mtn
Dork
10/31/08 3:01 a.m.
foxtrapper wrote:
All this, and no mention of the Electoral College.
Tsk tsk tsk.
I mentioned it:
mtn wrote:
pete240z wrote:
they end up being throw away votes.
Pete, you live in Illinois. Do you really think it matters who you vote for? NO. Barack is gonna take the state by a landslide. I don't know if you've noticed it or not, but people here are in love with the idiot.
I hate it. It makes my vote completely worthless.
"I mentioned it:"
I appologize, I didn't see it.
I always liked the Electoral College, as spelled out in the Constitution, once I understood it.
therex
SuperDork
10/31/08 6:06 a.m.
The electoral college isn't a terrible idea in and of itself. Clearly the founding fathers intended for the United States to be a, well, confederation of states, with each on equal footing. That's hard to do when like, a 12% of America lives in 1 state.
SVrX, have you thought about one of the voting fit sites, and did a few of them to figure out if any of the 3 party candidates even come close to what you want? Then you can do the future research on that candidates website to see if they are even realistic in those views.
Early on, I did that, which forced me to look at a handful of candidates, and oddly enough, one of the finalists was my top match at the time... One of the others (who wasn't even on the D radar in the priamaries) was a better fit, but when I read his web page, his methods were crazy, so I couldn't really buy the possibility.
Really. It's your vote- you want us to tell you who to vote for? None of the third party is going to win, so it's quite important to find out which one matches you the best of the best for your vote. If you are lucky, and other like minded Americans vote like you, that third party will actually get some funding next time.
It's, by far, not a throw away vote.
IMHO, Nader is looked upon as loosing the election in 2000, right? If you ask me, he really was able to shake up the Democratic party to ask who they really are- which was a good thing in the long run.
Anyway...
Eric
(and I still disagree with term limits, but I completely agree with you, Jensen, in how comfortable they get- but you forgot the whole legal bribery- campaign contributions/ads)
Salanis wrote:
Jensenman wrote:
And there you'd be wrong. It was necessary for him to go to the Legislature to override the Board of Education's protests. The way it worked: the Board of Education and the individual school boards wanted the machines out and for them to be replaced with vending machines that had more healthy snacks and drinks. The manufacturers association hired this guy to get that stopped. Since the Board of Education has to do what the Legislature says, guess where he went. This happened maybe 10-12 years ago; in 2006 the Board of Education reached an agreement with the association to restrict the sales of certain high sugar soft drinks to after school hours. So it looks like this guy's efforts did not lead to a permanent agreement.
Link to the announcement of the 2006 change:
http://www.sc.gov/NewsCenter/DOE/Soft+drink+announcement-SDE+reax.htm
That makes no mention of what happened however long ago you're claiming. Could you provide me a link to the legislation passed to require a local contract with a soda distributor?
Umm... and by your own admission it sounds like there was never a permanent legislative agreement.
Your scenario doesn't make sense because you're claiming that a state legislature mandated particular soda machines at locally operated fixtures that they have no jurisdiction over the operation of.
Now you are getting the idea! The way it works: the education and local school boards can be overruled by the Legislature. At the time this was passed (roughly 1995-1996) teh int3rweb was not as widespread as it is now, meaning the chance of a link is pretty remote. It was more one of those 'back room deals' where an arm gets twisted but there is no real law etc passed.
I got into discussions with this lobbyist because my trail advocacy group was considering hiring one to promote a statewide system of OHV trails. Needless to say, after a couple of rather candid conversations, it was decided that we really didn't want him representing us.
I could walk you through yet another one (no lobbyist involved) where a state legislator did some arm twisting on a guy who handled trail grants and when that guy refused to deviate from the way it was supposed to be done he found his office etc being investigated by SLED. I know this for a fact because I had to go make a deposition in that case. I can guarantee you that you won't find that one on teh int3rweb either. The guy got removed from his position and left the state; i still have the letter he wrote after the investigation was completed explaining what happened and apologizing for the problems it brought onto all of us.
Not everything a legislator or lobbyist did/does is above board or completely on the record. In the vast majority of the incidents I have seen, it's driven by greed and self interest.
Duke
Dork
10/31/08 8:10 a.m.
Salanis wrote:
A politician who's been around longer will be better able to identify who is full of E36 M3 and who is on the level. A politician that will see a longer term also has to develop policy that won't come back to bite them in the ass 10-20 years later. If you're going to be out in 6 years, you can write all kinds of E36 M3 and not have to concern yourself with how feasible it will eventually be.
Yeah, ask the rest of us who have had to deal with Strom Thurmond's and Teddy Kennedy's bullE36 M3 for umpteen bazillion years how we feel about it.
Duke wrote:
Salanis wrote:
A politician who's been around longer will be better able to identify who is full of E36 M3 and who is on the level. A politician that will see a longer term also has to develop policy that won't come back to bite them in the ass 10-20 years later. If you're going to be out in 6 years, you can write all kinds of E36 M3 and not have to concern yourself with how feasible it will eventually be.
Yeah, ask the rest of us who have had to deal with Strom Thurmond's and Teddy Kennedy's bullE36 M3 for umpteen bazillion years how we feel about it.
Amen, brudda. It still amazes me that Thurmond was so virulently racist yet kept that Senate position until he died and that Ted Kennedy could kill someone and never face a moment's jail time and even become one of the senior members of Congress.
SVreX wrote:
48 posts and no one has given me any detailed information about a single candidate.
Uggh.
I expected more of you guys.
Don't blame them, blame the candidates that prefer to speak in platitudes and generalizations—even on their official web sites where they "spell it all out"—to try to appeal to emotion and instinct rather than reason and logic. Honestly, the only guy who I've ever seen run a campaign the way I would like to see a campaign run was Perot. And while I didn't agree with a lot of what he had to say, I liked the way he said it. Of course, he was widely ridiculed for being "boring" and never really had any shot.
Look at the way campaign are run now. This season, especially, there has been rampant use of the "appeal to ridicule." Just look at every time McCain or Palin refer to Obama as a "community organizer." They're practically rolling their eyes and making the jerk off motion. And Obama did the same thing every time he used the word "maverick." It's a sad and pathetic way to go about your business and I won't support it.
Honestly, about the only thing that really motivated me to vote this year was to weight in on Florida's amendment 2. If that hadn't been on the ballot I may have stayed home, or showed up and turned in a blank ballot with my name on it and some hand-scrawled, vaguely coherent diatribe about my various revenge fantasies. That may have gotten me in trouble, though.
jg
Honestly, the only guy who I've ever seen run a campaign the way I would like to see a campaign run was Perot.
A big horkin' +1 there. Where do you think Obama got the idea for the half-hour 'infomercial?'
Anyway SVREX, No offense, but why haven't you educated yourself by now? Anyway, here's all you need to know about Bob Barr:
-
He's the only candidate I'm aware of who supports the Fairtax.
-
He vehemently opposed the bailouts.
-
He believes (as I do) that a vote for Obama or McCain is a vote for slightly varying degrees of Socialism.
-
IMO, he's the only candidate who fully understands the Constitution of the United States of America, and understands its importance, ESPECIALLY regarding the role of our Federal and State governments.
Here's a E36 M3 load of videos with Barr on Glenn Beck. He's articulate, funny, and likeable, if any of that E36 M3 matters to you. No, I don' know how much he spends on his berkeleying suits or where he buys his doughnuts, or what the berkeley he thinks about britney damned spears:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bob+barr+glenn+beck&search_type=&aq=f
SVreX
SuperDork
10/31/08 11:57 a.m.
Poopy:
I've done everything I can to educate myself, including having read every single website link posted in this thread long before they were posted here. I've found most of that stuff to be lacking, as JG outlined above.
I was asking for the informed opinions of a group of people I know and have come to respect. Didn't get too much.
Your last post was an exception, for which I am grateful. But it was too late- I'd already voted.
If anyone cares, I managed to leave the voting booth having checked a complete slate of candidates from all three of the major parties.
I vote for the candidates and their platforms, not the personalities or the rhetoric.
SVreX wrote:
If anyone cares, I managed to leave the voting booth having checked a complete slate of candidates from all three of the major parties.
Who's the third?
Green Party/Nader?
Libertarian?
While I suspect we'll see a rise in 3rd party voting this time around, does anyone think it'll be enough to make a third "major party"?
Side rant: I hate hate hate hate how it's become a fad to be a Libertarian. Oh sure, moderatly hot girl in class, it makes you seem interesting, till you explain why and manage to totally miss the party's platform...
Then again, I manage to miss most of "my" party's platform these days. Touche, moderatly hot girl.
SVreX
SuperDork
10/31/08 12:31 p.m.
OK, Libertarians are probably not a "major" party, but they are clearly the 3rd largest.
And their presidential candidate is on the ballot in 48 states.
Osterkraut wrote:
Side rant: I hate hate hate hate how it's become a fad to be a Libertarian.
Has it really? And we somehow recruited hot chics? Woohoo!
Salanis
SuperDork
10/31/08 1:29 p.m.
DILYSI Dave wrote:
Osterkraut wrote:
Side rant: I hate hate hate hate how it's become a fad to be a Libertarian.
Has it really? And we somehow recruited hot chics? Woohoo!
Vote Libertarian
We're recruiting more hot chicks than they are.
Side rant: I hate hate hate hate how it's become a fad to be a Libertarian.
Really? I'm not really around "class" or "moderately hot girls" all that much, so apparently I missed the boat.
walterj
HalfDork
10/31/08 1:35 p.m.
Osterkraut wrote:
Side rant: I hate hate hate hate how it's become a fad to be a Libertarian.
LOL. Yeah, total sellouts! I was a fan back when they were hardcore! Its like Twisted Sister all over again.
walterj wrote:
Osterkraut wrote:
Side rant: I hate hate hate hate how it's become a fad to be a Libertarian.
LOL. Yeah, total sellouts! I was a fan back when they were hardcore! Its like Twisted Sister all over again.
Ha ha ha! I'm not a Libertarian, and the party itself didn't sell out. It's just become "hip" (note: around here) and that's lead to people who have no idea what Libertarians are, but like being associated with the image. Obama enjoys similar support.
walterj
HalfDork
10/31/08 3:19 p.m.
Osterkraut wrote:
walterj wrote:
Osterkraut wrote:
Side rant: I hate hate hate hate how it's become a fad to be a Libertarian.
LOL. Yeah, total sellouts! I was a fan back when they were hardcore! Its like Twisted Sister all over again.
Ha ha ha! I'm not a Libertarian, and the party itself didn't sell out. It's just become "hip" (note: around here) and that's lead to people who have no idea what Libertarians are, but like being associated with the image. Obama enjoys similar support.
Seriously I think it is just a side-effect of a dissatisfaction with the current two parties... A lot of people who have been able to call themselves a democrat or republican in the past and pull that lever on election day are starting to have thoughts... I think its a good thing even if it has a little 'chic' going.
Osterkraut wrote:
SVreX wrote:
If anyone cares, I managed to leave the voting booth having checked a complete slate of candidates from all three of the major parties.
Who's the third?
Green Party/Nader?
Libertarian?
While I suspect we'll see a rise in 3rd party voting this time around, does anyone think it'll be enough to make a third "major party"?
Side rant: I hate hate hate hate how it's become a fad to be a Libertarian. Oh sure, moderatly hot girl in class, it makes you seem interesting, till you explain why and manage to totally miss the party's platform...
Then again, I manage to miss most of "my" party's platform these days. Touche, moderatly hot girl.
Its a fad to be a libertarian? WTF?
That's like saying its a fad to try and acquire zits. Libertarians don't go around bragging about it. 95+% of America is quite pleased enough to go around being a Democrat, Republican or Democratic/Republican voting Independent.
Modestly hot girls are usually democrats if you're looking to get in with that crowd.
I'm aggravated with both of the major parties and the populace as a whole, since that's where the problem really is.
Everybody bitches about Congress (their approval rating is lower than Bush's) yet their reelection rate is 94 to 98 percent. And Congress (both houses) is where the real problem lies.
We think we are doing a great thing by electing a new President every so often who promises 'change' (like Obama) and we ain't doin' shi+. And that's why I say all this yak about throwing away your Presidential vote means nothing; it matters not whether you vote Dem, Repub, Green, Lib or Whig for Prez, it's wasted if we don't fix Congress.
SVreX
SuperDork
10/31/08 4:58 p.m.
I never said I was asking about Prez.
I was asking about 3rd party candidates for all offices.
TJ
New Reader
10/31/08 6:00 p.m.
SupraWes wrote:
Voting your conscience rather than candidate A1 or A2 is the patriotic thing to do in my opinion.
I cannot agree with you on Nader, but I wholeheartedly agree with the part I quoted.