Why do working-class Americans vote Republican?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Yes, it does. We need a runoff system to stop this practice.

---

What we need is a voting populace of people who aren't too scared to put a checkmark next to a third-party candidate :lol

I've heard the "voting for the lesser of two evils" rationale a million times before and it never makes sense.... no matter how much you hold your nose, your vote counts the same as everyone else's, and all those votes are what keeps the two-party fraud in place....

"We need a runoff system to stop this practice."

bullshit.

We need the Repugs to govern in good faith.

We need to get money out of politics.

We need to get vote-districting out of politicians. control.

The entire system is 100% corrupt. 2+ parties and your bullshit runoffs would be just as corrupt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Uriel

I find it so ironic that you would label me a "shill" considering you're the one who's merely subscribing to the Republican Party's modus operandi, while being unable to display any capacity for independent critical thinking.

I've read numerous books, journals, and academic articles on a wide-range of social, political, and economic treatises. I've engaged in discourse and debate with various people from all walks of life, and have formulated my political views through logic and reason.

You, on the other hand, merely regurgitate whatever is said on Fox News. Please read a book for once (or at least attend an Economics class), instead of getting all your information from Fox News, since you clearly don't have sufficient background knowledge to engage in reasoned discussion. You're way out of your league in this debate. Step outside of your narrow universe.

---

Nice meltdown, but I'm a registered Libertarian and far from a shill for the neocon GOP.... I can't stand the Republicans' warmongering and surveillance state, and feel they are just as bad as Democrats when it comes to shoving wedge issues down our throats, wasting taxpayer money, and reducing our freedoms.... I also do not watch any cable news at all....

The reality is that you are the one in the narrow partisan bubble, and you can't comprehend that there is a growing number of people like me who are fed up with the two-party bullshit and see it for what it is....

"Libertarian"

:lol and hugely fraudulent (bowel) movement

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blizzardwizard

:cry I'm a lib :cry

:cry Gary needs to redistribute the Stanley Cup to the Sharts. The Kings are too wealthy while we're poor and unfortunate. :cry

---

:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clipper Nation

:lol

---

Lib? Christ no :lol

I'm a centre-left socialist, the Libs in this country are a joke :lol



4-0 on banner night


:downspin:some more

It was 3-0 last April.

:downspin: that shitttt!

:lol Socialism
:lol Still tried, but never works
:lol Much like how the Sharts keep trying to win a Cup with Jumbo Choke and Marchoke

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clipper Nation

It was 3-0 last April.

:downspin: that shitttt!

:lol Socialism
:lol Still tried, but never works
:lol Much like how the Sharts keep trying to win a Cup with Jumbo Choke and Marchoke

---

Hey man I can't disagree with that one :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clipper Nation

What we need is a voting populace of people who aren't too scared to put a checkmark next to a third-party candidate :lol

I've heard the "voting for the lesser of two evils" rationale a million times before and it never makes sense.... no matter how much you hold your nose, your vote counts the same as everyone else's, and all those votes are what keeps the two-party fraud in place....

---

I agree, but having runoff elections will insure things like Clinton winning with under 50% in 1992 won't happen. Any idea how many people think Bush would have won if Perot didn't take so many votes? Many are scared shitless to vote 3rd party because of things like that.

"Bush would have won if Perot didn't take so many votes"

Gore would have won FL and Presidency w/o Nader. All the Repug nightmares, from 2001 and well into the future, would have been avoided.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

"Bush would have won if Perot didn't take so many votes"

Gore would have won FL and Presidency w/o Nader. All the Repug nightmares, from 2001 and well into the future, would have been avoided.

---

You start with a lie by changing the context of my quote. Why must you do such despicable things? I did not say bush would have won you idiot. I said "Any idea how many people think Bush would have won if Perot didn't take so many votes.

As for the 2000 election, maybe Gore would have won if not for Nadar.

My point is you have people who want to vote third party, but are afraid their vote will put their last choice in office instead of their second choice.

We need runoff elections. Bush should have never won Florida with less than 50%+1 of the vote.

3rd parties MUST be the same corrupt whores as the 1st and 2nd parties, or they won't have enough $Bs to run elections.

so your 3rd-party-as-pure-white-knight fantasy delivering your Repug/Libertarian dystopia is hilarious, ridiculous, but that's you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by russellgoat

:lmao You chinks are the most racist people on earth, you don't like treating other races equally. You gooks are everywhere but you only allow a very small fraction of immigrants to your countries. I'm 100% sure that when you become the majority in Canada and Australia the immigration laws will be way more strict than they are today.

---

First of all, "chink" is a racist slur. It's pretty ironic that you would condemn a group of people for racism even as you engage in that practice yourself.

Second, just because I said I was Asian doesn't mean I'm automatically of Chinese / Japanese / Korean descent. Asia is far too big a continent to be compartementalized like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clipper Nation

What we need is a voting populace of people who aren't too scared to put a checkmark next to a third-party candidate :lol

I've heard the "voting for the lesser of two evils" rationale a million times before and it never makes sense.... no matter how much you hold your nose, your vote counts the same as everyone else's, and all those votes are what keeps the two-party fraud in place....

---

It depends on the candidate for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clipper Nation

What we need is a voting populace of people who aren't too scared to put a checkmark next to a third-party candidate :lol

I've heard the "voting for the lesser of two evils" rationale a million times before and it never makes sense.... no matter how much you hold your nose, your vote counts the same as everyone else's, and all those votes are what keeps the two-party fraud in place....

---

No what we need is a system that allows for viable candidates that don't rely on parties to function or at the very least allow for more than a handful of parties. Pluralism is dead.

. (Wrong thread)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FuzzyLumpkins

No what we need is a system that allows for viable candidates that don't rely on parties to function or at the very least allow for more than a handful of parties. Pluralism is dead.

---

yeah, this is why i'm pretty apathetic when it comes to elections nowadays. no matter who the candidates are, you are simply voting for the party platforms, and i'm not a fan of either of the 2 parties