Saint Johnny B Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 You know Ross Perot had some good points. Cool charts showing economic mismangement by Bush I. He talked about hearing a "giant sucking sound" where all the good jobs were sucked out of America due to stupid trade agreements. Perot seems to have been right. So could Ross Perot or someone like him emerge to challenge Bush II, the son, the shrub? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RABid Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Do you really want someone that gathers followers, gets people's hopes up, and then bails out of the election at the first sign of trouble? Robert This post edited for speling. My Sweetwater Gear Exchange Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 11, 2003 Author Share Posted December 11, 2003 Well I said like Ross Perot too. Old Ross said some pretty accurate things, but he's not the only one who could do this. What I'm asking is if someone could rise up who is not in either of the major parties, an independent, so to speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RABid Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 What ever happened to Alan Keys? (I think that is the correct name.) I had big hopes for him last time. I guess American is not quite ready, but he made more sense than any candidate four years ago. Robert This post edited for speling. My Sweetwater Gear Exchange Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Moore Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Yeah, I supported Keyes in the primary last time. He is a great guy, but I doubt he will run again, mainly because he would not want to split republican votes and hand the election to the opposition. But I agree, he is a breath of fresh air in politics. Chuck Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 11, 2003 Author Share Posted December 11, 2003 Well perhaps there will be someone like Alan Keyes then who will rise up and challenge the others. I'd really like to see some non-criminal run, in other words, someone who does not lie, is honest, has not sold out to big money special interests, and has some integrity. It used to be you needed a lot of money to challenge the power-elite, but Dean has proven that small contributions, the internet, and some fresh ideas, can motivate a ground crew. So someone like Allan Keyes could do it too, maybe even win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super 8 Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 Ralph Nader is probably the strongest 3rd party candidate. He will be announcing this month whether he'll be running on the Green ticket again. If he does, I think he's worth your vote. And no.... voting for a 3rd party is NOT throwing your vote away. You wanna see change? Then you better vote for change. Super 8 Hear my stuff here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggus Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 PAT BUCHANON 2004!!!! :freak: :freak: "You can't enjoy yourself unless you're having fun." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bitch Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 GO DEAN! :thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botch. Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 It's possible, unfortunately it has to be somebody with a lot of money. I can't see myself voting for [i]either[/i] front-running candidate, as both sides have sealed records of their past work (Cheney with the energy policies, Dean with a large volume of his work as Governor). Unless its a matter of classified info, I don't believe ANY government proceedings should occur without public oversight. Even something like a voice vote is "hiding" what your elected official really stood for. Botch "Eccentric language often is symptomatic of peculiar thinking" - George Will www.puddlestone.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibescotty Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 When Perot tried it we were ready for an independant. Then he waffled and bailed on us. I think he hurt the cause (of a future third candidate) with that blunder. Nader is the extreme left. He'll never win or even be competitive. The extremists never do. I would like to see someone who isn't affiliated with any party gain a foothold. Eliminate party politics and you make a step towards eliminating special interests. Double Posting since March 2002 Random Post Generator #26797 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bitch Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 [quote]Nader is the extreme left. [/quote]And will hurt Dean in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibescotty Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by WOW: [b] [quote]Nader is the extreme left. [/quote]And will hurt Dean in the end.[/b][/quote]Just like he did to Gore. Bush probably sent him a thank you letter. Double Posting since March 2002 Random Post Generator #26797 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super 8 Posted December 11, 2003 Share Posted December 11, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by ibescotty: [b] [quote]Originally posted by WOW: [b] [quote]Nader is the extreme left. [/quote]And will hurt Dean in the end.[/b][/quote]Just like he did to Gore. Bush probably sent him a thank you letter.[/b][/quote]A vote for Gore is a vote for Gore. A vote for Dean is a vote for Dean. A vote for Nader is a vote for Nader. Does a vote for Nader hurt Dean? No more than a vote for Bush would hurt Dean. What it comes down to is giving people a choice. People complain about only having two 'viable' candidates to choose from, and then they go and vote for a candidate they DON'T WANT just to keep a candidate they REALLY DON'T WANT from winning the election. Both, the Dems and Reps love this because it effectively eliminates their competition,and increases their percentage of votes. This also saves them from having to share the debates with 3rd party candidates. [i]"Freedom of choice is what you got Freedom from choice is what you want..."[/i] You want choice? You better start voting for it. Super 8 Hear my stuff here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanmass Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 This 'vote for such and such helps such and such' stuff is crap. I'd rather "throw my vote away" on Nader than have thrown it away on Bush. A win by the candidate furthest from what I want is not a win in my book. Wake up. Next election, I prefer to use what the Perot people were saying when he was in the running 'if you vote for him, he'll win' After I told people I voted for him, I was amazed at how many people said " I was gonna, but I did not want to throw away my vote' . Same thing with Nader. I say vote for who YOU want. F*** what everyone else wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bitch Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 [quote]This 'vote for such and such helps such and such' stuff is crap [/quote]If you really believe this, then you dont know political elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super 8 Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by WOW: [b] [quote]This 'vote for such and such helps such and such' stuff is crap [/quote]If you really believe this, then you dont know political elections.[/b][/quote]I disagree, Wow. While it is true that in the short-term you will not see the gains you would like to see, it is really the long-term that you are working toward. When some of these third party candidates get enough voters behind them to get into the debates, you are going to start seeing some serious changes. Super 8 Hear my stuff here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RABid Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 I thought Clark would be doing better but he may be in the wrong party for his background. Robert This post edited for speling. My Sweetwater Gear Exchange Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bitch Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 Third parties have always changed the outcome, Perot, Nader, and on and on. To say they dont matter is plain silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanmass Posted December 12, 2003 Share Posted December 12, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by WOW: [b]Third parties have always changed the outcome, Perot, Nader, and on and on. To say they dont matter is plain silly.[/b][/quote]Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but you seem to be contradicting yourself here? My point earlier was that ALL votes matter. Short term, they may have little or no impact, but long term, changes happen on nearly all levels. 3rd Party candidates matter. They really matter when they are left OUT of political debates even though they have met all the requirements, but I digress. I understand elections. They are currently a mess, but I will still vote for who I WANT to win, not who should or will win based on projections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.