Open Jam

[shreddersteve]

It actually made no change in existing law. The time to get upset about it was 10 years ago. And as for 3rd parties, so many people are disgusted with both the Dems and the Reps that if another party put forth a reasonable platform they would win easily. The reason why the existing 3rd parties can't get above 1% is because they are extremist nutjobs.

You're right. The patriot act already had provisions in it that took care of habeus corpus, and I was pissed 10 years ago. My point was that Democrats have traditionally protected civil liberties and Obama has done the EXACT OPPOSITE of that with section 21 of NDAA and no one in the Democrat party seems to care so they are equally as hypocritical as Republicans who bitch about Obama overspending when Bush did the same fucking thing. Dems and Repubs are both hypocritical parties that are beyond saving. You claim that the leaders of the third parties are nut jobs, then you don't have a clue. Watch the 3rd party debate that Larry king hosted. Any of the major third party candidates would be a vast improvement over Obama or Romney.

[isaac42]

The hypocrisy of accepting republican deficit spending on the military while screaming about the democrats and "big government" is astounding.

I am no longer astounded. It's amazing what a person can get used to.

[isaac42]

You fools who think electing a Democrat or Republican will make anything better makes me laugh. We are trillions of dollars in deficit and BOTH parties got us here. Obama is a fucking liar who has damn near done the opposite of everything he said he was going to do. Democrats are supposed to protect our civil liberties and stop bullshit like the Patriot Act, but instead Obama cracked down on marijuana dispenserys that were legal under state law and then he signed the FUCKING NDAA which eliminates Habeaus Corpus and Posse Comatatus. Obama is a fucking liar.

Mitt Romney is even worse.

You fucking morons arguing about Obama or Romney might as well be arguing about Coke or Pepsi because they are both the same fucking thing with VERY MINOR differences.

You want a change? Vote for a 3rd party.

That's the crux, as far as I'm concerned. There are several issues on which I disagree with Obama, but, on every one of them, Romney is worse.

[TubeAddict]

Dems and Repubs are both hypocritical parties that are beyond saving. You claim that the leaders of the third parties are nut jobs, then you don't have a clue. Watch the 3rd party debate that Larry king hosted. Any of the major third party candidates would be a vast improvement over Obama or Romney.

I joined the Libertarian party in 1978: I've been watching 3rd parties for a long time and there is a reason why I said what I did. Look at what Anderson and Perot or even Nader did in comparison to the 3rd parties: they're a joke and until they wake up and stop catering to narrow extremist fringes they will never advance.

In 2016, it is likely that declared Dems will drop to below 25% and declared Reps below 20%, which means that the majority will not be strongly aligned with either party. A smart candidate who could promote a reasonable platform could easily win a majority of the votes, but it won't happen. . .Christie will be elected in 2016.

[isaac42]

The all or nothing system isn't conducive to 3rd parties. You want change? Change the electoral system. Good luck with that

There is a push to force states to allocate their electoral votes to whomever receives the most popular votes. That might help. Wouldn't change Congress, though, and I think that's where the real problem lies.

[shreddersteve]

That's the crux, as far as I'm concerned. There are several issues on which I disagree with Obama, but, on every one of them, Romney is worse.

Yes he is. Romney calls Obama out on the defecit, yet the Republicans pushed that first domino. Romney will do nothing for the economy unless you work for a military contractor. We know what Obama is going to do and it hasn't been working. I truly believe America is fucked either way. With Obama we're fucked sideways, with Romney we'll be fucked from behind. Personally I don't like either position.

[shreddersteve]

There is a push to force states to allocate their electoral votes to whomever receives the most popular votes. That might help. Wouldn't change Congress, though, and I think that's where the real problem lies.

I'd say that congress needs term limits NOW. Lobbyists run congress. They fucking run it.

Eliminate super PAC's
HARSH regulation on lobbyists and banks.
MONEY IS NOT FREE SPEECH and Corporations are not people!
Term limits for congress.

That's where I'd start.

[shreddersteve]

I joined the Libertarian party in 1978: I've been watching 3rd parties for a long time and there is a reason why I said what I did. Look at what Anderson and Perot or even Nader did in comparison to the 3rd parties: they're a joke and until they wake up and stop catering to narrow extremist fringes they will never advance. In 2016, it is likely that declared Dems will drop to below 25% and declared Reps below 20%, which means that the majority will not be strongly aligned with either party. A smart candidate who could promote a reasonable platform could easily win a majority of the votes, but it won't happen. . .Christie will be elected in 2016.

Romney's winning this one. Mark my words. Also, I do agree that certain 3rd party leaders do cater too much to the fringes, but many don't. Gary Johnson is very reasonable and IMO he's a far better choice than Romney or Obama.

[isaac42]

I'd say that congress needs term limits NOW. Lobbyists run congress. They fucking run it. Eliminate super PAC's HARSH regulation on lobbyists and banks. MONEY IS NOT FREE SPEECH and Corporations are not people! Term limits for congress. That's where I'd start.

I think term limits would make the lobbyist situation worse, not better. I agree with the rest of your suggestions.

[isaac42]

Romney's winning this one. Mark my words. Also, I do agree that certain 3rd party leaders do cater too much to the fringes, but many don't. Gary Johnson is very reasonable and IMO he's a far better choice than Romney or Obama.

My experience with libertarians indicate that most are looney fringers already. Gary Johnson is certainly catering to them.

[shreddersteve]

My experience with libertarians indicate that most are looney fringers already. Gary Johnson is certainly catering to them.

In what regard? Which of his policies are looney?

[MrKnobs]

There is a push to force states to allocate their electoral votes to whomever receives the most popular votes. That might help. Wouldn't change Congress, though, and I think that's where the real problem lies.

Do you mean proportionally? I'd agree with that. Terry D.

[OU8124ME]

Good Luck !

[OU8124ME]

Give me Ohio, and Florida

and

Kiss

Obama

Goodbye !

[MrKnobs]

Give me Ohio, and Florida and Kiss Obama Goodbye !

Are you a one percenter, making more than two million dollars a year? Because otherwise, you'll be very sorry if Romney is elected. :idk: Terry D.

[OU8124ME]

Just give me

Ohio

and

I'll Be Happy

[shreddersteve]

Are you a one percenter, making more than two million dollars a year? Because otherwise, you'll be very sorry if Romney is elected. :idk: Terry D.

Not so sure that will make a difference economically speaking weather it's Obama or Romney. Look at Obama's record. He has propped up the top 1% just as much as his Republican "enemies". Obama has done NOTHING to bring the banksters who created this collapse to justice. Obama has continued to bail out wall street and let American homeowners get fucked in the ass. The legislation he signed to help homeowners would have worked if he would have regulated the banks and made them abide by the law, but instead he looked the other way and 95% of homeowners that were underwater were DENIED permanent modifications on their loans. GO OBAMA. He's a fucking shill for the banks just like Romney is. Obama has done nothing to help the economy. He hasn't proposed doing anything worthwhile to fix it either. On that same note Romney has proposed actions that would MAKE IT WORSE.

[Trashika]

Mitt will bring our freedoms back. He will secure our liberty and vanquish all our foes. He will balance the budget and get working people working again. He will help job creators and stop global warming. He will increased coal production by 40% and make America energy independent, and he will pass Medicare back to the states because that's what they want: local control. He will repeal Obamacare and keep all of its parts in place though. He will build ships for the military, who don't know they need them. It's an election about freedom, and who Americans really are. You are either with a real American or that Kenyan Marxist fucker. -Average American plumber

[shreddersteve]

Mitt will bring our freedoms back. He will secure our liberty and vanquish all our foes. He will balance the budget and get working people working again. He will help job creators and stop global warming. He will increased coal production by 40% and make America energy independent, and he will pass Medicare back to the states because that's what they want: local control. He will repeal Obamacare and keep all of its parts in place though. He will build ships for the military, who don't know they need them. It's an election about freedom, and who Americans really are. You are either with a real American or that Kenyan Marxist fucker. -Average American plumber

Unfortunately I have friends who believe this bullshit.

[isaac42]

In what regard? Which of his policies are looney?

I am not familiar with any of his personal policies, if he has any that differ from those of the Libertarian Party. But libertarianism, much like communism, is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature and/or economics. For a quick primer on what might happen if governmental controls were removed from industry, take a look at the late 19th Century. The result was the big trusts, which had to be broken by the government. Truly laissez-faire economics leads inevitably to monopolies and unrestrained corporate power.