• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iran president: 'Not feasible' for Israel to live

ludahai said:
Your problem is that you defend states that are not truly democracies and you have an abject lack of understand on the AMerican system of elections, yet you are claiming that your view is the valid one, though it is devoid of facts.
Click to expand...

You JUST DONT GET IT.. Its not about us and them mentality. I am not defending Iran in any way at all. I am just saying their leader was democratically elected..

Why do you people under the US spell always assume the "us against them" mentality, and everyone who dont view things in your singular perspective are "them" and defend "them";.

WOW.. JUST WOW..
 
ludahai said:
YES! You may laugh, but this is the reality in the United States.
Click to expand...

So then democrats can stand as candidates for the republican party without approval?

I would like to see a source for this, and official source which explains the process that anyone can nominate them self under any political platform under any political party without that parties approval.
 
ludahai said:
Goodness, gracious. ANYONE who is a qualified candidate can run for any office in the United States for either party WITHOUT the party heirarchy's approval. WHat about this do you NOT understand!?
Click to expand...

Yes, but how many times exactly have people not from the Republican or democrat party won..?

How many times to I have to say these same things.... GEEEEEEEEEEZ..
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
So then democrats can stand as candidates for the republican party without approval?

I would like to see a source for this, and official source which explains the process that anyone can nominate them self under any political platform under any political party without that parties approval.
Click to expand...

Being that you are labeled as a democrat or republican based on your views... yeah.

You aren't born into a party bro. People associate themselves with either or in order to broadly explain where they will tend to lean.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
So then democrats can stand as candidates for the republican party without approval?

I would like to see a source for this, and official source which explains the process that anyone can nominate them self under any political platform under any political party without that parties approval.
Click to expand...

Yes, ANYONE CAN. When you run for president or any other office, you register at the local government board of elections, NOT the party office. If you are a qualified candidate, you can run for any office in the party primary of ANY party that is registered in that state.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
OFCOURSE they do.. Dont you GET IT????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????, Whats really so difficult in understanding that in order to be president in the US one have to stand for either the democrats or the republicans? One cant simply stand for those parties without their approval, and you have to conform your platform to fit their image.
Click to expand...

Umm...no they don't. Anyone can run for president regardless if they have a party affiliation or not. I do not belong to any party and I could run as President. I'm sure I wouldn't get voted on by the populace. But I could still run. All that you need to be to run for POTUS is to be a Natural Born Citizen. Must be at least 35 years of age. And have been a resident of the US for the past 14 years. There is no other requirements.
 
Shiznit770 said:
It is the topic. You've just already come to the conclusion that he hates Israel because they're Jews. If all you want is a confirmation of your pre-drawn conclusion perhaps you shouldn't be posting in the Breaking News section.
Click to expand...

That Iranian nut case and his hatred/stupidity are the topic. He receives the attention of the press far too much; they and the world should ignore him..
And some things are so obvious...
 
Last edited:
ludahai said:
Talk about classic case of moving the goal posts. :spin:
Click to expand...

You just dont manage to see the whole context here. You get caught up in technicalities and spin. For that I am sorry on your behalf.
And now you obviously just gave up, your one sided perspective just burst into a state of "I am wrong but I cannot admit it", and of course, like any people like you you have to resort to ill methods to make youself believe you are still right.
 
ludahai said:
Yes, ANYONE CAN. When you run for president or any other office, you register at the local government board of elections, NOT the party office. If you are a qualified candidate, you can run for any office in the party primary of ANY party that is registered in that state.
Click to expand...

How to Become a Democratic Party Candidate | eHow.com

Its step 3 I am really curious about;. What is really that step 3?


What you are saying to put it on edge using Bob Jones as example is:

Bob Jones who is a hardcore liberal democrat and do not disagree with any of the stands of the republican party can nominate himself to stand as a primary candidate for the republican party without the republican party approval? And then he can go on to create a platform within the republican party which will have him elected in the primaries to become the republican partys presidential nominee?

Thats what yo are saying here? If it is, I want some proof of that. As I said I am no expert on the US presidential processes, but I am pretty sure my example above is incorrect.
 
earthworm said:
That Iranian nut case and his hatred/stupidity are the topic. He receives the attention of the press far too much; they and the world should ignore him..
And some things are so obvious...
Click to expand...

The bigger questions here really are..

1. Since he was elected by the people, does he represent their general views?
2. Is Israels actions over the past 50 years part of the reason why he is saying these things or is he really saying them rather out of blind biased hatred?
 
RightOfCenter said:
No, that's why I'm asking.
Click to expand...

Communism is not my favorite topic. Its to obscure to be. But I know that even in communism they have elections sometimes, usually less free than any other elections and more obscure.
As for Saddam, I never really cared about Iraq, I don't even know how he came to power, as far as I can dig up from memory it was a coup where he seized power from a "friend" who was then the leader of Iraq.

I would however say China of today is a form of democracy, since all people involved in politics "must" start from being elected in local elections(most national politicians have their start this way). Its not really very democratic, but it has some democratic features. The most democratic thing about China that I personally find is that the government exclusively work for the people and the nation, which in itself is a democratic concept which none of the western nations follow, as they tend to get caught up in fighting against each other, and against interest groups and so on rather than actually cooperating for what is best for people and country.
 
Communism is not my favorite topic. Its to obscure to be. But I know that even in communism they have elections sometimes, usually less free than any other elections and more obscure.
Click to expand...

Communism has never existed, so you can't know that.

The most democratic thing about China that I personally find is that the government exclusively work for the people and the nation
Click to expand...

wtf are you even talking about?
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
You just dont manage to see the whole context here. You get caught up in technicalities and spin. For that I am sorry on your behalf.
And now you obviously just gave up, your one sided perspective just burst into a state of "I am wrong but I cannot admit it", and of course, like any people like you you have to resort to ill methods to make youself believe you are still right.
Click to expand...

Abject dishonesty. I have given up on ever getting you to see the truth that the party leadership does not have to approve candidacies.

You moved the goalposts because your initial assertion was that the party higher ups MUST approve the candidacy of anyone running in party primaries. This is manifestly untrue. YOu then move those goalposts to claim that they need the support of the party - which is by in large true - but fail to note that when we talking abotu the support of the party, we are talking about the rank and file members of the party.

This is manifestly DIFFERENT from a bunch of unelected mullahs deciding who can and who can not run based on religious criteria.

Sorry, but you get a major league FAIL on this.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
How to Become a Democratic Party Candidate | eHow.com

Its step 3 I am really curious about;. What is really that step 3?


What you are saying to put it on edge using Bob Jones as example is:

Bob Jones who is a hardcore liberal democrat and do not disagree with any of the stands of the republican party can nominate himself to stand as a primary candidate for the republican party without the republican party approval? And then he can go on to create a platform within the republican party which will have him elected in the primaries to become the republican partys presidential nominee?

Thats what yo are saying here? If it is, I want some proof of that. As I said I am no expert on the US presidential processes, but I am pretty sure my example above is incorrect.
Click to expand...

Yes you can, and YES it has happened where people are nominated on a platform opposed to the party. David Duke ran for governor of LA a couple of decades back on a platform partly against the party and against the express wishes of the party leadership. He finished in second in the open primary and was the Republican representative in the general election!
 
Last edited:
Maximus Zeebra said:
The bigger questions here really are..

1. Since he was elected by the people, does he represent their general views?
2. Is Israels actions over the past 50 years part of the reason why he is saying these thingsIsrael has been struggling to survive since day one.
This, and their history should be known.. or is he really saying them rather out of blind biased hatred?
Click to expand...

Hard to tell, but I doubt that he was really elected; I cannot see free and fair elections in any Islamic state..

MaxZee, I suspect that you agree with this Iranian nutcase.
 
Maximus Zeebra said:
Compared to western governments bickering against the other side of the political specter and forgetting to cooperate for people and country.
Click to expand...
A man, I forget who it was, once said that the Western democracies were a lousy form of government.
And until someone comes up with a better one, we will have to use it and tolerate its shortcomings....
 
View Post
Compared to western governments bickering against the other side of the political specter and forgetting to cooperate for people and country.
Click to expand...

Because the Chinese government doesn't act like them at all...:roll:
 
earthworm said:
A man, I forget who it was, once said that the Western democracies were a lousy form of government.
And until someone comes up with a better one, we will have to use it and tolerate its shortcomings....
Click to expand...

Oh we will come up with a new one. It's been in the works for a very long time now. It's called the New World Order.

Funny about Iran and their relationship with Russia. I was just reading an end times prophecy that was suppose to be based on the Bible, who claimed that Gog and Magog were to be Russia and Iran, and they would destroy Israel.

But then it went on to say that Prince William would be a leader of the armies and would triumph over Israel and that he was born on the summer solstice (6-21-82) and there was also a great solar eclipse, and he is suppose to be the antichrist. :shock:

Oh and they supply this picture as proof because of how satan was suppose to have his two hind legs cloven hoofed, and this picture shows Prince William holding the Lamb of God and particular, the hind cloven hoof.

0,,5463453,00.jpg



Anyway, it's what I read. I'm not ready to accept this quite yet though. OMG. :shock:
I guess it's something to keep an eye out for in case it does happen.

Would make a great movie. We could call it Omen II or Omen III.
Oh wait. Never mind. They did that already.
 
Zeebra, I don't believe lud is fully correct. Parties can choose and reject their candidates in any way they see fit. However, anyone can run for office if they meet some minimal requirements. As previously stated some states require that presidential candidates gain so many citizen signatures before they will be typed on a ballot, otherwise the list would be pages long and impractical. However, any candidate can be written-in in the provided blank spot. That means I could vote for myself and others could too if I met the requirements.

The difference between Iran and the US is that there is no subjectivity to the US election process. The people vote and whoever has the most electoral votes wins, period. Our country has a two party system, not because its mandated but because the majority of americans agree the most with one or the other party. Overnight this could change and we could have 0, 1 or any number of viable parties. It all depends on how the people choose. No one is forced to vote for a particular party. Just because it happens that a two party system has evolved doesn't somehow mean its no longer a democracy.

Iran is not a democracy. The people vote but their vote is worthless because nothing gurantees that the elected person will get in. Moreover, elected officials are still subserviant to the mullahs. For example, if 100% of the country voted for adjimihad then he isn't guranteed to get appointed because a small group of people decide, not the voters. The people have ZERO say. They just get to say who they would PREFER but the gov't is under no obligation to oblige. This is unlike the US where if a person, no matter what party or affiliation, receives a majority of electoral votes then he will be the new president. Neither the SCOTUS or congress can change this.

Now if you wanted to point out how america isn't a democracy then you would have some valid points if you discussed the electoral voting system. This is why the US is actually a constitutional republic. But, as others have said repeatedly, the term "liberal democracy" as used by the US and other western countries isn't defined by voting alone.

You've got a lot more to learn. This barely scratches the surface.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
So, full quote? Or no? Otherwise, the OP should be dismissed.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Threads on DP are changeable things and as long as the conversation is productive they should go on, even if they don't have to do with the OP. Even if someone in the thread is doing the intellectual equivalent of shoving their fingers in their ears and saying, "Nuh uh, nuh uh, I'm not listening!" like Zeebra is doing.
 
scourge99 said:
Zeebra, I don't believe lud is fully correct. Parties can choose and reject their candidates in any way they see fit. However, anyone can run for office if they meet some minimal requirements. As previously stated some states require that presidential candidates gain so many citizen signatures before they will be typed on a ballot, otherwise the list would be pages long and impractical. However, any candidate can be written-in in the provided blank spot. That means I could vote for myself and others could too if I met the requirements.

The difference between Iran and the US is that there is no subjectivity to the US election process. The people vote and whoever has the most electoral votes wins, period. Our country has a two party system, not because its mandated but because the majority of americans agree the most with one or the other party. Overnight this could change and we could have 0, 1 or any number of viable parties. It all depends on how the people choose. No one is forced to vote for a particular party. Just because it happens that a two party system has evolved doesn't somehow mean its no longer a democracy.

Iran is not a democracy. The people vote but their vote is worthless because nothing gurantees that the elected person will get in. Moreover, elected officials are still subserviant to the mullahs. For example, if 100% of the country voted for adjimihad then he isn't guranteed to get appointed because a small group of people decide, not the voters. The people have ZERO say. They just get to say who they would PREFER but the gov't is under no obligation to oblige. This is unlike the US where if a person, no matter what party or affiliation, receives a majority of electoral votes then he will be the new president. Neither the SCOTUS or congress can change this.

Now if you wanted to point out how america isn't a democracy then you would have some valid points if you discussed the electoral voting system. This is why the US is actually a constitutional republic. But, as others have said repeatedly, the term "liberal democracy" as used by the US and other western countries isn't defined by voting alone.

You've got a lot more to learn. This barely scratches the surface.
Click to expand...
Or, it doesn't have to be about how many votes you have. You can just lose a few and then have your daddy's friends on the Supreme Court appoint you into the position. The minimum requirements to run is a lot of money. To win, it helps to have the right bank support you. We're a Corporocracy controlled by corporations. :mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom