Reply With Quote
Obama.
He gave taxpayer subsidies to the movie industry while governor of New Mexico... they were also "refundable" so the companies didn't even have to pay taxes to get the $$$.... that's the same crony capitalism we get from the two major parties tbh....
Obama.
What's there to be completely sold on? It's not like he has any chance to win.
Gary Johnson or Ron Paul.
How many and which leading economists have you seen that say it is not worth a damn?
It preserves Medicare, as is, for those over 55 (probably those over 53 because it will take some time to get legislation passed). There will be no Grannies thrown from the cliff.
It give everyone else the option of remaining in Medicare or opting for private, federally subsidized insurance.
Ideal? No. But, it's a soft landing for an en lement program that is in flames and falling fast -- even faster now that President Obama has robbed the program of more than $700 billion to pay for Obamacare.
It's better than Obama's 13-member death panel that will be deciding on what Medicare will pay to treat covered seniors.
I think the Romney/Ryan campaign should produce an Obama throws Granny from the cliff commercial of their own.
Right after that, they should produce a commercial where Obama lines a bunch of Delphi employees up by an open trench and murders them; after which UAW goon descend into the trenches and steal their shoes, jewelry, and gold fillings.
Romney/Ryan in 2012! "America's Comeback Team"
and until people who are this fed up start making it a point to vote strategically and vote third party every time, none of what you say is going to happen.
People who say not voting is still a choice and that it shows their contempt for the process, etc are half right. It is a choice, you are choosing to let those in power know that they don't have to worry about you (and to a lesser extent your demographic anymore). Vote third party and you (and others voting for that third party) are showing that there is support for "X" platform. Or at the least, you still have to be paid attention to. If you get a third party to 5%, now you are starting to give real coverage to an alternate voice.
It will be slow, and it will suck, but I hypothesize that one of two things will happen
A) Say the Greens get federal matching funds. This will inspire the Libertarians and they may get a better turnout the next election and all of a sudden you have 4 voices instead of two. You are on your way to a permenant multi-party system.
B) Most people can't think more than two days ahead of where they are and this idea never catches on and I am wasting my time voting in every election in my life.
I am a realist, I understand that B is the likely outcome. I will probably be scoffed for even thinking A is possible, whatever. When I think of that, I think, "At least I know I will get 4 hours off of work every four years for something that takes 30 mins".
The only thing that happens when you vote third party is that the greater of two evils gets the vote you would have given the lesser of two evils. To me, it only makes sense if you see absolutely no difference in the two choices you have.
That mindset is exactly why we have the two disfunctional parties that we have. Neither party has any need or incentive to actually be good at governing. All they're shooting for is to be the lesser evil.
BTW, you are absolutely right, it is just that this clip is what I thought of when I read the last sentence (specifically the very last part of the clip).
But for the senate, we would not have a USA today. No small state would have joined the USA without an equal vote through the Senate. The larger states only wanted a house of representatives which number of representatives would be determined by population. You can see why less powerful states are happy with a legeslative body that give them an "equal" vote.
Funny, because when someone writes something like this, the only thing that happens is it shows that they are 100% behind their party without thinking critically about their candidate. To me, anyone who thinks critically about politics would never hold such a view.
It certainly fits.
Love that movie.
voting for a 3rd party...u be wasting votes,
obama will be a 2 term president, if the economy turns around...he might be 3 term if his lucky...
problem atm romney and ryan has alot going against them due to their private life and policy voting in the past...
Did Obama suspend term limits without telling anybody or something?
Voters like you have ruined our political process, tbh...
Meh. Most people agree with you, but that's not how I see it. If I don't think red team or blue team have given me an acceptable candidate I'd much rather use my vote to tell them that than to sell out and go with the guy who I think is drowning closer to the surface.
If you truly believe this is 100% rock solid
The the exact opposite of this must be true in your mind.
voting for a 3rd party...u be wasting votes,
I will vote for Obama even though I live in Texas and it will not matter. While I do not agree fully with any candidate, I sure as can not vote for Romney/Ryan 2012. Truth be told, I would have considered the Romney that was governor of Mass., but he disappeared in order to get the nomination and then pandered further by selecting Ryan.
Actually, the 17th amendment and the feckless State legislatures abdicating their Cons utional obligation to select the President and Vice President have ruined our political process, tbh.
The moment State legislatures made it a popularity contest is when and why we have the two dysfunctional parties we have. Both parties have every incentive to pander to the most people possible in order to buy their votes.
If the States had kept the responsibility for selecting and sending the electors to December vote for President and Vice President, you and I would still have a modi of control through our elected State representatives in the State House and State Senate.
I think Mitt Romney hit the nail on the head in his speech to the people of Chillicothe, Ohio, yesterday:
[Y]ou don’t hear any answers coming from President Obama’s re-election campaign. That’s because he’s intellectually exhausted, out of ideas, and out of energy. And so his campaign has resorted to diversions and distractions, to demagoguing and defaming others. This is an old game in politics; what’s different this year is that the president is taking things to a new low.
It wasn’t supposed to be this way.
In 2008, Candidate Obama said, “if you don’t have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters.” He said, “if you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from.” And that, he told us, is how, “You make a big election about small things.”
That was Candidate Obama describing the strategy that is the now the heart of his campaign.
His campaign and his surrogates have made wild and reckless accusations that disgrace the office of the Presidency. Another outrageous charge came a few hours ago in Virginia. And the White House sinks a little bit lower.
This is what an angry and desperate Presidency looks like.
President Obama knows better, promised better and America deserves better.
Over the last four years, this President has pushed Republicans and Democrats as far apart as they can go. And now he and his allies are pushing us all even further apart by dividing us into groups. He demonizes some. He panders to others. His campaign strategy is to smash America apart and then cobble together 51 percent of the pieces.
If an American president wins that way, we all lose. …
Everywhere I go in America there are monuments that list those who have given their lives. There is no mention of their race, their party affiliation or what they did for a living. They lived and died under a single flag fighting for a single purpose. They pledged allegiance to the United States of America. So, Mr. President, take your campaign of division and anger and hate back to Chicago and let us get about rebuilding and reuniting America.
Happened for Roosevelt.Did Obama suspend term limits without telling anybody or something?
The mentality that we must pick one of two teams, carry water for them at all costs, and vote for whatever bankster-serving, warmongering shill they put in front of us without question is what allows the self-serving Cons ution-haters in Congress and the state legislatures to gain power, tbh.....
It's all strategic - the two establishment candidates in every race always obsess over minor semantics arguments, play to voters' prejudices, and try to rile people up to "just vote the bums out"... that way, they don't actually have to discuss policy, because chances are, they'd agree on 99.9% of policy matters, all of which are geared towards destroying our liberty... and people like you just fall for the scam every election cycle like clockwork...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions