View Poll Results: MT 2012 Presidential Poll:
President Obama
11
21.57%
GOP candidate
31
60.78%
Third party candidate
9
17.65%
Voters: 51. You may not vote on this poll
Who whould you vote for in the 2012 presidential election?
12-17-2011, 09:43 AM
#44
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,490
Total Cats: 4,079
no, he's not. it's a bunch of drivel.
100% of his campaign contributions are from unions. Therefore, he represents the worker and believes they are "losing", and it's his goal to make sure the wealth become poor, to close the gap. He doesn't necessarily want the poor to be richer, only that the rich get less rich to close the gap. It's class warfare--the rich need to pay their "fair share", and by that, he means everything.
I wonder why this is a such a prevailing message in washington...you know, with all those fat cats lobbying congress:
100% of his campaign contributions are from unions. Therefore, he represents the worker and believes they are "losing", and it's his goal to make sure the wealth become poor, to close the gap. He doesn't necessarily want the poor to be richer, only that the rich get less rich to close the gap. It's class warfare--the rich need to pay their "fair share", and by that, he means everything.
I wonder why this is a such a prevailing message in washington...you know, with all those fat cats lobbying congress:
Reply
0
0
12-17-2011, 10:00 AM
#45
That does not a capitalist make.
Corzine used his power/influence in the state/fed to do whatever he wanted -- for example, he manipulated the Commodities Future Trading Commission into giving him the greenlight to invest his customer's cash into forgien debt. He convinced his firm this would be a good idea.
In capitalism, he wouldn't need permission to do it, but his failure to produce for his clients when he lost their money wouldn't be a good business model and I wouldn't expect that business to remain in business or get bailouts to continue to operate in this manner. But at the same time, I'm sure he had some inside information that told him that the US would be bailing out Italy and he'd make his money back tenfold. This again is NOT capitalism.
Corzine sacrficed his customers in order to try to make a buck. That's pretty much the definition of our mixed ecomony: an amoral, institutionalized civil war of special interests and lobbies, all fighting to seize a momentary control of the legislative machinery, to extort some special privilege at one another’s expense by an act of government—i.e., by force.
the only end to this would be either the private sector regains its freedom and starts rebuilding or we give up and all take the road back to serfdom.
Corzine used his power/influence in the state/fed to do whatever he wanted -- for example, he manipulated the Commodities Future Trading Commission into giving him the greenlight to invest his customer's cash into forgien debt. He convinced his firm this would be a good idea.
In capitalism, he wouldn't need permission to do it, but his failure to produce for his clients when he lost their money wouldn't be a good business model and I wouldn't expect that business to remain in business or get bailouts to continue to operate in this manner. But at the same time, I'm sure he had some inside information that told him that the US would be bailing out Italy and he'd make his money back tenfold. This again is NOT capitalism.
Corzine sacrficed his customers in order to try to make a buck. That's pretty much the definition of our mixed ecomony: an amoral, institutionalized civil war of special interests and lobbies, all fighting to seize a momentary control of the legislative machinery, to extort some special privilege at one another’s expense by an act of government—i.e., by force.
the only end to this would be either the private sector regains its freedom and starts rebuilding or we give up and all take the road back to serfdom.
Reply
0
0
12-17-2011, 05:49 PM
#49
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,490
Total Cats: 4,079
I picked my campaign song:
It's been a long time
Now it's time to get your bubble burst
Things are bad enough in this world
Why do you have to make them worse?
Day after day, you just gotta get it
So sick and tired of your bitching and complaining
So long you've been oppressed while others lives are gaining
Want reparations, you're needy and deserving
Can't understand why some are served while you're doing the serving
Anything but responsibility
Where's my slice?
I want more than equal rights
I want everything for free!
You waste your time concerned with what others are earning
You want a revolution to start the tables turning
A demonstration to make a better nation
We'll spend the day protesting all the problems that we're facing
Anything but face reality
Where's my slice...
Your brilliant theory
how the world owes you a living
You'll take away from others
the things they should be giving
They own the pie and you want your share
Whoever told you life was fair?
You were dealt your hand - now play it
Where's my slice...
Now it's time to get your bubble burst
Things are bad enough in this world
Why do you have to make them worse?
Day after day, you just gotta get it
So sick and tired of your bitching and complaining
So long you've been oppressed while others lives are gaining
Want reparations, you're needy and deserving
Can't understand why some are served while you're doing the serving
Anything but responsibility
Where's my slice?
I want more than equal rights
I want everything for free!
You waste your time concerned with what others are earning
You want a revolution to start the tables turning
A demonstration to make a better nation
We'll spend the day protesting all the problems that we're facing
Anything but face reality
Where's my slice...
Your brilliant theory
how the world owes you a living
You'll take away from others
the things they should be giving
They own the pie and you want your share
Whoever told you life was fair?
You were dealt your hand - now play it
Where's my slice...
Reply
0
0
01-05-2012, 05:30 PM
#53
i can't vote eithor of the three options you proposes at this time gearhead
im not gonna vote republican just cause they are republican
you cant just go throwing Ron Paul in with the rest cuz he is hardly comparable to them
concerning this thread i am writing in ron paul
im not gonna vote republican just cause they are republican
you cant just go throwing Ron Paul in with the rest cuz he is hardly comparable to them
concerning this thread i am writing in ron paul
Reply
0
0
01-05-2012, 05:53 PM
#54
If Ron Paul gets the nom, Ron Paul.
I'm not voting for the rest of the Republican field because their just voting for Obama.
If I vote for Obama, I'm going to Brainying vote for Obama.
/Slight update from previous posts. Except for Paul, the Republican field is nothing but Obama clones the more I find out about their positions and past stances.
I'm not voting for the rest of the Republican field because their just voting for Obama.
If I vote for Obama, I'm going to Brainying vote for Obama.
/Slight update from previous posts. Except for Paul, the Republican field is nothing but Obama clones the more I find out about their positions and past stances.
Reply
0
0
01-05-2012, 06:24 PM
#58
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,490
Total Cats: 4,079
no, I never said that; voting for anyone other than the republican nominee is voting for obama.
but it's really not like your one electoral vote counts--it's not going to change the outcome. But you should use it to vote to protest against the opposition, that's the only real valid reason to vote.
but it's really not like your one electoral vote counts--it's not going to change the outcome. But you should use it to vote to protest against the opposition, that's the only real valid reason to vote.
Reply
0
0
01-05-2012, 06:27 PM
#59
im so sick of hearing this
"if you vote for RP as a third party candidate then you are just letting obama get the win" bullcrap
so just because i want to vote for a proven constitutionalist who has the most consistent voting record and he is not one of the big two then I am the bad guy?
yeah thats a pile of crap if i have ever seen one
yeah im bad for voting for the most consistent and loyal just because he is not one of the big two
plain and simple
if RP goes third party
his supporters wont back down
so the crowd that will "vote for anyone but obama" should then vote for RP
EDIT: so way i see it is if RP goes third party and you dont vote for him you are voting for obama.
"if you vote for RP as a third party candidate then you are just letting obama get the win" bullcrap
so just because i want to vote for a proven constitutionalist who has the most consistent voting record and he is not one of the big two then I am the bad guy?
yeah thats a pile of crap if i have ever seen one
yeah im bad for voting for the most consistent and loyal just because he is not one of the big two
plain and simple
if RP goes third party
his supporters wont back down
so the crowd that will "vote for anyone but obama" should then vote for RP
EDIT: so way i see it is if RP goes third party and you dont vote for him you are voting for obama.
Reply
0
0
01-05-2012, 06:28 PM
#60
That's untrue, Brainy. I've already explained the problem behind that logic.
However, here's another. Let's say Ron Paul runs third party, under the support of another political party.
If he gets 5% of the vote....
We just got a viable third party.
So long as people retain the mindset you are displaying, we're going to be stuck in the situation we are forever. The current situation is not acceptable, and what you are saying implicitly consents to the situation we are in.
(Ninja edit) Holy Brainy. Jared and I agree on this topic completely.
However, here's another. Let's say Ron Paul runs third party, under the support of another political party.
If he gets 5% of the vote....
We just got a viable third party.
So long as people retain the mindset you are displaying, we're going to be stuck in the situation we are forever. The current situation is not acceptable, and what you are saying implicitly consents to the situation we are in.
(Ninja edit) Holy Brainy. Jared and I agree on this topic completely.
Reply
0
0
