US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
MrMarcello said:
Paul is a nutter, he'd got destroyed against this duo, and only his lunatic supporters would vote for him. I'd say he'd get well under 10%, probably under 5% of the vote, and not a single electoral vote (unless the POTUS electoral college allows states to split votes, there could be some rogue nut casting an electoral vote or two to him).

However, I would prefer to see all candidates on the ballot given a fair chance. Democracy, oh wait, we're a Duopoly funded by Corporations, my bad.
Click to expand...

Didn't say Paul would do well in the debates. But he's the only one that is not in the two parties (he's not a Repub not matter what letter he puts after his name) that anyones heard of.

I think the first debate for sure should involve more candidates. Then maybe from there you could pare it down some. And maybe by the third or fourth have the 4 leading parties represented.
 
MrMarcello said:
Sounds good, have it an elimination process per debate.

Jon Stewart is hilarious tonight.
Click to expand...

Money would have to be controlled in the campaigns and I'm not sure how you do that. Maybe Eliminate contributions by corporations and unions or something. Maybe only allow contributions from individuals. Not realistic though.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
The Democrats don't want the Greens represented and the Republicans woudl rahter do without the Libertarians. Each with a self interest.

It's a bit different at state level though right? Didn't a third party, the IP i thinki, secure a respectable vote share in Minnesota last time around?
Click to expand...

You mean on the Federal level? I think there are 2 Independents in the Senate, maybe just 1. House not sure.

I know New Hampshire is the home of a Libertarian movement called the Free State Project. Don't know much about the success or failure. Read only a little on it.
 
Cali Red said:
You mean on the Federal level? I think there are 2 Independents in the Senate, maybe just 1. House not sure.

I know New Hampshire is the home of a Libertarian movement called the Free State Project. Don't know much about the success or failure. Read only a little on it.
Click to expand...

:) Well yeah, in that sense. I suppose i mean that they were [as far as i knew] a Minnesota based party. Used to have a friend who lived out there so took an interest in 08 through the local NPR station. But you don't really care about that. lol


Do we have any new polling date from Florida and Ohio since the debate yesterday?
 
Eboue said:
The other parties do have a chance, it's just that the voters don't like them.
Click to expand...

It's just no one knows about them. And how can you get to know them if the main tv/radio outlets don't cover them or allow them in the debates. I think it has more to do with how dominant the two main parties are at using, and maybe even controlling, the media.
 
Cali Red said:
It's just no one knows about them. And how can you get to know them if the main tv/radio outlets don't cover them or allow them in the debates. I think it has more to do with how dominant the two main parties are at using, and maybe even controlling, the media.
Click to expand...

I think that the main problem for the smaller parties is that no big business is going to throw millions of dollars at their election campaign, without that cash they have no chance of getting heard.
 
Tagg Romney joked that he wanted to ‘take a swing’ at Obama during Tuesday’s debate

A bit of buzz in the blogosphere Wednesday night about a radio interview in which Mitt Romney’s oldest son said he had the urge to “take a swing” at President Obama for constantly challenging his father’s veracity during Tuesday’s contentious debate.
Tagg Romney appeared on the talk show of North Carolina radio personality Bill LuMaye. The host asked him what was it like “to hear the President of the United States call your dad a liar?”
Romney chuckled as he responded: “You know … jump out of your seat and rush down to the debate stage and take a swing at him. But you know you can’t do that because there’s a lot of Secret Service agents between you and him.” He also suggested it was the nature of politics to badmouth one’s opponent


http://billlumaye.blogspot.sg/2012/10/tagg-romney-drops-by-bill-show.html?spref=fb
 
The real problem with fringe parties is that the salient elements of their platforms can be accommodated by the two major parties. When Perot became a player in the 92 elections, both parties competed to swallow up his base by reaching out to their concerns. Luckily for them, Perot imploded shortly thereafter and less relevant when he ran in 96. Nader in 2000 and 04 was more of a nuisance for the Dems because there aren't any Green Party policies the GOP base were interested in, which effectively resulted in Bush winning both elections. If there was a proper Libertarian candidate (Ron Paul could be him), both parties would again be forced to compete for their votes. Republicans on fiscal issues and Dems on non-interventionism. But that won't happen because there just aren't enough Libertarians in the US, who couldn't otherwise be accommodated by either big party.
 
I really like Jill Stein, if I were an American she'd get my vote.

This GOP-Dem monopoly in US politics needs to be shattered, its ridiculous how much leverage corporations have over the democratic system simply by proxy effect of those two parties.
 
I'd think that Ron Paul would siphon off more Republican votes than Democrats, wouldn't you agree? The nonintervention one is a good point, but I tend to think that the people who agree with that part of his policies would be horrified by some of the other parts, and so more likely to stick with the Democrats. The same could perhaps be said for the other way around, but there's probably something to be said for nationalism/patriotism and noninterventionism, a sort of "America first" approach. Perhaps I'm overestimating American Democrats.
 
niMic said:
I'd think that Ron Paul would siphon off more Republican votes than Democrats, wouldn't you agree? The nonintervention one is a good point, but I tend to think that the people who agree with that part of his policies would be horrified by some of the other parts, and so more likely to stick with the Democrats. The same could perhaps be said for the other way around, but there's probably something to be said for nationalism/patriotism and noninterventionism, a sort of "America first" approach. Perhaps I'm overestimating American Democrats.
Click to expand...

The key question is who do the hardcore Paulites vote for (they're quite a substantial base). From what I understand they hate Romney as much as they hate Obama. I know a lot of them will opt for Gary Johnson in the end (who's essentially Ron Paul lite).
 
Kaos said:
I really like Jill Stein, if I were an American she'd get my vote.

This GOP-Dem monopoly in US politics needs to be shattered, its ridiculous how much leverage corporations have over the democratic system simply by proxy effect of those two parties.
Click to expand...

Both parties generally accomodate most voters in their platforms.
 
sglowrider said:
A bit of buzz in the blogosphere Wednesday night about a radio interview in which Mitt Romney’s oldest son said he had the urge to “take a swing” at President Obama for constantly challenging his father’s veracity during Tuesday’s contentious debate.
Tagg Romney appeared on the talk show of North Carolina radio personality Bill LuMaye. The host asked him what was it like “to hear the President of the United States call your dad a liar?”
Romney chuckled as he responded: “You know … jump out of your seat and rush down to the debate stage and take a swing at him. But you know you can’t do that because there’s a lot of Secret Service agents between you and him.” He also suggested it was the nature of politics to badmouth one’s opponent


http://billlumaye.blogspot.sg/2012/10/tagg-romney-drops-by-bill-show.html?spref=fb
Click to expand...
:lol:

So he's a loon like his dad then.
 
Cali Red said:
Money would have to be controlled in the campaigns and I'm not sure how you do that. Maybe Eliminate contributions by corporations and unions or something. Maybe only allow contributions from individuals. Not realistic though.
Click to expand...

Biggest crock of shit ever allowed by politics IMO. Shows who really has the politicians interest.
 
while it may not be practical to have more than the two main candidates in debates, I am a big fan of run off voting. That way people will not be afraid their vote is 'wasted'.

Having said that many are not even aware of other party candidates.

At least at the primary levels they should be given some air time perhaps.
 
Any progress made through the inclusion of smaller parties is surely going to be negated so long as you continue to have Super PACs roaming wild across the political landscape?
 
evra said:
I swear this place might as well be a Michael Moore forum.
Click to expand...

It could be an Owen Jones Appreciation forum, just bear that worrying thought in mind. ;)



Are you responding directly to the topics being discussed on this page of the thread out of interest? Nothing too controversial or objectionable from a British Conservative PoV from what i can see.
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
It could be an Owen Jones Appreciation forum, just bear that worrying thought in mind. ;)



Are you responding directly to the topics being discussed on this page of the thread out of interest? Nothing too controversial or objectionable from a British Conservative PoV from what i can see.
Click to expand...

Just as an example of the left-wing bias that sums up the general forum. For example, when they moan about campaign finance they never mention that Saint Obama reneged on the promises he made to join with John McCain and use the public financing system. There was a rare opportunity and he cynically squandered it for his own ends.
 
evra said:
Just as an example of the left-wing bias that sums up the general forum. For example, when they moan about campaign finance they never mention that Saint Obama reneged on the promises he made to join with John McCain and use the public financing system. There was a rare opportunity and he cynically squandered it for his own ends.
Click to expand...

Yes, but most of contributions to Obama's campaign are from common people, 10 million people have already contributed.

On another topic, this article is a must read:

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics...scandinavia-red-states-are-guatemala?page=0,1
 
evra said:
Just as an example of the left-wing bias that sums up the general forum. For example, when they moan about campaign finance they never mention that Saint Obama reneged on the promises he made to join with John McCain and use the public financing system. There was a rare opportunity and he cynically squandered it for his own ends.
Click to expand...

You do love playing the martyr. If you had said anything else... fine, whatever. We know we're left wing. I'm not ashamed of it. But the "Saint Obama" comment just goes to show how little you let facts get in the way of your little act. This forum is highly critical of Obama, very often.

Besides, who said anything about Obama or Romney? The comments were about Super PACs in general. Which Obama also uses. At least tune your victim mentality to work on a context sensitive basis.
 
Evra, Jaz and MJS all have something in common, and it's not their republican tendencies.
 
niMic said:
You do love playing the martyr. If you had said anything else... fine, whatever. We know we're left wing. I'm not ashamed of it. But the "Saint Obama" comment just goes to show how little you let facts get in the way of your little act. This forum is highly critical of Obama, very often.

Besides, who said anything about Obama or Romney? The comments were about Super PACs in general. Which Obama also uses. At least tune your victim mentality to work on a context sensitive basis.
Click to expand...

:lol: Can we get the fact checkers on that one please, there are three or four right leaning posters on this forum, the rest have been shouted down and hounded out.
 
evra said:
:lol: Can we get the fact checkers on that one please.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? Do you actually read this forum? It goes without saying that when there's an election on, and the alternative is Romney, Obama's flaws fade away temporarily. Romney has all the same flaws as Obama, just worse, and more of them. But if you've paid any attention at all to the last four years, Obama has caught a lot of flak on here, for failing to do many of the things he said he would do. Like close Gitmo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.