Obama the war monger; Left still silent...

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

You illustrate the problem just fine. Now, either it is insurmountable or it is not. If people who say "#### you, #######s..." are supported, it can be surmounted. If people who say "Can't we just all get along..." are supported...

Okay, I think I've been perfectly clear in plain, understandable English. But you still refuse to understand that the 5 people who are paying attention DO NOT get to pick the President or Congress. And that you cannot force the other 300 million to start paying attention or want what you want.

You seem to think that the masses will get a clue and vote against their oppressors, but if you take a brief peek at history, you will find that that almost never happens. Or there would be no such thing as North Korea, or Cuba, or Venezuela, or China.

The green Left tried their hardest to rally behind Ralph Nader, and you see where that got them. All those "Google Ron Paul" signs last year and all his supposed support? Nothing. Not even a good showing.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of people will vote for whoever the media tells them to vote for. THE END. And until the media starts touting you or Mickey Mouse or whoever, your vote that is not for either the Democrat or the Republican is wasted and of no consequence. Pissing in the wind, as it were.

AND! You still can't seem to wrap your mind around the fact that we have an election primary in this country, and the winners of that go on to the show. Don't win the primary? Thanks for playing and we have some nice parting gifts.

This is all demonstrable truth, and why you have such a hard time accepting it is beyond me.

[vraiblonde]

Remember Howard Dean, and how he was supposed to be the hands-down favorite and walk away with the 2004 Dem nomination?

Pffft.

The media told the sheeple to vote for John Kerry, so they did.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Okay, I think I've been perfectly clear in plain, understandable English. But you still refuse to understand that the 5 people who are paying attention DO NOT get to pick the President or Congress. And that you cannot force the other 300 million to start paying attention or want what you want.

You seem to think that the masses will get a clue and vote against their oppressors, but if you take a brief peek at history, you will find that that almost never happens. Or there would be no such thing as North Korea, or Cuba, or Venezuela, or China.

The green Left tried their hardest to rally behind Ralph Nader, and you see where that got them. All those "Google Ron Paul" signs last year and all his supposed support? Nothing. Not even a good showing.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of people will vote for whoever the media tells them to vote for. THE END. And until the media starts touting you or Mickey Mouse or whoever, your vote that is not for either the Democrat or the Republican is wasted and of no consequence. Pissing in the wind, as it were.

AND! You still can't seem to wrap your mind around the fact that we have an election primary in this country, and the winners of that go on to the show. Don't win the primary? Thanks for playing and we have some nice parting gifts.

This is all demonstrable truth, and why you have such a hard time accepting it is beyond me.

Oh look! Another opportunity for us to get into another fight over politics!

Why do you care? Why do you even bother if your rock solid, never gonna change position is that there is no hope and no way out of this? Why do you keep commenting on a race you see as totally and completely unwinable?

My goal has been and always will be to talk about issues, work on my own thoughts and opinion and hope that people WILL care more and WILL make better, as I see it, decisions in who and what they support.

What's yours?

[twinoaks207 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

Oh look! Another opportunity for us to get into another fight over politics!

Why do you care? Why do you even bother if your rock solid, never gonna change position is that there is no hope and no way out of this? Why do you keep commenting on a race you see as totally and completely unwinable?

My goal has been and always will be to talk about issues, work on my own thoughts and opinion and hope that people WILL care more and WILL make better, as I see it, decisions in who and what they support.

What's yours?

You both care as evidenced by your posts. You just disagree on the method needed to solve the problem.

(Okay, fire on me now -- I was hoping for a distraction element here as I hate to see major political disagreements between married people )

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

AND! You still can't seem to wrap your mind around the fact that we have an election primary in this country, and the winners of that go on to the show. Don't win the primary? Thanks for playing and we have some nice parting gifts.

There's at least a silver lining - somewhere.

I've argued repeatedly that I could care less if a party chooses NOT to have primaries. They just come out and say "we've thought about, and we like THIS guy - he's our man".

Think about it. You create a totally new party. It has like, ten members, and you call it the Surprise Party. You created it. So you nominate yourself for the election in November. Why not? It's your party - you don't need to ask for a "vote".

The problem ISN'T so much that after the primaries are done, we just have who's left. That gives the false impression that primaries are like the first round or two of voting, like American Idol or something. It isn't. It's the two main parties' time to pick THEIR candidate, and primaries themselves are somewhat recent ideas. It's been pretty much in our lifetime that voters pick the candidate - prior to our generation, they were picked at the convention, by delegates.

But I digress. Again, it's irrelevant who wins the primaries. We're missing the fact that the two major parties rule the roost. If they nominate a dead cat and an old wino, ONE OF THEM will be President, because of a dozen reasons why third parties get no say. Aside from Ross Perot, they never get a part of a televised debate. They don't get pilloried on late night TV. You rarely see national ads, and the nightly news never discusses them. They have no mass appeal.

It kind of reminds me of the less exciting Olympic events. I mean, who cares if we won GOLD in women's fencing or men's skeet shooting? (We did). What we CARE about is LOSING to the Chinese in Women's gymnastics. That's what the networks covered. No one talks about the gaffes of the Libertarians, the Greens, the Constitution Party. They don't care. They have an hour of your time, and it's the McCain/Obama show. That's who you're watching.

If we want to break the way things are done, SOMEONE has to come up with a third way. A third option that will get people energized.

If I had the money, I'd do the Brewster's Millions "None of the above" thing.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

What's yours?

Right now my goal is to get people to understand WHAT the problem is. Until that is identified, there will be no solution because you cannot solve a problem when you're barking up the wrong tree.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

But I digress. Again, it's irrelevant who wins the primaries. We're missing the fact that the two major parties rule the roost. If they nominate a dead cat and an old wino, ONE OF THEM will be President, because of a dozen reasons why third parties get no say. Aside from Ross Perot, they never get a part of a televised debate. They don't get pilloried on late night TV. You rarely see national ads, and the nightly news never discusses them. They have no mass appeal.

It kind of reminds me of the less exciting Olympic events. I mean, who cares if we won GOLD in women's fencing or men's skeet shooting? (We did). What we CARE about is LOSING to the Chinese in Women's gymnastics. That's what the networks covered. No one talks about the gaffes of the Libertarians, the Greens, the Constitution Party. They don't care. They have an hour of your time, and it's the McCain/Obama show. That's who you're watching.

If we want to break the way things are done, SOMEONE has to come up with a third way. A third option that will get people energized.

I am pleased that someone else gets it.

[SamSpade]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Remember Howard Dean, and how he was supposed to be the hands-down favorite and walk away with the 2004 Dem nomination?

Pffft.

The media told the sheeple to vote for John Kerry, so they did.

Kind of. Dean's popularity was based SOLELY on Internet interest. Pundits are learning more and more it means nothing.

But Kerry was selected for exactly the same reason Dukakis was selected, and probably why Dole and McCain were selected. They generated the least amount of controversy. They got in, *BECAUSE* they were boring. Funny, huh? Obama gets rock star appeal because for once, for ONCE, SOMEONE gets up to the plate and *doesn't* sound like a droning robot. Really, who could listen to Hillary for more than five minutes and not beg for deafness?

Dukakis got nominated because as time wore on, everybody else did something stupid, said something out of line, had some dirty laundry that got aired. He didn't. He was dull as dirt.

Same for the others. They were the last man standing because there was nothing about them to knock down.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by twinoaks207

You both care as evidenced by your posts. You just disagree on the method needed to solve the problem.

(Okay, fire on me now -- I was hoping for a distraction element here as I hate to see major political disagreements between married people )

We don't have major political disagreements. On the vast majority of issues, we agree. Where we fight is in what the problem is; she thinks it's the media, they control everyone and we can't do anything about them. I think it's the people and we can very much control who we vote for.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

Right now my goal is to get people to understand WHAT the problem is. Until that is identified, there will be no solution because you cannot solve a problem when you're barking up the wrong tree.

What's the problem?