Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think we should have at least 4, if you have 3 parties people are always going to worry about voting for the "spoiler", such as was the case with Ralph Nader. People that lived in blue states voted Nader, but many people in swing states ended up not voting for him, even though they believed he was the best candidate. If you have 2 more parties, this would even out, IMO.
__________________
The price of anything is the amount of life you exchange for it. ~Henry David Thoreau
Katzenfreund: proposing 4 Ps, from left to right:
1. POT - hippie and tree huggers party (Greens) - get it "POT"?
2. POPE - POor PEople's party (middle class dems)
2. POOR - plain old oilmen's republican party (mid to center republicans)
4. PUG - party under god (right wing Reps)
PS: the thread was getting depressing
My comments are based on a CNN special and C-Span.
One is a congressman of many years seniority, the other a Harvard law graduate who turned down offers from Wall Street to take a $14K annual salary and work in the worst area of Chicago as a Community Organizer.
One has seven homes and a wife who is an heiress to a multi-million dollar beer distribulorship. The other has one home and a wife who is a corporate lawyer. Regardless of the character or intent of the seller, there is nothing to suggest his home purchase was not legal and binding according to state and federal law. .
One man was the son of a Naval Admiral. The other was of a mixed marriage and a broken home.
One candidate has been married more than once to beatiful women younger than himself. He regrets he cheated on his first wife. According to CNN he forgot to mention he applied for a marriage license while he was *still married" and living with his wife. His VP choice is a yonger, pertty woman. The other candidate is still married amd they are raising two children together. His VP choice is an older man of considerable experiennce.
One man who of late claims to be an agent for change has seven former Washington lobbyiest on his staff. The other man who has talked about change since the beginning of his campaign does not.
I grew up in mixed family, too. Dad was the Republican whilse monther was the Democrat. I heard politics at home for 47 years. It was never about smearing a candidate, demeaning a candidate or his family, and it was niever about character assination. Politics have gone down hill in a hurry. It's sad.
I think we have plenty to think about before November.
What happened to factual reporting instead of spin reporting??
Did the CNN overview of both candidates talk about Obama's buddy, Rezko and the help he gave the Obama's in purchasing Chicago real estate? Or the advisors behind his campaign who have close connections to the Daley machine of Chicago? One was doing bongs while the other was a POW. There is mud on both sides to cover all candidates. Would have been more enjoyable to see positions discussed instead. I look forward to the debates. Maybe I need to subscribe to "The Economist" again to get a more unbiased source of news. And ya know, that El Rushbo guy makes me laugh too. Sometimes he makes the straws he's grasping at seem like concrete pillars. The bias is on both sides. Is anyone still a moderate Dem/Rep.-a centrist?!
I would LOVE to include other parties in the debates, especially since the 3rd parties are more in line with my beliefs - particularly Libertarian and Green Party. I am a supporter of Ralph Nader, and always have been, but I simply cannot vote for him in major elections. Why?? Because his party doesn't have enough recognition yet, so I'd only be taking a vote away from the Democrats (which is how I vote otherwise). I think if the other parties were allowed to participate in debates, they would gradually gain acceptance and support... then we'd finally have a wider pool to choose from, instead of having to choose "the lesser of two evils" as I currently feel at each election.
How about the third parties having their own debates? Might be a few fireworks, there. I'd watch them. Also, if they had a national forum, other people might see a few points they'd like to pass on to their representative or senators.
How about the third parties having their own debates? Might be a few fireworks, there. I'd watch them. Also, if they had a national forum, other people might see a few points they'd like to pass on to their representative or senators.
Not quit what you had in mind, but still something, Brian!
There's an article and a link to the 4 minute story. I am sure there is more on this elsewhere and that it will not be the last time we hear from these folks.
The problem with American politics is money, political clout and racial bias. It takes an obscene amount of money to pay for: TV air time and media ad campaigns, a chartered bus and plane. offices in most every state, paid staff for these offices, expenses associated with several campaign stops in most states, personal travel expenses for the candiate and is entourage. The Ralph Nader's do not have the money of the clout; they have good ideas; sometimed. We the people have little to with any of it. IF we did, we would not have voter fraud nor the $XXXM dollars worth of voter machines that do not work as promised.
Since we know that no Senator is qualififed for Presidency, and no governor -regardless of how cute, charming or experienced they are is prepared for it - what do we do?
The only thing I think we can look at then is charachter, but to do so we must be willing to set aside personal preference, religion, party platform and political rhetoric. The choices left are a young black man and an old white man who both claim to love God and country.
My comments are based on a CNN special and C-Span.
One is a congressman of many years seniority, the other a Harvard law graduate who turned down offers from Wall Street to take a $14K annual salary and work in the worst area of Chicago as a Community Organizer.
And the "organizer" did not do that job very long, went on to teach law at a prestigious university, and got into politics in one of the most corrupt political systems in the country. He also chose as a running mate a person who has done little but be a politician. Biden graduated from law school in 1968, became a New Castle County, Delaware commissioner in 1970, and was elected to the US Senate in 1972, a job he has held since.
One has seven homes and a wife who is an heiress to a multi-million dollar beer distribulorship. The other has one home and a wife who is a corporate lawyer. Regardless of the character or intent of the seller, there is nothing to suggest his home purchase was not legal and binding according to state and federal law. .
Regardless of how many homes the one owns, there is nothing to suggest his home purchases were not legal.
One man was the son of a Naval Admiral. The other was of a mixed marriage and a broken home.
And what does that have to do with either's qualifications for public office?
One candidate has been married more than once to beatiful women younger than himself. He regrets he cheated on his first wife. According to CNN he forgot to mention he applied for a marriage license while he was *still married" and living with his wife. His VP choice is a yonger, pertty woman. The other candidate is still married amd they are raising two children together. His VP choice is an older man of considerable experiennce.
Aside from cheating on his wife, as did a very popular recent Democratic president, what does any of this have to do with character? What does any of it have to do with being qualified for public office?
One man who of late claims to be an agent for change has seven former Washington lobbyiest on his staff. The other man who has talked about change since the beginning of his campaign does not.
The man who has been talking about being a change agent for the past 19-20 months chose a career politician as his running mate.
I grew up in mixed family, too. Dad was the Republican whilse monther was the Democrat. I heard politics at home for 47 years. It was never about smearing a candidate, demeaning a candidate or his family, and it was niever about character assination. Politics have gone down hill in a hurry. It's sad.
I think we have plenty to think about before November.
I agree there is mud enough to cover both candidates. Both are politicians. All said, I'm not sure yet who I will vote for.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 09-10-2008 at 06:57 PM..
How about the third parties having their own debates? Might be a few fireworks, there. I'd watch them. Also, if they had a national forum, other people might see a few points they'd like to pass on to their representative or senators.
Great point -- third parties need to push for themselves to be included. Any publicity - even if it an "way off Broadway" show - is good for them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
