TEA (political)
 

I was browsing my sample ballot and much to my supprise there was a candidate with a party affiliation of TEA.

So for those that said they 'might' consider the tea party a valid movement once they appear on the ballot ... there you go ;)

Well, that's very nice, but no such label is formally recognized, even according to the Tea Party's own website:

http://www.teaparty.org/

Reading there, it's still all about the GOP. Smoke and mirrors.

Again, I imagine that if the Tea Party had broken from Team R, they probably would have posted it on their website.

"Their" website? Which one? As far as I know there is no national tea party that is recognized by the various local tea parties.

It seems that you are correct. The site is run by Dale Robertson, who many regional groups have rejected as a leader. This would also seem to indicate that the Tea Party is a long way off from being a party independent of the Republicans.

The Tea party never said they were an 'orginized party' rather it is a movement towards conservatisim regardless of party afilliation.

Many have eschewed their republican registration and have registered as conservative or independant.

Its just that its pretty damn hard to find a conservative democrat.

Are you sure it's not the "rent is too damn high"party?

http://www.nypress.com/imgs/blogs/blog7287widea.jpg

Well as long as they are tied to the Neo-Conservatives, whom I suspect they will vote with en masse, I will not vote for them; I'll stay home. The mood of the independents is such that they will get in with or without my vote, but I will need to see their actions before they earn my support. The 'we're not the Democrats' line does not appeal to me, as I find the Neo-Conservative Republicans as repugnant as the Progressive Democrats.

That's what I did the last election, and I'll do the same this election. Ain't nobody up there worth voting for, and (in my opinion) the end results will be the same regardless who gets the office.

you guys know that we have a marijuana party here in Canada right?:O:

Not voting accomplishes nothing. :nope: Now if our elections were based on a percentage of people voting, it might mean something, but that's not how our system works. :nope:

In a representative government, it is the duty of all citizens to vote for the best candidate, not some mythical perfect candidate.

To paraphrase Donny Rumsfield -- you go to the polls with the candidates you have and you make the best of what is most likely a compromise decision.


Choosing not to vote is choosing not to support our form of governance.

Please give serious consideration to vote. Yes, it may seem like we are always picking the lessor of two evils or as South Park puts it, between a turd and a douche. But that's who we have to work with.

If you are not happy with the candidates, then work on the campaign of someone you do like. But let's make the system work as opposed to abandoning it. :salute:

Neither does voting when the end result will be the same regardless of who wins. Waste my time at the polls, or stay home, end result is the same.

I have, and my general stance remains unchanged.
:woot:

"None of the above" should be a permanent ballot choice. If it gets more votes than anyone else then a new election is held in 6 months and with different candidates. Rinse and repeat until somebody wins a real majority vote.

I'm not a fan of many party systems. Two parties ensure majority assent. With 5 candidates in a race a mere 21% of the vote can carry an election. Under our system of government that's downright scary.

If that were the case, id have the picture perfect voting record.