View Full Version : Who should vote in the US?
Apparently anyone.
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/153079-gop-says-5000-non-citizens-voting-in-colorado-a-wake-up-call-for-states
Similar story in NM. The new governor ordered a similar study and simply compared the number of illegal aliens with driver's licenses with the voter registrations and there was a bunch of overlap. Many also actually voted (guess which party, lol).
We wouldn't want to "disenfranchise" people, would we?
Takeda Shingen
03-31-11, 04:27 PM
Ridiculous. That is simply ridiculous. :down:
I know in the case of New Mexico we're a closely divided state on the national level elections. Sometimes going one way or another by well under 1000 votes.
Heather Wilson (R) won in 2006, but by under 900 votes. The margin would have been greater without several hundred illegals voting. Note that in Colorado, these were merely "non-citizens." Some might have been US citizens who moved to another State. NM alone has thousands of registered illegal aliens.
It's really ridiculous. Many elections are very close, and anyone illegally voting disenfranchises a citizen. The acceptable level of illegal voting should be zero.
Ducimus
03-31-11, 04:39 PM
Nothing will ever be done because the jackwagons who want to get re elected don't want to piss off the growing hispanic vote. (give you three guesses why the hispanic vote is growing but the first two don't count. :O: )
If congress was going to do anything about immigration they would have done it already. This problem as been ongoing for years.... decades even. They ain't doing squat except talk. talk talk and more talk. All show, and no go.
Republicans have tried to get the DLs for illegals repealed here, but since they don't control the legislature, it never goes through. The Democrats want illegals to have a DL because they know they will illegally vote. That was said when they passed the law, and they said it would never happen. It has been proved, since illegals have registered, and actually voted, it's right there in the voter records.
Then the republicans tried to get stricter voter ID laws. Democrats are against those, too. They claim that having to show ID with "scare" legal voters away from the polls for some inexplicable reason. It'll scare ILLEGAL voters, to be sure. Since they know who the illegals vote for though...
Ducimus
03-31-11, 04:50 PM
Tater, Illegal immigration has been a problem long before we had a Democratic controlled congress. Even when the Reublican's had control of the white house AND congress nothing (or little to nothing at best) was done. This problem has been ongoing since the F'ing 80's. Probably before even then. They simply are NOT going to do anything. Espeically now since they want votes.
Gargamel
03-31-11, 05:38 PM
Republicans have tried to get the DLs for illegals repealed here, but since they don't control the legislature, it never goes through. The Democrats want illegals to have a DL because they know they will illegally vote. That was said when they passed the law, and they said it would never happen. It has been proved, since illegals have registered, and actually voted, it's right there in the voter records.
I think that's a failure of the voter registration laws, not of the DL laws.
As a paramedic for many years, I know I'd rather have "trained" drivers on the road rather than random people. Not saying it'd really make a difference, but it'd help some. Anyways, I believe I can travel overseas and obtain a DL in England correct? Whats the difference with any foreigner getting a DL here?
I think that's a failure of the voter registration laws, not of the DL laws.
As a paramedic for many years, I know I'd rather have "trained" drivers on the road rather than random people. Not saying it'd really make a difference, but it'd help some. Anyways, I believe I can travel overseas and obtain a DL in England correct? Whats the difference with any foreigner getting a DL here?
Not a foreigner, an ILLEGAL ALIEN can get a DL in NM.
They claimed it was so they'd be legal and get insurance, etc. Not that you need a DL to insure a vehicle anyway. Also, of the accidents caused by illegals, apparently 98% of them are uninsured anyway. The law is an utter failure.
It IS a democrat problem, because the control the State House, and they made the voter registration laws such that having a DL gets you a registration... then give DLs to illegals. Poof! Instant, illegal, democrat voters. (there is no citizenship requirement, other than claiming citizenship, and any government photo ID is "proof") The law was designed for enabling voter fraud as the primary purpose.
Democrats are consistently in favor of lax voter registration requirements. They are as a matter of platform against proof of citizenship for voter registration. It is very simply, they know who illegals vote for. If illegals voter for republicans, the tables would likely be turned—but they don't. Regardless, it's 100% wrong. Being against voter ID and proof of citizen requirements is being in favor of fraudulent voting, period.
Onkel Neal
03-31-11, 07:13 PM
Yes, sad but true. Have to hang this one on the Democrats, they are always pushing to allow people to vote with no serious ID verification. Hell, we should also allow the Chinese to vote in our elections, they own most of the country.
Platapus
03-31-11, 07:25 PM
Since we have a problem getting American citizens to even vote in the first place, if states tighten up the laws (which they should), election day will be a ghost town. /sarcasm
Since we have a problem getting American citizens to even vote in the first place, if states tighten up the laws (which they should), election day will be a ghost town. /sarcasm
Heck, they even took write-in votes in AK where they read the "intent of the voter" even though the law says that the name must be spelled correctly for the vote to count.
In general, too many vote, IMHO. People without a basic understanding of government should be disallowed. Since public education exists, and is free, this is not a draconian standard since everyone has the free means by which to obtain this very minimal level of education.
It IS a democrat problem, because the control the State House, and they made the voter registration laws such that having a DL gets you a registration... then give DLs to illegals. Poof! Instant, illegal, democrat voters. (there is no citizenship requirement, other than claiming citizenship, and any government photo ID is "proof") The law was designed for enabling voter fraud as the primary purpose.
Democrats are consistently in favor of lax voter registration requirements. They are as a matter of platform against proof of citizenship for voter registration. It is very simply, they know who illegals vote for. If illegals voter for republicans, the tables would likely be turned—but they don't. Regardless, it's 100% wrong. Being against voter ID and proof of citizen requirements is being in favor of fraudulent voting, period.
:agree:
Onkel Neal
07-11-12, 11:42 AM
http://youtu.be/P5p70YbRiPw
Poll Workers on Primary Day in Washington, DC offer US Attorney General Eric Holder's ballot... to a complete stranger. No ID needed.
Correct me if I'm wrong but Mexico requires proof of ID to vote. Why are we so stupid?
mookiemookie
07-11-12, 12:51 PM
“We don’t have a screen for citizenship on the front end when people register to vote,” he said.
(Said in my best mechanic's voice) "Well there's your problem right there."
nikimcbee
07-11-12, 05:43 PM
(Said in my best mechanic's voice) "Well there's your problem right there."
http://www.oilcanhenry.com/henrysjobs/images/uniforms.jpg
nikimcbee
07-11-12, 05:53 PM
Speaking of voter fraud, Ore-gone is a one party rule state and we have vote by mail. Our last election for gov was very close the republican was ahead at the end of the day in the rest of the state, but the democrats have their ace card up their sleave; they always count the city of Portland last.
And guess what, they magically find bags of uncounted ballots from Portland...:hmmm:
...and the demmicrat reign continues.:hmph:
Madox58
07-11-12, 05:59 PM
http://www.oilcanhenry.com/henrysjobs/images/uniforms.jpg
Fixed.
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n12/privateer_2006/fixed.jpg
CaptainMattJ.
07-11-12, 06:16 PM
Yes, sad but true. Have to hang this one on the Democrats, they are always pushing to allow people to vote with no serious ID verification. Hell, we should also allow the Chinese to vote in our elections, they own most of the country.
Misconception. the chinese hold the largest debt out of any FOREIGN nation, but they only control about 2 trillion. no, the Us is still more in debt to its own people...
As for the democrats, its where we part ways. But MANY republicans are the same way about illegal immigration. It disgusts me to see such blatent disregard for the law, and the enforcers EMBRACINNG IT. In California, some even consider illegal immigration heroic, and people who stand up and proudly display their illegality are heralded as brave and righteous. WHAT?!?! Looks like Obama is going to be another politician who tries to win the hispanic vote by "embracing" illegal immigrants.
I dont want obama back. i want someone stronger, unfortunately he/she is not present. We need to shut down the borders with unrelenting and swift force. Realistically, we need to reform immigration so its easier than now( I do agree the system is broke, no excuse to brake the laws that are in place though) to become a citizen, and actually ENFORCE zero tolerance for illegal immigrants.Its what needs to be done and no one seems to be able to step up and do it.
nikimcbee
07-11-12, 07:05 PM
Fixed.
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n12/privateer_2006/fixed.jpg
Is that after a few shots of whiskey?
Buddahaid
07-11-12, 10:42 PM
Of course all voter fraud is on the Dem side.
Anyway there is all types of fraud. There are lots of seniors in homes that can't remember where they are but they still vote by proxy and there is no certainty that those votes are being cast as the senior desires.
em2nought
07-11-12, 10:52 PM
Voting is so boring, armed revolt would be much more interesting. :up:
Heck, they even took write-in votes in AK where they read the "intent of the voter" even though the law says that the name must be spelled correctly for the vote to count.
In general, too many vote, IMHO. People without a basic understanding of government should be disallowed. Since public education exists, and is free, this is not a draconian standard since everyone has the free means by which to obtain this very minimal level of education.
Words can not describe the amount of disgust I am feeling at that statement. In a country with "universal" sufferage, everyone should be allowed to vote. Stupid or smart. Man or woman. Religious or irreligious. Straight or gay. American born or legal immigrant. Rich or impoverished.
CaptainMattJ.
07-12-12, 01:45 AM
Words can not describe the amount of disgust I am feeling at that statement. In a country with "universal" sufferage, everyone should be allowed to vote. Stupid or smart. Man or woman. Religious or irreligious. Straight or gay. American born or legal immigrant. Rich or impoverished.
Psychotic or anarchist? Extremely violent people? Meth addicts? (not convicted yet, of course) There needs to be a line drawn somewhere. I feel that propaganda, extreme fabrications, and general misinformation or lack of information altogether makes for an extremely poor vote cast. If only the world worked in such a way that our potential leaders can be broadcast as they are and not what they pretend to be. but it doesnt work that way. Those who literally base their votes off of the morsels of information they hear and through the propaganda media that blasts blatant lies are not fit to vote. However, excluding them would be immoral. I do not want the ship to sink because too many people cant take the time to actually investigate the people they vote for. I do not want to flounder with those people. But taking away their right to vote isnt the right thing to do either.
It sucks. We need to get the word out. You wouldnt believe some of the things ive heard said about both candidates. They consider Obama to be the worst president in the history of the United States. Pure propaganda and blatant lies, and people eat it up. Its infuriating. the public needs to stop being such lazy hypocrites and learn the truth. Even if we do get the truth out, were still plagued by incessant tribalism, and/or alterior motives. Its all about being against us or with us, never about the facts and making decisions based on it, it seems, within the masses. I really hate those kinds of people. "My side is better, regardless of the truth and the logic behind it. la la la im not listening". Tribalism, misinformation, and no information at all is whats causing so many poorly placed votes. It really needs to stop, its getting out of hand. :nope:
Psychotic or anarchist? Extremely violent people? Meth addicts? (not convicted yet, of course) There needs to be a line drawn somewhere. I feel that propaganda, extreme fabrications, and general misinformation or lack of information altogether makes for an extremely poor vote cast. If only the world worked in such a way that our potential leaders can be broadcast as they are and not what they pretend to be. but it doesnt work that way. Those who literally base their votes off of the morsels of information they hear and through the propaganda media that blasts blatant lies are not fit to vote. However, excluding them would be immoral. I do not want the ship to sink because too many people cant take the time to actually investigate the people they vote for. I do not want to flounder with those people. But taking away their right to vote isnt the right thing to do either.
It sucks. We need to get the word out. You wouldnt believe some of the things ive heard said about both candidates. They consider Obama to be the worst president in the history of the United States. Pure propaganda and blatant lies, and people eat it up. Its infuriating. the public needs to stop being such lazy hypocrites and learn the truth. Even if we do get the truth out, were still plagued by incessant tribalism, and/or alterior motives. Its all about being against us or with us, never about the facts and making decisions based on it, it seems, within the masses. I really hate those kinds of people. "My side is better, regardless of the truth and the logic behind it. la la la im not listening". Tribalism, misinformation, and no information at all is whats causing so many poorly placed votes. It really needs to stop, its getting out of hand. :nope:
I would allow everyone to vote. That includes anarchists, communists, and religious zealots. Regardless of how stupid, hateful, or ignorant their beliefs are, they deserve to voice them in free and fair elections. What happens when we start limiting voting rights? Are we going to start issuing "free speech licenses"? Are some people not smart enough to talk freely? The decisions of elected officials affect everyone in this country. That is why everyone needs to have their voice heard. I don't care how stupid, misinformed, or ignorant you or I think their candidate of choice is. We have to work to make people better informed the right way,but DO NOT start limiting their rights because YOU think they are not fit to vote. This nation was formed on the basis of everyone having a say in the matters of government. Not only the people that you or I deem "fit" to vote.
mookiemookie
07-12-12, 06:24 AM
I would allow everyone to vote. That includes anarchists, communists, and religious zealots. Regardless of how stupid, hateful, or ignorant their beliefs are, they deserve to voice them in free and fair elections. What happens when we start limiting voting rights? Are we going to start issuing "free speech licenses"? Are some people not smart enough to talk freely? The decisions of elected officials affect everyone in this country. That is why everyone needs to have their voice heard. I don't care how stupid, misinformed, or ignorant you or I think their candidate of choice is. We have to work to make people better informed the right way,but DO NOT start limiting their rights because YOU think they are not fit to vote. This nation was formed on the basis of everyone having a say in the matters of government. Not only the people that you or I deem "fit" to vote.
:salute:
kraznyi_oktjabr
07-12-12, 07:04 AM
I would allow everyone to vote. That includes anarchists, communists, and religious zealots. Regardless of how stupid, hateful, or ignorant their beliefs are, they deserve to voice them in free and fair elections. What happens when we start limiting voting rights? Are we going to start issuing "free speech licenses"? Are some people not smart enough to talk freely? The decisions of elected officials affect everyone in this country. That is why everyone needs to have their voice heard. I don't care how stupid, misinformed, or ignorant you or I think their candidate of choice is. We have to work to make people better informed the right way,but DO NOT start limiting their rights because YOU think they are not fit to vote. This nation was formed on the basis of everyone having a say in the matters of government. Not only the people that you or I deem "fit" to vote.:agree:
:salute:
Having system where someone decides who is and who is not "fit" to vote allows great abuse. What you do when political parties get their voice heard in "committee" or similar body determining "fitness" of citizens?
Who should vote in the US?
Anyone smart enough to vote for an independent. :D
Come on, D & R have surely dominated congress for long enough and they are just boring now.
With America in a decline, how about some real change to try and turn the ship around.
Why not let some one else have a go at driving? Gary Johnson maybe? ANYONE, JUST GET THE D's & R's OUT, whats the worst that can happen? :)
Ducimus
07-12-12, 07:42 AM
As for the democrats, its where we part ways. But MANY republicans are the same way about illegal immigration. It disgusts me to see such blatent disregard for the law, and the enforcers EMBRACINNG IT. In California, some even consider illegal immigration heroic, and people who stand up and proudly display their illegality are heralded as brave and righteous. WHAT?!?! Looks like Obama is going to be another politician who tries to win the hispanic vote by "embracing" illegal immigrants.
I dont want obama back. i want someone stronger, unfortunately he/she is not present. We need to shut down the borders with unrelenting and swift force. Realistically, we need to reform immigration so its easier than now( I do agree the system is broke, no excuse to brake the laws that are in place though) to become a citizen, and actually ENFORCE zero tolerance for illegal immigrants.Its what needs to be done and no one seems to be able to step up and do it.
It's too late for California. That state is a lost cause. Rampant illegal immigration from Mexico has gone unchecked for too long. It's a Mexican province now. California is the poster child of what happens when you do nothing about illegal immigration, that says, "Act now before it's too late, or this will happen to you."
Aside from the unaffordable cost of living, that is one of the reasons i left California. It's great to live in America again. Where going down the street you'll see American flags instead of Mexican flags. Yeah, i seriously think you'll see more mexican flags flying in california then US flags.
kraznyi_oktjabr
07-12-12, 08:02 AM
It's too late for California. That state is a lost cause. Rampant illegal immigration from Mexico has gone unchecked for too long. It's a Mexican province now. California is the poster child of what happens when you do nothing about illegal immigration, that says, "Act now before it's too late, or this will happen to you."
Aside from the unaffordable cost of living, that is one of the reasons i left California. It's great to live in America again. Where going down the street you'll see American flags instead of Mexican flags. Yeah, i seriously think you'll see more mexican flags flying in california then US flags.Do you know have anyone yet proposed secession from United States of America and submitting application to become 32nd state of United Mexican States? :D
CaptainMattJ.
07-12-12, 03:23 PM
I would allow everyone to vote. That includes anarchists, communists, and religious zealots. Regardless of how stupid, hateful, or ignorant their beliefs are, they deserve to voice them in free and fair elections. What happens when we start limiting voting rights? Are we going to start issuing "free speech licenses"? Are some people not smart enough to talk freely? The decisions of elected officials affect everyone in this country. That is why everyone needs to have their voice heard. I don't care how stupid, misinformed, or ignorant you or I think their candidate of choice is. We have to work to make people better informed the right way,but DO NOT start limiting their rights because YOU think they are not fit to vote. This nation was formed on the basis of everyone having a say in the matters of government. Not only the people that you or I deem "fit" to vote.
I said that. Taking away voting rights, regardless of how unfit I or someone else may think they are, is ridiculous. i didnt say anarchists or others shouldnt be allowed to vote, but my point was where the line was going to be drawn, if there was one. We dont allow prisoners to vote, not those in prison at least. Should they be allowed to vote? I dont think so, but its up to the majority in that state to decide.
My thoughts on the misinformation of the average voter and his inability to make a truly informed and educated decision do not take me to the point where i believe they shouldnt be allowed to vote. Im not saying they shouldnt be allowed, im saying that multitudes of people are simply making hasty ill-informed decisions without all the facts, making for a poor vote cast. Once they have gotten enough necessary information, truthful information, then they can make an educated decision instead of basing them off of the tidbits those people hear from biased sources. I never wanted to take away suffrage for the voter, i just want the voter to be informed before taking shots in the dark, which i think is ridiculous.
So yes, i agree, everyone should have the right to vote. But not everyone's vote is necessarily as informed as people hope they would be. I dont care what they end up choosing as long as they know about both sides of the equation. They choose whatever they want to choose, because its their right and freedom to do so.
MaddogK
07-12-12, 04:28 PM
I would allow everyone to vote. That includes anarchists, communists, and religious zealots. Regardless of how stupid, hateful, or ignorant their beliefs are, they deserve to voice them in free and fair elections. What happens when we start limiting voting rights? Are we going to start issuing "free speech licenses"? Are some people not smart enough to talk freely? The decisions of elected officials affect everyone in this country. That is why everyone needs to have their voice heard. I don't care how stupid, misinformed, or ignorant you or I think their candidate of choice is. We have to work to make people better informed the right way,but DO NOT start limiting their rights because YOU think they are not fit to vote. This nation was formed on the basis of everyone having a say in the matters of government. Not only the people that you or I deem "fit" to vote.
Citizens have the right to own firearms, but I can't think of anywhere I can legally buy a gun or ammo without an I.D.
Anyone can exercise their privilege to drive but I can't think of any state that doesn't require you to surrender your drivers I.D. (license) to a police officer to prove who you are and that you have the states blessing to operate a motor vehicle.
Apparently anyone can vote without proving they are entitled to that right, that the right hasn't been rescinded to them, or that they are who they claim to be.
Imagine if you were to replace 'vote' in your posting with 'owning a gun', without limits. Imagine "anarchists, communists, and religious zealots. Regardless of how stupid, hateful, or ignorant their beliefs are" walking around armed. Is this the world you'd want to pass on to your kids ?
breadcatcher101
07-12-12, 07:49 PM
Interesting when Holder gave his speech to the NAACP everyone had to show a photo ID.
Citizens have the right to own firearms, but I can't think of anywhere I can legally buy a gun or ammo without an I.D.
Anyone can exercise their privilege to drive but I can't think of any state that doesn't require you to surrender your drivers I.D. (license) to a police officer to prove who you are and that you have the states blessing to operate a motor vehicle.
Apparently anyone can vote without proving they are entitled to that right, that the right hasn't been rescinded to them, or that they are who they claim to be.
Imagine if you were to replace 'vote' in your posting with 'owning a gun', without limits. Imagine "anarchists, communists, and religious zealots. Regardless of how stupid, hateful, or ignorant their beliefs are" walking around armed. Is this the world you'd want to pass on to your kids ?
The right to vote and the right to bear arms are two completely different things. That's like if I said,"If we give gays the right to marry, we give them the right to murder."
If you go out and shoot someone, you will be arrested. If a politician makes a stupid choice that leads to a nuclear war, we all suffer. That is why everyone deserves a vote. Unless you plan on building fallout shelters for those who didn't get a "voting license".
wellsronald18
07-13-12, 08:30 AM
Ultimately we have to choose our leader wisely, so voting is very important as there is no point in blaming any political parties.
MaddogK
07-13-12, 11:53 AM
The right to vote and the right to bear arms are two completely different things. That's like if I said,"If we give gays the right to marry, we give them the right to murder."
If you go out and shoot someone, you will be arrested. If a politician makes a stupid choice that leads to a nuclear war, we all suffer. That is why everyone deserves a vote. Unless you plan on building fallout shelters for those who didn't get a "voting license".
:har:
Are you for real ?
Rockstar
07-13-12, 01:45 PM
Who should get to vote?
All white anglo males 21 years of age or older. Women should be home cooking a meal so the man has something to eat when he returns home from the polling centers. All others should be working in the fields. Ferners can enter the country but only to clean a house or mow lawns. :D
Just let the Libertarians vote for Gary Johnson and stick everyone else in FEMA camps until the election is over (Since they need to be protected from themselves anyway) :D
Walla, America Fixed (apart from the existing defecit). :O:
Sailor Steve
07-13-12, 04:18 PM
I think everybody in the country should vote. Twice. Three times if they're dead. :sunny:
Walla
Did you perchance mean "voilà"?
Ducimus
07-13-12, 04:29 PM
Last time I voted was for George W's first term. I was expecting the son to be more like the father. Since then, whoever it is, whatever he's done, don't blame me, I didn't vote for him.
Did you perchance mean "voilà"?
Probabaly - Mr Spell check Steve :O:
Sailor Steve
07-13-12, 04:55 PM
It's not the spelling. It's the knowing what the word means. "Walla" isn't even a word, unless you're visiting Washington state, and then you need to double down. :D
Last time I voted was for George W's first term. I was expecting the son to be more like the father. Since then, whoever it is, whatever he's done, don't blame me, I didn't vote for him.
W's father was one of the worst Presidents we ever had! His son faithfully followed in his legacy of idiocy... Oh, and if you don't vote, but can, you have no right to complain about politics.
Sailor Steve
07-13-12, 07:03 PM
Oh, and if you don't vote, but can, you have no right to complain about politics.
Wow, how many times have I heard that misguided adage? Until they put in a box that says "None Of The Above" I have every right to complain, no matter who I vote for, or don't vote for.
Ducimus
07-13-12, 07:34 PM
W's father was one of the worst Presidents we ever had! His son faithfully followed in his legacy of idiocy... Oh, and if you don't vote, but can, you have no right to complain about politics.
"I don't vote because I believe if you vote, you have no right to complain. People like to twist that around, I know. They say: "Well, if you don't vote, you have no right to complain"; but where's the logic in that? If you vote and you elect dishonest, incompetent people and they get into office and screw everything up... well, you are responsible for what they have done. You caused the problem; you voted them in; you have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote, who did not vote, who in fact did not even leave the house on election day, am in no way responsible for what these people have done and have every right to complain as long as I want about the mess you created that I had nothing to do with. " - Carlin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk
"I don't vote because I believe if you vote, you have no right to complain. People like to twist that around, I know. They say: "Well, if you don't vote, you have no right to complain"; but where's the logic in that? If you vote and you elect dishonest, incompetent people and they get into office and screw everything up... well, you are responsible for what they have done. You caused the problem; you voted them in; you have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote, who did not vote, who in fact did not even leave the house on election day, am in no way responsible for what these people have done and have every right to complain as long as I want about the mess you created that I had nothing to do with. " - Carlin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk
You should Vote Ducimus, plenty of other options besides D and R, they wont win a majority, but if enough peeple do it......
kraznyi_oktjabr
07-14-12, 06:28 AM
If D or R don't have good candidate available cast write in vote (you can do so right?). Donald Duck, Fethry Duck, Gyro Gearloose, Mickey Mouse, Goofy... here are few serious candidates for ya! :O:
Ducimus
07-14-12, 08:05 AM
You should Vote Ducimus, plenty of other options besides D and R, they wont win a majority, but if enough peeple do it......
The thing is, they are ALL losers. No matter who you vote for, they will be dishonest and incompetent. Aside from that, it doesn't matter who gets into office, because the special interest groups get their way anyway. Either way, we lose. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjZSCi2MSc4)
There are plenty of independant parties out there. Contrary to popular belief we do have more than two parties.
kraznyi_oktjabr
07-14-12, 10:14 AM
There are plenty of independant parties out there. Contrary to popular belief we do have more than two parties.Its very unfortunate that they don't get serious media coverage. By following your so called "mainstream media" its hard to believe there are any other parties (Libertarians? Greens?).
I have sometimes heard USA described as "two party dictatorship" and "corporatist plutocracy" (I know they are not totally fair descriptions).
I have sometimes heard USA described as "two party dictatorship" and "corporatist plutocracy" (I know they are not totally fair descriptions).
If a 3rd party were to gain large amounts of support from US citizens then they would naturally rise to power. The only mechanism keeping the Democrats and Republicans in power is people's unwillingness to vote for anyone else.
Platapus
07-14-12, 02:09 PM
"Walla" isn't even a word, unless you're visiting Washington state, and then you need to double down. :D
Ahem,
Walla is a sound effect imitating the murmur of a crowd in the background.
:D
kraznyi_oktjabr
07-14-12, 02:30 PM
If a 3rd party were to gain large amounts of support from US citizens then they would naturally rise to power. The only mechanism keeping the Democrats and Republicans in power is people's unwillingness to vote for anyone else.I know. What I don't understand is why your people feel that they can vote either D or R - nobody else? (btw this question applies in lesser extent to Britons aswell)
u crank
07-14-12, 02:53 PM
If a 3rd party were to gain large amounts of support from US citizens then they would naturally rise to power. The only mechanism keeping the Democrats and Republicans in power is people's unwillingness to vote for anyone else.
There is a certain truth to that, but I wonder how that would happen. The big money corporations that keep the D and R in power are not going to switch to a 3rd party that is basically opposed to their way of thinking. It's a good thought, but hard to imagine it happening.
There is a certain truth to that, but I wonder how that would happen. The big money corporations that keep the D and R in power are not going to switch to a 3rd party that is basically opposed to their way of thinking. It's a good thought, but hard to imagine it happening.
So hypothetically... who and in what way would deny you the voting right for such party?
Elections coast money and advertising but still you could vote for anyone right?
Maybe the problem is in your heads ...not in the "corrupted" system.
u crank
07-14-12, 03:20 PM
So hypothetically... who and in what way would deny you the voting right for such party?
Elections coast money and advertising but still you could vote for anyone right?
Maybe the problem is in your heads ...not in the "corrupted" system.
Well it is hypothetical, cause I'm not an American.:O:
But yes you are right, there is nothing stopping anyone from voting for any party or person. But to have a national party that could actually win an election would require enormous resources that these days comes from corporations and the very rich. To convince them to sponsor you when you want to limit their power is going to be a trick. Convincing the voter gets people elected and these days that takes money.
Platapus
07-14-12, 05:13 PM
If a 3rd party were to gain large amounts of support from US citizens then they would naturally rise to power. The only mechanism keeping the Democrats and Republicans in power is people's unwillingness to vote for anyone else.
I know. What I don't understand is why your people feel that they can vote either D or R - nobody else? (btw this question applies in lesser extent to Britons aswell)
One of the problems is, at the POTUS level, the electoral college. All but two states (Maine and Nebraska) are what is called "winner takes all" states where all the electoral votes for that state are awarded to the candidate with the largest plurality vote.
in those 48 states, It does not matter if 48% of the people vote for a third party, if 49+% vote for R/D, R/D gets the electorals... all the electorals
That means that until a third party can ever get the plurality they will remain politically invisible.
Fortunately, the other federal elections and all the state elections don't involve the EC and therefor third parties can start to slowly build up a public political presence.
This is what the Libertarian party has been doing. They have been working on this for 40+ years. Fortunately, or unfortunately, it will take another political party multiple generations to become viable
Blood_splat
07-14-12, 06:08 PM
Democrats and Republicans work for the same criminals.
Democrats and Republicans work for the same criminals.
Yup :dead:
Ducimus
07-15-12, 06:59 AM
I have sometimes heard USA described as "two party dictatorship" and "corporatist plutocracy" (I know they are not totally fair descriptions).
Personally, I'd call that an accurate description. The way the political machine, the media, and "good ole boy" system works, it's designed and meant to keep power in one of the two, and people rallied to one or the other. This situation where people are extreme right or left in their views only adds to the situation. Those parties oppose one another every way immaginable, hell, you could say they hate each others guts, but they both benefit from this situation, and neither will allow any change to it.
In my opinion a third party has virtually no chance of gaining enough politiical clout to change the balance of power between R & D, and I don't think its a far stretch to say, that R & D mean to keep it that way. If I had my way, id dismantel the whole thing, starting with abolishing the political parties (R & D are beyond saving), kick everyone out of congress and the white house (they're all corrupt), kick all the special interests out of the political scene and keep them out (the root of the problem), and start the hell over. Only THAT will put us on a path to fix things. Nothing short of complete removal of the whole lot of them. But that ain't ever gonna happen. So screw it, i wash my hands of it. :88)
mookiemookie
07-15-12, 07:48 AM
If a 3rd party were to gain large amounts of support from US citizens then they would naturally rise to power. The only mechanism keeping the Democrats and Republicans in power is people's unwillingness to vote for anyone else.
And the massive amounts of clout and money that Dem's, R's, corporations and lobbyists throw around to keep a third party from being viable. If any third party candidate or movement seriously gained traction, they'd co-opt it as the R's did with the Tea Party, or they'd use everything in their power to get the media to ignore it and discredit it as they've done with Ron Paul and various others through the years.
All natural...show me a democracy where it works any diffrent..
No one will say 'hey vote for the other guy lol'
All natural...show me a democracy where it works any diffrent..
No one will say 'hey vote for the other guy lol'
Why not? Im in the UK and I say 'vote for the other guy' the fact that our and everyone elses democratic system sucks as much as yours is no reason to get complacent.
Take the lobbyists away (get money out of it) and then we'll see how long our beloved major parties can cling on to power.
The Democracy we all have now is pretty poor. The Founding fathers of the USA would be rather ashamed if they saw the corrupt unconstitutiontal systems we all use today.
As long as people see an independant vote as a waste, all we have is a farce of a democracy that is 50% better than a dicatorship, nothing more, nothing less. So we have two fat self serving incompetent groups of liars who 'take it in turns' to screw things up - rather than just one.
well whoopy do and power to the people! :dead: We change our governments underwear from red to blue every 4 to 8 years, aren't we civiliized and clever?
Onkel Neal
07-16-12, 08:55 AM
A clipping I found from years back:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=165&pictureid=5785
Republicans have to get religous people and single issue voters like gun nuts to the polls to survive. One thing Democrats can proudly claim is the need to get people who have no idea about what's going on or how our government works to vote in huge numbers--and these people mainly vote Democrat.
We change our governments underwear from red to blue every 4 to 8 years, aren't we civiliized and clever?
I clearly see some shifts in polices when in comes to USA not only due to personal views of people at the top but also due to public opinion.
Think usually freeze due to disagreement.
You also cant turn such a big ship as USA in one day due to realities of the world.
Sometimes there are election promises and then reality kicks in....
Not saying that i see everything in pink though.:D
.........
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.