Print

[Baggins]

Yup, and I understood what you said and is why I replied with John Anderson, a Republican, did.

Very good point, a person that declares themselves a democrat or republican, can't turn around and run as an independent in the same election...There is absolutely no credibility to their game.

There have been several cases where someone lost the primary and then won in the general election as an independent.  Joe Lieberman comes to mind.  There was also the Alaska Senate election recently.

It is a different set of voters.  A candidate that my not appeal to a subset of party members may appeal better to the electorate as a whole. 

If you get the signatures on the petitions why shouldn't you be able to run?

See above...They might have the right to do so, but they are not sticking to what they declared themselves to be to start with...I find it unethical.

[Monroe Native]

I can't agree with you on this one.

Lieberman is a good example.

Apparently he alienated a segment of his party, and they ran a candidate against him, and in a low voter turnout in the primary were able to defeat him.

Running as an independent he won the election handily - and actually carried a substantial portion of the Republican vote in the process.

Lieberman never changed his positions - but his positions played better before the general electorate.

Remember - the voters in the primary can be very different then the voters in the general election.

There is nothing I know of in the constitution that say you must win your parties primary to run, because there is nothing in the constitution about political parties.

If you meet the requirements to get on the ballot you should be able to run. 

If you want a valid third party in the future you should want that process to be reasonably easy and straight forward.

If you restrict who can / can't run in a general election

[lilly]

An even better reason to have open primaries. Throw everyone into the pot together and the top 4 candidates are the ones we get to vote for come November. You might get 3 Republicans and a Democrat, or 3 Democrats and a Republican. Or 2 Democrats a Republican, and a 3rd party candidate. Etc Etc.

Just something to think about.

[Baggins]

Bump...
People's State of the Union: A Green New Deal for America on Vimeo

[Collegekid]

Yup, and I understood what you said and is why I replied with John Anderson, a Republican, did.

I misunderstood your comment. I thought you meant that he ran as an IND is all. Gotcha now.

[Collegekid]

There have been several cases where someone lost the primary and then won in the general election as an independent.  Joe Lieberman comes to mind. 

I believe that Lieberman ran as a write it didn't he? The law (and it's a Michigan law) merely states that he can't be on the ballot, not that he can't run at all.

[The Fuzz]

No, he ran under an independent third party called "Connecticut for Lieberman".

[Monroe Native]

I believe that Lieberman ran as a write it didn't he? The law (and it's a Michigan law) merely states that he can't be on the ballot, not that he can't run at all.

Lisa Murkowski won the Alaska Senate race with a write in campaign fairly recently.  Perhaps that was the election you were thinking of?

Pretty remarkable you could get the majority to write in the name Lisa Murkowski correctly!

[SMASH]

That sounds great!  We should ALL vote Green.

I had to stop about ten minutes in.

To do what she wants would require the abject disposal of the remaining remnants U.S. Constitution.

I can get all of this Left wing voodoo from Obama.

I do however have some questions.

She mentions all of the new low paying jobs. This is nothing new. My question is who created the economy that breeds these jobs?
Were we not warned of this a couple of decades ago?

Giant Sucking Sound - Ross Perot 1992 Presidential Debate.flv

She blames Wall St. and greed for our problems. To me she comes off as an anti-capitalist. If that's the case what would she prefer? It sounds like she would like more of what we currently have. Forced income redistribution only at a higher level.
Well let me tell ya, it takes a high mind and lot's of dough to think that way! Or, you're just angry and disappointed that someone just might be successful and have more than you do.
Well, to me jealousy is just as bad as greed, and riping apart a Country and it's economy is no way to level the playing field it is just a petty way to ensure equal misery!
Why not fix the currency and give ALL the opportunity for prosperity?
Why not adhere to the Constitution and have just and proper "weights and measures" and a medium of exchange that is equal to all?

She prattles on about Austerity Measures being implemented here in the U.S..
Where?
We are deficit spending like the house is on fire and only cash from the Federal Reserve money hose will put out the fire!
This Nation is hemorrhaging cash and she wants to spend MORE!
 
The Green New Deal? What the hell is that?
We have had the New Deal, The New New Deal, and now she proposes the Green New Deal?
They are all "tax and spend" your way to prosperity ponzi schemes!

She has the audacity to invoke the "programs" of the 30's like they were some magic bullet that "fixed" the economy.

BS!

All they did was make a Depression a really GREAT ONE and centralize even more authority in the Federal Government.
What she leaves out is the fact that many Corporations and individuals did very well in the peak of the Depression thanks to free market CAPITALISM that did an end run around the efforts of the government to strangle the economy.

Cheap and easy money inflated the bubble of the late twenties and when it popped and the interest rates went up minimal percentage points it wiped people out by the thousands. That is EXACTLY what the Fed is doing today with QE1, and 2, and now 3.

Read this text given in testimony to our Congress in 1934.

Recently in one of our States, 60,000 dwelling houses and farms were brought under the hammer in a single day. 71,000 houses and farms in Oakland County, Michigan, were sold and their erstwhile owners dispossessed. The people who have thus been driven out are the wastage of the Fed. They are the victims of the Fed. Their children are the new slaves of the auction blocks in the revival of the institution of human slavery. 


The Fed has said it will "buy" 40 BILLION of junk balance sheet crap from banks a month for the unseen future. Great, where does the Fed get it's money? From magical money fairies that poop green pieces of paper?

She uses words like New Deal and Green Emergency plans, and Sustainability.

Well, I know what the New Deal did, I know what the New, New Deal did.
I am well aware of what the new crowd of "Sustainability" people are about. And, I am well aware of what "Emergencies" named by the government cost in both cash and freedom.

No Thanks, we have enough of that already, and Obama can dish out more than enough in the future.
 
This is nothing but more of the same with a different face.

[Collegekid]

Lisa Murkowski won the Alaska Senate race with a write in campaign fairly recently.  Perhaps that was the election you were thinking of?

It's very possible.

[jbs49238]

An even better reason to have open primaries. Throw everyone into the pot together and the top 4 candidates are the ones we get to vote for come November. You might get 3 Republicans and a Democrat, or 3 Democrats and a Republican. Or 2 Democrats a Republican, and a 3rd party candidate. Etc Etc.

Just something to think about.

I disagree with you alot, but am smiling ear to ear right now.

[Baggins]

I had to stop about ten minutes in.

To do what she wants would require the abject disposal of the remaining remnants U.S. Constitution.

I can get all of this Left wing voodoo from Obama.

I do however have some questions.

She mentions all of the new low paying jobs. This is nothing new. My question is who created the economy that breeds these jobs?
Were we not warned of this a couple of decades ago?



She blames Wall St. and greed for our problems. To me she comes off as an anti-capitalist. If that's the case what would she prefer? It sounds like she would like more of what we currently have. Forced income redistribution only at a higher level.
Well let me tell ya, it takes a high mind and lot's of dough to think that way! Or, you're just angry and disappointed that someone just might be successful and have more than you do.
Well, to me jealousy is just as bad as greed, and riping apart a Country and it's economy is no way to level the playing field it is just a petty way to ensure equal misery!
Why not fix the currency and give ALL the opportunity for prosperity?
Why not adhere to the Constitution and have just and proper "weights and measures" and a medium of exchange that is equal to all?

She prattles on about Austerity Measures being implemented here in the U.S..
Where?
We are deficit spending like the house is on fire and only cash from the Federal Reserve money hose will put out the fire!
This Nation is hemorrhaging cash and she wants to spend MORE!
 
The Green New Deal? What the hell is that?
We have had the New Deal, The New New Deal, and now she proposes the Green New Deal?
They are all "tax and spend" your way to prosperity ponzi schemes!

She has the audacity to invoke the "programs" of the 30's like they were some magic bullet that "fixed" the economy.

BS!

All they did was make a Depression a really GREAT ONE and centralize even more authority in the Federal Government.
What she leaves out is the fact that many Corporations and individuals did very well in the peak of the Depression thanks to free market CAPITALISM that did an end run around the efforts of the government to strangle the economy.

Cheap and easy money inflated the bubble of the late twenties and when it popped and the interest rates went up minimal percentage points it wiped people out by the thousands. That is EXACTLY what the Fed is doing today with QE1, and 2, and now 3.

Read this text given in testimony to our Congress in 1934.

Recently in one of our States, 60,000 dwelling houses and farms were brought under the hammer in a single day. 71,000 houses and farms in Oakland County, Michigan, were sold and their erstwhile owners dispossessed. The people who have thus been driven out are the wastage of the Fed. They are the victims of the Fed. Their children are the new slaves of the auction blocks in the revival of the institution of human slavery.


The Fed has said it will "buy" 40 BILLION of junk balance sheet crap from banks a month for the unseen future. Great, where does the Fed get it's money? From magical money fairies that poop green pieces of paper?

She uses words like New Deal and Green Emergency plans, and Sustainability.

Well, I know what the New Deal did, I know what the New, New Deal did.
I am well aware of what the new crowd of "Sustainability" people are about. And, I am well aware of what "Emergencies" named by the government cost in both cash and freedom.

No Thanks, we have enough of that already, and Obama can dish out more than enough in the future.
 
This is nothing but more of the same with a different face.

Nonsense...Nothing she stated would hamper or harm the constitution, in fact it bolsters the individuals rights in that context over corporations and conglomerate monopolies who care little of what consequences their actions may bring, whether that be to the well being of the people or the environment...Like you said, you only listened to 10 minutes...So, you're doing nothing but preaching party rhetoric you've gained over the years.

Nothing to do with "voodoo" either, only giving a chance for some good common sense(something that is of a very short commodity with Americans these days!) and ambitious ideals that frighten most people for reasons(bold face lies in some cases) they have been repeatedly told they must believe by individuals who have the most to lose...The system is corrupt and the game is fixed to benefit the wealthy over the common good of anything sensible and just.

You claim devoting ourselves to green energies as a waste and scam of tax dollars, but you elude to the fact the oil companies have been bilking the tax payer for decades with no real return from the billions thrown at them...That money should go to better technologies that truly will further our existence and give us a better way of life and a sense of accomplishment, not to pad the pockets of a few that hold all the cards and want for nothing and wish to keep everything as a status quo, where we have a false sense of security. 

Another important point you refuse to mention is the unethical profiteering from war, which by the sounds of it you deem a righteous ambition.  Well, let me tell you that human life is worth more than a profit margin.  It's the evil side of your precious capitalism and down right immoral...Furthermore Wallstreet is to blame for the economic mess we find ourselves in, to say otherwise is fooling yourself and drinking the corporate koolaid...What magic wand does a mass of private investors have that will fix this sinking ship when their only concern is personal gain...And our health care system has become nothing short of a money pit feeding an over powerful insurance industry which dictates how and when or if ever we receive medical care.  Neither Obama's nor Romney's system will fix or change that colossal waste of money.

Romney's only great act is to blame a 4 year president for a situation that took over 10 years to create...Obama has tried to right some wrongs from the past with no good results mainly because of the bipartisan tug of war of a broken and bought system, for no other reason than to have the bragging rights of "the fix"...The fix will take more than a few years and most definitely a different perspective on how things can or will get done.

Think outside the box for a change and don't tell me new ideas are wrong or dangerous...You have to understand that tax dollars will be taken and spent no matter what your political view happens to be, and the current system is NOT working or changing it's ways or ever will in any foreseeable future unless we take that unfamiliar road and let go of our preset expectations of how things must be done.

You have falsely twisted and warped the message she presents by saying she wants to do nothing but spend "more", when in fact she's saying that it must be spent more wisely and on better causes on a human level...


Your political stance has made you practice the act of not listening to other ideas to perfection...

[SMASH]

Nonsense...Nothing she stated would hamper or harm the constitution, in fact it bolsters the individuals rights in that context over corporations and conglomerate monopolies who care little of what consequences their actions may bring, whether that be to the well being of the people or the environment...Like you said, you only listened to 10 minutes...So, you're doing nothing but preaching party rhetoric you've gained over the years.

Nothing to do with "voodoo" either, only giving a chance for some good common sense(something that is of a very short commodity with Americans these days!) and ambitious ideals that frighten most people for reasons(bold face lies in some cases) they have been repeatedly told they must believe by individuals who have the most to lose...The system is corrupt and the game is fixed to benefit the wealthy over the common good of anything sensible and just.

You claim devoting ourselves to green energies as a waste and scam of tax dollars, but you elude to the fact the oil companies have been bilking the tax payer for decades with no real return from the billions thrown at them...That money should go to better technologies that truly will further our existence and give us a better way of life and a sense of accomplishment, not to pad the pockets of a few that hold all the cards and want for nothing and wish to keep everything as a status quo, where we have a false sense of security. 

Another important point you refuse to mention is the unethical profiteering from war, which by the sounds of it you deem a righteous ambition.  Well, let me tell you that human life is worth more than a profit margin.  It's the evil side of your precious capitalism and down right immoral...Furthermore Wallstreet is to blame for the economic mess we find ourselves in, to say otherwise is fooling yourself and drinking the corporate koolaid...What magic wand does a mass of private investors have that will fix this sinking ship when their only concern is personal gain...And our health care system has become nothing short of a money pit feeding an over powerful insurance industry which dictates how and when or if ever we receive medical care.  Neither Obama's nor Romney's system will fix or change that colossal waste of money.

Romney's only great act is to blame a 4 year president for a situation that took over 10 years to create...Obama has tried to right some wrongs from the past with no good results mainly because of the bipartisan tug of war of a broken and bought system, for no other reason than to have the bragging rights of "the fix"...The fix will take more than a few years and most definitely a different perspective on how things can or will get done.

Think outside the box for a change and don't tell me new ideas are wrong or dangerous...You have to understand that tax dollars will be taken and spent no matter what your political view happens to be, and the current system is NOT working or changing it's ways or ever will in any foreseeable future unless we take that unfamiliar road and let go of our preset expectations of how things must be done.

You have falsely twisted and warped the message she presents by saying she wants to do nothing but spend "more", when in fact she's saying that it must be spent more wisely and on better causes on a human level...


Your political stance has made you practice the act of not listening to other ideas to perfection...

Nonsense...Nothing she stated would hamper or harm the constitution,

No? She clearly speaks of "emergencies" that exist and I assume she would use the dictatorial powers of the Executive Branch under the War and Emergency Powers Act to carry out her New Green Deal stuff.
Right? Or,no?
If not what mechanism would she use to forward this Green Agenda? The Congress?
Good luck with that. They can't even pass a budget now!
If she does chose to use the only mechanism in the powers of the Executive Branch today then we will just be continuing the on going usurpation of the Constitution that is used today.

Your last sentance accuses me of not listening.

Seems as though you have a lot of work to do with just your first sentance.

I can't wait til we get around to your bizarre statements regarding my feelings on War and the Economy, and TAXES!