that any person from any UN country can request for a ballot for free . Is it allowed for citizens for other countries to vote in US presidential elections?. Their website is http://www.voteinusa.com . Awaiting your comments....[/b]

I went to that site after I saw your post it is very strange. I wish I was more computer litterate to post it for you. It is pre filled out to say that your last voting post was in (i can't remember the exact name right now) Prairie church road in Texas. Everything legal that is needed is pre-filled in for you. It basically makes people who aren't american seem like they are but living abroad. I am not sure they are using it for pure statistical purposes or what. It seems like it is a legit is request for an absentee ballot for the upcoming election. Its pretty nuts. I wonder if people are actually able to cast a vote who aren't American? i have bad luck and would be the one to get caught so I'll pass as the Guinea pig.

Golddave · Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 1557 Location: Australia

Eynon81 wrote: Fist in the air wrote: Considering the Global impact of US policies it seems only right that those affected (the whole world) should have a say in the U.S elections.

Think of Iraqi's. The policies of the U.S government directly affect their lives as much as U.S policies affect U.S citizens, there is no valid reason they therefore should not be able to vote in US elections.

But elections are all but a scam anyway to spread the democratic illusion.

half of what you say would give our conspiracy wanks on this board s**t a brick..the other half would make them wanna buy you a beer :-D

So if you can vote in our elections can I vote for John Howard?

I agree with you Enron, I am voting for John and I wish you could to because we need all the votes we can get to keep our country great.

Golddave · Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 1557 Location: Australia

Fist in the air wrote: The Australian state generally follows US policy so the same argument doesn't apply very well..

And the US can get rid of Our Leaders (CIA's involvement in the Whitlam disminsall in '73) while i dont think the Aust. Gov could get Bush impeached.

Still practicing mastering the english language Fisty, good to see mate, dismissal doesn't have an n in it. What proof do you have for the CIA having anything to do with Whitlem getting sacked? that is commie bulls**t man.

eynon · Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 4:37 am Post subject:

thorn wrote: Eynon81 wrote: I think Blair would make a great prez :-D

eh?!? :shock: :-o
Imagine, poodling for a foreign power AND ignoring the wishes of his constituency AND going to a war his constituency does not want or deem necessary in the first place. Even the Democrats would go bananas over that one. Besides, technically he's one of "them pinko all warm and fuzzy inside bleedin' heart anti-gun liberal socialist UN lovers", which wouldn't go too well with the right-wing. (Come to think of it, why do some right-wingers in this forum rout for him at all???)
He'd make a great US Prez. Aye, mon. Beloved by the people like an itchy-weepy rash on your foreskin. (Sorry Mods :!oops: )

Well, at least he knows English (unlike Dubya)... :1lol:

wow thorn....I aint feelin the love....No Iraq war aside Blair would make a good us prez...he's not the greasy sonofabitch that clinton was so we'd let him get away with a lot more. Plus you gotta remember that the vast majority of the US leadership was for our little dumb-ass sandy adventure...so the debate over here is over other things. And on those other things Blair would do pretty good...he just have to become a bit more pro-gun....

Dr Strangelove · Joined: 27 Sep 2004 Posts: 57 Location: Australia

Fist in the air wrote: The Australian state generally follows US policy so the same argument doesn't apply very well..

And the US can get rid of Our Leaders (CIA's involvement in the Whitlam disminsall in '73) while i dont think the Aust. Gov could get Bush impeached.

There is no direct correlation between the CIA and the dismissal of the Whitlam Labor Government in 1975.

What actually occurred was that the Labor Govt contemplated borrowing over 4 billion dollars in foreign loans in 1974. The Govt decided not to pursue the loans, one of the Govt Minister's decided to continue in private.

The Liberal/National opposition found out this was going on and the Loan Affairs scandal broke. Whitlam sacked several of his ministers, but the opposition decided to block the Govt supply bill, money for the budget and so the Govt could function, in the Senate.

The Liberal/National parties held the balance of power in the Senate. There was no such thing as the Greens/Democrats at this time. Their idea was that this would force the Govt to dissolve both houses of Parliament and call an election. The only problem was the Whitlam refused and so for six weeks there was a standoff.

The Governor-General ,Sir John Kerr stepped in and using his reserve powers, sacked the Whilam Labor Govt and appointed Malcolm Fraser to form a caretaker Govt until elections were held on 13 Dec 75.

The Liberal/National Parties won in a landslide.

This is a very basic overview of what occurred in 1975.

Golddave · Joined: 08 Sep 2004 Posts: 1557 Location: Australia

Dr Strangelove wrote: Fist in the air wrote: The Australian state generally follows US policy so the same argument doesn't apply very well..

And the US can get rid of Our Leaders (CIA's involvement in the Whitlam disminsall in '73) while i dont think the Aust. Gov could get Bush impeached.

There is no direct correlation between the CIA and the dismissal of the Whitlam Labor Government in 1975.

What actually occurred was that the Labor Govt contemplated borrowing over 4 billion dollars in foreign loans in 1974. The Govt decided not to pursue the loans, one of the Govt Minister's decided to continue in private.

The Liberal/National opposition found out this was going on and the Loan Affairs scandal broke. Whitlam sacked several of his ministers, but the opposition decided to block the Govt supply bill, money for the budget and so the Govt could function, in the Senate.

The Liberal/National parties held the balance of power in the Senate. There was no such thing as the Greens/Democrats at this time. Their idea was that this would force the Govt to dissolve both houses of Parliament and call an election. The only problem was the Whitlam refused and so for six weeks there was a standoff.

The Governor-General ,Sir John Kerr stepped in and using his reserve powers, sacked the Whilam Labor Govt and appointed Malcolm Fraser to form a caretaker Govt until elections were held on 13 Dec 75.

The Liberal/National Parties won in a landslide.

This is a very basic overview of what occurred in 1975.

you seem to be a very intelligent man mr strangelove

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Eynon81 wrote: hahahaha...you know I wouldn't mind brits voting in our elections one bit

ARRRRGGGGHHHHH! I can't believe you said that! I hope you realize which party Blair is in. The LABOR party, the source of Fabianism itself. This alliance should really make people think about exactly what they are supporting!

thundertaker · Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2004 4:17 am Post subject:

cap'n queasy wrote: Eynon81 wrote: hahahaha...you know I wouldn't mind brits voting in our elections one bit

ARRRRGGGGHHHHH! I can't believe you said that! I hope you realize which party Blair is in. The LABOR party, the source of Fabianism itself. This alliance should really make people think about exactly what they are supporting!

Actually, Blair has virtually destroyed all the remnants of the Labour party's socialist origins. In terms of fiscal policy, 'New' Labour is now indistinguishable from the tories..........