Sicem, Eielson, and other koolaiders just won't admit that they are voting unwisely. Why do we waste our time talking about this?Originally Posted by SoonerorLater
Sicem, Eielson, and other koolaiders just won't admit that they are voting unwisely. Why do we waste our time talking about this?
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
If I am a citizen of Maine the reason I am interested in voting for them is because they are NOT a Democrat. If they are elected as an (R) it helps keep the majority which dictates committee assignments etc. If they are elected as an (R) their drawbacks can be diminished and they can still be useful. Additionally whoever they are running against is almost certain to be as bad or worse.
It's all about party politics and I say this as a guy who HATES party politics. In our political climate nothing else matters other than acquisition of power. Nothing. In the foreseeable future the only entities which will be power players are Democrats or Republicans. That's it. Not Libertarians, not Independents not the Green Party. Voting 'for the man' is a noble but largely ineffectual idea.
In the hopes one day they will arise and be enlightened......nah, never mind, your probably right.
sadly
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
You think that if Obama forced everybody to vote that it would favor the Republicans? I, for one, don't believe that to be the case.
Well, ain't that dandy! Let me clear it up for you: "those conservatives who sat home on their voting hands"
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
I just demonstrated how you don't know what the hell you are talking about by picking out two representative and key swing states in the 2008 and 2012 elections, and I demonstrated quite clearly how 3rd party libertarian votes did NOT cost either McCain or Romney the election. I don't know what you paid for that Political Science degree, but you need to ask Boren for your money back -- or they need to ask for their diploma back....either work.
Let me copy what you couldn't be bothered to read just a few posts up:
2008 results:
Ohio: 2,940,000 votes, Obama; 2,677,000 votes, McCain; 20,000 votes, Barr
Difference between Obama-McCain=263,000 votes..............Barr only got 20,000 votes still leaving a deficit of 260,000 votes for McCain.
Florida: 4,300,000 votes, Obama; 4,000,000, McCain; 17,000, Barr
Difference between Obama-McCain=300,000 votes.............Barr only got 17,000 votes leaving a deficit of 283,000 votes for McCain
2012:
Ohio: 2,827,000 votes, Obama; 2,661,000, Romney; 49,500, Gary Johnson
Difference between Obama-Romney=166,000 votes........Johnson only got 49,500 leaving a deficit of 116,500 votes for Romney.
Florida: 4,237,000 votes, Obama; 4,163,000 votes, Romney; 45,000, Gary Johnson
Difference between Obama-Romney=74,000..............Gary Johnson got 45,000 leaving a deficit of 29,000 votes for Romney.
TL/DR: RLIMC doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.
I don't think you understand what that term means.
Quote Originally Posted by RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!
Sicem, Eielson, and other koolaiders just won't admit that they are voting unwisely. Why do we waste our time talking about this?Unfortunately for America, too few figure it out, and especially now with all the new illegals who will somehow vote. And, that's without addressing the subject of other types of voter fraud.
Sadly, my signature probably still holds true.
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Oh, stop it! We are all wasting our time here.
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
see post 106 & 109
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Well yeah...if every Republican voted Republican, and no Democrats ever voted, the Republicans would win every election by a landslide. I don't see where you're going with this, though.
I've admitted, and continue to admit, that staying at home and not voting isn't as effective as voting for a third party candidate.
Your way has been the only way for decades. How's that working out for the country or conservatism? If your way worked, we wouldn't be having this converstaion right now. How about we try an alternative...you know...maybe for ****s and giggles?
If that many Republicans choose not to vote for a Republican candidate that it swings the election then I maintain there has to be something very seriously wrong with that particular Republican candidate; however, as I've shown, that was not the reason Obama won in either 2008 or 2012. He won because the American people had no interest in Romney and even less interest in McCain. They both ran incredibly bad campaigns purely from a technical point of view (especially McCain), and Romney allowed his gaffes to define who he is in the mind of the public.
You should admit the truth, that you apparently think the effect of the two is different.
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
Skeletor or Tara VanDerveer?
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
You just can't grasp big-picture concepts, can you?
But yes, I think there is a difference in "throwing away" your vote, and not even voting in the first place. It's a lot easier to dismiss somebody that doesn't vote at all as a bad American citizen, and pretend as if there isn't an issue with the candidate or the party. It's much more noticeable if 3rd party candidates were to get 15% of the popular vote than if 15% of the country didn't vote at all.
At the end of the day, though, losing elections is the biggest thing, so I think both tactics can have an effect.
so, VanDerveer?
Put a lid on it! Kiss it goodbye. We gave it away, and apparently thought it made sense to do so.
If we had Republican candidates that were as good politically as those two are at coaching women's basketball, then I would gladly pick one, and wouldn't hold out for Geno. I'm not going to hire Bill Callaghan just because he's better than John Blake, though.
I've always enjoyed peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. I'm 32 years old, and I still love a great PB&J. I'm picky though..
It has to be very fresh thin white bread (preferably Rainbow), Peter Pan Peanut Butter (creamy or whipped will suffice), and Welch's grape jelly. All of that -- specifically. Just the right ratio of PB to jelly is incredibly important. I've found that the best mix is something close to 2/3 PB and 1/3 jelly. I want just enough jelly to 'lubricate' the throat because too much peanut butter makes it difficult to chew and eat. Sometimes I cut them into squares and other times I do triangles -- I never know which until start cutting....live for the moment, I say. As a kid, I liked to sometimes put Nacho Cheese Doritos inside the PBJ for some cheesy-crunch which is a practice I continue to this day.
You're never too old for a good PB&J.
Posting Permissions
