The Official Soxtalk Poster Elections - Discussion Thread

[Texsox]

I will be away from a computer beginning Friday morning until late Sunday. Anything I can get done ahead of time as to not mess up anyone's plans?

[Gregory Pratt]

 

No.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Color me impressed by all of the first three candidate responses to the environmental stewardship debate. Some broad strokes lacking details but of course with the word count that is unavoidable. I'm looking forward to seeing Mr. Kicka**'s response and then a little interchange between you all on this topic.

 

The Editorial Board of the prestigeous FlaSoxx Times has yet to officially endorse a candidate. So. . . who's gonna' be THE Environmental President of SoxTalk Nation?

 

[Texsox]

Color me impressed by all of the first three candidate responses to the environmental stewardship debate. Some broad strokes lacking details but of course with the word count that is unavoidable. I'm looking forward to seeing Mr. Kicka**'s response and then a little interchange between you all on this topic.

 

The Editorial Board of the prestigeous FlaSoxx Times has yet to officially endorse a candidate. So. . . who's gonna' be THE Environmental President of SoxTalk Nation?

 

 

Duh, I've been looking around for some info and realized you might have it. I want to start an artificial reef project at my Sea Base. I've been reading some conflicting opinions about their usefulness. Texas has a program, but I understand there are some private ones as well. I want to set up a work station at the camp and offer campers an opportunity to contribute.

[sox4lifeinPA]

Color me impressed by all of the first three candidate responses to the environmental stewardship debate. Some broad strokes lacking details but of course with the word count that is unavoidable. I'm looking forward to seeing Mr. Kicka**'s response and then a little interchange between you all on this topic.

 

The Editorial Board of the prestigeous FlaSoxx Times has yet to officially endorse a candidate. So. . . who's gonna' be THE Environmental President of SoxTalk Nation?

 

 

 

well, when I'm soxtalk president, I'm DEFINITELY having an underwater lair and sharks with frickin' laser beams on their foreheads. You can come too

[NorthSideSox72]

Color me impressed by all of the first three candidate responses to the environmental stewardship debate. Some broad strokes lacking details but of course with the word count that is unavoidable. I'm looking forward to seeing Mr. Kicka**'s response and then a little interchange between you all on this topic.

 

The Editorial Board of the prestigeous FlaSoxx Times has yet to officially endorse a candidate. So. . . who's gonna' be THE Environmental President of SoxTalk Nation?

 

Thanks FlaxxJim! I tried to be concrete - my 7 point plan for energy, increases in EPA staff, pollution credit markets. But some things, like wilderness and open space protections, are hard to make into detailed plans.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Thanks FlaxxJim! I tried to be concrete - my 7 point plan for energy, increases in EPA staff, pollution credit markets. But some things, like wilderness and open space protections, are hard to make into detailed plans.

 

True. But other things, like stating whether or not you will push for legislation that recognizes CO2 as a pollutant regulatable within the framework of the Clean Air Act, push for US ratification of the Convention on Biodiversity, etc., are stark position-defining statements that my vision of a bold Environmental President would run on.

[NorthSideSox72]

True. But other things, like stating whether or not you will push for legislation that recognizes CO2 as a pollutant regulatable within the framework of the Clean Air Act, push for US ratification of the Convention on Biodiversity, etc., are stark position-defining statements that my vision of a bold Environmental President would run on.

I'll give you an honest answer on those points - I do not know enough about them to decide right now whether or not I'd endorse them. But if I have time between now and Sunday to research them a little bit, I'll get back to you on them.

[Texsox]

True. But other things, like stating whether or not you will push for legislation that recognizes CO2 as a pollutant regulatable within the framework of the Clean Air Act, push for US ratification of the Convention on Biodiversity, etc., are stark position-defining statements that my vision of a bold Environmental President would run on.

 

You are probably remembering Bush's unfulfilled campaign promise to regulate carbon dioxide as part of a comprehensive reduction in emissions from power plants. First off, as I have understood the Clean Air Act, CO2 has always been included and it is only this President's sleight of hand that is bringing this up. I support legislation that will firmly establish CO2 as a pollutant and call for reductions in CO2 emissions from our fossil fuel power plants.

 

Of all the dangers that face our society, a safe water and food supply is the most important. I am more concerned about corporate farms and moving our food supplies off shore than I am about our oil supplies. The Convention on Biodiversity recognizes that biodiversity is about more than plants and animals, that it involves our food, clothing, shelter, and raiment. Not only should we ratify but we should be leaders in this initiative.

[FlaSoxxJim]

I'll give you an honest answer on those points - I do not know enough about them to decide right now whether or not I'd endorse them. But if I have time between now and Sunday to research them a little bit, I'll get back to you on them.

 

Fair enough. Since the question of whether to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and the consequences of the EPA's non-regulation is being argued before the Supreme Court as we speak, I figured it would have been a topical point for an opening salvo in the debate.

Great, more presidential hopefuls who don't read the news.

 

Tex, you're right, CO2 emissions should fall under Clean Air because it is known in excess to harm environmental and human health. Simply knowing that however will not change the status quo unless the point is explicitly and legally made.

Edited November 30, 2006 by FlaSoxxJim

[sox4lifeinPA]

The Ocean is a sponge for all things CO2. It is rapidly changing the Ph of the water and thusly making it very difficult for coral, a habit for thousands if not millions of species, to make their protective layers.

 

It is essential for the next President to take steps to decrease Carbon Dioxide emissions in order to prevent further damage to our precious water bodies.

 

I would be that President.

 

vote for PA.

[Texsox]

Fair enough. Since the question of whether to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and the consequences of the EPA's non-regulation is being argued before the Supreme Court as we speak, I figured it would have been a topical point for an opening salvo in the debate.

Great, more presidential hopefuls who don't read the news.

 

Tex, you're right, CO2 emissions should fall under Clean Air because it is known in excess to harm environmental and human health. Simply knowing that however will not change the status quo unless the point is explicitly and legally made.

 

IMHO It was explicitly and legally made but a creative interpretation of the Clean Air Act has brought it to this point. I have read the arguments that CO2 is naturally occurring and should not be regulated, but in the levels that we are currently generating, it is clearly a pollutant and clearly must be legally regulated and reduced. It is the pressure from a huge industry, the power generating industry, that is causing us to bow to economic interests instead of our own health interests. I can't answer this any more directly and firmly. Yes I favor regulating CO2 as a pollutant. I favor the Supreme Court in clearly defining that.

[Controlled Chaos]

What is your position on the role of government in supporting innovation in the field of biotechnology?

 

 

Recent research has shown that empirical evidence for globalization of corporate innovation is very limited and as a corollary the market for technologies is shrinking. As a world leader, it's important for America to provide systematic research grants for our scientists. I believe strongly there will always be a need for us to have a well articulated innovation policy with emphasis on human resource development. Thank you.

[NorthSideSox72]

The debates have now closed. I'll start the actual election thread tomorrow morning, and it will run through Thursday (I'll probably actually shut it down first thing Friday morning).

 

The original setup for this allowed for one last "statement" from each candidate, so I'll open that thread now. This is your chance to get your last lick in, if you want to. Limit to 500 words again, please.

 

There are TWO RULES on the voting that everyone should be aware of. One was specifically stated when we started this, the other is common sense...

 

1. You may not vote for yourself. Honestly, we have no way to police that - so its the honor system (among politicians - HA!). If people think that is a dumb rule, then we'll do away with it next year (we do an annual cycle here on Soxtalk). I just figured, with such a small number of voters in Buster, it would go better this way.

 

2. For those of you who may be considering creating other ID's on the site to vote more than once, please do not do that. Its against the site rules anyway, I believe. Just a reminder (*cough*... Friends of PA... *cough*).

 

Good luck everyone! Enjoy this last day of discussion!

[NorthSideSox72]

Well, I have to tip my cap to GP. He used an unconventional strategy, one which bothered some folks. But it wasn't against any of the rules. And so, he wins the initial election.

 

Our original rules called for a second election among the top half of vote-getters. But, since we only had 5 to begin with, that seems silly, no?

 

Now, if Rex and GP are both willing, they will select a VP candidate, and we'll do the runoff next week. The VP candidate can be anyone they'd like (it doesn't have to be someone who ran in the election, necessarily).

 

Are you two in? And if so, who do you want to pick as your VP?

[NorthSideSox72]

Well, I have to tip my cap to GP. He used an unconventional strategy, one which bothered some folks. But it wasn't against any of the rules. And so, he wins the initial election.

 

Our original rules called for a second election among the top half of vote-getters. But, since we only had 5 to begin with, that seems silly, no?

 

Now, if Rex and GP are both willing, they will select a VP candidate, and we'll do the runoff next week. The VP candidate can be anyone they'd like (it doesn't have to be someone who ran in the election, necessarily).

 

Are you two in? And if so, who do you want to pick as your VP?

GP has declared he will not run in a runoff. The rules had called for one. We did not set up rules for this particular problem. Our options are:

 

1. Just end it here.

2. Rex runs uncontested in the runoff.

3. The thrid place vote getter, Tex, runs against Rex.

 

Thing is, the competition is fun, but it was never about that. I just wanted to give a forum for real political debate. Apparently, that was not everyone else's motivation.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Thing is, the competition is fun, but it was never about that. I just wanted to give a forum for real political debate. Apparently, that was not everyone else's motivation.

 

Politics shmolitics. You old dinosaurs get so hung up on you 'facts' and the 'issues' and 'meainingful dialog' . . .

 

BORING!!

 

 

And I, for one, welcome our new teenage insect overlords.

 

 

[Texsox]

GP has declared he will not run in a runoff. The rules had called for one. We did not set up rules for this particular problem. Our options are:

 

1. Just end it here.

2. Rex runs uncontested in the runoff.

3. The thrid place vote getter, Tex, runs against Rex.

 

Thing is, the competition is fun, but it was never about that. I just wanted to give a forum for real political debate. Apparently, that was not everyone else's motivation.

 

Fourth option. Since Rex is almost a classic Democrat, why not draft a conservative or have PA run against him?

Fifth option. Since GP is simply a screen name, form a campaign team and run for him. Hell, that mirrors real world nicely in some cases.

 

I think the second round would be interesting if we built on the previous debates. Allowing each campaign team to read over and devise a strategy based on the other candidate's opinions. Better develop themes. That would probably work best in a PA v. Rex campaign.

 

I think we should also give GP time to rethink is withdrawl. Perhaps he will honor the voter's decision to place him in the second round.

[Gregory Pratt]

I'm running.

 

I request that the next election occur in, oh, maybe a week and a half?

Why?

 

Two reasons, really: one, it gives Rex and I plenty of time to debate plenty of issues and not just one two or three.

 

Two: I want a longer election.

 

I'll be happy, though, if the next election -- the actual voting -- were setup, oh, say, next Friday and ran through Sunday? Though I'd prefer next Monday through Wednesday or Thursday.

 

Not that I make those decisions but those are my suggestions.

 

I would also like to formally challenge Rex Kickass to six debates.

[Texsox]

I'm running.

 

I request that the next election occur in, oh, maybe a week and a half?

Why?

 

Two reasons, really: one, it gives Rex and I plenty of time to debate plenty of issues and not just one two or three.

 

Two: I want a longer election.

 

I'll be happy, though, if the next election -- the actual voting -- were setup, oh, say, next Friday and ran through Sunday? Though I'd prefer next Monday through Wednesday or Thursday.

 

Not that I make those decisions but those are my suggestions.

 

I would also like to formally challenge Rex Kickass to six debates.

 

All great ideas. I wonder how far we wish to take this. Have each candidate appoint a campaign manager and allow each campaign to select a couple debate topics (I like that) I think a smaller scale VP debate is also in order. Perhaps just two topics.

[Gregory Pratt]

I agree wholeheartedly except for the "campaign manager." I don't think that should be mandatory as I wish to run my own campaign with assistance from friends as requested. Though I am going to have an HQ.

 

More time is paramount to a strong election, I think, because it'll give Rex and I time to really go at it.

[Texsox]

I agree wholeheartedly except for the "campaign manager." I don't think that should be mandatory as I wish to run my own campaign with assistance from friends as requested. Though I am going to have an HQ.

 

More time is paramount to a strong election, I think, because it'll give Rex and I time to really go at it.

 

With six debate issues, I think each side should be allowed to pick two, and two coming from the debate panel. We probably should also look at the debate panel and possibly change them up a bit or add a couple people.

[Gregory Pratt]

I don't feel comfortable with the Debate Panel. Personally, I think it would be more interesting if Rex and I each picked three and we also picked, perhaps in conjunction with our Veeps, one VP Debate Topic each.

[NorthSideSox72]

I don't feel comfortable with the Debate Panel. Personally, I think it would be more interesting if Rex and I each picked three and we also picked, perhaps in conjunction with our Veeps, one VP Debate Topic each.

You don't feel comfortable with the debate panel? Its two people from opposite ends of the political spectrum, neither of whom are running. They stay.

 

Just to be clear, if you read the original schedule, it states the election schedule - next week. Let's stick with that.

 

We hadn't specified a new round of debate, but if you'd both like, we can have one - if Soxy and SS2K5 are willing to put the time in. Otherwise, if you just want to start some threads yourself to do whatever kind of debating with Rex you want, you are welcome to do so.

 

So let's start with this - each of you pick a Veep. And if both of you are in for this, then you can debate at will on whatever topics you'd like. Alternately, maybe you could actually answer the debate topics you chose to ignore previously. Either way, I'll set up the vote for next week, as previously planned.

[Texsox]

You don't feel comfortable with the debate panel? Its two people from opposite ends of the political spectrum, neither of whom are running. They stay.

 

Just to be clear, if you read the original schedule, it states the election schedule - next week. Let's stick with that.

 

We hadn't specified a new round of debate, but if you'd both like, we can have one - if Soxy and SS2K5 are willing to put the time in. Otherwise, if you just want to start some threads yourself to do whatever kind of debating with Rex you want, you are welcome to do so.

 

So let's start with this - each of you pick a Veep. And if both of you are in for this, then you can debate at will on whatever topics you'd like. Alternately, maybe you could actually answer the debate topics you chose to ignore previously. Either way, I'll set up the vote for next week, as previously planned.

 

To be honest I think it would be interesting if both candidates were allowed to pick a couple debate topics *and* have a moderated, structured, debate. The only restriction is the topics should be somewhat "real world" and something that would realistically be brought up in debate. For example Mary Chaney having a baby could spark a debate on gay adoptions but not a who is the hottest lesbian couple.