mitt, mitt, mitt

[Danzig]

and they say women can't make up their mind...


http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/...ut_taxes_.html


of course, in that 'secret' tape from the big pocket dinner, people kind of ignored the part where mitt said that just by him winning, the economy would begin to do better. ta-daaaa
so, i guess this current scheme is just an offshoot of the 'do nothing, everything will fix itself' plan? the lame will walk, the dumb will speak, the deaf will hear, just because the money man wins. it's gonna be great.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

of course, in that 'secret' tape from the big pocket dinner, people kind of ignored the part where mitt said that just by him winning, the economy would begin to do better. ta-daaaa
so, i guess this current scheme is just an offshoot of the 'do nothing, everything will fix itself' plan? the lame will walk, the dumb will speak, the deaf will hear, just because the money man wins. it's gonna be great.

Sounds eerily similar to the idea tha Obama winning in 2008 was going to lead to an elevation of America's prestige abroad, that our enemies would see our point of view, our relations to the Muslim world would dramatically improve...

"The planet will start to heal, the levels of sea will stop rising" ... blah blah blah...

That by the way has all been proven to be nonsense.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Sounds eerily similar to the idea tha Obama winning in 2008 was going to lead to an elevation of America's prestige abroad, that our enemies would see our point of view, our relations to the Muslim world would dramatically improve...

"The planet will start to heal, the levels of sea will stop rising" ... blah blah blah...

That by the way has all been proven to be nonsense.

yep, they're both full of ish.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yep, they're both full of ish.

OK - all things being equal - I'll take the new guy.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

OK - all things being equal - I'll take the new guy.

which is no good move.

try taking the third guy.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

which is no good move.

try taking the third guy.

Sadly, a vote for the third guy is the same as a vote for the current guy. That is the way the math plays out - today. Unless the third guy is Ralph Nader.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Sadly, a vote for the third guy is the same as a vote for the current guy. That is the way the math plays out - today. Unless the third guy is Ralph Nader.

not necessarily, and not if enough people did it.

[Antitrust32]

my vote for Gary Johnson will NOT in any way shape or form be a vote for Pres Obama. nor is it in any way shape or form a vote for non-Pres Romney.

and you wonder why nothing changes... the majority of this country believes that there are only two choices.. and SOMEHOW (not sure how) they believe one is less evil than the other?

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Sadly, a vote for the third guy is the same as a vote for the current guy. That is the way the math plays out - today. Unless the third guy is Ralph Nader.

No offense, but this is an ideology that is precisely why the country is doomed.

Your corporate puppetmasters offer you a choice of two evils, then use their corporate-controlled media to get you to believe that going off the menu will result in you getting the evil that you tolerate less than the evil that only makes you throw up a little.

How about "don't vote for evil"?

The reality is that a vote for Romney or Obama only weakens the country and does nothing to force the change we so desperately need. So the prospect of getting Romney by sacrificing ideals that you believe in (not assuming you do, you may really believe Romney can make a difference) is no bargain anyway you look at it.

Will a third party candidate get elected? Absolutely not. Not a chance in hell.

Can the entrenched system ignore 20 million voters who essentially tell both of them "No Thanks"? No, they can't.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

my vote for Gary Johnson will NOT in any way shape or form be a vote for Pres Obama. nor is it in any way shape or form a vote for non-Pres Romney.

and you wonder why nothing changes... the majority of this country believes that there are only two choices.. and SOMEHOW (not sure how) they believe one is less evil than the other?

A vote for Gary Johnson, in this election, is a vote for Barack Obama. That is a statement summarizing the fact that the mathematical outcome is the same.

It is also identical to writing in your own name at the ballot box. And pretty close to just staying home.

I respect your conviction in your beliefs. Unfortunately, elections are won or lost by the counting of votes, and on that basis all the justification you put into Gary Johnson evaporates when the count is made.

Those are the facts. Anything else is like Quixotic tilting at windmills.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Can the entrenched system ignore 20 million voters who essentially tell both of them "No Thanks"? No, they can't.

That's where we disagree. They can and will ignore 20 million people who threw their vote away. They could and did ignore the 20 million Ross Perot voters that gave us Bill Clinton.

They also ignored all the John Anderson voters from the Reagan-Carter race in 1980. When was the last time you actually heard anyone MENTION John Anderson?

The fact is there are two viable parties. We do not yet have a coalition government like the UK, Israel, or Italy where such coalitions exist. And I'm not sure that's any better.

If you don't vote for Romney in 2012, you are, in mathematical effect - NOT intent - endorsing a second term for Barack Obama and all the threats to your freedom that will certainly follow with it.

[jms62]

[quote=joeydb;892612]That's where we disagree. They can and will ignore 20 million people who threw their vote away. They could and did ignore the 20 million Ross Perot voters that gave us Bill Clinton.

They also ignored all the John Anderson voters from the Reagan-Carter race in 1980. When was the last time you actually heard anyone MENTION John Anderson?

The fact is there are two viable parties. We do not yet have a coalition government like the UK, Israel, or Italy where such coalitions exist. And I'm not sure that's any better.

If you don't vote for Romney in 2012, you are, in mathematical effect - NOT intent - endorsing a second term for Barack Obama and all the threats to your freedom that will certainly follow with it.[/QUOTE]

What threats to our freedom Joey?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by joeydb

That's where we disagree. They can and will ignore 20 million people who threw their vote away. They could and did ignore the 20 million Ross Perot voters that gave us Bill Clinton.

They also ignored all the John Anderson voters from the Reagan-Carter race in 1980. When was the last time you actually heard anyone MENTION John Anderson?

The fact is there are two viable parties. We do not yet have a coalition government like the UK, Israel, or Italy where such coalitions exist. And I'm not sure that's any better.

If you don't vote for Romney in 2012, you are, in mathematical effect - NOT intent - endorsing a second term for Barack Obama and all the threats to your freedom that will certainly follow with it.

god..the melodrama Joey..Please.

And of course, we all know who Ralph Nader gave us

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by joeydb

A vote for Gary Johnson, in this election, is a vote for Barack Obama. That is a statement summarizing the fact that the mathematical outcome is the same.

It is also identical to writing in your own name at the ballot box. And pretty close to just staying home.

I respect your conviction in your beliefs. Unfortunately, elections are won or lost by the counting of votes, and on that basis all the justification you put into Gary Johnson evaporates when the count is made.

Those are the facts. Anything else is like Quixotic tilting at windmills.

what about liberals who do not like Obama and will vote Libertarian.. is that still a vote for Obama.. or is that a vote away from Obama? It's not like those people would have ever voted for Romney.

No amount of rhetoric will make me vote for Obama or Romney in this election. I'm simply no longer interested in the status quo, which is what we will get with both of them. Both parties are equally interested in taking away freedoms, its one of the only bipartisan supported issues going on now. Romney will not change that, business as usual.

I'm voting Libertarian. If that indirectly makes me vote for Obama, well then so be it.

I really cant believe that voting 3rd party is no better than staying home. So much for personal responsibility and choices in this country.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

what about liberals who do not like Obama and will vote Libertarian.. is that still a vote for Obama.. or is that a vote away from Obama? It's not like those people would have ever voted for Romney.

No amount of rhetoric will make me vote for Obama or Romney in this election. I'm simply no longer interested in the status quo, which is what we will get with both of them. Both parties are equally interested in taking away freedoms, its one of the only bipartisan supported issues going on now. Romney will not change that, business as usual.

I'm voting Libertarian. If that indirectly makes me vote for Obama, well then so be it.

I really cant believe that voting 3rd party is no better than staying home. So much for personal responsibility and choices in this country.

if enough people voted c, it would be a revolution.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Danzig

if enough people voted c, it would be a revolution.

That is all we need, another Johnson in the White House.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by pointman

That is all we need, another Johnson in the White House.

hey, maybe third times' the charm there too. hopefully not a drunk like the first one.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by pointman

That is all we need, another Johnson in the White House.

Condy then?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

what about liberals who do not like Obama and will vote Libertarian.. is that still a vote for Obama.. or is that a vote away from Obama? It's not like those people would have ever voted for Romney.

No amount of rhetoric will make me vote for Obama or Romney in this election. I'm simply no longer interested in the status quo, which is what we will get with both of them. Both parties are equally interested in taking away freedoms, its one of the only bipartisan supported issues going on now. Romney will not change that, business as usual.

I'm voting Libertarian. If that indirectly makes me vote for Obama, well then so be it.

I really cant believe that voting 3rd party is no better than staying home. So much for personal responsibility and choices in this country.

It wasn't intended as rhetoric - honestly. If you vote third party, you will get the status quo when the incumbent wins.

If you indirectly vote for Obama, as you correctly put it, then how is it NOT the same as staying home or simply voting for him?

This is just the math of the situation. Third parties (for both sides - though the left is less frequent in having a split) suffer from this numerical handicap.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

if enough people voted c, it would be a revolution.

If enough people feared capital punishment, there would be no premeditated murder.

The polls are close - 47% each, or 46% to 45% - how is that remaining 9% going to go third party and win?