NationStates Jolt Archive

Oh it all begins all well and good

It is obvious by this presidential election that the Republican party is going to need more states than just the same old population of the old south to ever win another presidential election.

All three paragraphs. But then they just can't wait to respond and you suddenly get an OMGWTFBBQing tone shi(f)t to this:

First of all, the Republican Party hasn`t seen its time. The party has had members that can be questioned. President Bush is not on that list in my opinion. George Bush has stood up against a declining moral attitude in our country, he stood against Islamic terrorism, he stands for marriage between a man and a woman, he stands for a baby's right to life, he stood for the rights of citizens to bear arms, not for the government to tell them what arms they can bear, if any.


LOL FREHDUMS1 (http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_143194.asp)

Seriously? Is it really possible to be that retarded?

On the bright side, there was this little nugget of "wisdom":

Furthermore, the liberal left and the media are one in the same. You cannot get honest reporting about the war, about gay marriage, about abortion on demand, about the economy, from a media that is absolutely supported by the liberal money hogs that want things their way. Many names come to mind, as well as organizations such as PITA and many others. They all contribute vast amounts to push agendas that go against the morals of a society it was founded on.

I am especially intrigued by this PITA organization. I hope it stands for People for the Imaginative Treatment of Animals.

I just finished reading Bill Vick's article in the opinion section. First of all, I want to say to Bill Vick this: I salute you, sir, because the truth has not been told up to this point and now with your article it finally has been told.

Also to Harold McCoy, I would say that you need to change your last name, sir, because you sure are not the 'real' McCoy. The real McCoys are true Americans.What the fuck? ...Not this shit again. :mad:

I am especially intrigued by this PITA organization. I hope it stands for People for the Imaginative Treatment of Animals.

I think it stands for Pain In The Arse organization.

lulz. Retards like this will ensure the Republican party remains politically obsolete. Keep on fighting the good fight, culture warrior!

I am especially intrigued by this PITA organization. I hope it stands for People for the Imaginative Treatment of Animals.

Maybe he's attacking the Bread Industry?

lulz. Retards like this will ensure the Republican party remains politically obsolete. Keep on fighting the good fight, culture warrior!

So you actually want your two party system reduced to a single party system?

So you actually want your two party system reduced to a single party system?

Wait, what? I want the Republican party, in its current incarnation destroyed, if thats wat your asking. Of course I want a party whose ideology is dirt to be obsolete.

Maybe he's attacking the Bread Industry?

Liberal wheat conspiracies?

So you actually want your two party system reduced to a single party system?

The more likely conclusion is that the defunct party will eventually shed the dead weight and old guard in a bloody (metaphorical) night of long knives and reinvent itself under the helm of someone charismatic and not quite that stupid.

The more likely conclusion is that the defunct party will eventually shed the dead weight and old guard in a bloody (metaphorical) night of long knives and reinvent itself under the helm of someone charismatic and not quite that stupid.Yes, please. I will take two of these.

The more likely conclusion is that the defunct party will eventually shed the dead weight and old guard in a bloody (metaphorical) night of long knives and reinvent itself under the helm of someone charismatic and not quite that stupid.

Exactly. But its much easier to imply Im a facist or something.

Someone with political sense on the internet?!

I must attack them with clever placements of letters in parentheses!!!!

Furthermore, the liberal left and the media are one in the same. You cannot get honest reporting about the war, about gay marriage, about abortion on demand, about the economy, from a media that is absolutely supported by the liberal money hogs that want things their way. Many names come to mind, as well as organizations such as PITA and many others. They all contribute vast amounts to push agendas that go against the morals of a society it was founded on.

I think we should all just start referring to the media as the 'right-wing media' to shut the right-wing up about their persecution complex.

Someone with political sense on the internet?!

I must attack them with clever placements of letters in parentheses!!!!

Huh? Who has political sense? Wtf?

Or you could actually vote for third parties. Actually I think If Americans ever can wrap their heads around having a third party you'll actually end up having more like 23! (but thats ok)

OH NOEZ! Pakistani IT workers (http://www.pita.org.pk/) are giving the Dumbocrats teh monez!!! :mad: (Or was he referring to the Palestinian IT Association (http://www.pita.ps/newweb/etemplate.php?id=184)?)

Someone with political sense on the internet?!

I must attack them with clever placements of letters in parentheses!!!!

I must, actually. I have this disorder, you see. I'm compelled to do that sort of thing on a regular basis. So you've just made fun of a retarded kid. I hope you're happy.

Jackass.

Liberal wheat conspiracies?

lmfao

augh so hungry now *best zombie voice*
"piiiita! piiiiiiiiiiiiiitA!"

Or you could actually vote for third parties. Actually I think If Americans ever can wrap their heads around having a third party you'll actually end up having more like 23! (but thats ok)

I don't get why people think voting for third parties is the answer. Our system can really only support to mega-parties.

I don't get why people think voting for third parties is the answer. Our system can really only support to mega-parties.

Why?

I am especially intrigued by this PITA organization. I hope it stands for People for the Imaginative Treatment of Animals.

I think they work with that radical Palestinian group, Hummus.

According to exit polls, 39% of voters were registered Democrats. 89% of them voted for Obama, 10% voted for McCain. 32% of voters were registered Republican. 89% of them voted for McCain, 10% voted for Obama. 29% of voters are Independent. 52% of them voted for Obama, 44% voted for McCain.

Yeah, Republican party: Keep rallying the base. ;)

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008

Who are these people?

Or you could actually vote for third parties. Actually I think If Americans ever can wrap their heads around having a third party you'll actually end up having more like 23! (but thats ok)

We'll vote for a third party candidate when one worth voting for comes along.

I think they work with that radical Palestinian group, Hummus.

oh no! Thats terrible! lol

*gives you cookie out of respect for clever punning*

We'll vote for a third party candidate when one worth voting for comes along.This. ^

Why?

That's part of being a Two-Party system.

Maybe he's attacking the Bread Industry?
Pitas aren't bread. That's evil in pocket form, it is.

We'll vote for a third party candidate when one worth voting for comes along.

Well seeing that lots of people are always complaining about having to pick between two equally unattractive options you'd think that having a viable third party would be an attractive option for a lot of people.

And why not start one. Or a bunch of people can join the reform party, oust Nader (he's still around isn't he?) and make it into a viable option.

We'll vote for a third party candidate when one worth voting for comes along.

What about Nader? What do you have against Vulcans in politics? :(

That's part of being a Two-Party system.

There is nothing forbidding you from having a third party.

I think they work with that radical Palestinian group, Hummus.

Suddenly, this (hezbollahtofu.blogspot.com\) seems relevant.

What do you have against Vulcans in politics? :(

Im a Romulan.

There is nothing forbidding you from having a third party.

The Electoral College makes that a difficult task.

Im a Romulan.

Kinda explains your preference for a one party state then doesn't it?

*runs*

What about Nader? What do you have against Vulcans in politics? :(Baldwin/Castle: Constitution(Party) 37(states) 196,461(votes)Third parties are doing it wrong.

The Electoral College makes that a difficult task.

I wont even pretend to understand the electoral college. Why don't you just count votes the normal way, you know, the number of votes?

Kinda explains your preference for a one party state then doesn't it?

*runs*

And my cloaking device.

I wont even pretend to understand the electoral college. Why don't you just count votes the normal way, you know, the number of votes?

That is actually a point . . .why is the states on an electoral College voting system???

And my cloaking device.

*"sir KOL has been lost on sensors!"*
*"uh oh"*
(Famous last Words books three)

I wont even pretend to understand the electoral college. Why don't you just count votes the normal way, you know, the number of votes?

As if that were even the only problem.

As a result of the two-party tradition, minor parties face difficulties in getting on the ballot in all 50 states. The names of Republicans and Democrats are automatically on the ballot in many states, but third-party candidates are required to obtain a large number of voter signatures in a short time.

Another difficulty for third-party candidates is that nearly all all elected officials in the United States are selected by single-member districts. Under this system no matter how many candidates compete in a district, only one will win. Because most voters support a major party, the winner will almost always be a Democrat or a Republican.

A related problem is financing third-party campaigns. Political campaigns require a great deal of money. Americans, convinced that a third-party candidate cannot win are reluctant to contribute to such a campaign.

In the past, third parties have appealed mainly to voters in certain regions of the country or to certain groups in society. To survive, a third party must plant political roots in all parts of the country. Few third parties have demonstrated this kind of staying power.

The country would be better served by abolishing political parties and electing individuals.
Imagine people would actually have to hear what their candidate stands for not what party they belong to.

The country would be better served by abolishing political parties and electing individuals.

And if we all rode unicorns.

And if we all rode unicorns.

I dunno that would clash with my blue hair and purple skin . . . .

EDIT: somehow I read that as "Rode Red Unicorns" bedtime methinks

And if we all rode unicorns.

That could breathe fire!

http://images.elfwood.com/art/e/m/emirror/evil_fire_breathing_unicorn.jpg

And if we all rode unicorns.

wouldn't be that hard. Just simply ban a candidate for office from revealing affiliation with political party. Then ban political parties form funding campaigns. Lastly ban listing anything other then the candidates name on the ballot.

harder for special interest groups to buy congress (easier to bribe a party boss then 200 members of congress). And dumb asses who only know how to vote a straight party ticket stop voting.

I think we should all just start referring to the media as the 'right-wing media' to shut the right-wing up about their persecution complex.

Wait there is a bumper sticker that reads "The Media is only as Libral as the Conservative corporations allow them." Or something along those lines...*sigh* internet meme hunting here I go.

fixed and now with linkage
Actual quote is: "The media are only as liberal as the concervative businesses that own them."
http://www.stickergiant.com/Conservative-Businesses_b5814.html

So you actually want your two party system reduced to a single party system?

We have a two-party system? Since when?

wouldn't be that hard. Just simply ban a candidate for office from revealing affiliation with political party. Then ban political parties form funding campaigns. Lastly ban listing anything other then the candidates name on the ballot.

harder for special interest groups to buy congress (easier to bribe a party boss then 200 members of congress). And dumb asses who only know how to vote a straight party ticket stop voting.

Candidates could easily name their ideology or some other affiliation. Political parties could change their names and become churches/clubs/charities/ect. In any case the party system in the US is pretty weak in the US with a relatively high variance n basic ideology, probably with negative effects of accountability of Congress to the nation as a whole and it makes members more beholden to local special interest groups.

Another difficulty for third-party candidates is that nearly all all elected officials in the United States are selected by single-member districts. Under this system no matter how many candidates compete in a district, only one will win. Because most voters support a major party, the winner will almost always be a Democrat or a Republican.


You forgot that voting for a third party increases the chance that the candidate one likes the least will win since the vote for the other side is split.

Candidates could easily name their ideology or some other affiliation. Political parties could change their names and become churches/clubs/charities/ect. In any case the party system in the US is pretty weak in the US with a relatively high variance n basic ideology, probably with negative effects of accountability of Congress to the nation as a whole and it makes members more beholden to local special interest groups.

yeah but you know what the voting public would then have to figure out what ideology a candidate supports. instead of just going republicans love jeebus that's who i vote for. make it so campaign funds must come from individuals and must go to individuals candidates.

yeah but you know what the voting public would then have to figure out what ideology a candidate supports. instead of just going republicans love jeebus that's who i vote for.

The candidates could just say on tv what ideology they are, wear clothes or symbols, like crosses, that fignify their ideology, or the like. How do you expect the people who vote Republican cuz Republicans love jeebus to pay attention to the individual views of the 10-20 candidates each election cycle?

make it so campaign funds must come from individuals and must go to individuals candidates.

Organizations can then contract out individuals. The individuals get money from the political party, called clubs or some other name, who then give the vast majority of said money to the candidates. The guy could even get a token job with zero responsibilities to "prove" its not just the organization giving him money to give to candidates.

How do you expect the people who vote Republican cuz Republicans love jeebus to pay attention to the individual views of the 10-20 candidates each election cycle?

What the hell is that suppose to mean? Do mean the retards that shouldn't be allowed to vote or the majority of republicans? And if someone says samething, they'd better hope they can duck.

We need to elect Ron Paul, grant him emergency corruption powers after three appropriate refusals, and sit back in terror as he takes a blowtorch to the entire government.

Mayor Sheila Dixon, in Baltimore, is a joke. She stole Best Buy cards she was supposed to give to the poor and bought herself a ps2, bunch of other junk.
Funny that she got a ps2, as if they wouldn't detect a last-gen system. Also, boyfriend contractors getting special tax exemptions, etc. etc.
That city council president on the Wire was basically her.

Worst of all, of course, is that Baltimore is already wracked with crime, corruption, you name it. Her attorney is trying to use this "there's an old saying in City Hall that you don't take down the monarch (mayor) for a misdemeanor" defense, haha. "This city has always been corrupt, who are we kidding?" basically.
Naturally, her lawyers are moving to have her extensive legal fees paid for by the city's minute budget.

Anyway, I'm a disenchanted Republican who's looking at the Libertarian philosophy. It's basically "Follow the Constitution, stay out of my personal life, stay out of my pocketbook." I like the fiscal conservatism of Republicans, small government (in the days of yore), and the Social liberalism of Democrats. We all pay taxes, we can smoke or do whatever we want as long as it doesn't harm others. Parenting raises good kids, not censorship or legislating morality.

Bob Barr was a disappointment because of his ridiculous anti-marijuana crusades in the late 90's. That's not limited government, no suh.

Or you could actually vote for third parties. Actually I think If Americans ever can wrap their heads around having a third party you'll actually end up having more like 23! (but thats ok)
We do have 23. We had at least 6 presidental ones last election.

We need to elect Ron Paul, grant him emergency corruption powers after three appropriate refusals, and sit back in terror as he takes a blowtorch to the entire government.
And then loot everything not tied down.

What the hell is that suppose to mean? Do mean the retards that shouldn't be allowed to vote or the majority of republicans? And if someone says samething, they'd better hope they can duck.

In b4 "What's the difference?"

An excerpt form Murphy's law, and Other Reasons Why Things Go WRONG:

If the law is against you, argue the facts.
If the facts are against you, argue the law.
If both are against you, yell like hell.

It seems that both the law and the facts are against the republicans. :)

This thread's OP was trolling. I left it alone because a discussion seemed to be developing.

Mea culpa.