Make these ads go away.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: A new dog in the fight.

  1. #1
    Proudly humble LarsMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    usually on the road to somewhere.
    Posts
    10,802
    Local Date
    12-09-2019
    Local Time
    01:11 AM

    A new dog in the fight.

    Here in Colorado, we have a new guy joining the fray.
    He talks a good talk.
    He calls for abandoning the canabalistic Two-Party system that has us at each other's throats.

    I like the rhetoric. It's far more refreshing than all the gobbledegook we get from our "friends in Washington"
    Perhaps the gubernatorial race will be interesting here in Colorado.
    "The trouble with people isn't that they don't know, but that they know so much that ain't so." - Will Rogers
    "Truth isn't Truth" - Rudy Giuliani

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    667
    Local Date
    12-09-2019
    Local Time
    02:11 AM

    Re: A new dog in the fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by LarsMac View Post
    Here in Colorado, we have a new guy joining the fray.
    He talks a good talk.
    He calls for abandoning the canabalistic Two-Party system that has us at each other's throats.

    I like the rhetoric. It's far more refreshing than all the gobbledegook we get from our "friends in Washington"
    Perhaps the gubernatorial race will be interesting here in Colorado.
    The question is: If elected, will he make a good Gubernator?

    The Republicans best hope for "abandoning the canabalistic Two-Party system" is to return to their former greatness by divesting themselves of the losers, loonies and louts of the so-called "teaparty" faction, and let the latter strike out on their own.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Saint_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    The High Rockies
    Posts
    3,229
    Local Date
    12-09-2019
    Local Time
    01:11 AM

    Re: A new dog in the fight.

    Well, Thomas Jefferson was worried the two-party system would devolve into deadlocked partisanism. Looks like he was right, so I'm all for something else. But if not that, then what?

    a ONE PARTY SYSTEM? (See: Benito Mussolini - inventor of Fascism.)

  4. #4
    Proudly humble LarsMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    usually on the road to somewhere.
    Posts
    10,802
    Local Date
    12-09-2019
    Local Time
    01:11 AM

    Re: A new dog in the fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Aspam View Post
    The question is: If elected, will he make a good Gubernator?

    The Republicans best hope for "abandoning the canabalistic Two-Party system" is to return to their former greatness by divesting themselves of the losers, loonies and louts of the so-called "teaparty" faction, and let the latter strike out on their own.
    When the Tea Party first started up, the same notion seemed to be driving them. Abandon the Republicrats and build a "Grass Roots" movement to take back the political game.
    It did not take long for the candidates to see that the only way to build an electorate was to spend money, and most of that money came from either the PACs or the religious community.
    Before long they were overrun with the small government-Religious Right community, and suddenly they had to take up the Moral Drive to get the vote.

    There really is no consensus among the voters, other than the frustration with the two parties. Factions spring up for every POV and the independents lose focus very quickly.
    "The trouble with people isn't that they don't know, but that they know so much that ain't so." - Will Rogers
    "Truth isn't Truth" - Rudy Giuliani

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    667
    Local Date
    12-09-2019
    Local Time
    02:11 AM

    Re: A new dog in the fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by LarsMac View Post
    There really is no consensus among the voters, other than the frustration with the two parties. Factions spring up for every POV and the independents lose focus very quickly.
    Well, I don't know if the independents "lose focus", but they certainly lose elections. Recently Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, Pat Robertson, previously George Wallace, and even further back Strom Thurmond, Henry Wallace, and others, all failing miserably at the polls.

    Nor am I sure that American voters are "frustrated with the two parties". It seems to me that the last two elections have offered the voters a real choice.

    There are also several current senators and congress(wo)men who I think might realistically be classified as Socialists, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Al Franken of Minnesota immediately come to mind; only a few years ago a Socialist couldn't have been elected dog catcher.

    Al Franken vs. Michelle Bachmann - Now there's a contest for you! Al would eat her alive, with Rand Paul for dessert!

  6. #6
    Proudly humble LarsMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    usually on the road to somewhere.
    Posts
    10,802
    Local Date
    12-09-2019
    Local Time
    01:11 AM

    Re: A new dog in the fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Aspam View Post
    Well, I don't know if the independents "lose focus", but they certainly lose elections. Recently Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, Pat Robertson, previously George Wallace, and even further back Strom Thurmond, Henry Wallace, and others, all failing miserably at the polls.

    Nor am I sure that American voters are "frustrated with the two parties". It seems to me that the last two elections have offered the voters a real choice.

    There are also several current senators and congress(wo)men who I think might realistically be classified as Socialists, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Al Franken of Minnesota immediately come to mind; only a few years ago a Socialist couldn't have been elected dog catcher.

    Al Franken vs. Michelle Bachmann - Now there's a contest for you! Al would eat her alive, with Rand Paul for dessert!
    Pardon me. No insult intended, but you must not have been paying attention during the last Presidential election process. In the primaries, the Republicans managed to get rid of anyone who sounded sensible within the first months of caucuses. They ended up with a bunch of nutcases, and Mitt. Some choice.

    The voters often are left with a choice between Status Quo, or Looney Tune. And often, they choose Looney Tune over Status Quo. That "should" send a message to the Party Politic.
    Part of the issue is that many voters will vote against a candidate because of that person's stand, or voting record on one issue.
    I have heard a number of people state that they will vote against a candidate that is well qualified, simply because "He is in favor of Abortion", or "He is against Gay Marriage", or "She is in favor of Gun Control"
    "The trouble with people isn't that they don't know, but that they know so much that ain't so." - Will Rogers
    "Truth isn't Truth" - Rudy Giuliani

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    667
    Local Date
    12-09-2019
    Local Time
    02:11 AM

    Re: A new dog in the fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by LarsMac View Post
    Pardon me. No insult intended, but you must not have been paying attention during the last Presidential election process. In the primaries, the Republicans managed to get rid of anyone who sounded sensible within the first months of caucuses. They ended up with a bunch of nutcases, and Mitt. Some choice.
    Oh, I don't feel the least bit insulted about anything you posted, and I agree with you to some extent. I am assuming that you are an American, so you know that Americans may or may not vote for anyone on the ballot for any reason or no reason, and I think that most Americans would wish to keep it that way.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Saint_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    The High Rockies
    Posts
    3,229
    Local Date
    12-09-2019
    Local Time
    01:11 AM

    Re: A new dog in the fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Aspam View Post
    Oh, I don't feel the least bit insulted about anything you posted, and I agree with you to some extent. I am assuming that you are an American, so you know that Americans may or may not vote for anyone on the ballot for any reason or no reason, and I think that most Americans would wish to keep it that way.
    I do wish to keep it that way, but I wish that my fellow Americans would vote more with their heads and less with their hearts.

    (Actually, I'm personally in favor of a Artificial-Intelligence-run world government. Either one big one or a triumvirate of three massive A.I.s. I probably won't live to see that, though.)

  9. #9
    Proudly humble LarsMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    usually on the road to somewhere.
    Posts
    10,802
    Local Date
    12-09-2019
    Local Time
    01:11 AM

    Re: A new dog in the fight.

    Register to remove this ad.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Aspam View Post
    Oh, I don't feel the least bit insulted about anything you posted, and I agree with you to some extent. I am assuming that you are an American, so you know that Americans may or may not vote for anyone on the ballot for any reason or no reason, and I think that most Americans would wish to keep it that way.
    OK, so we seem to be looking at this from very different perspectives. I can live with that.
    Yes, Americans can vote for whoever they want, for whatever reasons they want. True. The problem is that many Americans DON'T vote, and many who do, don't really think a whole lot about why they vote.

    We, as a population, tend follow the media, and will judge a candidate by a single issue. As if that issue is the only thing that matters. Take Abortion, for example. People who feel strongly about abortion will ignore any other position a candidate holds, and concern themselves solely with what that candidate once said about abortion, and vote for or against that candidate for that reason. He might be a very wise person, and have a lot of knowledge and experience that could help the state or county, or nation find its way in the world, but because he once made a statement that exposed a particular opinion on one issue, they will shoot him down.
    With voter turnout was at its highest in decades at just over 58% in 2012. With that, a minority of eligible voters can, and often do, decide who gets the job.
    Obama was re-elected in 2012 by 27% of the eligible voters.
    G W Bush was elected in 2000 by 24.5% of the eligible voters.

    So, if Americans are truly making a statement about their political preferences, we have to deduce that nearly half don't care, and that the lunatic fringe has been running the country for decades.

    So, anyone out there who wonders why we do some of the things we do, perhaps there is your answer.
    "The trouble with people isn't that they don't know, but that they know so much that ain't so." - Will Rogers
    "Truth isn't Truth" - Rudy Giuliani

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts