Give 'Em The Bird

[buckstopshere]

Another reason why I feel great about voting for someone like Gary Johnson is because I believe the office of POTUS is somewhat over rated. (s)he isn't a king who gets to make policy decision.

We sometimes forget that, to really effect change, the best strategy is local, state, and the house. Look at the success of the tea party movement ie...Rand Paul, etc....

The top seat isn't the only important seat up for grabs, it's just the most talked about.

 

[rparker3709@comcast.net]

Another reason why I feel great about voting for someone like Gary Johnson is because I believe the office of POTUS is somewhat over rated. (s)he isn't a king who gets to make policy decision.

We sometimes forget that, to really effect change, the best strategy is local, state, and the house. Look at the success of the tea party movement ie...Rand Paul, etc....

The top seat isn't the only important seat up for grabs, it's just the most talked about.

Amen. One step at a time. One candidate at a time. We didn't wake up one morning to this mess; it happened over time. We need to restore it the same way they took it- Baby steps.

 

[firehawk1]

Amen. One step at a time. One candidate at a time. We didn't wake up one morning to this mess; it happened over time. We need to restore it the same way they took it- Baby steps.

No you are wrong. To these modern day Paul Revere's it is all or nothing, black or white. They are totally unable to see shades of gray therefore assuring their minority status for years to come.

Which IMO is sad while I believe their intentions are pure, they lack the patience at attempting to solve this mess in incremental steps.

 

[mydoghasfleas]

No you are wrong. To these modern day Paul Revere's it is all or nothing, black or white. They are totally unable to see shades of gray therefore assuring their minority status for years to come.

Which IMO is sad while I believe their intentions are pure, they lack the patience at attempting to solve this mess in incremental steps.

It is sad. Sad that patients and pure intentions while doing the same thing over and over again change nothing.

How long have the mainstream voters been "attempting to slolve this mess?" And which direction have the very patient "incremental steps" been taking us?

I have given reasons how my voting will ultimately affect change in our representation. And I must say that it is illogical to think that voting for Romney will make more Romney candidates less likely. May it keep the lesser of two evils in office? It might. But then again, I do not know how evil Romney would be.

 

[buckstopshere]

May it keep the lesser of two evils in office? It might. But then again, I do not know how evil Romney would be.

I'd sum it up this way:

Obama

Romney

I'd give the nod to Freddy/Obama as more evil but that doesn't mean I'm inviting Jason/Romney over for dinner.

I also like the fact that all four are fake.

 

[mydoghasfleas]

Is Freddie smoking a skull bong!!! He may be more like Ron Paul!


And that must be the blade Romney (Jason) is going to use to "slash" the deficit!

 

[buckstopshere]

Is Freddie smoking a skull bong!!! He may be more like Ron Paul!


And that must be the blade Romney (Jason) is going to use to "slash" the deficit!

Lol. Actually, I chose the bong Freddy pic for BHO since he likes to brag on Kimmel how he smoked pot.

 

[Lucas156]

Another reason why I feel great about voting for someone like Gary Johnson is because I believe the office of POTUS is somewhat over rated. (s)he isn't a king who gets to make policy decision.

Well except for those pesky supreme court justices the president gets to pick. I mean they do decide on a couple small tweaks here and there.

 

[88GT]

I find it amazing that folks actually think that voting for a 3rd party candidate has no effect. Or is simply a protest or symbolic vote. At the very least, it changes the future mainstream candidates. To try to get more votes, the parties do not look at the votes they recieved, they look at the ones they lost

Lost? As in went to the other side? No, they don't. It's considered a colossal waste of time and resources to attempt to flip the opposing side voter. They'll remind those who've voted for them in the past to do so again and then try to get the uncommitted. THey use voter rolls and primary vote history.

Even though 3rd party candidates may not win, they get votes. That forces the other parties to make a change in policy to chase after the votes they lost to the third party candidate. The more votes they loose the more they will have to change/adapt. We do ultimately get the gov we ask for and support.

In theory, that's how it's supposed to work. But reality isn't working out that way. The third party pull for most national offices is less than the differences between the two main party candidates. How long are we supposed to vote for third party before we can expect this magnificent change in the mainstream parties? Someone said something about doing the same thing and expecting different results. Don't see much different between voting third party same thing and voting Republican same thing. Neither has the intended effect.

If you want politicians to change, you have to change the people who vote for them. WHY would anybody these days want to vote for Paul or Johnson?

What mechanism does loyally voting for a mainstream party invoke to cause its stance on the issues to move? None.

What pressure does third party voting actually place on mainstream party such that it is sufficient to cause it to change? None.

It would be more accurate to say that a vote for the mainstream candidate will have no effect. Why would it have an effect. You are showing approval for them with the only voice you have that they listen to, buy voting for them. Tea party protests mean nothing without follow through. Ultimately, they are often just empty threats or co-opted movements that continue to support big gov/neocon policy.

If you want to vote for the lesser evil, fine. But do not say that a third party vote has no effect.

A third party vote has no effect on national politics or the platforms of the mainstream parties. Prove me wrong.

Then the current way of doing things is clearly not working. Maybe its time to change strategy.

And what would you suggest?

 

[mydoghasfleas]

Lost? As in went to the other side? No, they don't. It's considered a colossal waste of time and resources to attempt to flip the opposing side voter... Im not talking about the "opposing side voter" Im talking third party/and so called "Independent voters" which just among the "independents" supported Ron Paul over romney and obama. To get those votes they need to be more like him and they know that. (hence, the talk of auditing the federal reserve now being more "mainstream". That alone answers the rest of your post.)


In theory, that's how it's supposed to work. But reality isn't working out that way. The third party pull for most national offices is less than the differences between the two main party candidates. If it has no effect, then people should stop being threatened by third party voters or blaming them for the re-election of, as you have put it, "the Kenyan"

What pressure does third party voting actually place on mainstream party such that it is sufficient to cause it to change? None. I demonstrated earlier that it does, and you dodged the question (that I didnt ask you)


A third party vote has no effect on national politics or the platforms of the mainstream parties. Prove me wrong. Ross Perot. Before him, I believe the "New Republican party" with the upstart Abe Lincon. (formerly with the Whig party) But mainstream parties do have a good stranglehold on the system, and that is the problem.
Plus, voting for the same 2 teams over and over will not reverse our course.


And what would you suggest?

I have made my suggestions, but have not heard anything constructive in any part of your response.

 

[mrjarrell]

The campaign has a new ad out. I rather like this one.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X3QRSIXgns&list=PL7BE34898EFC5C04E&index=1&feature=plpp_video[/ame]

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

The campaign has a new ad out. I rather like this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X3QRSIXgns&list=PL7BE34898EFC5C04E&index=1&feature=plpp_video

Not quite sure he fades his image in and out while the voice over is saying things like "today there's a handful of people ruining America for 330 million of us"... Maybe it's just me but I think it confuses the message a little.

Also, I see they are still doing the quick message on the lightning strike. Last time it was something like "2012 GO GJ & RP".

This time it is:

 

[mrjarrell]

The campaign has a new ad out. All about those worried about wasting a vote. This one's for you.

http://youtu.be/izCXJZAIXMI

 

[mrjarrell]

Here's the latest ad. Getting rid of the IRS. Now, this one is tricky and concerns an issue I disagree with Johnson on. He wants to replace the current tax system and code with the Fair Tax.

http://youtu.be/vpdTBt73st4

 

[NavyVet]

I hope they have the appropriate signage up, or the Smoke Free Indiana gestapo will have his head!

I'd sum it up this way:

Obama

Romney



I'd give the nod to Freddy/Obama as more evil but that doesn't mean I'm inviting Jason/Romney over for dinner.

I also like the fact that all four are fake.

 

[mrjarrell]

Today's a twofer day. Neither of the other two will address the War on Drugs, unless it's to lie to everyone and say it's working.

http://youtu.be/YdpcggfIt0U

 

[mrjarrell]

This one's nice. Either of the other two gonna actually try to address taxes? Unlikely.

[ame]http://youtu.be/C-PeKNXe3ts[/ame]

 

[mrjarrell]

Johnson lay it out better than the duopoly candidates.

[ame]http://youtu.be/VmZ1JilA0qg[/ame]

 

[Yup!]

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...29256-romney_chooses_ryan-31.html#post3199585

With a little re-wording, this post fits nicely into this thread as well.

 

[mrjarrell]

The latest campaign ad is a good one. Here's hoping it spreads.

http://youtu.be/FP69507fTKY