Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

[jtwcornell91]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

That won't help unless the open primary is IRV.

Condorcet all the way!

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

OK, I'll take some blame on this one due to lack of context. Michael Savage has a new book out entitled "Trickle Down Tyranny". It, along with the statement I made, have absolutely nothing to do with supply side economics, but rather the policies that the Obama administration have been setting forth.

Go on...

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

Ok you need to make up your mind. The post before this one you say that Obama is putting forth the theories he learned from a Communist then in this post say he is ruling under the tyranny of Trickle Down Economics. See that doesn't work, you cannot be both. It ranks up there with him being both a Black Christian Fundamentalist and a Kenyan Muslim...you cant have it both ways.

Unless Regan Republicans are now Communists...now THAT would be quite a shift in the political spectrum

OK, I'll take some blame on this one due to lack of context. Michael Savage has a new book out entitled "Trickle Down Tyranny". It, along with the statement I made, have absolutely nothing to do with supply side economics, but rather the policies that the Obama administration have been setting forth.

[Handyman]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

Trickle down tyranny? Sorry, that's Obama.

Ok you need to make up your mind. The post before this one you say that Obama is putting forth the theories he learned from a Communist then in this post say he is ruling under the tyranny of Trickle Down Economics. See that doesn't work, you cannot be both. It ranks up there with him being both a Black Christian Fundamentalist and a Kenyan Muslim...you cant have it both ways.

Unless Regan Republicans are now Communists...now THAT would be quite a shift in the political spectrum

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

Trickle down tyranny? Sorry, that's Obama.

Plus, the last time I checked, Gary Johnson is not a member of the GOP.

And Gary Johnson has as much chance of being elected as my big toe.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

No, I have no realization. I do realize however that the only idea the GOP has is more trickle down. When they get a fresh idea let me know.

Trickle down tyranny? Sorry, that's Obama.

Plus, the last time I checked, Gary Johnson is not a member of the GOP.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

You do realise that he is applying just about every single theory that Frank Marshall Davis, member of the Communist Party, taught him, yes?

No, I have no realization. I do realize however that the only idea the GOP has is more trickle down. When they get a fresh idea let me know.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

Obama is less of a socialist than GW Bush was. But, all I ever hear nowadays is the term socialist. Which Obama isn't, and the US isn't and has never been.

You do realise that he is applying just about every single theory that Frank Marshall Davis, member of the Communist Party, taught him, yes?

[joecct]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

2004 came down to a few "malfunctions" in Ohio voting machines. That's pretty darn close.

And 1960 came down to how many people (dead or alive) voted in Chicago. Good move by Hizzoner, but there are probably shenanigans in every election from voting early/often, ineligible voters, to make up the totals so we can win.

Who cares?

Funny anecdote I heard on Rush radio on the way home from the golf course this PM -- you have to show proof of citizenship to get an Obama birth certificate coffee mug (it's a campaign donation).

[Kepler]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

If you follow the lamestream media's mantra that this will be a "50/50" election, then you can buy into the hype about Gary Johnson being a factor. I personally don't think this election will be any closer than 2004 one way or the other, hence the 500 votes Johnson wins will not be decisive.

2004 came down to a few "malfunctions" in Ohio voting machines. That's pretty darn close.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

Then perhaps it's time to see the death of the Democrat party and the rise of the Socialist party?

Obama is less of a socialist than GW Bush was. But, all I ever hear nowadays is the term socialist. Which Obama isn't, and the US isn't and has never been.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

Each party has its special interests. Its just the choice of those interests. If you say the GOP has special interests of big oil, military industrial complex and major banks...its difficult to say whether its driven by causes or money. Its not hard to say why the Dems are looking at unions and environmental companies as its not where you want to be if your looking for hand outs.

Then perhaps it's time to see the death of the Democrat party and the rise of the Socialist party?

[Rover]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

Most of Johnson's voters will be stoned to the bejeezus come election day, and therefore might have trouble making it to the polls unless they're handing out free snacks that day.

If you follow the lamestream media's mantra that this will be a "50/50" election, then you can buy into the hype about Gary Johnson being a factor. I personally don't think this election will be any closer than 2004 one way or the other, hence the 500 votes Johnson wins will not be decisive. I'd be more interested in former VA Congressman Virgil Goode (D to I to R-Liberty U) and his impact in Virginia since he just made the ballot. That has the potential to be a very close race.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

I highly doubt special interests is the draw, unless you consider Constitutionally protected individual liberties to be a special interest. Granted, you can't get away from special interests anywhere on the political spectrum. It isn't like the Democrat shoot-off known as the Green party that mostly focuses on environmental issues; that's definitely special interests. The same could also be said for New York State's Working Families party, Independence party, or Conservative party; I'm sure your state have similar party differences.

Each party has its special interests. Its just the choice of those interests. If you say the GOP has special interests of big oil, military industrial complex and major banks...its difficult to say whether its driven by causes or money. Its not hard to say why the Dems are looking at unions and environmental companies as its not where you want to be if your looking for hand outs.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Gary Johnson Part I: Why be slaves to a two-party system?

Potentially good. Or special interests. Potentially bad. But ideologically nuetral on the spectrum...I'll take that.

As I said, know nothing about this guy.

I highly doubt special interests is the draw, unless you consider Constitutionally protected individual liberties to be a special interest. Granted, you can't get away from special interests anywhere on the political spectrum. It isn't like the Democrat shoot-off known as the Green party that mostly focuses on environmental issues; that's definitely special interests. The same could also be said for New York State's Working Families party, Independence party, or Conservative party; I'm sure your state have similar party differences.