republicanchick
New member
FOR SURE!
lots of morons around, then...
If this trend continues, we will get another Obama for pres... Clinton or worse, that Eliz Warren...:shocked:
Does this say it all about Congress these days?
- Thread starter republicanchick
- Start date
FOR SURE!
lots of morons around, then...
If this trend continues, we will get another Obama for pres... Clinton or worse, that Eliz Warren...:shocked:
republicanchick
New member
what? NO they didn't!
they gave us LACK of healthcare... I htink u meant to say Obamacare
which I call obamaDoesn'tCare
it's almost comical (if it weren't so scary).. a plan that was supposed to insure the uninsured and now that its implemented, we have the same % of people uninsured
that's the Gumit for ya
You might be surprised how often it happens, if you give it a chance.
republicanchick
New member
well, they disagree on BIG things:
human life should be protected, being one of the biggest. When one side says its OK to butcher/torture children... uh... yeh... We should automatically know which side to take...
:luigi:
No one is for butchering or torturing children. But if abortion is your only issue of interest, you might actually really like this Congress.
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/228686-gop-relaunches-abortion-push
republicanchick
New member
Daniel1611
New member
Oh, people who think your votes make any sort of difference. :chuckle:
shagster01
New member
The largest voice is the growing third party voice, namely libertarianism.
View it this way. . .
Presidential elections are typically won by 2-5 percentage points. Let's say, for example, a democrat wins the election with 49% of the vote and the Republican loses with 47% of the vote. Another 3% goes to libertarian and the remaining 1% goes to all others. In this scenario the libertarian vote now holds a lot of power. If Republicans would have worked harder to earn that vote, they could have won the election. The option now would be to either try to incorporate more libertarian views next time, or risk losing again.
Where on the flip side, all of you who automatically vote republican regardless give republican candidates little reason to listen to what you want or care about, being that they will get your vote regardless.
I used to be a card-carrying (literally) Libertarian. I drank the cool-aid too. It is the party of the future, and it always will be.
I'll give you a real example. In 2000, there was a close Presidential race between one George Walker Bush of the Grand Old Party, and one Albert Arnold Gore, Jr. of the Democratic Party, and a less close race between these gentlemen and one Harry Edson Browne of the Libertarian Party, Ralph Nader of the Green Party, Pat Buchanan of the Reform Party, and some other gentlemen who no one knows. Because of the peculiarities of American Presidential elections, the race came down to the outcome of the race in Florida.
And the final vote came down to 2,912,790 for Bush, 2,912,253 for Gore, 97,488 for Nader, 17,484 for Buchanan, 16,415 for Browne, and several thousand more for each of several small parties that had no chance of winning.
Since the difference between Bush and Gore's vote totals was around 500, the voters for each of the five next parties in the final result, most notably for Nader, whose participation ensured a Bush presidency, had to ask themselves if the outcome was worth voting on principle. Sure, Gore lacked charisma, and he wasn't as ideologically pure as Nader, but I would bet that there aren't many who think the future Mr. Inconvenient Truth wouldn't have been worlds better than an oil tycoon. And the rational people who voted on principle for a third party have to admit that they could have used their votes in a much more useful way.
Third parties lose because they function as spoilers. They always will. In times of exceptional political disruption, they can very infrequently rise to power. But this is exceptionally rare, and most of the time, they just provide the chance for their larger enemies to win elections. The only way that they can actually wield the power that you speak of is to integrate themselves into the power structures of the main parties, and get their hands dirty trying to change those institutions from within. Which, to the purists, makes them appear compromised, but anyone who wields real political power will be.
No dispute here. Though, Big Data has made this much more challenging. The main parties know how we vote, down to the block or the house, so they are very good at figuring out who they can sway and who they can't. The people who are really powerful politically are either in politics themselves, or they are independents.
He is the only one that realizes that he doesn't always have to be a pain in the to the President of the United stated who won with the most votes of the Americans.
I can feel the power coursing through my veins.lain:
Don't let that go to your head, now. :noway:
Actually, what I should have said is independents in areas (districts or states) that are not firmly in one party's control or the other, of which there are fewer each cycle.
Last edited:
republicanchick
New member
The others buried the Republicans so deep they may never get elected again.
Because the red sugar pill is obviously much better for you than the blue sugar pill.
That may just be a sign of hypertension.I can feel the power coursing through my veins.
lain:republicanchick
New member
kind of interesting someone threatened to kill Boehner
hmmmm...
why is it the nut cases always go after the conservatives? not that B is a flaming conservative or anything... but closer to it than others in Congress, the Ds... so why don't the wackos go after the libs??
I guess b/c that would be like going after themselves
++
hmmmm...
why is it the nut cases always go after the conservatives? not that B is a flaming conservative or anything... but closer to it than others in Congress, the Ds... so why don't the wackos go after the libs??
I guess b/c that would be like going after themselves
++