kelpdiver 2 #51 April 16, 2006 QuoteQuoteBecuae she follows whatever orders Bush barks.....care to differ??? It's her job to follow the orders of the president. actually her job is to advise the president. Powell understood this much better. Quote On her own, one could only guess how she'd do. Which means not a chance for my vote. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #52 April 16, 2006 QuoteQuote What You Said!!!! If ever a canidate close to this (that has a chance) I will vote for them!! Well, if nobody votes for third party candidates because they believe those candidates don't have a chance, those candidates will NEVER have a chance. It may be necessary to vote for candidates that have a slim chance of victory at this time to convince the rest of the public that third party candidates can be viable options. A small sacrifice now to perhaps alter the political spectrum in the future. Before the last presidential election, I made a decision to vote my conscience rather than to vote for someone who I thought could "win". I picked the candidate I thought could best lead the country. Isn't that what we're supposed to do? Point taken however, If that thought process gives a better chance to someone I think dangerous (like Hilary) I will cast my vote for someone that can beat her. I guess in effect, I will vote against someone as opposed to "for someone". But this doens't take away from you point!"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #53 April 16, 2006 QuoteQuoteBecuae she follows whatever orders Bush barks.....care to differ??? It's her job to follow the orders of the president. On her own, one could only guess how she'd do. Plenty of subordinates have diverged from their superiors when it appears they are harming teh mission. Powell did and was essentially fired for it, so they looked for a puppet. Doing your duty and being a head-nodder are different and she is the latter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #54 April 16, 2006 QuackWhen an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skykittykat 0 #55 April 17, 2006 Could Americans take another 4 years of "keep it in the Family" leadership? Bush - Father was President and Brother (Jeb) managed to get Jnr his Presidency (remember Jnr's first election and how the vote of Florida and lawyers got him elected???). Clinton - Hillary and Bill had decided early on that whomever got the furthest would support the other. Bill got there, but Hillary has shown that she influenced her husband's politics and even took on some power herself which could be questionable under the American democratatic policy (another argument). Soooo, America possibly has 2 front runners who influence or have influenced past leaders, so no matter which of the 2 you vote for, America will not change, especially in it's foreign policy. Liz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #56 April 17, 2006 Powell stated in the first election he was on for only 1 term. He did dissagree and if he hadn't had the 1 term plan maybe he would have been fired or "encouraged" ro re-retire, like some other Generals have done.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #57 April 17, 2006 QuoteI think that it would encourage people to vote for a third party if we had proportional representation - where the legislative seats would be allocated to each party by the percentage of votes that they won. I think that this is the only way that a third party candidate will ever have a chance of winning a presidential election, because it's the only way to stop people from thinking that they are "wasting their vote" if they vote for anyone other than the two main party candidates. How do you propose to do that, when you're voting for individual senators and representatives?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #58 April 17, 2006 QuoteCould Americans take another 4 years of "keep it in the Family" leadership? Bush - Father was President and Brother (Jeb) managed to get Jnr his Presidency (remember Jnr's first election and how the vote of Florida and lawyers got him elected???). Clinton - Hillary and Bill had decided early on that whomever got the furthest would support the other. Bill got there, but Hillary has shown that she influenced her husband's politics and even took on some power herself which could be questionable under the American democratatic policy (another argument). Soooo, America possibly has 2 front runners who influence or have influenced past leaders, so no matter which of the 2 you vote for, America will not change, especially in it's foreign policy. Liz Jeb managed to get Jr. the Presidency, hmm? Was this before or after the Supremes struck down the hijinks that the Dems were trying to pull? You know, the recounts and delays that were against Florida law??Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #59 April 17, 2006 QuoteQuoteI think that it would encourage people to vote for a third party if we had proportional representation - where the legislative seats would be allocated to each party by the percentage of votes that they won. I think that this is the only way that a third party candidate will ever have a chance of winning a presidential election, because it's the only way to stop people from thinking that they are "wasting their vote" if they vote for anyone other than the two main party candidates. How do you propose to do that, when you're voting for individual senators and representatives? I'm not very good at explaining some things, so I'll just post a link that describes some possible ways that it could work. I'm not sure which one would work best... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation (Oh no! I posted a link to wikipedia right after I was making fun of it. ) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #60 April 17, 2006 I understood what you meant... I was trying to figure out how you'd go about it, since you're voting for individual senators and representatives. The only way I could see that happening would be if they changed the laws so that it was proportionally divided either on a state or federal level for the representatives... wouldn't be able to do that with the Senators as easily. Of course, then you'd have the fringe parties clogging the system with all sorts of silly bills... It'd end up all talk and nothing getting done... Hmm...all talk and nothing getting done... that might not be such a bad thing.... ;o)Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #61 April 18, 2006 QuoteI don't think it's the job of the government to provide social programs or medical care. That's our own responsibility. The government exists to protect our lives, liberty and property from criminals and outside forces. I don't have a problem with the government making it easier for private organizations to provide certain services, but whenever the government tries to do more than that, it usually messes up royally and wastes huge amounts of money on things that don't work. We've had a welfare system in place for decades now, and it doesn't work. Throwing more money at a system that doesn't work isn't going to make it work. It's just going to waste more money that could be spent actually helping people. Actually, at this point I'm voting for Nightingale. And sending flowers. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #62 April 18, 2006 Nightingale '08? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #63 April 18, 2006 Quote Nightingale '08? I say the winner of Hitlery and Jeb fighting to the death in a cage match should have to face Nightengale Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #64 April 18, 2006 Quote Nightingale '08? I would definitely vote for you if you were the third option in that election. And actually, I think that you would make a pretty good President. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #65 April 18, 2006 Mark my words Mit Romney will be the new POTUS in 08' ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #66 April 18, 2006 Quote Hillary Jeb Green/Libertarian Party no-name/Ralph Nader Oh God we're really fucked Hey, where's the "Sock Monkey" option? I wanna vote for a sock monkey for President! Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #67 April 18, 2006 QuoteHey, where's the "Sock Monkey" option? I wanna vote for a sock monkey for President! Nightingale would kick Sock Monkey's ass in an election. Both straight vote and electoral. Sock Monkey might take California, but NG08 has the rest of the map. NG08 - President of the USA (that's who Alex Crowley would vote for) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
