(December 15, 2011 at 4:54 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: I'm in one of the reddest states in the union. Obama has no chance to take my state's electoral votes anyway. The Republicans could run the Hitler/Stalin ticket, the Dems could run the Washington/Lincoln ticket and Kentucky would still be colored red on the post election maps.

Um, I don't think Hitler and Stalin would ever dream of collaborating on anything. I mean, do you remember the Eastern front of WW2? For better or for worse, without Stalin sending his troops to fight Hitler (they actually killed more Nazis than anyone else.) Nevermind that Fascism and Communism are fundamentally incompatible except in the minds of people too ignorant in Politics to know any better: Communism is (at least in theory) opposed to social stratification, and Fascism positively revels in it.
Okay Rant over.

Other than that, it seems (at least at first glance) like a pretty good idea. Especially since it doesn't have too many of the problems that are inherent with Third Party votes.

But just for the record,

This is a map of the fifty states sorted by how "blue" and "red" they are. The Pink states are ones which went Democratic for one of the last four elections. Should this apply to them?

(December 21, 2011 at 1:14 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: Um, I don't think Hitler and Stalin would ever dream of collaborating on anything.

That was a joke intended to underscore how even the most unpopular candidates would still take KY on the Republican ticket. Since they're both dead and neither was ever an American citizen, their hypothetical run for President and Vice President of the United States is hardly something to seriously speculate.

Kentucky did go for Clinton once but only because Perot split the conservative vote.

---

I do agree that if you live in any of the sold red states viewed above, you can safely vote 3rd Party without spoiling the results in favor of the Republicans. I'd just add Kentucky, Tennessee and Arkansas to that list.

(December 15, 2011 at 4:54 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: I'm in one of the reddest states in the union. Obama has no chance to take my state's electoral votes anyway.

Yes, me too. Damn South Carolina. I am about the only Democrat here. I will still vote.... though it won't matter. SC will never vote Democratic in any election for the foreseeable future.

Though I am getting a little bit hopeful as North Carolina is now pink instead of red because of the last few elections that resulted in Democratic nominations. This is mainly because Charlotte, North Carolina is a huge banking center and has a lot of residents that have relocated from up north that tend to vote Democratic. South Carolina, um, no one really moves here... they are born here. Haha.. except me (lower taxes, better schools).

(December 21, 2011 at 8:47 am)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(December 21, 2011 at 6:08 am)ReB Wrote: Look guys, I'm just saying, Obama's main concern was a socialist healthcare system...

You know, I remember there was a time when "socialism" was a political-economic ideology and not just some generic pejorative bandied all around while screeching about anything left of the hard right wing in America. During the Bush administration, anyone pointing out how we were lied into the Iraq War was accused of being "shrill" and yet shrieking "socialism" all the time isn't?

When your right wing is as stupid as our's you have to give them simple slogans to mouth because they can't handle anything longer.

I'd vote for the lesser of any evil.
For all politics is dipped in evil, and presented before the evil masses.
The masses are evil because they happily comply with this evil process of electing pre-elected evil people.
Stop being evil.

(December 21, 2011 at 8:27 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: I'd vote for the lesser of any evil.
For all politics is dipped in evil, and presented before the evil masses.
The masses are evil because they happily comply with this evil process of electing pre-elected evil people.
Stop being evil.

Says the man who has a war lord for his avatar

(December 21, 2011 at 8:36 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote:

(December 21, 2011 at 8:27 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: I'd vote for the lesser of any evil.
For all politics is dipped in evil, and presented before the evil masses.
The masses are evil because they happily comply with this evil process of electing pre-elected evil people.
Stop being evil.

Says the man who has a war lord for his avatar

A khan, a sultan.
More than a warlord. Osman Ghazi was a warlord.
Well, let's not get into that.
However, he did not answer to no man, and had therefore nothing to prove. He devoted himself to an ideal instead. That's what we need.
Not men who try to woo the public, in order to gain votes with things that they say they will do.

So wait..we need to get away from evil, and voting evil in and instead act more like the warlord in your avatar?

(December 21, 2011 at 9:12 pm)reverendjeremiah Wrote: So wait..we need to get away from evil, and voting evil in and instead act more like the warlord in your avatar?

IF you want to be the "warlord", you can certainly be as such. But I'd rather suggest a state where a single leader takes responsibility for running the country, with no bullshit, multi-party democracy in place.
Some sort of a parliament should be there, and the people in it should be chosen from learned men and women who represent a community, who in turn should choose the one to lead, and when necessary, depose of him.
But unless there is a serious reason for him/her to go, he/she should stay in place.
In fact, I dream of a country where a leader is born, not made, and raised to be the leader that he is expected to be.
Knowing that he would be the leader, he'd cope with the great responsibility at an early age, and then after he finishes his education, he is enrolled into his place. He has not to worry about pleasing others via promises, as such, will not be tainted by politics.

Yes, it will be some sort of a monarchy, however it's better than simple mob rule, where people vote not for good governance, but for selfish demands.

Wow..your government model sucks donkey dick...its nothing but the upper rich elite running the system. Clearly your government would become corrupt the very minute of its conception. Sounds like every kind of dictatorship typically known throughout the middle east.

I would necessarily be an enemy of this fictional government of yours, mind you, as this governemtn would obviously be holding down the common persons freedom of speech and assembly and religion, etc...

P.S. - America is not "mob rule", and if you think it is, then you do not know shit about American govt.