Vote 3rd Party

[revelarts]

click link here to see whole graphic
https://staticapp.icpsc.com/icp/loadimage.php/mogile/1115108/22cab92c9a5570239645652913dcfb29/image/jpeg

Not my choice of a candidate but the comparison makes a point that's lost on some Republicans and Democrats. That is, that their candidates are not very different in most important areas.

I wish some folks had started a Vote 3rd party campaign, ANY 3rd party,
There are A LOT of people that really don't care for Romney or Obama and if the D's and R's saw close to a 1/3 voting in other parties they'd have to take some notice and at the least throw some bones to the people. And at best really start running candidates and voting in ways that lined up with the constitution and the peoples desires.


It'll get little traction here i suppose but still i'll put it out there.
VOTE 3rd PARTY
ANY 3rd Party

[fj1200]

A pointless endeavor. Americans do not want a third party. They may not want BO or Romney but they're going to want Johnson even less.

[revelarts]

Any 3rd party

[fj1200]

Whom they like even less. It's like shooting blind.

[revelarts]

Whom they like even less. It's like shooting blind.

No, it's pulling real votes from the D's and R's. letting them know that people will not just vote for any candidate they throw in our faces just because they are on the ticket.

The bare differences between the candidates show anyone not joined at the hip the the big 2 that there's really no choice here.

Any 3rd party choice AT LEAST sends a message. Not hoping for a win. But a Awake up call for the powers that be.

[Little-Acorn]

Any 3rd party
Yep, every vote we take away from Romney helps put Obama back in office.

GREAT plan.

Typical of the short-sighted loser cadre, to NOT mount the kind of massive campaign needed to get a win, wait for their "new" candidate to be reduced to insignificance, and then push him weakly at the last moment when they only thing he can do that late is make the least-bad major candidate lose.

These people give a whole new meaning to "fifth column".

[revelarts]

And Romney will change what in office? Go to war with Iran faster?
Fix the economy? are you sure?
Stop the terrorist? Obey the constitution? protect gun rights? Abortion? Are you sure?

The thread where i ask for real differences between the 2 has crickets having babies 3rd and 4th generations at this point.

Any 3rd party

[fj1200]

No, it's pulling real votes from the D's and R's. letting them know that people will not just vote for any candidate they throw in our faces just because they are on the ticket.

But that's exactly what you propose.

Any 3rd party


The bare differences between the candidates show anyone not joined at the hip the the big 2 that there's really no choice here.

Any 3rd party choice AT LEAST sends a message. Not hoping for a win. But a Awake up call for the powers that be.

Fine, you believe there is very little difference, most disagree. I share your desire for more parties/voices to be included in the mix on election day but under our current methods for voting it will not happen. The requirement to simply get the most votes on election day will almost always come down to the big 2. Start calling for election reform that insists on 50% +1 for every federal election, including electoral votes, and you'll automatically eliminate the "throwing away your vote" reasoning for not voting third party. I would know that if I "threw away my vote" on the Libertarians I could make it up on the runoff if it came down to it.

[revelarts]

As long as the votes are counted, the D's and R's will be concerned about the numbers that go to 3rd parties. Even if they "don't count". the numbers will tell a story that can't be ignored.

whether enough people are fed up enough or have the blinders off enough is any story.

[fj1200]

No, they'll be happy that they won. The best you can hope for is if they take honest stock in the tenor of the third party votes, if they're even significant, and they adjust their strategy/message for the next voting cycle.

[revelarts]

No, they'll be happy that they won. The best you can hope for is if they take honest stock in the tenor of the third party votes, if they're even significant, and they adjust their strategy/message for the next voting cycle.

exactly, that would be the bare minimal as as mentioned in my 1st post.

[Abbey Marie]

No, it's pulling real votes from the D's and R's. letting them know that people will not just vote for any candidate they throw in our faces just because they are on the ticket.

The bare differences between the candidates show anyone not joined at the hip the the big 2 that there's really no choice here.

Any 3rd party choice AT LEAST sends a message. Not hoping for a win. But a Awake up call for the powers that be.

Rev, Romney was not "thrown in our faces". We had primaries, and he won.

[tailfins]

If Obama has failed you by not getting a single payer health plan and hasn't done enough for the environment, the Green Party is on the ballot!

http://www.gp.org/index.php


Whether the issue is universal health care, corporate globalization, alternative energy, election reform or decent, living wages for workers, Greens have the courage and independence necessary to take on the powerful corporate interests.

[fj1200]

exactly, that would be the bare minimal as as mentioned in my 1st post.

But any third party will just muffle the message. And even then the only place you can build on those gains would be in the primaries which third partiers have eschewed.

[revelarts]

Yep, every vote we take away from Romney helps put Obama back in office.

GREAT plan.

Typical of the short-sighted loser cadre, to NOT mount the kind of massive campaign needed to get a win, wait for their "new" candidate to be reduced to insignificance, and then push him weakly at the last moment when they only thing he can do that late is make the least-bad major candidate lose.

These people give a whole new meaning to "fifth column".

And BTW what's worse, if the party leaders compromise to what the "enemy" wanted for years? But give lip service to party values. Or a "5th column" that fights for the original goals the party was for in the 1st place?

[revelarts]

Rev, Romney was not "thrown in our faces". We had primaries, and he won.

GOP Suing to Keep Third Parties Off Ballot in Novemberhttp://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12731-gop-suing-to-keep-third-parties-off-ballot-in-november

There's the party of Freedom for you. If wonder why I support the principals and not the party this is one example.


Around the country, the Republican Party is mounting legal challenges to keep third-party candidates off the ballot in November.

Writer Karl Dickey reports in the Examiner (http://www.examiner.com/article/johnson-campaign-has-had-enough-of-republican-ballot-shenanigans) that “in recent weeks, with the full support and legal assistance of the Republican Party (http://www.gop.com/), [Gary] Johnson's ballot status has been challenged in Michigan, Pennsylvania, the District of Columbia, Iowa and now Ohio." Gary Johnson (pictured) is the former governor of New Mexico and the Libertarian Party’s candidate (http://www.lp.org) for president of the United States. As of this writing, Johnson is on the ballot in 43 states.
On September 1 the Ohio voters challenging Johnson’s appearance on the November ballot officially withdrew their opposition (http://www.ballot-access.org/2012/Ohio-surprise.pdf). In the one-page notice filed with the office of Ohio’s secretary of state, Kelly Mills and Cynthia Rees did not explain their decision to drop their protest.
It could be related to the decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision handed down on August 31 (http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/12a0967n-06.pdf) dismissing the Ohio state legislature’s appeal of a U.S. district court ruling putting the Libertarian Party on the ballot for 2012.
On August 31, a senior advisor to Johnson released a statement regarding the various efforts to block Libertarian ballot access: (http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/gop-accused-of-attempting-to-keep-gov-gary-johnson-off-ballots)
The national Republican Party may not want to publicly acknowledge the presence of a true fiscal conservative in this race, but they are certainly taking Gov. Johnson seriously enough to engage in a concerted campaign to get his name off ballots in key states before voters even get a chance to vote.
In states across the nation, Republican operatives, lawyers, and in some cases, elected officials, are filing frivolous challenges to Governor Johnson's ballot status. They know that even if their challenges fail, fending them off is a drain on our resources and a distraction from the real issues in this campaign. We don't have hundreds of millions of dollars to throw around, nor do we have the Republicans' endless supply of lawyers.
We have dealt with many challenges in this campaign from the major parties, who clearly don't want voters to have a viable third option in this election, but this attack on voting rights and democracy is over the top.
Governor Johnson has made it clear that we will fight every one of these challenges and do everything in our power to be on the ballot in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The prospect of a successful two-term governor who is a proven fiscal conservative and champion of social tolerance may be a thorn in the sides of the two so-called major parties, but Governor Johnson will not be deterred in his effort to give voters a real choice in November.
Despite the frustration such legal wrangling must cause the Johnson campaign, they were likely pleased by the decision announced late last week to allow Johnson’s name to appear on the ballot in Iowa.
As reported by the Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/aug/29/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-be-iowa-ballot/):
Two Iowa voters had challenged his candidacy last week and Jay Kramer, a Romney campaign staffer, signed as a witness the challenge that Libertarians' convention at the Iowa State Fair wasn't real.
Republican Secretary of State Matt Schultz, Democratic Attorney General Tom Miller, and Warren Jenkins, the chief deputy for Republican Auditor David Vaudt, said Iowa's law on holding conventions to get on the ballot is vague and they opted to err on the side of open ballot access, the AP reported.
Johnson reportedly told the Washington Times that he will be the only third-party candidate whose name will appear on the ballot in all 50 states.
Remarkably, this may be the case.
On August 21, the Constitution Party (http://www.constitutionparty.com) withdrew their petition to get on the ballot in Pennsylvania. According to a story published online by Philadelphia Weekly (http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/phillynow/2012/08/23/constitution-party-kicked-off-the-pennsylvania-ballot/), “the decision came after multiple warnings of the court costs by attorneys for the Republican Party, who have challenged the Constitution and Libertarian parties’ ballot petitions.”
Former Virginia Congressman Virgil Goode is joined on the Constitution Party’s presidential ticket (http://www.goodeforpresident2012.com) by Pennsylvania attorney James Clymer.
“The challenge represented a monolithic establishment party which is intent on denying people the opportunity to vote for anyone who might criticize it from a limited government, non-interventionist perspective,” Clymer told Philadelphia Weekly. “It used its almost limitless resources to take advantage of laws designed by Republicans and Democrats to make sure no other party has a place at the election table and court decisions that have supported raising the hurdles a third party has to jump over to get to a general election,” he added.
The Philadelphia Weekly story reports that the Constitution Party presented 35,000 signatures to Pennsylvania state election authorities on August 1, more than the minimum number needed to qualify for ballot inclusion.
“This means yet another voice in Pennsylvania is stilled,” said Bob Small, facilitator for the Pennsylvania Ballot Access Coalition (http://www.paballotaccess.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage&Itemid=53), the blog reports.
Despite the setback in the Keystone State, the Washington Post reports (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-politics/virgil-goode-makes-presidential-ballot-in-virginia/2012/09/04/c5c57ea6-f698-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_story.html) that Goode’s name will appear on the ballot in his home state in November.
According to the story in the Washington Post, the Virginia State Board of Elections ruled September 4 that Goode has qualified for the presidential ballot in Virginia.
The story indicated that the opportunity for Virginians to vote for a third-party candidate could be “a potential obstacle (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/virgil-goode-campaign-could-be-a-spoiler-for-romney-in-virginia/2012/07/14/gJQAqjPxkW_story.html) to Republican Mitt Romney’s hopes of winning the pivotal state.”
Republicans in the Old Dominion are desperate to keep their state in the Romney tally, however, and are continuing to challenge the board’s decision. The Washington Post reports that the Virginia GOP is alleging petition fraud on the part of the Constitution Party in the hopes of keeping Goode’s name off the ballot. They are afraid the former congressman could “siphon votes from Romney.”
If the last presidential election is any guide, Romney may have reason to fight for every vote. In 2008 Barack Obama won the state, the first time the Democratic candidate had done so in over 40 years.
Recent polls have Romney and Obama running neck and neck in Virginia.
Results of a survey conducted by Public Policy Polling (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_NCVA_071012.pdf) in July show Goode receiving nine percent of the vote, up from five percent in May.
Finally, although many hoped that Ron Paul would have announced a third-party run during his appearance Tuesday on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno (http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12695-gop-convention-recap-what-will-ron-paul-say-on-leno-show), the good doctor made no such declaration (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSGNE07LHXI).
Paul’s apparent absence on the ballot leaves many wondering where to look for relief from the rule of the two major parties, both of which seem to be controlled by the same small coterie of Establishment insiders.
For their part, the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party are promoting their candidates as attractive alternatives, at least in those states where the Republican Party isn’t threatening them with expensive and protracted legal battles.



http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/12660-republican-convention-rules-changes-how-the-establishment-stole-the-gop

[aboutime]

We are all missing the real point here. Of course. revelarts is free to vote for whomever he pleases in November. The constitution gives him that avenue to consider.

But what we must also remember is. Anyone who demands that they will vote for a THIRD PARTY candidate, also is granted the rights, according to that same constitution...to do, and say dumb things for as long as they live.

Like that definition of 'Insanity', trying something and failing because it didn't work. Then trying it the same way again, expecting different results is so accurate, when it comes to anyone who is honestly convinced...their VOTE for a third party candidate will help their life change is just......(you fill in the appropriate word here)

[revelarts]

We are all missing the real point here. Of course. revelarts is free to vote for whomever he pleases in November. The constitution gives him that avenue to consider.

....

Not if the establishment Republicans have any say in it.
They don't want anyone else on the ballot and are willing to Sue and make S**T up to do it.

where's the Acorn like Outrage?
me and the crickets will hang out here waiting for that.

[aboutime]

Not if the establishment Republicans have any say in it.
They don't want anyone else on the ballot and are willing to Sue and make S**T up to do it.

where's the Acorn like Outrage?
me and the crickets will hang out here waiting for that.

revelarts. If what you insist is true. Then how would you handle the demands of every American who is eligible, according to the constitution to place their name on the Ballot across the nation?
Why stop at a THIRD party?
How bout, like they do in France, where everything political is in such PERFECT shape, and the economy is Number One in the world?
More candidates listed on ballots seems to be your answer.
Example. People recognize BABY BOO BOO, and vote for her as a Write In.
Would that make you happy?

[mundame]

Very interesting that the GOP is the party eager to block third party candidates on the ballot --- they know it's their party that people would mostly leave to vote for a third party.

I considered voting for a third party, but have decided not to vote for the president at all. I don't want Gary Johnson to be president: I want two normal persons to run and to be able to choose between two reasonable, viable candidates. If all the main parties can do is put up completely unacceptable weirdos, the heck with them.

I was never comfortable with the concept of voting for the lesser of two evils. If there are two evils to vote on, and that's it, democracy just failed and I'm not playing a stupid, fixed game like that. If they want democracy to work, let them put up reasonable, normal candidates.

[aboutime]

Very interesting that the GOP is the party eager to block third party candidates on the ballot --- they know it's their party that people would mostly leave to vote for a third party.

I considered voting for a third party, but have decided not to vote for the president at all. I don't want Gary Johnson to be president: I want two normal persons to run and to be able to choose between two reasonable, viable candidates. If all the main parties can do is put up completely unacceptable weirdos, the heck with them.

I was never comfortable with the concept of voting for the lesser of two evils. If there are two evils to vote on, and that's it, democracy just failed and I'm not playing a stupid, fixed game like that. If they want democracy to work, let them put up reasonable, normal candidates.

Thank You for Not Voting, Mundame. That is a great service you are doing for the rest of the nation.

[WiccanLiberal]

I am not necessarily advocating ANY candidate at this moment but I was under the impression that the Constitution still gave us the right to a secret ballot for the candidate we choose, not just the candidates of the major parties. Third parties have, historically, not made a huge impact except in one key way. When a third party candidate starts to get serious interest and or make a statistical dent in the usual polling, it tends to make the two bullies on the block (the Dems and Repubs) take a little closer look at what they may have been missing. It brings to their attention ways in which they may have been ignoring key interests of the electorate. I don't know anything much about Mr, Johnson but I will certainly give his candidacy the respect of a look at his positions.

Meanwhile, in other important news, AJ the Amazing just tried to hijack my posting. He is a horrible keyboard walker.7yyyyyyyyyyyyyyy[-44444444444444444444444-

[aboutime]

I am not necessarily advocating ANY candidate at this moment but I was under the impression that the Constitution still gave us the right to a secret ballot for the candidate we choose, not just the candidates of the major parties. Third parties have, historically, not made a huge impact except in one key way. When a third party candidate starts to get serious interest and or make a statistical dent in the usual polling, it tends to make the two bullies on the block (the Dems and Repubs) take a little closer look at what they may have been missing. It brings to their attention ways in which they may have been ignoring key interests of the electorate. I don't know anything much about Mr, Johnson but I will certainly give his candidacy the respect of a look at his positions.

Meanwhile, in other important news, AJ the Amazing just tried to hijack my posting. He is a horrible keyboard walker.7yyyyyyyyyyyyyyy[-44444444444444444444444-

WiccanLiberal. And you are absolutely correct. You still have that secret ballot for the candidate you choose.
Nobody is trying to take the ability to vote, for anyone away.
But there is some question as to why anyone would knowingly, and intentionally throw their vote toward someone they Know, has little, if any chance of winning. That's all.

[WiccanLiberal]

Aboutime, you and I can respectfully differ about that. Sometimes it is not about winning but about conscience which I know you know something about. If I cannot, in good conscience, support one of the major candidates, then a third party is a valid choice. They may not win the given election but their ability to draw votes may make a big difference in a future one. At the moment, in my disenchantment with both major parties, I am looking seriously at all possibilities. The only one I will NOT entertain is abstaining from the process entirely. That is allowing others to make my choices for me and that I will never consent to.

[aboutime]

Aboutime, you and I can respectfully differ about that. Sometimes it is not about winning but about conscience which I know you know something about. If I cannot, in good conscience, support one of the major candidates, then a third party is a valid choice. They may not win the given election but their ability to draw votes may make a big difference in a future one. At the moment, in my disenchantment with both major parties, I am looking seriously at all possibilities. The only one I will NOT entertain is abstaining from the process entirely. That is allowing others to make my choices for me and that I will never consent to.

Thank you. I totally respect, and admire your opinions, and desires. I never had any intention of trying to make you do anything you didn't feel you wanted to do here.

So. As you said. You and I can respectfully differ, or disagree. That's the beauty of our Constitution, and the 1st amendment we enjoy.

[mundame]

. At the moment, in my disenchantment with both major parties, I am looking seriously at all possibilities. The only one I will NOT entertain is abstaining from the process entirely. That is allowing others to make my choices for me and that I will never consent to.

If you choose a candidate you know won't win, like Gary Johnson, isn't that still letting others choose who will actually be president?

I think there is a lot more pressure to vote for someone, anyone, when it might be a more meaningful protest against bad candidates by both parties just to throw over the whole process. But that's just my opinion.

I think we get brainwashed at a young age into the "holiness" of voting when in fact it's too often fairly meaningless --- in a safe state, what use is it to vote for the guy who is going to get very few votes? Or if the parties put up just any clown, how is it holy to vote for one of them?

[Gaffer]

If any third party had any real following and any real desire to change thing in the country they would be going after the congress and senate seats, not worrying about the presidency. That's why I don't take any of them seriously. The third party people remind me of a kid fresh out of college expecting to be hired as a CEO when they have no experience.

If you don't like Romney stay home.

[aboutime]

If any third party had any real following and any real desire to change thing in the country they would be going after the congress and senate seats, not worrying about the presidency. That's why I don't take any of them seriously. The third party people remind me of a kid fresh out of college expecting to be hired as a CEO when they have no experience.

If you don't like Romney stay home.

Gaffer. That's how I feel, and it is just as pragmatic as I believe I am.

Being Only one person, in a melting pot filled with more than 300 Plus Million other folks, and thinking my vote will actually have any effect, or play any part in something MUCH BIGGER than I could ever imagine. I have learned over the years to Just Go with the Flow, vote for the people I think...may actually be honest, and at least know the difference between the Constitution, and their Dream list for Financial Independence...AT OUR EXPENSE.

My father died in 1981. And almost to his last days. He reminded all of us to NEVER trust any politician, from either party, and to stay away from Union memberships, and the crooks who run them. He was a life-long member of the Teamsters, as a truck driver, and later, someone who oversaw the loading of trailers in a large, Philadelphia trucking outfit.
He hated..literally. Nixon, and Carter. And before them. He only trusted IKE, but always distrusted Truman, and called FDR a phony, rich bastard who took us into a war...my dad never quite recovered from.
So. To everyone reading this.
Vote for whoever has convinced you to be as gullible, and easily led as they ALL expect WE THE PEOPLE to be.

[DragonStryk72]

But that's exactly what you propose.




Fine, you believe there is very little difference, most disagree. I share your desire for more parties/voices to be included in the mix on election day but under our current methods for voting it will not happen. The requirement to simply get the most votes on election day will almost always come down to the big 2. Start calling for election reform that insists on 50% +1 for every federal election, including electoral votes, and you'll automatically eliminate the "throwing away your vote" reasoning for not voting third party. I would know that if I "threw away my vote" on the Libertarians I could make it up on the runoff if it came down to it.

Except in Ireland, where it comes down to 6. Telling people they're wasting their vote by voting for who they believe in is the most unamerican thing you could have possibly said at this point. The only waste of a vote that exists is when you vote for a candidate you don't believe in cause the sheep are voting.

Third parties "can't win" because you won't vote for them. You keep voting for the same guys, every time expecting different results from it. You'll note that's pretty close to the definition of insanity.

[mundame]

Except in Ireland, where it comes down to 6. Telling people they're wasting their vote by voting for who they believe in is the most unamerican thing you could have possibly said at this point. The only waste of a vote that exists is when you vote for a candidate you don't believe in cause the sheep are voting.

Third parties "can't win" because you won't vote for them. You keep voting for the same guys, every time expecting different results from it. You'll note that's pretty close to the definition of insanity.


I agree with you --- if you believe in someone, vote for that person no matter if you are the only voter!

I suppose the reverse of this is why I'm not voting this time -- I don't believe in or approve of either of the two main candidates (or care about any of the third parties) and just as I don't think people should be told not to "throw away their vote" on a minor candidate, I don't think we should be pressured to vote the "lesser of two evils."

It's important to believe in the candidates. If we can't, why bother.

[KarlMarx]

Vote 3rd party and give Obama another 4 years? No thanks... that's how Clinton got to be president. Romney may not be the best, but he's better than Obama

come to think of it... a case of Ebola virus is better than having Obama as president

[revelarts]

If any third party had any real following and any real desire to change thing in the country they would be going after the congress and senate seats, not worrying about the presidency. That's why I don't take any of them seriously. The third party people remind me of a kid fresh out of college expecting to be hired as a CEO when they have no experience.

.

No experience? you mean like Obama, or Governors like Romney and Gary Johnson of the libertarian party , or Congressman like Newt Gingrich or Vigil Goode of the Constitution party.

how many congressional seats do they have to run for before they reach your particular idea of legitimacy?
the oregan constitution party has got like 17 running in state and federal races
South Carolina has about 7
they are out there if you look.

We've just been brainwashed into thinking that the 90 million voters in U.S. some how should seriously consider ONLY 2 parties.
It's kinda crazy really.

I'm sure the Founders never imagined there'd be 90 million voting on behalf of 300 million citizens for 1 man from 2 parties as president. And 500+ congress people to represent them all again from 2 parties. Not much in the way of real "representation" there.

No reason why that's the way it's got to be.

(still waiting for the outrage on the RNC suppression of 3rd party candidates. I really hope i don't hear jack squat about Acorn this election you guys if you can't get outraged about this too.)

[gabosaurus]

If you are not completely sold on Romney, I totally endorse voting a third party candidate. Perhaps Gary Johnson. Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[Classic Liberal]

click link here to see whole graphic


Not my choice of a candidate but the comparison makes a point that's lost on some Republicans and Democrats. That is, that their candidates are not very different in most important areas.

I wish some folks had started a Vote 3rd party campaign, ANY 3rd party,
There are A LOT of people that really don't care for Romney or Obama and if the D's and R's saw close to a 1/3 voting in other parties they'd have to take some notice and at the least throw some bones to the people. And at best really start running candidates and voting in ways that lined up with the constitution and the peoples desires.


It'll get little traction here i suppose but still i'll put it out there.
VOTE 3rd PARTY
ANY 3rd Party

America’s election system is rigged from the get-go by the Democrat & Republican Duopoly. First they bribe Wall Street and special interest with friendly and advantageous legislation for campaign donations. Major media is owned and operated by ideological hacks on the left and the right. They control the ballot access process in every state making ballot access cumbersome and costly for any third party. They control the national debate system.

That’s why third parties have no success in America, the Duopoly has the election system rigged and in their pocket.

[revelarts]

CLiberal i think your pretty much right, I still have to wonder though the 2 parties work so hard to keep out extra voices so there's still fear that others can get some foot in the door it seems to me.
the country's long gone in many ways but, i hate to just lay down and die.

there was an great couple of interviews about 3rd parties not being in the Debates. How the questions and formats are controlled literally by the candidates and a debate corp run by 2 former D&R party hacks.
Also how they manufacturer the illusion of great differences in the platforms by what they don't talk about. but would be address by 3rd parties.

a 2 quotes

GEORGE FARAH: In many ways, yes. The exclusion of these viable third-party candidates from these kinds of actual presidential debate processes have the consequence of a certain ideological containment that Glenn is describing. Third parties are responsible for the abolition of slavery, women’s right to vote, child labor laws, unemployment compensation, Social Security, direct election of senators, public schools, public power—the list goes on and on. And when you exclude those third-party voices by structuring the debate in such an exclusionary format, you’re preventing third parties from actually breaking the bipartisan silence on critical issues, and doing exactly what Glenn is saying, which is presenting a narrow bandwidth in a wide manner, presenting the illusion that there’s extraordinary difference between the parties when in fact there’s [inaudible]—...


....it illustrates just how mythological this idea is that the Democrats and Republicans are universes apart, that in reality they share all kinds of policy premises and, most importantly, serve exactly the same interests. Only by excluding those candidates and having the two parties focus on the tiny differences that they have and vociferously fight about them can this mythology be maintained that we have massive and real choice in this country.

The other aspect of it is, is that if you have, for example, Gary Johnson, who is the Libertarian Party candidate, and even a couple of other candidates on the right, who oftentimes are far more—far greater advocates of what progressives have long claimed to be their values—antiwar, pro-civil liberties, anti-harsh penal policies, anti-drug war—what then begins to happen, as well, is that the ideological and partisan spectrum begins to blur a great deal. Loyalties break down. Cultural identities can be subverted. And that, more than anything, is what the two parties do not want. They want both of their—their followers to think that the only way that these views can be represented is by clinging to either one of the two political parties. And introducing these third parties into the debate shows that actually the ideological spectrum is far less rigid and linear than these two parties insist on perpetuating. And that’s why they’re joined together at the hip and have a common interest in keeping this process as it is and why this collusion exists so smoothly, as George described, because they both want to keep these candidates out for the same reasons....

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/16/glenn_greenwald_presidential_debates_highlight_fau x?autostart=true&get_clicky_key=suggested_next_story

[KarlMarx]

Stop to think about this won't you? A three party system will ensure that a majority of people will will NOT want the person who is currently in power the majority of the time. I think it's best to reform the Republican Party (forget about the Democrat Party, they're too far gone) rather than look to a third party. A third party will not likely win any election and only serve to keep the incumbent party in power.

[Classic Liberal]

Stop to think about this won't you? A three party system will ensure that a majority of people will will NOT want the person who is currently in power the majority of the time. I think it's best to reform the Republican Party (forget about the Democrat Party, they're too far gone) rather than look to a third party. A third party will not likely win any election and only serve to keep the incumbent party in power.

Well, there seems to be two factions in the Republican party today the neo-conservatives, AKA RINO’s, and a growing number of Ron Paul & Gary Johnson libertarian thinking “REAL” Republicans. The way Ron Paul and Gary Johnson were treated by the RINO’s in this election cycle, it’s perfectly evident to me that the BIG government RINO Neo-Cons are the vast majority in the Republican party and even the Tea Party seems to favor BIG government RINO’s over libertarian constitutional types. So what’s the tactic that could ever be successful at reforming the Republicans?

The RINO’s have adopted the bribery tactics of the Democrats, undeclared unconstitutional wars, trouncing on constitutional freedoms, i. e. The Patriot Act, The Drug War, BIG government socialist programing, religious zealots, bedroom window peeping busybodies, opposition to marriage contracts for “SOME” folks, an isolationist foreign policy and world police force that provokes terrorism, Wall Street bailouts and special interest bribery. If that’s to be reformed, somebody better get started with the reforming, huh?

[revelarts]

Exclusive: Expanding the Debate with Third-Party Candidates Jill Stein, Virgil Goode, Rocky Anderson (http://www.democracynow.org/2012/10/17/exclusive_expanding_the_debate_with_third)

"President Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney sparred last night in their second of three debates. Today, in a two-hour special, we expand the debate by including the voices of three presidential candidates shut out of the official debate. We are joined by Jill Stein of the Green Party, Constitution Party nominee Virgil Goode, and Justice Party candidate Rocky Anderson. We re-air parts of last night’s presidential debate, pausing the videotape to give third-party candidates a chance to respond to the same questions put to the major-party candidates. [includes rush transcript]"


Guests:

Dr. Jill Stein, Green Party 2012 presidential nominee.

Rocky Anderson, former mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah. He is a former Democrat who once endorsed Mitt Romney for governor of Massachusetts but is now running against him for president on the Justice Party ticket.

Virgil Goode, Constitution Party 2012 presidential nominee. He is a former six-term Virginia congressman. He was first elected as a Democrat, later switching to the Republican Party.

interesting




CANDY CROWLEY: Governor Romney, as you know, you won the coin toss, so the first question will go to you. And I want to turn to a first-time voter, Jeremy Epstein, who has a question for you.

JEREMY EPSTEIN: Mr. President, Governor Romney, as a 20-year-old college student, all I hear from professors, neighbors and others is that when I graduate, I will have little chance to get employment. What can you say to reassure me—but more importantly, my parents—that I will be able to sufficiently support myself after I graduate?
MITT ROMNEY: Thank you, Jeremy. I appreciate your—your question, and thank you for being here this evening....
CANDY CROWLEY: Mr. President.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Jeremy, first of all, your future is bright, and the fact that you’re making an investment in higher education is critical, not just to you but to the entire nation....

...
AMY GOODMAN: Dr. Jill Stein, Green Party presidential candidate, your response?
DR. JILL STEIN: So, first, to ensure that our students have a strong, secure economic future, how about we bail out the students instead of bailing out the banks for the fourth time? The Federal Reserve just announced its latest quantitative easing, where it will be spending $40 billion a month to bail out the banks for what’s effectively the fourth bailout, yet we’ve really gone nowhere with these bailouts. It’s time to bail out the students instead, so that way students can enter into their professional life, their careers, without the deep burden of debt that they currently now have.
While we’re at it, let’s make public higher education free. We owe it to our young people to give them a good, strong start in life, to have the security that a college degree provides. We provided a high school degree throughout the 20th century, but in the 21st, a college degree is essential for that security. And we know this pays for itself from the GI Bill, in which every dollar taxpayers invested in student public higher education, $7 was returned in economic benefits to the economy.
And as for jobs, we’re actually calling for a program that has a track record of actually creating jobs—that is, a Green New Deal for America. We want to directly create jobs, not simply provide tax breaks for corporations or tax breaks for the job creators to move their jobs to China or India. The Green New Deal will create 25 million jobs. We’ll put an end to unemployment, and we’ll jump-start the green economy. And that means putting a halt to climate change as well as making wars for oil obsolete. And the Green New Deal puts national resources, national funding into the hands of communities, so that they can decide what kinds of jobs they need to become sustainable economically, socially and environmentally. So it includes a spectrum of jobs in the green sector, as well as jobs that meet our social needs, and these are public services and public works, like during the New Deal that got us out of the Depression. And these are jobs you can get by going down not to an unemployment office, but to an employment office, and actually getting a job, as well as small businesses and worker-owned co-operatives.
AMY GOODMAN: Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party in Rocky Mount—in Rocky Mount, Virginia.
VIRGIL GOODE JR.: All right, thank—thank you very much, Amy Goodman.
To get jobs in America, neither President Obama nor Governor Romney are focusing on some of the key issues. First issue, we need to eliminate illegal immigration, keep illegals from coming into this country, taking jobs from American citizens. Secondly, we need to have a near-complete moratorium on green card admissions to this country until unemployment is under 5 percent. We give hundreds of thousands of green cards per year to working-age persons that come into the United States, take good-paying jobs from students that had just graduated, like Jeremy. We need to preserve jobs in America for American citizens first, and none of the other presidential candidates are—are addressing this issue. It’s not politically correct, but it is one thing we could do right away to have jobs in America for American citizens first.
I would also end "Obamacare," which is a real restraint on job creation among small businesses. They are fearful of the fines, the taxes and also the regulations that’s going to be imposed on them under this. We can have more jobs in small businesses if "Obamacare" is eliminated.
I also favor more energy growth in all areas in this country—drilling for oil, drilling for natural gas, utilizing coal. And I like alternatives, too, but we need to be energy independent, produce more energy in this country, be an exporter, like Canada and Russia have become. That has helped the economies and provided thousands upon thousands of more jobs in those nations. These are the things we can do so that the Jeremys will have jobs when they graduate.
AMY GOODMAN: Rocky Anderson, presidential candidate of the Justice Party.
ROCKY ANDERSON: It was amazing to me to see that the number one issue on people’s minds in this country was raised as the first question in this debate last night, and neither of the major-party candidates answered it. The most we got out of Mitt Romney is he said, "I know how to create jobs," this coming from a man who had no problem—he’s already said he loves to fire people. He had no problem taking over companies, wringing out all the money he could, and firing people. And then President Obama, he has set our nation’s record for the most months in a four-year period of over 8 percent unemployment. He has not ever even suggested renegotiating the trade agreements that are responsible for sending so many millions of jobs overseas. We need leadership in this country, with people who care about those who are struggling, about young people who are so worried about their futures.
And I absolutely agree, we don’t let people out of college with this crushing tuition debt. For the first time in our nation’s history, there is more student debt than there is credit card debt. It’s over a trillion dollars. It takes now students 2,000 hours on average to pay for their tuition. When I was going to college, it took about 200 hours to pay for one’s tuition.
So we need to renegotiate our trade agreements so that we’re no longer sending these millions of jobs overseas and we’re bringing them back. We need to provide the kinds of incentives so that there is an equal playing ground for those employers who will hire United States workers and provide the kinds of good jobs that our young people should be looking forward to.
President Obama talks about his recovery and all the new jobs. The fact is that when we lost all these jobs in 2008 and 2009, 60 percent of them were mid-skill, mid-paying jobs, and only 22 percent of the jobs in the so-called recovery are of that level. Most of them are low-paying, low-skill jobs. We also need a WPA-like project where we’re building up our nation’s infrastructure and employing millions of people. We can do this, but not with these austerity programs that are being proposed by both Republicans and Democrats.
...

VIRGIL GOODE JR.: Thank you. Mayor Anderson, in his previous response, was right on target about these free trade agreements. When I was in Congress, I voted against, consistently, these agreements that have cost so many American jobs in this—in the United States. They need to be, as he said, renegotiated, with the emphasis on bringing jobs to this country instead of sending them overseas.
What we have are some of the big political donors behind the super PACs, are big on promoting more of these trade agreements which cost us jobs—another reason that we need to end political action committees and have only individual donations with their donations being disclosed completely with names and addresses and other information. That would enhance our economy indirectly, because we would not do so many things that benefit a few and not the majority of people who want jobs in America for U.S. citizens....

[Robert A Whit]

No, it's pulling real votes from the D's and R's. letting them know that people will not just vote for any candidate they throw in our faces just because they are on the ticket.

The bare differences between the candidates show anyone not joined at the hip the the big 2 that there's really no choice here.

Any 3rd party choice AT LEAST sends a message. Not hoping for a win. But a Awake up call for the powers that be.

Last time that stunt was pulled, we got Bill Clinton.

Remember Ross Perot?

[aboutime]

Last time that stunt was pulled, we got Bill Clinton.

Remember Ross Perot?



Problem is. That 'WAKEUP CALL' only lasts as long as the MSM keeps talking about the Winners, and Losers after every election. Then. As usual. ALL is forgotten for another two, or four years while the BIASED MSM decides WHICH SIDE they will take, and protect.

We really can't fully blame individual American voters. They are only as smart, and as informed as the Liberally Biased MSM wants them to be.

[revelarts]

Last time that stunt was pulled, we got Bill Clinton.

Remember Ross Perot?

yep, he was right about the economy, NAFTA and GAT which G Bush I was for as well as Clinton.
Bush I was an establishment "new world order" (his words) Republican as well.
If he'd have been MORE of a fiscal, social and constitutional conservative Perot would not have had a place as the table.
And the establishment R still don't get it.

[aboutime]

yep, he was right about the economy, NAFTA and GAT which G Bush I was for as well as Clinton.
Bush I was an establishment "new world order" (his words) Republican as well.
If he'd have been MORE of a fiscal, social and constitutional conservative Perot would not have had a place as the table.
And the establishment R still don't get it.

revelarts. So tell us. When did you graduate from the DNC, LIBERAL SCHOOL of Repeated Talking Points? And what score did you get for being so competent at REPEATING those known, repeated Lies?

[fj1200]

Except in Ireland, where it comes down to 6. Telling people they're wasting their vote by voting for who they believe in is the most unamerican thing you could have possibly said at this point. The only waste of a vote that exists is when you vote for a candidate you don't believe in cause the sheep are voting.

Third parties "can't win" because you won't vote for them. You keep voting for the same guys, every time expecting different results from it. You'll note that's pretty close to the definition of insanity.

They have a parliamentarian system; Completely different set of dynamics.

[revelarts]

revelarts. So tell us. When did you graduate from the DNC, LIBERAL SCHOOL of Repeated Talking Points? And what score did you get for being so competent at REPEATING those known, repeated Lies?

whaat?

[aboutime]

whaat?

Oh. That's right. They failed to teach you how to spell simple words like 'what'?

[fj1200]

yep, he was right about the economy, NAFTA and GAT which G Bush I was for as well as Clinton.
Bush I was an establishment "new world order" (his words) Republican as well.
If he'd have been MORE of a fiscal, social and constitutional conservave Perot would not have had a place as the table.
And the establishment R still don't get it.

Perot wasn't right about the economy. He might have been right about the debt but it didn't take drastic efforts to rein that in.

[fj1200]

America’s election system is rigged from the get-go by the Democrat & Republican Duopoly.

Not really. It's evidence that Congress, as an institution, is stupid.

[jimnyc]

Well, there seems to be two factions in the Republican party today the neo-conservatives, AKA RINO’s, and a growing number of Ron Paul & Gary Johnson libertarian thinking “REAL” Republicans. The way Ron Paul and Gary Johnson were treated by the RINO’s in this election cycle, it’s perfectly evident to me that the BIG government RINO Neo-Cons are the vast majority in the Republican party and even the Tea Party seems to favor BIG government RINO’s over libertarian constitutional types. So what’s the tactic that could ever be successful at reforming the Republicans?

The RINO’s have adopted the bribery tactics of the Democrats, undeclared unconstitutional wars, trouncing on constitutional freedoms, i. e. The Patriot Act, The Drug War, BIG government socialist programing, religious zealots, bedroom window peeping busybodies, opposition to marriage contracts for “SOME” folks, an isolationist foreign policy and world police force that provokes terrorism, Wall Street bailouts and special interest bribery. If that’s to be reformed, somebody better get started with the reforming, huh?

Welcome to DP, Classic Liberal, glad to have you here! :beer:

Please don't post your posts in bold though! :)

[jimnyc]

Posting 3rd party will do about as good as voting in the primaries for Ron Paul. Have at it though!

[fj1200]

Posting 3rd party will do about as good as voting in the primaries for Ron Paul. Have at it though!

Even less because you've lost any real say you might have had.

[Robert A Whit]

No experience? you mean like Obama, or Governors like Romney and Gary Johnson of the libertarian party , or Congressman like Newt Gingrich or Vigil Goode of the Constitution party.

how many congressional seats do they have to run for before they reach your particular idea of legitimacy?
the oregan constitution party has got like 17 running in state and federal races
South Carolina has about 7
they are out there if you look.

Here is the thing. If you believe that the job of being president is at the same time one of the hardest jobs to do, and takes a man with exceptional skill and training to do, you will refuse to vote for those who do not meet those criteria.

Obama met none of them.

Please, let's stick to former Governors. Remembering the lessons of Ross Perot, let's not get another Clinton type in office.

[red states rule]

No, it's pulling real votes from the D's and R's. letting them know that people will not just vote for any candidate they throw in our faces just because they are on the ticket.

The bare differences between the candidates show anyone not joined at the hip the the big 2 that there's really no choice here.

Any 3rd party choice AT LEAST sends a message. Not hoping for a win. But a Awake up call for the powers that be.

Rev, looks to me like you are suffering from SOre Loser Syndrome. Since your guy did not win the nomination, now you want to make sure the winner of the nomination loses

How the hell it that an improvement? All it may do is give you some sort of sad satisfaction

[Noir]

Even less because you've lost any real say you might have had.

Because what 'say you might have' is more important than personal principles, right?

[mundame]

If you are not completely sold on Romney, I totally endorse voting a third party candidate. Perhaps Gary Johnson. Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


My candidate is the One-Eyed, One-Horned Flying Purple People Eater. :rolleyes:


My daughter wrote from North Carolina saying she and her husband were so disgusted they may not either of them vote for president. I pointed out that they live in a "battleground state" --- they might make a difference.

In Maryland, where I live, be sure, Republican votes don't count at all. This is a "safe" state for Obama because of all the blacks in Baltimore and Prince George's County. Maryland is expected to go for Obama by fully 23%. So there is no need to go through mental anguish about whether I can in conscience vote for a Mormon for president. I don't have to, there is no need to, good.

And NEXT TIME I hope they nominate normal people for a change.

[red states rule]

My candidate is the One-Eyed, One-Horned Flying Purple People Eater. :rolleyes:


My daughter wrote from North Carolina saying she and her husband were so disgusted they may not either of them vote for president. I pointed out that they live in a "battleground state" --- they might make a difference.

In Maryland, where I live, be sure, Republican votes don't count at all. This is a "safe" state for Obama because of all the blacks in Baltimore and Prince George's County. Maryland is expected to go for Obama by fully 23%. So there is no need to go through mental anguish about whether I can in conscience vote for a Mormon for president. I don't have to, there is no need to, good.

And NEXT TIME I hope they nominate normal people for a change.

Eh, Mitt has NC locked up and it is rumored Obama is pulling out of NC. You will notice he has not set foot in NC sicne the convention

MD is important as voters will decide on gay marriage, kids of illegals getting in state college tuition; table games, and the rip off O'Malley pulled when it came to redistricting

Mundame, we all know you are a bigot and you will not vote for Mitt because of his religion and NOT because you disagee with his policies. Is this why your daughter is "disgusted"? Did you hand down your bigoted views down to your daughter?

[fj1200]

Because what 'say you might have' is more important than personal principles, right?

I'm all for voting based on principle even went you want to throw your voice away. I'm more concerned about voters making their presence felt where it will actually hold some sway, and that is in the primaries.

[aboutime]

My candidate is the One-Eyed, One-Horned Flying Purple People Eater. :rolleyes:


My daughter wrote from North Carolina saying she and her husband were so disgusted they may not either of them vote for president. I pointed out that they live in a "battleground state" --- they might make a difference.

In Maryland, where I live, be sure, Republican votes don't count at all. This is a "safe" state for Obama because of all the blacks in Baltimore and Prince George's County. Maryland is expected to go for Obama by fully 23%. So there is no need to go through mental anguish about whether I can in conscience vote for a Mormon for president. I don't have to, there is no need to, good.

And NEXT TIME I hope they nominate normal people for a change.

mundane. I have no idea how old you are. So you may not be aware of this. But first. Using the excuse of Romney being a Mormon, sounds exactly like those who will only vote for Obama...because he is Black.
What I mean is. I am old enough to remember 1960, when Americans who opposed Kennedy because he was a Catholic...said the very same thing you said above.
To me. That sounds pretty bigoted, and typically liberal. And JFK was elected, despite all of the Catholic, narrow minded, haters. Why would you settle for being the very same kind of Mormon hating American?
Judging anyone in this nation...because of their religious beliefs...as you appear to be doing. Is as wrong as calling ANYONE a Racist...unless they really are Racists.

If that excuse is the deciding factor, as to whether you will vote. You should just stay home, and forget about voting at all.

[Classic Liberal]

Yep, every vote we take away from Romney helps put Obama back in office.

Typical arrogant reply from the right assuming that if we didn’t vote for a 3rd party candidate, we’d be stupid enough to vote for either Romney or Obama. I reckon the right thinks that staying home is a vote for Obama and the left thinks that staying home is a vote for Romney, how pathetic!

“Don’t vote it just encourages the bastards.” (P. J. O’Rourke)

[aboutime]

Typical arrogant reply from the right assuming that if we didn’t vote for a 3rd party candidate, we’d be stupid enough to vote for either Romney or Obama. I reckon the right thinks that staying home is a vote for Obama and the left thinks that staying home is a vote for Romney, how pathetic!

“Don’t vote it just encourages the bastards.” (P. J. O’Rourke)


Classic Liberal. That Arrogance you are speaking of above. REEKS from your own typewritten fingers above.

[Classic Liberal]

Classic Liberal. That Arrogance you are speaking of above. REEKS from your own typewritten fingers above.

So you say, but who are you.....really?

[jimnyc]

Typical arrogant reply from the right assuming that if we didn’t vote for a 3rd party candidate, we’d be stupid enough to vote for either Romney or Obama. I reckon the right thinks that staying home is a vote for Obama and the left thinks that staying home is a vote for Romney, how pathetic!



So you say, but who are you.....really?

Perhaps your reply could be used to question your other reply?

Bottom line - a vote for anyone other than the 2 actually in the race is one less for either of them. So even if you didn't vote 3rd party, and didn't vote for either of them, it's still helping Obama stay in office as it's one less vote for Romney. You may not like the reasoning, but it's true.

[Classic Liberal]

Perhaps your reply could be used to question your other reply?

Bottom line - a vote for anyone other than the 2 actually in the race is one less for either of them. So even if you didn't vote 3rd party, and didn't vote for either of them, it's still helping Obama stay in office as it's one less vote for Romney. You may not like the reasoning, but it's true.

Excuse me Jimmy, but that is absurd, because it’s also one less vote for Obama. That of course means that Romney will have to win or lose the election on the totally fair basis of getting more votes than Obama. Notice I use the word “fair” loosely. Of course it’s only fair for the Duopoly, no others need apply because the Duopoly has it rigged in their favor.

Just like all rightist and leftist y’all arrogantly assume that if we didn’t vote for a third party candidate, we’d be obliged and stupid enough to vote for your candidate. It just isn’t so! Most of us would rather forget the rigged election and go fishing.

“Don’t vote it just encourages the bastards.” (P. J. O’Rourke)

[jimnyc]

Excuse me Jimmy, but that is absurd, because it’s also one less vote for Obama. That of course means that Romney will have to win or lose the election on the totally fair basis of getting more votes than Obama. Notice I use the word “fair” loosely. Of course it’s only fair for the Duopoly, no others need apply because the Duopoly has it rigged in their favor.

Just like all rightist and leftist y’all arrogantly assume that if we didn’t vote for a third party candidate, we’d be obliged and stupid enough to vote for your candidate. It just isn’t so! Most of us would rather forget the rigged election and go fishing.



So people who stay home and don't vote at all aren't making an impact on election results?

And keep stating that things are rigged, it helps your argument! :lol: I'll ask you what I asked Rev and got ignored - where are the actual crimes? Who is continually being brought up on charges? What are these charges? Please articulate to us how it's rigged. And don't make lame and baseless accusations, as if it's rigged and criminal, showing a regulation being repealed doesn't fit that definition. Showing criminal acts and guilty charges is the only thing that will support these lame and laughable claims.

It's funny, this rigged crap didn't start until Ron Paul hit the shitter, again. :laugh2:

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Excuse me Jimmy, but that is absurd, because it’s also one less vote for Obama. That of course means that Romney will have to win or lose the election on the totally fair basis of getting more votes than Obama. Notice I use the word “fair” loosely. Of course it’s only fair for the Duopoly, no others need apply because the Duopoly has it rigged in their favor.

Just like all rightist and leftist y’all arrogantly assume that if we didn’t vote for a third party candidate, we’d be obliged and stupid enough to vote for your candidate. It just isn’t so! Most of us would rather forget the rigged election and go fishing.

“Don’t vote it just encourages the bastards.” (P. J. O’Rourke)

Bullshat dude, obama voters dont think deep enough to abstain due to complicated questions about integrity and our political system. Only informed and intelligent voters may do that and those basicly are not obama's fans/supporters! Refusing to vote will only help obama and thats why it must be discouraged not embraced.
Obama is by far the worst PRESIDENT IN THIS NATION'S HISTORY AND YOU DECLARE TO NOT VOTE ROMNEY!
ARE YOU INSANE?-Tyr

[revelarts]

Expanding the Debate: Presidential Debate Special Broadcast
On Monday, Oct. 22. 8:30 p.m. – midnight EDT we will continue our "Expanding the Debate" series with a special live broadcast of the last presidential debate. We will pause the video after the 2 major party candidates answer each question to include real-time responses from the Green Party’s Jill Stein and the Justice Party’s Rocky Anderson. Libertarian Gary Johnson has declined to participate. Ask your public radio or television station to air our special, or tune in right here at DemocracyNow.org.



for those interested.

[mundame]

mundane. I have no idea how old you are. So you may not be aware of this. But first. Using the excuse of Romney being a Mormon, sounds exactly like those who will only vote for Obama...because he is Black.
What I mean is. I am old enough to remember 1960, when Americans who opposed Kennedy because he was a Catholic...said the very same thing you said above.
To me. That sounds pretty bigoted, and typically liberal. And JFK was elected, despite all of the Catholic, narrow minded, haters. Why would you settle for being the very same kind of Mormon hating American?
Judging anyone in this nation...because of their religious beliefs...as you appear to be doing. Is as wrong as calling ANYONE a Racist...unless they really are Racists.

If that excuse is the deciding factor, as to whether you will vote. You should just stay home, and forget about voting at all.


That's what I plan to do, abouttime. Don't become an enemy, now, that would be yucky for me.

I'll go in to vote on the referenda Nov. 6; there are some hard-fought ones here in Maryland.

Quite a lot of people don't like the Mormon business, abouttime, and I'm one of them. I wouldn't vote for a Scientologist or a Hare Krishna, either. Or one of the Reverend Moon's weird mass-married people. It's everyone's right not to vote if the candidates are both or all wholly unacceptable, and I'm taking that right.

I definitely would not vote for a Muslim for president, either. Would you?

[jimnyc]

Expanding the Debate: Presidential Debate Special Broadcast


On Monday, Oct. 22. 8:30 p.m. – midnight EDT we will continue our "Expanding the Debate" series with a special live broadcast of the last presidential debate. We will pause the video after the 2 major party candidates answer each question to include real-time responses from the Green Party’s Jill Stein and the Justice Party’s Rocky Anderson. Libertarian Gary Johnson has declined to participate. Ask your public radio or television station to air our special, or tune in right here at DemocracyNow.org.

Interesting, so Johnson has a chance for even a small stage, and declines. I guess him and the party aren't quite interested in further getting their agenda out there.

[fj1200]

at DemocracyNow.org.

for those interested.

Shouldn't it be RepresentativeRepublicNow.org?

[aboutime]

That's what I plan to do, abouttime. Don't become an enemy, now, that would be yucky for me.

I'll go in to vote on the referenda Nov. 6; there are some hard-fought ones here in Maryland.

Quite a lot of people don't like the Mormon business, abouttime, and I'm one of them. I wouldn't vote for a Scientologist or a Hare Krishna, either. Or one of the Reverend Moon's weird mass-married people. It's everyone's right not to vote if the candidates are both or all wholly unacceptable, and I'm taking that right.

I definitely would not vote for a Muslim for president, either. Would you?


Don't know of any Muslim running for president. Other than the accusations about Obama. But I wouldn't have voted for him anyhow. I disagreed with all of his Socialist style policies that he, and the Dems in Congress have shoved down the American throats...without investigating how dangerous they are.
Of course. By announcing early on, how I wouldn't vote for Obama. I was instantly shoved into the Terror, and Racist categories by liberals, and even Black Americans who claimed...they would only vote for Obama...because he was Black.

[mundame]

Of course. By announcing early on, how I wouldn't vote for Obama. I was instantly shoved into the Terror, and Racist categories by liberals, and even Black Americans who claimed...they would only vote for Obama...because he was Black.

Well, if 97% of blacks are voting for Obama because he's black, and they are quite open about that, I don't see why white people shouldn't vote for Mitt Romney because he's white, if they want to.

[aboutime]

Well, if 97% of blacks are voting for Obama because he's black, and they are quite open about that, I don't see why white people shouldn't vote for Mitt Romney because he's white, if they want to.



mundame. It's not being RACIST if Black Americans do that.

But...it IS being RACIST if White Americans admitted to doing that.

Have you ever heard of WET vs. BET, or NAAWP rather than NAACP???

And February is Black History Month in America.

Do you know what month White History Month is???

[Classic Liberal]

So people who stay home and don't vote at all aren't making an impact on election results?

The impact they’re making is simply that there are fewer folks voting thus, the winner will be chosen from fewer voters. We can also determine that because half of eligible voters don’t vote, the ones that don’t vote are making an impact statement in protest of the elections being rigged.


And keep stating that things are rigged, it helps your argument! file:///C:\Users\Owner\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\ clip_image001.gif I'll ask you what I asked Rev and got ignored - where are the actual crimes?

Well right-wingers will tell you that the crime is the immoral leftist bias in the media and the left-wingers will tell you that the crime is the immoral rightist bias of Fox News and talk radio. I take a different view. I say the crime is how both right and left media ignore and marginalize constitutionalist candidates regardless of what ticket they’re running on. I also say the crimes are Wall Street and special interest bribery money, absurd ballot access requirements and the duopoly’s control of the national debate. All that may not be “legally” criminal, but after all the criminals are making the laws, huh Jimmy?


Who is continually being brought up on charges? What are these charges? Please articulate to us how it's rigged. And don't make lame and baseless accusations, as if it's rigged and criminal, showing a regulation being repealed doesn't fit that definition. Showing criminal acts and guilty charges is the only thing that will support these lame and laughable claims.

I just made the charges for you Jimmy. I’m bringing the corrupt duopoly up on the above charges in the court of public opinion. When criminals make the laws, the laws are crimes. The only folks that don’t know that America’s elections are rigged are those duopoly partisan hacks who have their heads in the sand and those BIG blue and brown lovin eyes for their corrupt duopoly party that never see what they refuse to see.

[Classic Liberal]

for those interested.

Why try to put a Band-Aid on a hatchet wound?

The political scenery will surely change, but only after the Duopoly has bankrupted the nation and everybody knows it, the socialist welfare state has folded it’s cheap tent and folks realize that the vast majority of their individual rights are gone. Our Neo-Roman Empire is its own worst enemy.

“We have seen the enemy and he is us!”

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Why try to put a Band-Aid on a hatchet wound?

The political scenery will surely change, but only after the Duopoly has bankrupted the nation and everybody knows it, the socialist welfare state has folded it’s cheap tent and folks realize that the vast majority of their individual rights are gone. Our Neo-Roman Empire is its own worst enemy.

“We have seen the enemy and he is us!”

We have seen the enemy and he is obama!
--Tyr

[Classic Liberal]

We have seen the enemy and he is obama!

​Just wait till you're unlucky enough to see Flipper Mitt operate.

[jimnyc]

The impact they’re making is simply that there are fewer folks voting thus, the winner will be chosen from fewer voters. We can also determine that because half of eligible voters don’t vote, the ones that don’t vote are making an impact statement in protest of the elections being rigged.



Well right-wingers will tell you that the crime is the immoral leftist bias in the media and the left-wingers will tell you that the crime is the immoral rightist bias of Fox News and talk radio. I take a different view. I say the crime is how both right and left media ignore and marginalize constitutionalist candidates regardless of what ticket they’re running on. I also say the crimes are Wall Street and special interest bribery money, absurd ballot access requirements and the duopoly’s control of the national debate. All that may not be “legally” criminal, but after all the criminals are making the laws, huh Jimmy?



I just made the charges for you Jimmy. I’m bringing the corrupt duopoly up on the above charges in the court of public opinion. When criminals make the laws, the laws are crimes. The only folks that don’t know that America’s elections are rigged are those duopoly partisan hacks who have their heads in the sand and those BIG blue and brown lovin eyes for their corrupt duopoly party that never see what they refuse to see.

In other words, your answer is NO, you cannot point out these specific criminals, the crimes they have committed, what charges were brought forth and what convictions were made. Thanks!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

[/SIZE]
​Just wait till you're unlucky enough to see Flipper Mitt operate.

So you are actually attempting to put forth the ideal that Romney will be worse than obama!!!
If that is the case, then you are indeed one gd dumbass fooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool..-Tyr

[Classic Liberal]

Bullshat dude, obama voters dont think deep enough to abstain due to complicated questions about integrity and our political system. Only informed and intelligent voters may do that and those basicly are not obama's fans/supporters! Refusing to vote will only help obama and thats why it must be discouraged not embraced.
Obama is by far the worst PRESIDENT IN THIS NATION'S HISTORY AND YOU DECLARE TO NOT VOTE ROMNEY!
ARE YOU INSANE?-Tyr

The definition of insanity is doing the samething over and over again and again like voting for the status-quo duopolydictatorship and expecting a different result, dude!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The definition of insanity is doing the samething over and over again and again like voting for the status-quo duopolydictatorship and expecting a different result, dude!

And why seek to counter by abstaining when we have a disaster like obama in there? Is it to allow total destruction of our nation? To allow great enough misery that you think a third party becomes more inviting? I suspect that it is..
Why would I or anybody put their kids/grandkids thru many decades of misery to sek an undrtermined outcome of having a third party? To me that would be insanity and this is with my agreeing that the two party system is corrupt as all hell and needs fixing desperately. The world is far too dangerous for us to weaken ourselves in such a way IMHO.-Tyr

[glockmail]

I think Libertardians are just too afraid of commitment. Their candidates are never going to be in office, so these voters never have to face the reality that their guy is far from perfect, and their political philosophy just doesn't work.

[aboutime]

I think Libertardians are just too afraid of commitment. Their candidates are never going to be in office, so these voters never have to face the reality that their guy is far from perfect, and their political philosophy just doesn't work.



glockmail. Kinda takes what they are doing back to that often used, definition of Insanity.

Every four years. They have a candidate they vote for. And every four years. They get the same result. Hoping it will be different.

[Classic Liberal]

So you are actually attempting to put forth the ideal that Romney will be worse than obama!!!
If that is the case, then you are indeed one gd dumbass fooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool..-Tyr

Is replacing Baby face Nelson with Al Capone better or worse? Is replacing cancer with a heart attack better or worse? Is replacing one flip-flopping lying politician with another flip-flopping lying politician better or worse?

I’ll report, you decide!

[aboutime]

Is replacing Baby face Nelson with Al Capone better or worse? Is replacing cancer with a heart attack better or worse? Is replacing one flip-flopping lying politician with another flip-flopping lying politician better or worse?

I’ll report, you decide!



Classic Liberal. That signature of yours below...from Einstein is very fitting for you.

He must have known someone like you would eventually appear here to demonstrate his LINE in person.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Is replacing Baby face Nelson with Al Capone better or worse? Is replacing cancer with a heart attack better or worse? Is replacing one flip-flopping lying politician with another flip-flopping lying politician better or worse?

I’ll report, you decide!

That does not cut it. When compared to obama Romney is a Saint. Your comparison is way off amigo. I get this feeling that you have not a damn clue just how damn bad obama truly is. Correct me if I have that wrong.-Tyr

[Classic Liberal]

Why would I or anybody put their kids/grandkids thru many decades of misery to sek an undrtermined outcome of having a third party? To me that would be insanity and this is with my agreeing that the two party system is corrupt as all hell and needs fixing desperately. The world is far too dangerous for us to weaken ourselves in such a way IMHO.-Tyr

Oh! So it’s the comfort and genius of the duopoly status-quo, its world police force, its continuous wars and foreign meddling, its trillion dollar deficits and trillions of dollars of national debt and its high speed pending train wreck, that good old 2 party Washington side show you know and love so well that warms your heart and comforts your soul and protects you from that unknown third party boogieman. Now I get it, silly me!

[Classic Liberal]

Classic Liberal. That signature of yours below...from Einstein is very fitting for you.

He must have known someone like you would eventually appear here to demonstrate his LINE in person.

But it’s not I that perpetuates the musicalchairs exchanging of one Republican crook with a Democrat crook and replacesone Democrat crook with a Republican crook over and over again and again, but Ido suspect you of that injsanity.

[aboutime]

But it’s not I that perpetuates the musicalchairs exchanging of one Republican crook with a Democrat crook and replacesone Democrat crook with a Republican crook over and over again and again, but Ido suspect you of that injsanity.

Gotta be insane for even trying to exchange communications with you. It is impossible to hold an intelligent conversation with someone like you, when there is very little intelligence you can brag about having. Which explains further. Your need to remind yourself of the definition of insanity.

[Classic Liberal]

That does not cut it. When compared to obama Romney is a Saint. Your comparison is way off amigo. I get this feeling that you have not a damn clue just how damn bad obama truly is. Correct me if I have that wrong.-Tyr

Well I never was a disciple of the RNC with those lovin eyes that never see the socialist authoritarian BIG government Richard Nixons and G. W. Bushes lurking within and trouncing my Constitution as violently as the black communist now occupying my White House.

Since Flipper Mitt has become the champion and darling of the RINO Neo-Cons that own and operate the RNC and their mouth piece Fox News, I’ll surely not have any confidence he’s a dime’s worth better than the black communist, but you can live for that dream if you want

[Classic Liberal]

Gotta be insane for even trying to exchange communications with you. It is impossible to hold an intelligent conversation with someone like you, when there is very little intelligence you can brag about having. Which explains further. Your need to remind yourself of the definition of insanity.

Does your resorting to nothing but personalinsults mean you can’t handle the truth? Of course it does! Thank you foryour surrender! I enjoyed ourconversation, we’ll have to do it againsometime.

[aboutime]

Well I never was a disciple of the RNC with those lovin eyes that never see the socialist authoritarian BIG government Richard Nixons and G. W. Bushes lurking within and trouncing my Constitution as violently as the black communist now occupying my White House.

Since Flipper Mitt has become the champion and darling of the RINO Neo-Cons that own and operate the RNC and their mouth piece Fox News, I’ll surely not have any confidence he’s a dime’s worth better than the black communist, but you can live for that dream if you want



Why am I not surprised how immature, and childish you are? Using liberal, democrat tactics, techniques, words, expressions, and constantly repeated talking points...as you do. Bet your life is pretty miserable these days.
As for me living for some dream.
I am living the American dream. I have my health, as I wake up each morning, a wonderful wife and family, and five beautiful grandchildren who are seemingly much more mature and respectful than you could ever hope to be. And the oldest is just Ten.

[Classic Liberal]

Why am I not surprised how immature, and childish you are?.

Oh I see, you’re the one with the “personal insults” tactic of debating, but I’m the “immature childish” one. Funny fellow!

It’s so easy to know when they’re whipped, it’s when their post resort to name calling and personal insults.

[aboutime]

Oh I see, you’re the one with the “personal insults” tactic of debating, but I’m the “immature childish” one. Funny fellow!

It’s so easy to know when they’re whipped, it’s when their post resort to name calling and personal insults.

If that's how you see it. Thank yourself, and other liberal, democrats for teaching me how to be JUST LIKE YOU, with the name calling, and insults.

If you say I'm whipped. Fine with me. Just doing my best to Emulate You, and other Liberals. Using your tactics really does hurt ya. Huh?

[Classic Liberal]

If that's how you see it. Thank yourself, and other liberal, democrats for teaching me how to be JUST LIKE YOU, with the name calling, and insults.

“Just like me?” I haven’t done any name calling or personal insults, that was you remember?


If you say I'm whipped. Fine with me. Just doing my best to Emulate You, and other Liberals. Using your tactics really does hurt ya. Huh?

My Mama taught me that sticks and stones can break my bones, but names and personal insults will never harm me, it just means they’re whipped.

[aboutime]

“Just like me?” I haven’t done any name calling or personal insults, that was you remember?



My Mama taught me that sticks and stones can break my bones, but names and personal insults will never harm me, it just means they’re whipped.


Maybe you should ask Mama if her whittle Classic Liberal will Ever Grow up? Repeating favorite, childhood, schoolyard slogans must be an embarrassment to anyone who pretends to know you.

[red states rule]

Maybe you should ask Mama if her whittle Classic Liberal will Ever Grow up? Repeating favorite, childhood, schoolyard slogans must be an embarrassment to anyone who pretends to know you.

Does the word delusional come to mind? It is a common trait with libs and their leader

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/bg102312dAPR20121023034525.jpg

[Classic Liberal]

Maybe you should ask Mama if her whittle Classic Liberal will Ever Grow up? Repeating favorite, childhood, schoolyard slogans must be an embarrassment to anyone who pretends to know you.

But I haven’t called any names, used personal insults like a schoolyard child, that’s you remember? You are a hilarious and entertaining fellow and a “whipped” one too, huh?

[glockmail]

Oh! So it’s the comfort and genius of the duopoly status-quo, its world police force, its continuous wars and foreign meddling, its trillion dollar deficits and trillions of dollars of national debt and its high speed pending train wreck, that good old 2 party Washington side show you know and love so well that warms your heart and comforts your soul and protects you from that unknown third party boogieman. Now I get it, silly me!So you just hate America in general then. :slap:

[aboutime]

But I haven’t called any names, used personal insults like a schoolyard child, that’s you remember? You are a hilarious and entertaining fellow and a “whipped” one too, huh?



Happy to entertain you. Let us know when you decide to actually whip yourself into using that 4015