Look for a clean sweep.

Good advice. I voted for a third party candidate and I don't even remember his name. My wife asked me just the other day who Nick Clooney was running against because she got a bunch of ads telling her not to vote for Clooney, but they never said who was running against him. He is pretty liberal but I believe that he's pro-life which should appeal to the Northern Kentucky voters. I have seen Geoff Davis' name on signs I think every election year and in the past, I've voted for Democrat Ken Lucas for that position, but he just retired. So I voted for the Independent.


What a dirty campaign it was. We actually got a flyer in the mail that had a picture of Clooney with camera red-eye that made him look evil. Unbelievably childish. I was likely to have abstained from that particular vote until I saaw the Indy candidate. Funny thing is, I know as much about him as I know about the Republican Davis. I wouldn't vote for either of these guys as class president much less Representative.
 
Great idea, someguy. The problem I see with the big two is that they are run by extremists. I am not in line with the religious right or the socialist left; I am pretty moderate. But the primaries are run by the extremists. Why didn't the moderate Lieberman or McCain win? OK, many reasons, but I think that it was in large part due to the fact that the extremists are more likely to vote in the primaries and the extremists make up such a large part of the parties. I'd vote for Lieberman over many Republicans and most Democrats. What sucks is that so many Americans are moderate and they are forced to choose which extreme is better.
 
By clean sweep, I thought you meant the executive, the House, the Senate, the judiciary, and the media. Yes, looks like a clean sweep to me.

As for choosing a "real" candidate, wouldn't you say that a Senator who came out of nowhere to take nearly half the popular vote from a powerful incumbent president during wartime constitutes a "real" candidate? Somebody has to win, and Bush won by a few percentage points, but to imply that Kerry was not a "real" candidate, I think, is unjustified.

And when did people start referring to liberals like myself as "socialists"? I'm really getting tired of hearing it.
 
Phoenix44 said:
And when did people start referring to liberals like myself as "socialists"? I'm really getting tired of hearing it.
Click to expand...

As an actual socialist, I'm sorry you find the term insulting, but I'm sure you probably recognize that it's part and parcel of the attack propaganda that the Right has relied upon for, well, decades.
 
PeachMonkey said:
As an actual socialist, I'm sorry you find the term insulting, but I'm sure you probably recognize that it's part and parcel of the attack propaganda that the Right has relied upon for, well, decades.
Click to expand...
I didn't say I found the term insulting. I find it inaccurate....AND "part and parcel of the attack propaganda....."
 
Phoenix44 said:
I didn't say I found the term insulting. I find it inaccurate....
Click to expand...

Ah, fair enough, then.

I'm sure you're also barely surprised that the right uses inaccuracy and hyperbole to advance their agenda.
 
I would say socialism is to the extreme left, at least in the US. Some of the extreme liberal ideas are socialist, but nobody said that all liberals were socialists. It wasn't an insult but to say that it's part of the attack propaganda from the right is laughable because it implies that the left doesn't do it too. Ever heard of the extreme right-wingers being called fascists? Because I'm kind of tired of it and I'm not even that far to the right. Besides, I used the term socialist earlier in this thread in the same sentence as "religious right." Is religious an insult or inaccurate too?


By the way, who said that Kerry wasn't a real candidate? I can't find it in this thread anywhere. Another thread maybe?
 
Why didn't the moderate Lieberman or McCain win?
Click to expand...

In all likelihood, Lieberman lost the Democrat primaries because: 1) he was too conservative (Jon Stewart called him a "Jewish George Bush"), and 2) he was Jewish.

McCain lost the Republican primaries because of the campaign of mudslinging and personal attacks (such as him "betraying" his country when he was a POW or him having a "black daughter") that Bush's neocon cronies launched against him. McCain, being an honorable man, did not follow suit and lost.
 
I would say socialism is to the extreme left, at least in the US. Some of the extreme liberal ideas are socialist, but nobody said that all liberals were socialists.
Click to expand...

All of the 'socialists' in the United States tend to be in socialist parties. I can't think of a single socialist Democrat. But, again, this is part of the Republican neo-conservative attack machine.

It wasn't an insult but to say that it's part of the attack propaganda from the right is laughable because it implies that the left doesn't do it too. Ever heard of the extreme right-wingers being called fascists?
Click to expand...

Not by an mainstream Democrats. The opposite, however, cannot be said (i.e., mainstream Republicans have no problem whatsoever calling Democrats "socialists" or "communists").
 
Kaith Rustaz said:
Seriously, we have to look at the big picture. (Which many of us have).

Kerry lost. Bush won.
Nader, and the other 3rd parties didn't really take big bites out of them.

If in the next 4 years we can find a viable party to back, maybe get the Naders and the Libs and the Greens together behind 1 person, we might be able to make a good run.

How?
Over the next 4 years, take -very- careful looks at your local representatives. Vote for the person who fits what you want. By electing more and more 3rds to the lower offices, we will put pressure on the "Big 2". We may never get a 3rd elected President, but by filling the lower branches with our real representatives we can force the "Big Boys" to listen to us, and evolve to meeting our desires.

The Republicans were just another 3rd party until Lincoln. You don't hear about the Whigs anymore, or the Torries in the US. They've faded away. We can boost a strong third and even a forth if we all simply get out there and put the effort into it.

Bush has 4 years. In 2008, it's an open race.
Lets find us a real candidate, and put the boots to the big 2.

:)
Click to expand...


Guliani Vs Hillary in '08!!
 
By the way, who said that Kerry wasn't a real candidate?
Click to expand...
Nobody. But somebody on this thread said, "Let's find us a real candidate." My opinion is that Kerry was a "real" candidate.
 
If 2008 is Guliani Vs Hillary then I'm outta here.
I'll never support Hillary...she's worse than a liar...and Guliani...well, lets just say I'd rather vote for Bush.
 
RandomPhantom700 said:
So, who do you think we'll invade next, now that Bush & Co. don't have a re-election to worry about?
Click to expand...
:whip:
So mature there...
Nice.

:rolleyes:
Nothin like sore losers.







Your Brother
John
 
Right, you said that Lieberman lost because he was too conservative. Well, to clarify, he was too conservative for the Democrats, so I guess we're agreed there. Same with McCain. He was too moderate or liberal for the majority of the Republicans.

The idea that "it takes a village to raise a child" is socialist. Haven't some Democrats suggested a socialist health care system? I'd call Hillary a socialist, but if that offends you, then I'm glad, because maybe you won't vote for her either? You're a little bit right; I have no problem calling a socialist a socialist or a communists a communist, but they are not all in their respective parties; some are Democrats. That doesn't make them bad and it's not an insult to be called a believer in a certain political ideal. I don't randomly call Democrats socialists just to make them look bad. I've never said Lieberman was a socialist; I've said I'd love to have the opportunity to vote for him. Same with McCain.

I hope you're right Ender...Giuliani vs. Hillary. Landslide victory for Giuliani...52 million to 39 million, about 400 EV to 138...that's my prediction if it comes to that. I'd rather see McCain, though, but I don't know everything about him and I don't understand how he got out of that Keating 5 deal. That was him right?
 
Brother John said:
Just curious: What is it, you feel, keeps her so far separated from socialism?
Click to expand...

What is so wrong with a little socialism?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Manly Man Question

Previous Thread

Concession the day after

Next Thread

Similar threads

M
The focus on Iran
Replies
1
Views
714
Flatlander
Flatlander
M
A Letter to Senator Bob Smith - September 2002
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
michaeledward
M
S
W. Virginia elector might leave Bush?
Replies
0
Views
579
Spud
S
Bob Hubbard
The Bush Strategy: Ignorance & Disenfranchisement Rigging the 2004 Vote
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
5K
PeachMonkey
P
M
2006 Elections
Replies
19
Views
2K
michaeledward
M

Latest Discussions

Back
Top