CaptainHaplo campaign straw poll
 

If the election were held today would you vote for or against CaptainHaplo?

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=147353

Ooh, can we get a poll poll????:DL

And, open to US only, or everyone?

Who the heck is CaptainHaplo and what is he/she running for?

Apparently you beat me to the punch. Poll up! :D

The poll is currently 100% percent against captainhaplo in foreigners.

Americans really are apathetic voters, aren't they?

I think there should also be an entry for Subsim members who have made a donation to his campaign kitty

No hard feelings CH, but you're killing yourself with that "Blow up Mecca and Medina" policy. Sorry dude.

Can I see his birth certificate first? :88):88)

Bombing Mecca will strengthen moderate Muslims.

:har:

Tell us another one.

I voted no for that, and for most of his domestic policies.

Ah, before I vote I must know who he's running against.:hmmm:

I'm all for it as a foreigner, conditional on the bombing of cities. As posted int he other thread, stepping up the war to try win it has my favour, but not the method advocated.

Presuming it was a runoff right now between barry or haplo, It'd be a tight tight pick for me. I'd probably sit out if the war on terror policy wasn't changed though. The joys of your non-compulsory voting system :D

...me :know: :haha:

I think for the purposes of this poll it should be an stereotypical candidate you neither actively dislike or support. Vote for or against Haplo based on his platform, no voting for the lesser of two evils so to speak.

If this thing has legs maybe we can run another straw poll in a week or two and compare stats.

I think it's clear where I stand (if you've read the other thread). I understand Haplo's intentions and I would probably be more dismissive of him if not given in the context of being POTUS.

I consider myself a "centrist" because I try to always debate my points from a neutral perspective (and because there are some social issues I really couldn't give a damn about). However, when it comes to national defense I lean decidedly Conservative. I believe in a strong military and a proactive defense of our interests. I agree with the Iraq War (if not completely in its execution) as I believe it will serve our future interests immeasurably.

The problem with Haplo's idea is that it is extreme and unnecessary as it is doomed to failure. But that's not all.

I've intellectually grappled with whether or not I'd support the plan if it were guaranteed to work (even though it would undoubtedly fail) and I've concluded that I would not. One of the things that most morally distinguishes us from terrorist is that we select our targets with respect and care for civilian populations. Haplo's plan would remove that distinction. 1.7 MILLION PEOPLE live in Mecca, and it is host to countless more visitors. Any plan that would suggest their destruction makes me literally sick to my stomach. Sometimes, ideologies just aren't important.

He also argues that the carpet bombing prevailent in World War II is somehow a justification for his idea. I submit that the reason he must go as far back as World War II is because we've since developed technologies that have antiquated the practice, therefore it is not used (it was even morally questionable in those days prior to the "smart" bomb, although, given the context, I support its use in WWII).

Even so, WWII had nations and populations defined. The War on Terror has no such parallel.

Oh, and if you think that destorying cities would actually work, I submit the USSR in WWII...