View Full Version : Bill Whittle makes the best case against the 3rd party protest vote.
Zundfolge
11-01-2012, 16:39
I posted this in response to the Gary Johnson thread in L&P but thought the video deserved a larger audience.
This debate has become one of the most contentious and divisive debates here on this forum and its been one of the most frustrating I've debated on the internet (including debating with liberals).
If you're one of those considering voting for Gary Johnson or some other third party protest vote, please watch this video. I promise I won't bother any of you about this any more, just watch the video.
wPjBXufufUU
Teufelhund
11-01-2012, 16:59
I like Whittle. He's a great speaker and a smart guy. It is sad that he has succumbed to the latest Chicken-Little syndrome. He still did a great job with the inspiring, patriotic speech.
Unfortunately, his basic premise is false. He implies the Democratic party, specifically Obama, has and will do more to hurt this country than the Republican party. I'm sorry so many of you are unwilling to accept this downhill slide started long before Obama took office. Another Republican in office is not going to do anything to reverse that slide, and if the record of the Republican party is any indication, he will in fact make it worse.
Yes, one of those two clowns will be the next President. I don't think anyone would argue that point with you. Neither of them will be good for the country. Read more here (http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/31/pick-your-constitutional-poison).
Great-Kazoo
11-01-2012, 17:52
I like Whittle. He's a great speaker and a smart guy. It is sad that he has succumbed to the latest Chicken-Little syndrome. He still did a great job with the inspiring, patriotic speech.
Unfortunately, his basic premise is false. He implies the Democratic party, specifically Obama, has and will do more to hurt this country than the Republican party. I'm sorry so many of you are unwilling to accept this downhill slide started long before Obama took office. Another Republican in office is not going to do anything to reverse that slide, and if the record of the Republican party is any indication, he will in fact make it worse.
Yes, one of those two clowns will be the next President. I don't think anyone would argue that point with you. Neither of them will be good for the country. Read more here (http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/31/pick-your-constitutional-poison).
Perhaps. HOWEVER he will select the next Supreme Court Justice, if not 2 of them. Who's finger do you want on that trigger O or Romney? That is where your conscience should be focused, on the SCOTUS nominee.
Bailey Guns
11-01-2012, 17:55
I like BW. He made the same arguments, far more eloquently, that have been made over and over right here on this forum. He's also absolutely right.
Goodburbon
11-01-2012, 18:00
Perhaps. HOWEVER he will select the next Supreme Court Justice, if not 2 of them. Who's finger do you want on that trigger O or Romney? That is where your conscience should be focused, on the SCOTUS nominee.
Doesn't really matter.
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Scotus so far:
Machine guns can be infringed.
imported guns can be infringed.
"assault weapons" can be infringed.
anything over 10rds can be infringed.
Anything exploding can be infringed.
local municipalities can infringe all they like.
states can infringe as much as they choose to.
automatic knives can be infringed.
rifles shorter than xxx can be infringed
pistols with buttstocks are rifles and can be infringed
shotguns shorter than xxx can be infringed.
weapons in DC can't be infringed quite so much. WOOHOO LETs CELEBRATE!
how's that conservative scotus working out for us again?[Bang]
Goodburbon
11-01-2012, 18:02
You can't even begin to convince me that those laws are even remotely constitutional, and yet they stand over and over again flying in the face of freedom.
Bailey Guns
11-01-2012, 18:05
Rights, even the 2A, are not absolute. Never will be. And that's probably a good thing.
Great-Kazoo
11-01-2012, 18:06
Doesn't really matter.
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Scotus so far:
Machine guns can be infringed.
imported guns can be infringed.
"assault weapons" can be infringed.
anything over 10rds can be infringed.
Anything exploding can be infringed.
local municipalities can infringe all they like.
states can infringe as much as they choose to.
automatic knives can be infringed.
rifles shorter than xxx can be infringed
pistols with buttstocks are rifles and can be infringed
shotguns shorter than xxx can be infringed.
weapons in DC can't be infringed quite so much. WOOHOO LETs CELEBRATE!
how's that conservative scotus working out for us again?[Bang]
Get a left leaning judge in and Soros with the VPC Will challenge Heller vs DC.
But you guys keep on keeping on. When and if that ever happens, i will remember and stay put on any firearm price, you have an interest in. Because, my conscience will not waver.
Bailey Guns
11-01-2012, 18:08
When and if that ever happens, i will remember and stay put on any firearm price, you have an interest in. Because, my conscience will not waver.
I have to confess... I actually have an "Obama Re-elected Contingency" stash of guns and ammo that will come pretty close to funding a new Harley.
Yeah...if he's re-elected I'm gonna make the most of it. If life gives you lemons and all that.
Teufelhund
11-01-2012, 18:21
Maybe it's SCOTUS that is a bad idea then. A handful of people get to decide what is constitutional and what is not for the entire country. Their record has shown they can not do this effectively, with impartiality, and completely invalidates any "wisdom" they may think to impart. If our greatest issue is the particular political polarization of potential Justices, we should probably evaluate why so few hold so much power over us, and if we would like to continue to allow it.
Bailey Guns
11-01-2012, 18:23
If our greatest issue is the particular political polarization of potential Justices, we should probably evaluate why so few hold so much power over us, and if we would like to continue to allow it.
No need to "evaluate". Just read the Constitution.
Maybe it's SCOTUS that is a bad idea then. A handful of people get to decide what is constitutional and what is not for the entire country. Their record has shown they can not do this effectively, with impartiality, and completely invalidates any "wisdom" they may think to impart. If our greatest issue is the particular political polarization of potential Justices, we should probably evaluate why so few hold so much power over us, and if we would like to continue to allow it.
although it isn't perfect, the scotus is absolutley necessary. someone, somewhere, has to have the final say. they can't bring issues to their own table or pass legislation, all they can do is evaluate what is brought to them, and even to get there it has to go through a lot of loops. its as good of a system as there can be. people are human, until you have computers making all the decisions opinion and bias will always affect policy.
Teufelhund
11-01-2012, 18:37
Both good points. The Supreme Court at one time ruled that black people can not be citizens. It also upheld the Patriot Act, and Obamacare. I don't have the answers, but I don't think we can deny there is a problem.
For the sake of discussion, I'll throw this out there: maybe Justices should be elected instead of appointed?
Bailey Guns
11-01-2012, 18:43
For the sake of discussion, I'll throw this out there: maybe Justices should be elected instead of appointed?
No need to "evaluate". Just read the Constitution.
Specifically the US Constitution: Article 2, Section 2
Teufelhund
11-01-2012, 19:04
Trying not to let you get under my skin today. I have read it. Over and over again. Let's just have a discussion, OK?
Great-Kazoo
11-01-2012, 19:08
(Hypothetically) I'd pay off my house if that were to happen:).
I'd never confess, not w/out an attorney present.
I have to confess... I actually have an "Obama Re-elected Contingency" stash of guns and ammo that will come pretty close to funding a new Harley.
Yeah...if he's re-elected I'm gonna make the most of it. If life gives you lemons and all that.
Bailey Guns
11-01-2012, 19:12
Trying not to let you get under my skin today. I have read it. Over and over again. Let's just have a discussion, OK?
I'm not trying to get under your skin. I'm trying, apparently unsuccessfully, to get you to understand there's no need to "evaluate" or "discuss" something that's clearly articulated in the Constitution. If you've read it "over and over again" you should understand that.
Teufelhund
11-01-2012, 20:03
OK, fella. I understand you are the guy who is convinced the law is always right and in our best interests, even when it is not right or in our best interests. I find it difficult as shit to argue with a mentality like that.
Let me try a different approach with you so we can keep the "discussion" in "General Discussion." Do you think the Patriot Act is constitutional? If not, what could we change that would have kept the Supreme Court from holding it up as such?
Zundfolge
11-01-2012, 20:12
I think its simple, if Obama is re-elected America is over. Dead. Period.
If he's not then we have a chance. Not a perfect chance, not a guarantee, hell maybe not even a good chance but we have a chance.
The alternative is just too horrible to think about (we're talking about millions dead and only a slim chance of ever regaining liberty).
But hey, at least those that don't help stop Obama can put that "Don't blame me I voted Libertarian" bumper sticker on their cars.
I think its simple, if Obama is re-elected America is over. Dead. Period.
If he's not then we have a chance. Not a perfect chance, not a guarantee, hell maybe not even a good chance but we have a chance.
The alternative is just too horrible to think about (we're talking about millions dead and only a slim chance of ever regaining liberty).
But hey, at least those that don't help stop Obama can put that "Don't blame me I voted Libertarian" bumper sticker on their cars.
Right, a chance. That is all we need is a chance. We will have the opportunity to replace Romney in 2016 with someone more conservative.
Doesn't really matter.
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Scotus so far:
Machine guns can be infringed.
imported guns can be infringed.
"assault weapons" can be infringed.
anything over 10rds can be infringed.
Anything exploding can be infringed.
local municipalities can infringe all they like.
states can infringe as much as they choose to.
automatic knives can be infringed.
rifles shorter than xxx can be infringed
pistols with buttstocks are rifles and can be infringed
shotguns shorter than xxx can be infringed.
weapons in DC can't be infringed quite so much. WOOHOO LETs CELEBRATE!
how's that conservative scotus working out for us again?[Bang]
http://i.imgur.com/CXJMi.jpg
Bailey Guns
11-01-2012, 21:13
OK, fella. I understand you are the guy who is convinced the law is always right and in our best interests, even when it is not right or in our best interests. I find it difficult as shit to argue with a mentality like that.
Let me try a different approach with you so we can keep the "discussion" in "General Discussion." Do you think the Patriot Act is constitutional? If not, what could we change that would have kept the Supreme Court from holding it up as such?
You don't seem to understand anything.
tmleadr03
11-01-2012, 21:15
I think its simple, if Obama is re-elected America is over. Dead. Period.
If he's not then we have a chance. Not a perfect chance, not a guarantee, hell maybe not even a good chance but we have a chance.
The alternative is just too horrible to think about (we're talking about millions dead and only a slim chance of ever regaining liberty).
But hey, at least those that don't help stop Obama can put that "Don't blame me I voted Libertarian" bumper sticker on their cars.
I really don't hate to burst bubbles on this one, but that ship sailed a LONG time ago. We are a nation in decline, anything else is fooling yourself. We may be the strongest nation in the world for another few decades but our time is numbered. This election is not going to anything but slow the decline a little in a best case scenario. And I do mean best case.
The most important election happened over a generation ago, because it sure isn't this one.
tmleadr03
11-01-2012, 21:16
http://i.imgur.com/CXJMi.jpg
Should have stated it with a pony pic. Son I am disappoint.
Should have stated it with a pony pic. Son I am disappoint.
http://i.imgur.com/quRXol.png
Aloha_Shooter
11-01-2012, 21:45
For all you morons that think there's no difference between Clinton, Bush II and Obama, I have five names for you:
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Samuel Alito
John Roberts
Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan
Bush II was hardly perfect. I have huge issues with his spending but there are HUGE HUGE differences between Bush and Obama.
"There are none so blind as those who will not see."
But are there huge, huge differences between Obama and Romney? Romney is a "Republican," but comes from a very liberal state.
I voted for Gary Johnson because I knew my vote would be wasted regardless of who I chose, so I voted for someone that I at least like.
http://i.imgur.com/QOi4z.png
Aloha_Shooter
11-01-2012, 22:39
But are there huge, huge differences between Obama and Romney? Romney is a "Republican," but comes from a very liberal state.
Yes, there are and you have to be intentionally blind to miss them. Romney is nowhere near as conservative as I'd like but he isn't even in the same galaxy as Obama's Stalinist beliefs.
But are there huge, huge differences between Obama and Romney? Romney is a "Republican," but comes from a very liberal state.
I voted for Gary Johnson because I knew my vote would be wasted regardless of who I chose, so I voted for someone that I at least like.
Good man. Don't fall for the falling sky talk that goes on every damn 4yrs and vote who YOU feel is the right man for the job. Now, if only we could convince more people to do this...
Inconel710
11-02-2012, 07:21
Good man. Don't fall for the falling sky talk that goes on every damn 4yrs and vote who YOU feel is the right man for the job. Now, if only we could convince more people to do this...
+1
I don't care who you vote for, just quit telling me a vote for something other than the ruling parties is a wasted vote. They've set the system up to keep themselves in power and the only way to get into the debates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Debate_Commission) or get campaign $ is to get over that 15% threshold.
speedysst
11-02-2012, 08:01
http://i.imgur.com/QOi4z.png
JOHNSON IS NOT GOING TO WIN...get that through your head for God's sake!
Great-Kazoo
11-02-2012, 08:20
JOHNSON IS NOT GOING TO WIN...get that through your head for God's sake!
HEY MAN IT'S FRIDAY MELLOW OUT. But you're correct JOHNSON IS NOT GOING TO WIN@#$%^&*(
Zundfolge
11-02-2012, 08:24
JOHNSON IS NOT GOING TO WIN...get that through your head for God's sake!
Also, Romney isn't going to appoint the same kind of Marxist/Progressives that Obama will. There is zero chance Romney would have nominated either Kagan or Sotomayor. There's also a good chance he'll nominate a Thomas or Scalia or an Alito ... at worst he'll nominate another Roberts but that will be significantly better than something like "Justice Holder" or "Justice Napolitano" (and I mean "Big Sis" not Andrew).
JOHNSON IS NOT GOING TO WIN...get that through your head for God's sake!
I think they realize that- and I have a belief that those who are not voting for Romney that aren't Obama supporters (or misguided independents voting for Marxism, er I mean Obama)- IE: Everyone voting for Johnson/Paul/Etc. are one of three categories:
1- Protest the 2-party system/republican party vote
2- Vote with their conscience
3- No other good choice
No need to berate them, at least they're voting... it's the morons that are refusing to vote I now have issue with. I honestly think the entirety of the L party realizes that they have a .0000000000000000000001% chance of winning this election, but what they're doing is more standing on principal over anything else. I applaud them for their steadfast holding on to their beliefs and I agree with about 70% of what they believe... But...
Obama and Romney are not one-and-the-same, they're not even similar, THAT is what I want everyone to get through their heads.
Look at it this way:
Obama is a Harvard Law educated community organizer who spent one term as a US Senator that did nothing while in his senate seat. He grew up around far-left leaning communists and Marxists (yes there is a difference between the two), learned a lot about Islam, and made friends with anti-colonial radicals and domestic terrorists. Plain and simple, the man does not like America the way it is.
Romney is a devout Mormon with a very successful background in business. He is well-known for his generosity and candor, as well as his record of bipartisanship while Governor of Mass. He is a financially smart man, who knows what businesses and governments need to succeed. He opposes bigger government, excessive spending, and foolish investments. He is a proud American who is pro-military, pro-freedom, and likes America the way it is.
But I honestly believe that if re-elected, Obama will destroy what is left of the America we know. You can't actually sit and believe that we're not going over that cliff very soon with him in office. He loves socialism, he's dropped the key words time and time again: "fair share," "rich pay a little more," and "redistribute." I don't think we'll have an "October Revolution" style revolution like in 1917 Russia, but I do fear that either in the next 4 years or because of the next 4 years, if Obama is allowed to stay in power, America will become socialist. Doom and gloom, sure, but I see that as the direction we're going. If Romney wins, I do believe he and Paul Ryan will begin to fix our economy, shrink our debt, and reduce our government's size. You are all free to disagree with me, but based on the evidence, I do think in that particular area Romney is the most qualified out of all the candidates this year. I just have to ask: What good are SCOTUS seats if either A) America's economy collapses, or B) America becomes a socialist nation?
Inconel710
11-02-2012, 11:24
Thank you Ronin. [Beer]
I think they realize that- and I have a belief that those who are not voting for Romney that aren't Obama supporters (or misguided independents voting for Marxism, er I mean Obama)- IE: Everyone voting for Johnson/Paul/Etc. are one of three categories:
1- Protest the 2-party system/republican party vote
2- Vote with their conscience
3- No other good choice
No need to berate them, at least they're voting... it's the morons that are refusing to vote I now have issue with. I honestly think the entirety of the L party realizes that they have a .0000000000000000000001% chance of winning this election, but what they're doing is more standing on principal over anything else. I applaud them for their steadfast holding on to their beliefs and I agree with about 70% of what they believe... But...
Obama and Romney are not one-and-the-same, they're not even similar, THAT is what I want everyone to get through their heads.
Look at it this way:
Obama is a Harvard Law educated community organizer who spent one term as a US Senator that did nothing while in his senate seat. He grew up around far-left leaning communists and Marxists (yes there is a difference between the two), learned a lot about Islam, and made friends with anti-colonial radicals and domestic terrorists. Plain and simple, the man does not like America the way it is.
Romney is a devout Mormon with a very successful background in business. He is well-known for his generosity and candor, as well as his record of bipartisanship while Governor of Mass. He is a financially smart man, who knows what businesses and governments need to succeed. He opposes bigger government, excessive spending, and foolish investments. He is a proud American who is pro-military, pro-freedom, and likes America the way it is.
But I honestly believe that if re-elected, Obama will destroy what is left of the America we know. You can't actually sit and believe that we're not going over that cliff very soon with him in office. He loves socialism, he's dropped the key words time and time again: "fair share," "rich pay a little more," and "redistribute." I don't think we'll have an "October Revolution" style revolution like in 1917 Russia, but I do fear that either in the next 4 years or because of the next 4 years, if Obama is allowed to stay in power, America will become socialist. Doom and gloom, sure, but I see that as the direction we're going. If Romney wins, I do believe he and Paul Ryan will begin to fix our economy, shrink our debt, and reduce our government's size. You are all free to disagree with me, but based on the evidence, I do think in that particular area Romney is the most qualified out of all the candidates this year. I just have to ask: What good are SCOTUS seats if either A) America's economy collapses, or B) America becomes a socialist nation?
You started off well & then turned into the same doom & gloom rhetoric as all the rest. Hyperbole & fear mongering; it's what's for dinner.
You started off well & then turned into the same doom & gloom rhetoric as all the rest. Hyperbole & fear mongering; it's what's for dinner.
It's my honest opinion of what course of action America will be taking... we're already in the toilet, the flush has been depressed, it's just a matter of if we'll sink or be a floater... and I really do think we're going down with Obama in office 4 more years.
Bailey Guns
11-02-2012, 15:49
Why is it if I vote for Romney I'm "compromising" my principles, voting for the lessor of two evils or (insert favorite Libertarian cliche)?
But if a Libertarian votes for Johnson or Paul they're not compromising their principles, they're voting their conscience, doing the right thing for the country or (insert favorite Libertarian cliche).
And we all know that Libertarians believe a vote for either Obama or Romney is a wasted vote (though they don't say it in those terms) but a vote of conscience for Johnson or Paul isn't a wasted vote (even though neither will win...ever). Oh...it seems everyone knows that but Gary Johnson. What's that you say, Gary? Don't write in Ron Paul's name on your ballot because he can't win? Oh, the irony:
–] (http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/10ia67/i_am_gov_gary_johnson_the_libertarian_candidate/c6dq4ft#)GovGaryJohnson (http://www.reddit.com/user/GovGaryJohnson)[S (http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/10ia67/i_am_gov_gary_johnson_the_libertarian_candidate/)] 83 points 1 month ago*As much as I support Ron Paul I think writing in his name will effectively be meaningless. Count on me to be a military non-interventionist. I think Kony could have been more effectively dealt with by letters of marque and reprisal.
Source: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/10ia67/i_am_gov_gary_johnson_the_libertarian_candidate/c6dq4ft
And we all know that Libertarians believe a vote for either Obama or Romney is a wasted vote (though they don't say it in those terms) but a vote of conscience for Johnson or Paul isn't a wasted vote (even though neither will win...ever).
I voted for Gary Johnson because I knew my vote would be wasted regardless of who I chose, so I voted for someone that I at least like.
It's my honest opinion of what course of action America will be taking... we're already in the toilet, the flush has been depressed, it's just a matter of if we'll sink or be a floater... and I really do think we're going down with Obama in office 4 more years.
Once that toilet has been flushed even the floaters go down. The comedy lies in the fact that people are still fighting over which turds will gown down quicker as if it matters.
Why is it if I vote for Romney I'm "compromising" my principles, voting for the lessor of two evils or (insert favorite Libertarian cliche)?
But if a Libertarian votes for Johnson or Paul they're not compromising their principles, they're voting their conscience, doing the right thing for the country or (insert favorite Libertarian cliche).
And we all know that Libertarians believe a vote for either Obama or Romney is a wasted vote (though they don't say it in those terms) but a vote of conscience for Johnson or Paul isn't a wasted vote (even though neither will win...ever). Oh...it seems everyone knows that but Gary Johnson. What's that you say, Gary? Don't write in Ron Paul's name on your ballot because he can't win? Oh, the irony:
Source: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/10ia67/i_am_gov_gary_johnson_the_libertarian_candidate/c6dq4ft
Now you're putting words into my mouth. If you think Romney is the right man or Obama is the right man then vote your conscious and we can discuss what pros and cons exist between the candidates. What I DO have a problem with are the people who pick one of the other and actually GIVE the reason that they are voting for the lesser of two evils... not me putting words into their mouth. Not even my choice of phrasing. Theirs. THAT drives me nuts. These are the same people who sticker their cars and put sings in their yards not because they support their candidate and genuinely think he's the right candidate but because they've absorbed all the feat mongering that made it seem like the other candidate was the devil himself. This lemming behavior is deplorable and then to question someone like myself who's taking a stand to vote the candidate they feel IS the right man for the job regardless of if they think they will win or not is ignorant at best. To me it stinks of a spoiled child who is afraid they're not going to get their way and I'm somehow to blame for that. So if you're voting Romney because you GENUINELY think he's the right man for the job then by all means, have at at it. I tend to disagree with both candidates for well known and often documented reasons and don't mind debating but that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it. If you're offended by anything I've said then you probably haven't made your selection based on who you feel is the right man for the position and should give deeper thought to what you're doing. Introspect. Don't shift focus to someone else like me.
Bailey Guns
11-02-2012, 16:28
My comments weren't directed specifically at you or anyone else. It was meant to be an "in general" comment.
And I've articulated why I'm voting for Romney many, many times here. I've also stated he's not a perfect candidate. But I honestly do believe he's the best man for the job, by far, of all the candidates. If you haven't read my posts about the stark, vast differences between Romney and Obama that's not my fault. They're there.
Now that that's outta the way...what about Johnson's comment about people voting for Paul? Personally, I thought it was pretty hilarious coming from a guy who has zero chance of winning.
Goodburbon
11-02-2012, 16:53
My comments weren't directed specifically at you or anyone else. It was meant to be an "in general" comment.
And I've articulated why I'm voting for Romney many, many times here. I've also stated he's not a perfect candidate. But I honestly do believe he's the best man for the job, by far, of all the candidates. If you haven't read my posts about the stark, vast differences between Romney and Obama that's not my fault. They're there.
Now that that's outta the way...what about Johnson's comment about people voting for Paul? Personally, I thought it was pretty hilarious coming from a guy who has zero chance of winning.
The point was that a written in vote for a libertarian who isn't running is one.lost that could have applied to a party who has a chance to get more future notariety and increased chances of winning in the future. While to.someone who subscribes to the A or B argument they all seem wasted, there is actually strategy and chance for a win within the loss.
Bailey Guns
11-02-2012, 17:05
I guess it could be spun that way.
My comments weren't directed specifically at you or anyone else. It was meant to be an "in general" comment.
And I've articulated why I'm voting for Romney many, many times here. I've also stated he's not a perfect candidate. But I honestly do believe he's the best man for the job, by far, of all the candidates. If you haven't read my posts about the stark, vast differences between Romney and Obama that's not my fault. They're there.
Now that that's outta the way...what about Johnson's comment about people voting for Paul? Personally, I thought it was pretty hilarious coming from a guy who has zero chance of winning.
My comments weren't necessarily directed towards you in their entirety either.
Rucker61
11-02-2012, 17:28
What I DO have a problem with are the people who pick one of the other and actually GIVE the reason that they are voting for the lesser of two evils...
Here's the most eloquent version of that I've seen:
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21565623-america-could-do-better-barack-obama-sadly-mitt-romney-does-not-fit-bill-which-one?fb_action_ids=498351110188858&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_ref=scn%2Ffb_ec%2Fwhich_one_&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%22498351110188858%22%3A17248 8779555530%7D&action_type_map=%7B%22498351110188858%22%3A%22og.l ikes%22%7D&action_ref_map=%7B%22498351110188858%22%3A%22scn%5 C%2Ffb_ec%5C%2Fwhich_one_%22%7D
The electoral college systems was designed to avoid third parties and the chaos of Europe, and parliamentary systems. So unless your candidate can carry 1 state but at least a path to victory in the electoral college, you may as well write yourself in (then never a disagreement on issues)
Inconel710
11-02-2012, 18:59
All I can add at this point is that at least the Gary Johnson campaign hasn't called my house five fucking times every night for the last two weeks. [Rant2]
Bailey Guns
11-02-2012, 19:05
All I can add at this point is that at least the Gary Johnson campaign hasn't called my house five fucking times every night for the last two weeks. [Rant2]
Probably can't afford it. Those calls are annoying. I got tired of the "other side" calling me (though there were very few of the Obama campaign calls) and in the last day or two I've had Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Tom Tancredo, Paul Ryan and too many unknowns to count, call the house. We finally just turned the ringer off the house phone.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.