View Full Version : I have stayed out of the politics posting, but...
CMP_5.56
10-20-2012, 00:39
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUFWvbXjIZc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Yeager may not be everybody's cup of tea, but he doesn't bullshit. And honestly, I'm pretty sick of people acting like we only have two choices. I keep hearing, I don't want to vote for someone who might not win, and I don't want to waste my vote. If everyone that said that bullshit line, actually voted their conscience, things mightactually change.
GilpinGuy
10-20-2012, 00:52
[Pop]
This will be good.
not sure if this is your video or not but:
the guy doesn't get it. if you read JUST the threads I have started, and some of the responses in the political forum, you will see that this country has pretty much never had a 3rd party that had a chance at winning an election for president of the united states.
there are lots of us who will vote Romney this time around, who would probably rather vote for ourselves, or a 3rd party candidate. I would much rather prefer if I were supreme ruler...then i can get done what i wanted to and head in the right direction as I see fit. but that isn't the way the system works. a third party is also not the way the system works. so in that aspect, I am a REALIST. anyone who thinks a third party win, let alone a third party vote is going to have an effect on them is lost.
A third party hasn't even won an electoral vote since the mid 1800's. sorry, but ross perrot didn't have a chance, Paul swapped over because he thought he might have a chance....he didn't. and now we are left with Romney. It is always going to be the lessor of two evils for the foreseeable future. The country is split damn near evenly with people on social welfare programs which completely run/affect their lives, and the rest who are paying the tab, getting taxed on everything, covers the private sector expenses, funding the .gov, and working to get the leeches of the .gov teat.
Until everyone is brought up with the understanding, and the adults paying into the system understand that you have to work for what you want, things shouldn't be handed to you, and the .gov is not necessary to better your life, we will continue down our current path.
This progression has not happened overnight. It has happened slowly. To expect and overnight cure is just as well asinine. It will require slow steps in the right direction to right this course.
Yeah, use
"pussy"
"treason"
"nation of pussies"
"anything other than gary johnson is treasonous"
"cowards"
Great way to gather up swing/undecided voters for his candidate.
It is like listening to MD about sequential-manual transmission job on a high end sports car.
CMP_5.56
10-20-2012, 01:47
Like I said, he isn't for everyone, but at least he stands for what he believes in.
I don't give a damn what our government has been, how long it took to get this way. I will vote for someone I believe stands for something. I refuse to vote for the lessor of two evils, it's that mentality that got us here.
This country started as a no party system. Change has to start somewhere, there is no reason to wait it out until people get smarter, because that isn't going to happen, ever.
Honestly, I speak the same way James Yeager does. I don't give a shit if people don't like the way I talk. I will vote for someone I believe in, and can stand behind. Even if he loses by a landslide, at least my conscience will be clear. When your choices are shit covered in dirt, and shit covered in ash, I'll say no to both. Even if the majority of the nation chooses to eat a pile of shit, I don't have to.
You say you can't change things overnight, but some people have to start before everyone else is comfortable with it.
I had to laughter a little when you said you don't have to eat the pile of shit[NoClue][/QUOTE] bceuse you coted your consious. You end up eating shit no matter what. Its been happening your entire life.
Because even if a 3rd party candidate could win the popular vote, I'm sure the electoral college would elect them as well right?
Bailey Guns
10-20-2012, 06:40
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUFWvbXjIZc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Yeager may not be everybody's cup of tea, but he doesn't bullshit. And honestly, I'm pretty sick of people acting like we only have two choices. I keep hearing, I don't want to vote for someone who might not win, and I don't want to waste my vote. If everyone that said that bullshit line, actually voted their conscience, things mightactually change.
Why is it so many people who want to vote for an unknown, un-electable or fringe candidate seem to think the rest of us aren't "voting our conscience" by voting for someone who can actually win. Furthermore, the argument isn't that you only have 2 choices. The argument is that you have 2 realistic choices. Either Romney or Obama will be elected. No one else. No matter how many times you or anyone else says otherwise, no matter how much you wish it wasn't so. Those two candidates are your only realistic choices for an electable candidate. So you can "vote your conscience" (just like I'm going to do by voting for Romney) or you can vote for the person who you think most closely matches your values and beliefs.
Your logic is flawed and I, like the overwhelming majority of others who support him, reject your reasoning that Romney is the "lessor of two evils" (as stated in the video). I'm not going to explain it again. You've either been paying attention or you haven't.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions. You're not wrong for wanting what you want. Misguided? Maybe. But here's the deal - and I'm guessing you're not an Obama supporter so I'll make that assumption:
You can vote libertarian (or some other 3rd party). Nothing will change because your candidate will not get elected. You'll still be frustrated with how things are. And I'm guessing this will help Obama to get elected more than it will help Romney (because I'm assuming some frustrated democrats will vote 3rd party, too...but not as many as republicans). On balance this is a vote for the status quo. But YOU will feel better for "voting your conscience". I'll also include the option of not voting in this category because I believe the outcome would be the same.
You can vote for Obama. This is a vote for continued big government only getting bigger. This is a vote for a weaker military, higher taxes, Obamacare, continued trillion dollar deficits, a $20T national debt by the end of the next 4 years, more entitlements to people who don't want to better themselves, less domestic energy production, higher potential for some sort of gun control, more government intrusion into your personal life, etc...
You can vote for Romney. This is vote for starting to shrink government, less government spending, no higher taxes, a balanced budget, increased domestic energy production, ending Obamacare, a stronger military, almost zero chance of any sort of gun control, no more "world apology tours" for America's greatness or "blame America first" attitudes, no more socialist and communist czars like Van Jones, etc...
So, choose wisely.
Bailey Guns
10-20-2012, 06:42
Because even if a 3rd party candidate could win the popular vote, I'm sure the electoral college would elect them as well right?
You do realize the popular vote means little, right? That's not how a president is elected. If it were, the high-population areas would ALWAYS control the elections. It's not uncommon for someone to win more popular votes and still lose the election (2000 for example). The only way it matters is on a state-by-state basis where the electors vote according to the popular vote in what is a winner-take-all system in most states.
Great-Kazoo
10-20-2012, 06:51
Well you were doing good (for a while) by staying out of the political threads.
Vote for who you want, just don't complain IF O wins.
Sniper7, Bailey Guns, MrPrena, and Jim said it for me. Thank you gentlemen.
The (L) will win when they manage to bring at least 45% of the voting public under their tent. If the attitude that many of the (L) have here is indicative of the (L) nationwide, that will NEVER happen.
Bailey Guns
10-20-2012, 07:18
Theodore Roosevelt was a candidate for president in 1912 running under the Progressive (Bull Moose) party. He actually won 88 electoral votes. But he was also a former, very popular president. George Wallace in 1968 was the last 3rd party candidate to win any electoral votes.
TEAMRICO
10-20-2012, 07:26
Hey.....vote your conscious!
Let the rest of us actually vote.
Singlestack
10-20-2012, 07:33
Votes for L's hurt the R candidate much more than the D candidate because the L ideology is much closer to the R ideology than the D ideology. In fact, these days with the D platform moving further and further to the left (just see the angst at the Dem convention with having the word "God" and support for Jerusalem as the seat of government for Israel in the D platform), the D ideology seems almost directly opposite the L ideology. Therefore, L votes mostly tend to split the R vote. There really isn't a counterpart with significant numbers on the left - neither of the Green, Socialist, or Communist parties has nearly as many supporters today as the L party. So the numbers of Green, Socialist, and Communist diehards who split the D vote are many fewer than L diehards.
Singlestack
mevshooter
10-20-2012, 07:57
I would imagine if Libertarians began pumping out kids and raising them under those ideologies that in a couple of generations there would be a large enough percentage of the population to actually make a third party candidate viable.
That is essentially how the political game is won. Put in your due diligence, raise the next generation to see things the way you do, and make things happen.
Trying to convince people who are for the most part already set in their ways is ridiculous and flat out lazy. Yes, occasionally children find a different political leaning in life, but for the most part if they have a good relationship with their parents, that is typically how they will vote.
You do realize the popular vote means little, right? That's not how a president is elected. If it were, the high-population areas would ALWAYS control the elections. It's not uncommon for someone to win more popular votes and still lose the election (2000 for example). The only way it matters is on a state-by-state basis where the electors vote according to the popular vote in what is a winner-take-all system in most states.
We were both making the same points. Yours with good writing and mine with sarcasm.
Bailey Guns
10-20-2012, 11:23
We were both making the same points. Yours with good writing and mine with sarcasm.
Sorry...sarcasm detector not working. [Beer]
Non of the 2 major party in US will be harder to get elected due to electoral college vote.
If it was general election or plurality voting system like typical smaller countries does, we might have a better luck.
DD977GM2
10-20-2012, 18:57
This election is about ousting that dipshit in office. Voting 3rd party this election won't accomplish that.
Further explanation you should refer to my sigline.[Bang][Bang][Bang]
the guy doesn't get it. if you read JUST the threads I have started, and some of the responses in the political forum, you will see that this country has pretty much never had a 3rd party that had a chance at winning an election for president of the united states.
As Sniper, and others, keep saying over and over, a third party will never be able to win because of (their) peer pressure.
People in mass do not respond to logic, evidence, etc. Like every other party in history, a third party can win with the proper social engineering.
It is the same as accepting gay marriage and demonizing drunk driving, cigarettes, and fatty foods.
DD977GM2
10-20-2012, 20:51
As Sniper, and others, keep saying over and over, a third party will never be able to win because of (their) peer pressure.
People in mass do not respond to logic, evidence, etc. Like every other party in history, a third party can win with the proper social engineering.
It is the same as accepting gay marriage and demonizing drunk driving, cigarettes, and fatty foods.
This election a 3rd party candidate WILL NOT WITH ELECTORAL VOTES OR POPULAR VOTE. The object right now is to vote the incumbent out of office. 3rd party will not accomplish this.
As Sniper, and others, keep saying over and over, a third party will never be able to win because of (their) peer pressure.
People in mass do not respond to logic, evidence, etc. Like every other party in history, a third party can win with the proper social engineering.
It is the same as accepting gay marriage and demonizing drunk driving, cigarettes, and fatty foods.
There is a time and place for everything, we are nowhere near that time or place.
if a L had a viable chance at winning, and I thought the candidate was the best person for the job, I would vote for them. But I am also a realist in that I know that there in no chance in hell a Libertarian or a socialist or green or justice or Rosanne Barr will even get an extremely small percentage of the popular vote, and probably not a single electoral vote.
call me crazy for understanding that there will only be 1 president, and it will be 1 of two people.
KevDen2005
10-20-2012, 21:10
Because even if a 3rd party candidate could win the popular vote, I'm sure the electoral college would elect them as well right?
The electoral college (or electrical college if you are Homer Simpson) is set up in a way that most states (except for two I believe) send all of their electoral votes to the most popular person elected in that state. This is a state legislative requirement in most states. I believe there are two states, with a smaller amount of electoral votes, that have it legislatively written that they will split the number of electoral votes.
The popularity comes from within a state, but as everyone has pointed out, you don't have to have the overall popular vote to win because of the way electoral votes are divided to each state (which I have no doubt you for sure knew that part).
Don't get me wrong. Anyone can vote for Mini Mouse at a Disney party if they sincerely want to. When I was UNDER 18, I wanted to vote for TROLL (TROLL FOR PRESIDENT). I still have that Troll Campaign sticker on my trash can. [ROFL1]
Colorado Luckydog
10-20-2012, 23:22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUFWvbXjIZc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Yeager may not be everybody's cup of tea, but he doesn't bullshit. And honestly, I'm pretty sick of people acting like we only have two choices. I keep hearing, I don't want to vote for someone who might not win, and I don't want to waste my vote. If everyone that said that bullshit line, actually voted their conscience, things mightactually change.
Stupid is as stupid does.........
Your vote for Yeager is a vote to keep Obama in office. Do as you must but if you vote Yeager and Obama wins, you have yourself to blame.
DD977GM2
10-21-2012, 00:50
Stupid is as stupid does.........
Your vote for Yeager is a vote to keep Obama in office. Do as you must but if you vote Yeager and Obama wins, you have yourself to blame.
If I thought a 3rd party cnadidate could get enough electoral votes and have a
solid chance at winning, he would receive my vote. I align more with Libertarian
ideaology and know that Romney is a rhino, but I will not allow my vote go to someone who has
absolutley no chance of gaining even 1 electoral vote much less enough to unseat oblowme......
So the moral of this thread is.....To Get Oblowme Out of Office, A Vote For Romeny Is The Only Choice We have So He Isnt Re-Elected!!!!
Diesel24
10-21-2012, 01:02
To Get Oblowme Out of Office, A Vote For Romeny Is The Only Choice We have So He Isnt Re-Elected!!!!
This!
Great-Kazoo
10-21-2012, 07:14
This!
Holy Shitte a newbie with under 100 post gets it AND not one mention in his post about conscience [Bang][Bang][Bang] YES!
Welcome and gratitude citizen.
If I thought a 3rd party cnadidate could get enough electoral votes and have a
solid chance at winning, he would receive my vote. I align more with Libertarian
ideaology and know that Romney is a rhino, but I will not allow my vote go to someone who has
absolutley no chance of gaining even 1 electoral vote much less enough to unseat oblowme......
So the moral of this thread is.....To Get Oblowme Out of Office, A Vote For Romeny Is The Only Choice We have So He Isnt Re-Elected!!!!
You realize that you are fighting yourself right?
"If I thought..."
"I will not allow my vote..."
You are your own reason that the people you say you align with won't ever get elected.
All this garbage about people's chances of winning wears on me. For the record, I'm not even talking about this election, nor do I think any third party has a chance of winning (this election). But don't you guys hear yourselves? I feel like I'm in high school just before prom or something. "I'm not going to ask that girl out because I think she'll say 'no.'" Well great job champ, you ended your chance to go to the chance with that girl before you even started. I hate being cliche, but "Whether you think you can, or you think you can't. You are right."
The electoral college (or electrical college if you are Homer Simpson) is set up in a way that most states (except for two I believe) send all of their electoral votes to the most popular person elected in that state. This is a state legislative requirement in most states. I believe there are two states, with a smaller amount of electoral votes, that have it legislatively written that they will split the number of electoral votes.
The popularity comes from within a state, but as everyone has pointed out, you don't have to have the overall popular vote to win because of the way electoral votes are divided to each state (which I have no doubt you for sure knew that part).
The way I understand it is that you vote for an elector and which ever elector wins then casts the vote that is actually counted. So you could vote for Romneys elector who could then vote for Obama. Doesn't happen often but it does happen.
Republican leaning libertarians who are thinking of voting for Gary Johnson, please consider this quote by Ayn Rand: “You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”
Quote from Rosen. I believe it applies.
I, like the overwhelming majority of others who support him, reject your reasoning that Romney is the "lessor of two evils" (as stated in the video). I'm not going to explain it again. You've either been paying attention or you haven't.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions. You're not wrong for wanting what you want. Misguided? Maybe. But here's the deal - and I'm guessing you're not an Obama supporter so I'll make that assumption:
You can vote libertarian (or some other 3rd party). Nothing will change because your candidate will not get elected. You'll still be frustrated with how things are. And I'm guessing this will help Obama to get elected more than it will help Romney (because I'm assuming some frustrated democrats will vote 3rd party, too...but not as many as republicans). On balance this is a vote for the status quo. But YOU will feel better for "voting your conscience". I'll also include the option of not voting in this category because I believe the outcome would be the same.
You can vote for Obama. This is a vote for continued big government only getting bigger. This is a vote for a weaker military, higher taxes, Obamacare, continued trillion dollar deficits, a $20T national debt by the end of the next 4 years, more entitlements to people who don't want to better themselves, less domestic energy production, higher potential for some sort of gun control, more government intrusion into your personal life, etc...
You can vote for Romney. This is vote for starting to shrink government, less government spending, no higher taxes, a balanced budget, increased domestic energy production, ending Obamacare, a stronger military, almost zero chance of any sort of gun control, no more "world apology tours" for America's greatness or "blame America first" attitudes, no more socialist and communist czars like Van Jones, etc...
So, choose wisely.
I completely agree
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.