Will Bush cancel the 2008 election?

kenneth · #16 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 09:01 AM

Please allow me to reiterate. . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenneth

Vote Green.

Green Party of the United States | Homepage

Kaminyu · #17 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenneth

Please allow me to reiterate. . .

Why vote for the green party, when we actually have favorable candidates running in the 2 main parties? The only reason I'd vote for a 3rd party candidate, is if I didn't like the choices in the first 2. However, since there is a good choice among the first 2, I don't see the point, especially when it's a 2-party system. Why try and change that now, when it's unnecessary to do so?

kenneth · #18 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 09:35 AM

Translation:

why would you vote for someone i wouldn't vote for?

Look here:

I VOTE FOR CANDIDATES BASED ON ISSUES. OK?

ONLY THE GREEN PARTY TAKES STANCE ON THE ISSUES AS I DO. DEMOCRATS DON'T. (they might try to talk like greens leading up to primaries but when it comes down to it, it's all just so much rhetoric.)

Don't give that "stealing votes" or "spoiler" schtick either. I'm not buying it. I vote my conscience which is my RIGHT. got a problem with that?

Take a look at how the democrats have treated Green Party candidates when it comes to ballot access and then let me know your opinions on how the dems measure up when it comes to 1st amendment rights (which is what ballot access is all about.)

a two party system is not constitutional anyways. people act like it's (the two party duopoly) some kind of sacred institution and any challenge to it, any attempt to express positions that differ from the two wings of the single party we have now is sacrelige.

wake up.

MossadConspiracy · #19 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 09:38 AM

yeah but you dont agree with the Green Party on every issue, so no matter what you are going to be voting for a party that advocates policies that you consider wrong. You compromise some of your values no matter who you vote for. The choice is to compromise and vote for someone that has a chance of winning or to compromise and vote for somebody that has no chance of winning

ws

kenneth · #20 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MossadConspiracy

yeah but you dont agree with the Green Party on every issue, so no matter what you are going to be voting for a party that advocates policies that you consider wrong. You compromise some of your values no matter who you vote for. The choice is to compromise and vote for someone that has a chance of winning or to compromise and vote for somebody that has no chance of winning

ws

ok so tell me which issues i disagree with the Greens over since you apparently know my mind better than I.

MossadConspiracy · #21 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 09:44 AM

Their strong support of Gay Marriage for one

Thats assuming you're a muslim (I dont know if you are) and that you agree with over 90% of American muslims on this (which may not be the case)

kenneth · #22 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 09:49 AM

In case you are unaware, America is not a Shariah state. It's actually a secular representative democracy as far as the present constitution says.

Give me one reason, based on secular representative democratic government why gay marriage should be disallowed. (religious beliefs are not legislation in this system, you know.)

so yeah. i agree with the greens on this too. but thanks for trying to think for me Mossad. that was really nice of you.

kenneth · #23 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 10:12 AM

By the way, the ONLY way I'd even CONSIDER voting for the left wing of america's property party (the democrats) is if Kucinich got the nomination. and that should happen right about the time that pigs are granted wings and hell freezes over.

Kona_Silat · #24 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psychoteddybear

So how do we cope with the harsh realities of such a Bush/Cheney/Rove dictatorial coup?

We may have about a year to prepare. Every possible scenario needs to be discussed in excruciating detail.

For only one thing is certain: denial will do nothing.
_______
About author Harvey Wasserman is co-author, with Bob Fitrakis and Steve Rosenfeld, of WHAT HAPPENED IN OHIO?, just published by the New Press. He is author of SOLARTOPIA! and HARVEY WASSERMAN'S HISTORY OF THE U.S., available at Harvey Wasserman.

I'm too busy preparing for the next zombie outbreak.

Kaminyu · #25 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenneth

Translation:

why would you vote for someone i wouldn't vote for?

Correct Translation:

why would you vote for an agreeable candidate who can't win, when you can vote for an agreeable candidate (like Ron Paul) who actually can win?

Quote:

Look here:

I VOTE FOR CANDIDATES BASED ON ISSUES. OK?

ONLY THE GREEN PARTY TAKES STANCE ON THE ISSUES AS I DO. DEMOCRATS DON'T. (they might try to talk like greens leading up to primaries but when it comes down to it, it's all just so much rhetoric.)

Don't give that "stealing votes" or "spoiler" schtick either. I'm not buying it. I vote my conscience which is my RIGHT. got a problem with that?

No. Why would I? I voted for the GP last time for the same reason. However, I don't see the reason to this time, when there's a better candidate like Ron Paul, who actually goes after the root of the problem and has better ideas, which would have a more lasting achievement of those same results that the GP strives for.

Quote:

Take a look at how the democrats have treated Green Party candidates when it comes to ballot access and then let me know your opinions on how the dems measure up when it comes to 1st amendment rights (which is what ballot access is all about.)

a two party system is not constitutional anyways. people act like it's (the two party duopoly) some kind of sacred institution and any challenge to it, any attempt to express positions that differ from the two wings of the single party we have now is sacrelige.

wake up.

I neither care about the democrats or the republicans, nor do I care about the 2-party system. I vote for who I agree with, regardless of what party they belong to. Ron Paul would shut down the Federal Reserve, and the IRS, which means I wouldn't have to pay income taxes. I didn't see anything on the GP website about that kind've tax reform.

ChotooMotoo · #26 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 11:05 AM

well, Ron Paul is not likely to get the nomination. He's also Republican.

kenneth · #27 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChotooMotoo

well, Ron Paul is not likely to get the nomination. He's also Republican.

yup.

join the repugnicans so you can vote Paul in the primaries.

I am sympathetic to the libertarian platform but i do not agree with many of thier policies.

(too pro-corporation, not pro-social justice enough to begin with)

i would love to work with Libertarians for common causes on which Greens can find common ground like ballot access reform. Instant runoff voting perhaps. (actually, i doubt Libertarians would support IRV since it would probably call for the abolition of the electoral college and hence a change in the present constitution.)

the repugs will never nominate a Libertarian. the dumbs will never nominate a true progresive like Kucinich.

I am a member of the Green Party which is a social movement. I am happy.

Kaminyu · #28 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChotooMotoo

well, Ron Paul is not likely to get the nomination. He's also Republican.

Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin. That's why I don't vote based on the party, but on the candidate, regardless of what party he belongs to.

The only thing that would be preventing Ron Paul from getting the nomination, is vote fraud. Ron Paul is actually a Libertarian running as a Republican, and has a lot of support, and has raised quite a bit of money. Those who know enough about him generally tend to vote for him.

kenneth · #29 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaminyu

Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin. That's why I don't vote based on the party, but on the candidate, regardless of what party he belongs to.

The only thing that would be preventing Ron Paul from getting the nomination, is vote fraud. Ron Paul is actually a Libertarian running as a Republican, and has a lot of support, and has raised quite a bit of money. Those who know enough about him generally tend to vote for him.

show me one poll where he's the front runner among repugs. remember, he has to win the primaries to get nominated.

Kaminyu · #30 (**permalink**) 08-12-2007, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenneth

show me one poll where he's the front runner among repugs. remember, he has to win the primaries to get nominated.

virtually all the polls they've done, where he was an option, he always came out on top of the others.