Why McCain will be the Next President of the United States

[rmsharpe]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Good now compare that to every other country.

China: 4.3%
Russia: 3.9%
U.S.: 3.9%

Not every other country, but it's the other countries that have large military forces.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Second, it's a fantasy that Hillary would've won easily.

Why? Clinton doesn't have the weaknesses that are bringing Obama down now. She's experienced, substantive and completely capable of pulling in the working class Democrats who are being tempted to vote McCain. Given the fundamental advantage the Democratic Party has in this election cycle, she would've beat McCain handily.

[ramseya]

White men hate Hilary Clinton

There, I said it!

[Ben Kenobi]

Better a Roosevelt Republican then a Wilson Democrat.

[Elok]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
Which proves my point on why we don't really need protection from these so-called "monopolies." How's GM doing now? Teetering on bankruptcy. So much for that powerhouse, right?

...because it's not a monopoly, or anything close to one, anymore. It's having to compete with the Japanese, who are kicking their ass. Also Ford, but IIRC Ford isn't doing so hot itself.

NGR, Hillary is just...no. Too much baggage. I doubt she'd do any better than Obama. Actually Obama's got a fair shot of winning this, given that McCain's doing his damnedest to look unhinged.

[DirtyMartini]

I find it mind boggling that Bush has record low approval numbers, but his party's candidate has at least a 50-50 shot at this election. I mean, clearly the US population dislikes bush's policies, so why not give the other party a try? Why? Obviously hard-line Dems and Repubs are going to vote their party, but elections are decided by the undeclared/undecided/independent voters. Usually, for them, it's a who-seems-like-a-nice-guy contest, but you'd think Bush=Republican/ McCain=Republican would actually mean something this year, given how terrible Bush's numbers are on the war and the economy. You really do have to be pretty *#$(&ing ignorant to be an "independent" who completely disapproves of Bush but votes for McCain anyway. There's really no way around that.

[ramseya]

For reference:

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by ramseya

Fiscal Year/
Military spending as
percent of GDP

These numbers don't pass the smell test.

I can't see the U.S. spending 15% of its GDP on the military in the 50's at a time when consumer growth was exploding. These numbers also indicate that military spending dropped when LBJ became President and began sending combat troops into Vietnam.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by rmsharpe

Which proves my point on why we don't really need protection from these so-called "monopolies." How's GM doing now? Teetering on bankruptcy. So much for that powerhouse, right?

And that's good for America how?

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by ramseya
GePap:

McCain has said repeatedly that he is a Teddy Roosevelt Republican.

Why? Doesn't he know that Teddy was an anti-big-business, trust-busting liberal? Plus, he did lots of government spending...like building the Panama Canal.

[ramseya]

Zkribbler:

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php

A quote from the page's mission statement... guess you were right about fishiness

A Word of Bias

Of course, the task of describing the world would be unmanageable without a filter, and the filter adapted here is that of modern, left-of-center political liberalism informed by Enlightenment values. Interested individuals will then be able to spend more time learning about the issues and making their own educated judgments. It is hoped that by emphasizing description and keeping any bias open and honest, TruthAndPolitics.org will help improve the quality of political discourse, and, by maintaining a course of integrity, gain the respect of thinkers on all sides of any particular debate.

Thus, TruthAndPolitics.org is an "index to political knowledge." I created it because of my desire to improve the quality of political debate in the United States. More specifically, I want to increase the circulation of informed liberal viewpoints. I believe "the Left" and the liberal community would benefit if more energy were spent on the twin goals of presenting the merits of liberal/left viewpoints and organizing people to further liberal political ends and less energy on emotional, partisan appeals.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by rmsharpe

China: 4.3%
Russia: 3.9%
U.S.: 3.9%

Not every other country, but it's the other countries that have large military forces.

This is addressed to ramseya also. Those countries have much smaller GDP's as well. That means nothing to you? You can't see why smaller countries would need to spend more on military as a percentage of GDP? You have to look at overall military expenditures. In that regard US military expenditures is about half of total world military expenditures.

Also, those numbers only count the amt spent on DoD, not overall military expenditures, like nuclear weapons and research.

[ramseya]

Kid:

You can't see why smaller countries would need to spend more on military as a percentage of GDP?

No. They have a smaller population to defend, less territory, and less international involvement. Up to a point, your point is true as there is a minimum amount that would need to be spent for anything approaching an okay military (a few infantry and armor divisions, a few fighter squadrons, and enough support for them all) and this could be a large % of GDP of a small country. But beyond that, the costs are variable.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by ramseya
Kid:



No. They have a smaller population to defend, less territory, and less international involvement. Up to a point, your point is true as there is a minimum amount that would need to be spent for anything approaching an okay military (a few infantry and armor divisions, a few fighter squadrons, and enough support for them all) and this could be a large % of GDP of a small country. But beyond that, the costs are variable.

Are you nuts?! What does the size of your population have to do with it when you have to fight a much bigger military with superior weapons?

[ramseya]

Kid:

AK-47's are going for what? $30-$125 on the world market?

The average American household could afford to finance a small army of insurgents.

Why do you think Iraq has been such a headache?