PDA

View Full Version : Magic Button Replacement for the last two Obama Years?



Kurmugeon
10-21-2014, 08:29 PM
So, let's pretend you're in the twilight zone, and a man hands you a magic box.

The box has a button, or more exactly, a series of buttons.

If you press the button, instead of having to endure two more years of Obama, you get a magically replaced President.

The Surrogate only gets the last two years, and he has to start with the mess created by the current buffoon...

But at least you don't have to suffer the extremes, violations and/or apathy of the lamest of ducks.

Who would you push a button for?

I'm actually seeking names, but I'll throw out a beginners poll, but would like names not given, more than anything.

Keep in mind, for good or ill, he/she only gets the two years, and CANNOT run for President in 2016.

Additionally, in 2022, the same choice will be given again...

-

Ethereal
10-21-2014, 08:36 PM
Defintely Ron Paul. Ralph Nader second choice. The rest of them are just neocons who would have started WWIII by now, although we might already be in it. Hard to tell.

GrassrootsConservative
10-21-2014, 08:44 PM
Ron Paul 100%. Didn't even read the other options TBH.

Cigar
10-21-2014, 09:40 PM
So, let's pretend you're in the twilight zone, and a man hands you a magic box.

The box has a button, or more exactly, a series of buttons.

If you press the button, instead of having to endure two more years of Obama, you get a magically replaced President.

The Surrogate only gets the last two years, and he has to start with the mess created by the current buffoon...

But at least you don't have to suffer the extremes, violations and/or apathy of the lamest of ducks.

Who would you push a button for?

I'm actually seeking names, but I'll throw out a beginners poll, but would like names not given, more than anything.

Keep in mind, for good or ill, he/she only gets the two years, and CANNOT run for President in 2016.

Additionally, in 2022, the same choice will be given again...

-

http://vinteeage.com/product-images/rub-one-out-t-shirt-road-kill-t-shirts-1.jpg (http://vinteeage.com/rub-one-out-t-shirt-road-kill-t-shirts/)

Redrose
10-21-2014, 09:55 PM
Because my choice would be prevented from running in 2016 I won't pick my favorite candidate. Considering how weak our economy is I would choose Donald Trump to get us back on track in two years. He is a phenomenal businessman if nothing else. I'd get him a hairnet though. Then I would hope either Romney or Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz would take 2016. Dr. Ben Carson would be great in a cabinet position.

Kurmugeon
10-21-2014, 10:03 PM
So far, the write in candidate with the most votes has been, on other forums (currently tracking 8) .... Kim Kardashian.

I kid you not!

9330

Cigar
10-21-2014, 10:06 PM
http://dealer-communications.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/easy_button.png (http://www.slideshare.net/SaltStack/forrest-alvarez-salt-formulas-and-states-salt-conf-32725456)

Redrose
10-21-2014, 10:15 PM
So far, the write in candidate with the most votes has been, on other forums (currently tracking 8) .... Kim Kardashian.

I kid you not!

9330


That mental midget was asked how she would solve starvation in third would countries and she answered "I'd tell them to eat more".

Those aren't implants in her butt, it's her brains.

Anyone voting for her should never be allowed out without adult supervision.

Kurmugeon
10-22-2014, 03:43 AM
That mental midget was asked how she would solve starvation in third would countries and she answered "I'd tell them to eat more".

Those aren't implants in her butt, it's her brains.

Anyone voting for her should never be allowed out without adult supervision.

I was a bit amazed myself. Desperation I guess. Wants away from the nightmare they created, and so they latch onto the first thing they see as not "Evil Republican" and, in their eyes, attractive.

Anyone who would vote to re-elect Obama has to be pretty twisted and ignorant.

-

Kurmugeon
10-22-2014, 09:26 PM
Because my choice would be prevented from running in 2016 I won't pick my favorite candidate. Considering how weak our economy is I would choose Donald Trump to get us back on track in two years. He is a phenomenal businessman if nothing else. I'd get him a hairnet though. Then I would hope either Romney or Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz would take 2016. Dr. Ben Carson would be great in a cabinet position.

Some of the people who have been Write-In Nominated have been interesting.

I agree that a Business Management oriented leader could do allot of good for America right now, but because of the structure of Congress controlling the purse strings, having the Executive aboard while important from a leadership perspective, is less crucial to that effort than having a fiscal conservative majority in Congress.

-

Peter1469
10-22-2014, 09:51 PM
Can we pick someone random out of the phone book?

Kurmugeon
10-22-2014, 10:02 PM
Can we pick someone random out of the phone book?

Well, at least lets make sure its not a Washington D.C. phone book....

-

Kurmugeon
10-22-2014, 10:15 PM
Ron Paul is by far the most constantly well supported candidate of the Poll pre-selected names.

On Leftie oriented forums, the name Dave Mustaine often comes up. Also, Kim Kardashian is very popular as a write-in in some quarters, Go Figure?!

Jon Huntsman, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Clint Eastwood have also been Write-Ins.

Surprisingly, Hillary has almost no support.

-

Peter1469
10-22-2014, 10:26 PM
Clint Eastwood would be a great stand in for two years.

Captain Obvious
10-23-2014, 07:17 AM
http://i.imgur.com/wJbce.jpg

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 08:06 AM
Ralph Nader.

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 09:02 AM
Who is that porn star who has run in the past? She would be a good fit for DC.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 09:06 AM
Ralph Nader.

Why?

What good things would Ralph Nader, given a two year free mini-term, do for the United States?

-

Cigar
10-23-2014, 09:07 AM
http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTIwNzQyMTg5OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwNzQzMzk4._V1_S Y317_CR10,0,214,317_AL_.jpg (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067741/)

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 09:18 AM
The poll is silly.

unRepublicans have already settled on Hillary as their next president.

even the ones who are casting token votes for the libertarian nominee.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 09:35 AM
The poll is silly.

unRepublicans have already settled on Hillary as their next president.

even the ones who are casting token votes for the libertarian nominee.

The Poll is designed to make people THINK about what they really want in a candidate, setting for a moment, aside the pragmatic concerns of voting for who you really want being a spoiler vote for the opposition.

The Poll is designed to bring out a list of potential dark horse candidates for the 2016 election, which should be investigated and vetting EARLY by our press system, before we get another Obama, a candidate who should have been eliminated in the primary as a dangerous radical.

If we cannot identify the dark horse candidates, such as Obama, early enough, there isn't time to sufficiently vet them, before the primary election.

The Poll is not Silly at all...

-

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 09:43 AM
.

The Poll is not Silly at all...

-

I know.

the poll is not silly but the libs responding to it are.

even the ones calling themselves libertarians are supporting Hillary even if they don't realize it.

just for the record Ted Cruz would make a great replacement for the lazy golfer in chief whether its for the last 2 years of his term or the next 8 years.

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 09:44 AM
I know.

the poll is not silly but the libs responding to it are.

even the ones calling themselves libertarians are supporting Hillary even if they don't realize it.

just for the record Ted Cruz would make a great replacement for the lazy golfer in chief whether its for the last 2 years of his term or the next 8 years.

Not voting for the loser put up by the GOP isn't voting (D).

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 09:50 AM
Not voting for the loser put up by the GOP isn't voting (D).

Did you support Paul or Johnson in the 2012 GOP primary?

Captain Obvious
10-23-2014, 09:50 AM
Not voting for the loser put up by the GOP isn't voting (D).

Correct.

It's telling the GOP that they're doing it wrong.

Voting party lines is enabling the establishment.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 09:51 AM
Correct.

It's telling the GOP that they're doing it wrong.

Voting party lines is enabling the establishment.

Its saying you prefer Obama over Romney.

Captain Obvious
10-23-2014, 09:53 AM
Its saying you prefer Obama over Romney.

You're wrong on a lot of things, not sure why I pay attention to you.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 09:56 AM
You're wrong on a lot of things, not sure why I pay attention to you.


Is ron Paul or Gary Johnson president today?

Captain Obvious
10-23-2014, 09:59 AM
Is ron Paul or Gary Johnson president today?

Both were the only real conservative options.

I voted for Johnson, ergo I voted more "conservatively" than you did.

You can support the GOP all you want, I support conservatism.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 10:08 AM
Both were the only real conservative options.

I voted for Johnson, ergo I voted more "conservatively" than you did.

You can support the GOP all you want, I support conservatism.

The appropriate and pragmatic time to support Gary Johnson is in the Republican Primary.

If you want any realistic chance of ever getting a Libertarian Candidate actually into office, they need to win one of the two major party primaries.

This is what the Uber Leftie Ethnocentric Progressives accomplished when Obama beat Hillary, and Obama DID make it to the Presidency.

-

Captain Obvious
10-23-2014, 10:10 AM
The appropriate and pragmatic time to support Gary Johnson is in the Republican Primary.

If you want any realistic chance of ever getting a Libertarian Candidate actually into office, they need to win one of the two major party primaries.

This is what the Uber Leftie Ethnocentric Progressives accomplished when Obama beat Hillary, and Obama DID make it to the Presidency.

-

A vote for Romney is a vote for the establishment, no difference IMO than having Obama or Hillary in office.

So yeah, I'll keep voting third party. Maybe the GOP will finally figure it out if they keep losing and nominate a conservative candidate for a change.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 10:11 AM
Both were the only real conservative options.

I voted for Johnson, ergo I voted more "conservatively" than you did.

You can support the GOP all you want, I support conservatism.

If Johnson had won the GOP nomination I would have voted for him against Obama.

but Johnson did not win the nomination and Johnson supporters acted like little children by walking away from Romney.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 10:13 AM
A vote for Romney is a vote for the establishment, no difference IMO than having Obama or Hillary in office.

So yeah, I'll keep voting third party. Maybe the GOP will finally figure it out if they keep losing and nominate a conservative candidate for a change.

You mean you will keep punishing republicans by helping to elect democrats.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 10:15 AM
You mean you will keep punishing republicans by helping to elect democrats.

Exactly what I was thinking.

Punish your friends until they agree to help you, but assisting radicals and thieves to club your friends over the head and take their wallets.

Hmmmm.... doesn't sound very likely to achieve much to me.

-

Captain Obvious
10-23-2014, 10:19 AM
If Johnson had won the GOP nomination I would have voted for him against Obama.

but Johnson did not win the nomination and Johnson supporters acted like little children by walking away from Romney.

You have a very fictitious imagination.

I'm not really a Johnson supporter (there's a joke in there actually), he was the best independent candidate in my opinion.

I took a candidate alignment survey and I was actually highly aligned with Gary Johnson, far moreso than other candidates and it was because of conservative ideology we have in common. I was not very aligned with Romney, because he's not really a conservative.

So anyway, a vote for Romney is a vote for Obama. You are the one who put Obama in office.

I voted for a real conservative.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 10:20 AM
Exactly what I was thinking.

Punish your friends until they agree to help you, but assisting radicals and thieves to club your friends over the head and take their wallets.

Hmmmm.... doesn't sound very likely to achieve much to me.

-

It achieves exactly what democrat strategic planners wanted it to achieve.

Captain Obvious
10-23-2014, 10:20 AM
You mean you will keep punishing republicans by helping to elect democrats.

I'm sure as hell not going to reward the GOP for nominating non-conservatives.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 10:26 AM
So anyway, a vote for Romney is a vote for Obama. You are the one who put Obama in office.

.

did you ask permission before stealing and bastardizing one of my lines?

Johnson ran as a republican and that means he was duty bound to support Romney in the general election.

but instead libertarians helped elect Obama.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 10:28 AM
I'm sure as hell not going to reward the GOP for nominating non-conservatives.

Romney was more conservative than Obama.

you think you are entitled to get what you want, but no one else should get anything they want if they don't agree with you.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 10:29 AM
I'm sure as hell not going to reward the GOP for nominating non-conservatives.

Conservative is a relative term.

A President Romney would have been far more "Conservative" than another disastrous four years of Obama.

Sorry, but your obstinate, totalitarian, absolutist thought process is self-defeating and foolish.

-

Captain Obvious
10-23-2014, 10:30 AM
Conservative is a relative term.

A President Romney would have been far more "Conservative" than another disastrous four years of Obama.

Sorry, but your obstinate, totalitarian, absolutist thought process is self-defeating and foolish.

-

GW's term was wholly disastrous - economically, sociopolitically.

I voted for him first term. Then I got smart.

Sorry, you can argue from unknowns all you want, it only makes it your baseless opinion.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 10:31 AM
GW's term was wholly disastrous - economically, sociopolitically.

I voted for him first term. Then I got smart.

Sorry, you can argue from unknowns all you want, it only makes it your baseless opinion.

When you cannot win the debate with facts and logic, snidely dismiss the opposition as meaningless.... are you SURE you're not a Liberal?

-

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 10:34 AM
GW's term was wholly disastrous - economically, sociopolitically.

I voted for him first term. Then I got smart.

Sorry, you can argue from unknowns all you want, it only makes it your baseless opinion.

If he lives that long 50 years from now the Captain will still be blaming Bush for his hatred of the GOP.

And he will still be contributing to ultra lib democrat party election wins.

Captain Obvious
10-23-2014, 10:35 AM
When you cannot win the debate with facts and logic, snidely dismiss the opposition as meaningless.... are you SURE you're not a Liberal?

-

Talking to a mirror?

:biglaugh:

You and Mac go jerk each other off now, I'm bored with both of you.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 10:38 AM
If he lives that long 50 years from now the Captain will still be blaming Bush for his hatred of the GOP.

And he will still be contributing to ultra lib democrat party election wins.

I am beginning to think that he's not a conservative at all, but a Leftie Shill Activist sowing discontent and distraction.

This is the Internet, where all of the "Men" are Boys, the "Women" are Men, and the young girls are FBI.

-

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 10:41 AM
I am beginning to think that he's not a conservative at all, but a Leftie Shill Activist sowing discontent and distraction.

-

There are many libs who are just ashamed to admit it.

They practice politics with a carrot on a stick enticing repubs left but never letting them eat the carrot.

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 11:10 AM
Did you support Paul or Johnson in the 2012 GOP primary? I supported Paul. Gave his team money too.

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 11:12 AM
We need to end the primary system. Just vote for the best candidate.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 11:13 AM
I supported Paul. Gave his team money too.

I voted for Gary Johnson in the primary and actually checked the box on the ballot in the general election, paused to think it through, and went back to discard that ballot as a mistake, and got a new one to vote for Romney.

It was a close thing, but I thought it THROUGH... I wish more did so.

-

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 11:26 AM
I voted for Gary Johnson in the primary and actually checked the box on the ballot in the general election, paused to think it through, and went back to discard that ballot as a mistake, and got a new one to vote for Romney.

It was a close thing, but I thought it THROUGH... I wish more did so.

-

There is a difference between voting and support.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 11:29 AM
I supported Paul. Gave his team money too.

I bet if Ron Paul had won the nomination you would have been real disappointed if all the Romney voters stayed home and he still got only the usual 3% libertarian vote anyway.

but repubs like myself who didn't support Paul in the primary would have voted for him in the general.

politically the L-crowd is living some place on Mars or Venus.

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 11:37 AM
I bet if Ron Paul had won the nomination you would have been real disappointed if all the Romney voters stayed home and he still got only the usual 3% libertarian vote anyway.

but repubs like myself who didn't support Paul in the primary would have voted for him in the general.

politically the L-crowd is living some place on Mars or Venus.

The establishment is the establishment because most people fall for that argument.

And (L) and (D) are functionally twins.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 12:04 PM
The establishment is the establishment because most people fall for that argument.

And (L) and (D) are functionally twins.

With you everything I say goes in one year and out the other.

you can't keep running libertarian assholes in repub primaries with the attitude of heads you win but tails we lose.

Your crowd are chronic 3 percenters and always will be.

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 12:13 PM
With you everything I say goes in one year and out the other.

you can't keep running libertarian assholes in repub primaries with the attitude of heads you win but tails we lose.

Your crowd are chronic 3 percenters and always will be.

I refuse to play along with the corrupt establishment. Once the rest of you get fed up with eating shit sandwiches my side will win. Until then I will watch and laugh at you.

Anyway as sort of a side issue, I think that the economy is screwed enough that no person could fix it in 2016 without enormous and devastating political damage to the president and his party. Let the dems drive the train over the cliff. Then the independents can take over. Purge you establishment types once and for all.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 12:46 PM
I refuse to play along with the corrupt establishment. Once the rest of you get fed up with eating $#@! sandwiches my side will win. Until then I will watch and laugh at you.



I think you are unwittingly playing into the establishments hands by feuding with any anti establishment conservatives who do not share your narrow views on religion
and social issues.

the GOP is ripe for change but the 3% ers are so uncompromising.

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 01:03 PM
I think you are unwittingly playing into the establishments hands by feuding with any anti establishment conservatives who do not share your narrow views on religion
and social issues.

the GOP is ripe for change but the 3% ers are so uncompromising.

Sorry, you just don't get it. The establishment dems are just like the establishment gop. That is what you support. No thanks.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 01:09 PM
The establishment dems are just like the establishment gop.

I know you have to tell yourself that so you don't feel like a damn fool every time obumer appears on tv.

but it won't work on me.

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 01:10 PM
I know you have to tell yourself that so you don't feel like a damn fool every time obumer appears on tv.

but it won't work on me.

You are a sheep.

Matty
10-23-2014, 01:12 PM
You are a sheep.
You are a unicorn. There are no perfect people. Funny that you ONLY pick on the GOP innit?

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 01:17 PM
Sorry, you just don't get it. The establishment dems are just like the establishment gop. That is what you support. No thanks.

No! they're not!

Some of them, those I designate as the "Old Guard" Republicans, have things in common with the Democrats, but they are not even close to being "Just Like Them".

Its like saying a Kitten is "Just Like" full grown Lion.

Its like saying T-38 Trainer is "Just Like" a C-5 Galaxy.

Its like saying Green Party member is "Just Like" a Democrat.

Its like saying a TEA Patriot is "Just Like" a Republican.

Words have meanings!

-

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 02:03 PM
If you can't see it, I suspect we are in for another 8 years of "Bush, Obama, next establishment hack." That is going to make 24 years. Congratulations. The sheep are well tended to I suppose.


No! they're not!

Some of them, those I designate as the "Old Guard" Republicans, have things in common with the Democrats, but they are not even close to being "Just Like Them".

Its like saying a Kitten is "Just Like" full grown Lion.

Its like saying T-38 Trainer is "Just Like" a C-5 Galaxy.

Its like saying Green Party member is "Just Like" a Democrat.

Its like saying a TEA Patriot is "Just Like" a Republican.

Words have meanings!

-

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 02:16 PM
If you can't see it, I suspect we are in for another 8 years of "Bush, Obama, next establishment hack." That is going to make 24 years. Congratulations. The sheep are well tended to I suppose.

If there is no difference, why are you so concerned about which, Democrat, or Republican, we vote for, and who wins.

Clearly, it is going to be one or the other.

What is your solution? Make damn sure the Democrat ALWAYS wins? Wow, that's deep....



In politics, and in democracy, no one, and I mean NO ONE, get to have everything just their way!

Yet you seem to have just that expectation, and make the screaming childish demands to get just that... or you help elect the Democrat.

Well, that means, from a pragmatic standpoint, you're not a Conservative Supporter, you are a Democrat Supporter.

As a Democrat Supporter, your input in the Conservative Efforts to win an election should simply be ignored.

As for the Rest of U.S., Conservatives need to learn how to consistently win the General Election, by simply showing up to vote for the Republican Candidate.

Once we are winning the General Election, on a regular basis, we can work on the finer point of getting the very best of Republican/Conservative Candidates in the Primary process.

We can work on improving the Primary process, in parallel with improving the General Election results, but if it comes at the cost of ALWAYS losing the General Election... Well, that's simply self-defeating.

-

Common Sense
10-23-2014, 02:23 PM
Did someone really say Trump?

He's left a trail of bankrupt companies in his wake. Great choice.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 02:32 PM
If there is no difference, why are you so concerned about which, Democrat, or Republican, we vote for, and who wins.

Clearly, it is going to be one or the other.

What is your solution? Make damn sure the Democrat ALWAYS wins? Wow, that's deep....


-

Its curious how these libertarian perfectionists never run in the democrat primaries or try to sabotage their candidate.

Matty
10-23-2014, 02:38 PM
Its curious how these libertarian perfectionists never run in the democrat primaries or try to sabotage the their candidate.


That has been my observation. Never once have they suggested that the democrats put forth the perfect candidate which tells me they already love democrat candidates!

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 02:38 PM
Its curious how these libertarian perfectionists never run in the democrat primaries or try to sabotage the their candidate.

Again, it is possible, that we're simply dealing with a Democrat shill.

On the Internet, the "Men" are often boys, the "Women" are often Men, and the Young Girls are FBI!

-

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 02:42 PM
That has been my observation. Never once have they suggested that the democrats put forth the perfect candidate which tells me they already love democrat candidates!

Well, you say that, but...

I AM a registered Democrat, who calls himself, when asked Political Affiliation, a Libertarian-Right with TEA Patriot Leanings, and I am here advocating that we break the power of the Progressive-Fascists by agreeing to vote for the Republican, no matter who it is, and do our best to select a good Republican in the Primary...

So, I'd say that you know at least ONE Democrat/Libertarian who suggests not supporting the Democrats.

-

Redrose
10-23-2014, 02:45 PM
Did someone really say Trump?

He's left a trail of bankrupt companies in his wake. Great choice.


I said Trump, to fill the two year span. His business saavy has established a billion dollar empire, those bankrupt businesses were not a direct result of his decision making. Those decisions were diluted long after Trump turned over control. Obama knows zip about business, a sad fact he has proven time and time again. Trump, with all his negatives, will still be 1000% better than BHO in that area. Once we get the economy healthy again, other problems will be easier to address.

Common Sense
10-23-2014, 02:52 PM
I said Trump, to fill the two year span. His business saavy has established a billion dollar empire, those bankrupt businesses were not a direct result of his decision making. Those decisions were diluted long after Trump turned over control. Obama knows zip about business, a sad fact he has proven time and time again. Trump, with all his negatives, will still be 1000% better than BHO in that area. Once we get the economy healthy again, other problems will be easier to address.

He would be an embarrassment on the world stage.

Trump himself has filed for corporate bankruptcy 4 times.

nic34
10-23-2014, 02:53 PM
Bernie Sanders, Brian Schweitzer

nic34
10-23-2014, 02:54 PM
He would be an embarrassment on the world stage.

Trump himself has filed for corporate bankruptcy 4 times.

Some call that business saavy....

nic34
10-23-2014, 02:57 PM
How about the one with the most votes is president, second most the VP?

nic34
10-23-2014, 02:59 PM
Electoral system

Our Constitution's framers created the vice presidency almost as an afterthought. In setting up a system for electing presidents, they devised an electoral college and provided that each of its members was to vote for two persons, "of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves." In those days when loyalty to one's state was stronger than to the new nation, the framers recognized that individual electors might be inclined to choose a leader from their own immediate political circle, creating the danger of a crippling deadlock, as no one candidate would win a plurality of all votes cast. By being required to select one candidate from outside their own states, electors would be compelled to look for individuals of national stature. Under the system the framers created, the candidate receiving the most electoral votes would be president. The one coming in second would be vice president.

In the election of 1800, however, the constitutional system for electing presidents broke down, as both Jefferson and Aaron Burr received the same number of electoral votes. This impasse threw the contest into the House of Representatives, where for thirty-five separate ballots, neither candidate was able to gain a majority. When the stalemate was finally broken, the House elected Jefferson president, thus making Aaron Burr our third vice president. Within four years of this deadlocked election, Congress had passed, and the necessary number of states had ratified, the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution, instituting the present system wherein electors cast separate ballots for president and for vice president.

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Vice_President.htm

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 03:29 PM
Why?

What good things would Ralph Nader, given a two year free mini-term, do for the United States?

-

Depends on if he'd get a free pass from Congress or not.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 03:31 PM
Depends on if he'd get a free pass from Congress or not.

Translation: nothing.

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 03:32 PM
Conservative is a relative term.

A President Romney would have been far more "Conservative" than another disastrous four years of Obama.

Sorry, but your obstinate, totalitarian, absolutist thought process is self-defeating and foolish.

-

The totalitarian thought process belongs to you and Mac-7 for suggesting that everyone is obligated to blindly vote for your party regardless of how they feel about the candidate.

nic34
10-23-2014, 03:38 PM
The totalitarian thought process belongs to you and Mac-7 for suggesting that everyone is obligated to blindly vote for your party regardless of how they feel about the candidate.

.....and if you don't agree with them, you are automatically a considered liberal...

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 03:40 PM
The totalitarian thought process belongs to you and Mac-7 for suggesting that everyone is obligated to blindly vote for your party regardless of how they feel about the candidate.

You are blindly voting for the democrat even if you don't know or refuse to admit it.

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 03:47 PM
You are blindly voting for the democrat even if you don't know or refuse to admit it.

That is nonsensical.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 03:55 PM
That is nonsensical.

Thats your story.

but you are democrats best friend.

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 03:56 PM
You are blindly voting for the democrat even if you don't know or refuse to admit it.

No, actually, I'm not. I'm voting against the Democrat.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 04:00 PM
The totalitarian thought process belongs to you and Mac-7 for suggesting that everyone is obligated to blindly vote for your party regardless of how they feel about the candidate.

Where did I say "Everyone"?

I think I've been quite clear, that I am addressing those "Conservatives who are pragmatic" as well as "Democrats who stand against the Progressive-Fasicsts that the Democratic Party has morphed into".

If you don't see yourself as one of those two, then I'm not talking to you at all. At least not on the subject of voting in the General Election for whatever Candidate gets the Republican Nomination.

I AM a Liberal, or at least, when I was young, people with my views, who supported JFK, a color blind society, social freedoms, but fiscal restraint and limited government,... we called those people "Liberals" in the 1960s and 1970s...

I don't think that the majority of people who support Obama are "Liberal" at all. They are Progressive-Fascists, who are some of the most intolerant, and un-Liberal, dictatorial people in the world.

I know of many staunch conservatives who are far more socially tolerant, than most Obama supporters. Though they would not practice the freedoms they willing to grant to other Americans in their own lives, they would give people the Option to choose. They would also judge a person by any means other then RACE, and maintain a goal of color blindness.

It is possible to be socially conservative in your own life, but socially TOLERANT of other people's choices. And underlying BOTH is a commitment to small, limited government.

Big Government is Controlling, not Tolerant and free, as we are seeing with some in the LGBT community being unwilling to let business which don't want to compromise their personal convictions, chose their clientele, and suffer the business outcomes of those decisions.

The Democratic Party has lost its way!

-

The Xl
10-23-2014, 04:02 PM
Ron Paul easily.

The Xl
10-23-2014, 04:04 PM
Both were the only real conservative options.

I voted for Johnson, ergo I voted more "conservatively" than you did.

You can support the GOP all you want, I support conservatism.

You must be a pedophile or something.

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 04:18 PM
Where did I say "Everyone"?

I think I've been quite clear, that I am addressing those "Conservatives who are pragmatic" as well as "Democrats who stand against the Progressive-Fasicsts that the Democratic Party has morphed into".

If you don't see yourself as one of those two, then I'm not talking to you at all. At least not on the subject of voting in the General Election for whatever Candidate gets the Republican Nomination.

I AM a Liberal, or at least, when I was young, people with my views, who supported JFK, a color blind society, social freedoms, but fiscal restraint and limited government,... we called those people "Liberals" in the 1960s and 1970s...

I don't think that the majority of people who support Obama are "Liberal" at all. They are Progressive-Fascists, who are some of the most intolerant, and un-Liberal, dictatorial people in the world.

I know of many staunch conservatives who are far more socially tolerant, than most Obama supporters. Though they would not practice the freedoms they willing to grant to other Americans in their own lives, they would give people the Option to choose. They would also judge a person by any means other then RACE, and maintain a goal of color blindness.

It is possible to be socially conservative in your own life, but socially TOLERANT of other people's choices. And underlying BOTH is a commitment to small, limited government.

Big Government is Controlling, not Tolerant and free, as we are seeing with some in the LGBT community being unwilling to let business which don't want to compromise their personal convictions, chose their clientele, and suffer the business outcomes of those decisions.

The Democratic Party has lost its way!

-

Will voting for Obamas and Clintons fix that?

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 04:23 PM
Will voting for Obamas and Clintons fix that?

Obviously NOT, which is why I appeal to "Classic Liberals" to vote for whoever is the Republican Candidate, until the power of the Progressive-Fascists is broken.

I would never advocate that we should blindly vote for anyone long term. But the greatest threat to American Democracy, is currently the group bringing us the Louis Lerner IRS and the Associated Press phone record seizures .... etc.

Once the power of the Progressive-Fascists is broken, the Republicans will have to work hard again to EARN my vote!

-

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 04:26 PM
No, actually, I'm not. I'm voting against the Democrat.

No, in most cases the democrst will win the election thanks to you.

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 04:39 PM
No, in most cases the democrst will win the election thanks to you.

Not really. Without the Green or Libertarian parties being on the ballot, I'd either be staying home or voting Democrat.

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 04:40 PM
Obviously NOT, which is why I appeal to "Classic Liberals" to vote for whoever is the Republican Candidate, until the power of the Progressive-Fascists is broken.

I would never advocate that we should blindly vote for anyone long term. But the greatest threat to American Democracy, is currently the group bringing us the Louis Lerner IRS and the Associated Press phone record seizures .... etc.

Once the power of the Progressive-Fascists is broken, the Republicans will have to work hard again to EARN my vote!

-

If voting for Obamas and Clintons won't fix the Democratic Party, how can you expect voting for Romneys and Bushes to fix the GOP?

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 05:14 PM
If voting for Obamas and Clintons won't fix the Democratic Party, how can you expect voting for Romneys and Bushes to fix the GOP?

I think you give it your best shot in the primary and then pay your dues in the regular election.

as it is now I know that libs voting in the primary are not serious players so I won't trust you or make any concessions.

romney was not my first choice but I knew he was better than Obama.

if libs had helped get him elected they would have had influence whether you believe it or not.

but I also know that no one can tell the 3% crowd anything.

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 06:29 PM
I think you give it your best shot in the primary and then pay your dues in the regular election.

as it is now I know that libs voting in the primary are not serious players so I won't trust you or make any concessions.

romney was not my first choice but I knew he was better than Obama.

if libs had helped get him elected they would have had influence whether you believe it or not.

but I also know that no one can tell the 3% crowd anything.

As it should be. I will vote for whoever I please, no matter what you have to say about it. Likewise, you will vote for whoever you please no matter what anyone has to say about it.

Just as it should be.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 06:55 PM
If voting for Obamas and Clintons won't fix the Democratic Party, how can you expect voting for Romneys and Bushes to fix the GOP?

Not all that much wrong with GOP, at the moment. With a few exceptions, where it appears that some GOP members may be complicit in wrong doing by Democrats.

When the GOP has a member who abuses the LAW or is guilty of corruption/abuse of power, the GOP party holds its own members accountable. Even if they did not, the MSM and the Democratic Party will not quit until they are held accountable, which is exactly as it should be.

When the Democrats has a member who abuses the LAW or is guilty of corruption/abuse of power, the party lies, excuses and ignores the issue.

Worse the MSM is often in their corner helping with coverup and/or excuses, or at best, ignores the issue.

Atop that, there is a significant element of the GOP that seems to be afraid to address the issues of the Democratic Party, and directly confront the abuses. It is not true of all GOP members, and the TEA Patriots seem to be the most outspoken, but the "Old Guard" Republican leadership seems reluctant to act and speak out at best, and sometimes there is evidence that they are complicit in the wrong doing.

The core of the problems within American Government is coming from a complete lack of accountability by the Democrats. This MUST change!

-

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 06:58 PM
As it should be. I will vote for whoever I please, no matter what you have to say about it. Likewise, you will vote for whoever you please no matter what anyone has to say about it.

Just as it should be.

Of course you can vote for whoever you want.

but as I have pointed out the dems stick together while libertarians pull just enough votes from the GOP to elect only democrats.

Common Sense
10-23-2014, 06:59 PM
Not all that much wrong with GOP, at the moment. With a few exceptions, where it appears that some GOP members may be complicit in wrong doing by Democrats.

When the GOP has a member who abuses the LAW or is guilty of corruption/abuse of power, the GOP party holds its own members accountable. Even if they did not, the MSM and the Democratic Party will not quit until they are held accountable, which is exactly as it should be.

When the Democrats has a member who abuses the LAW or is guilty of corruption/abuse of power, the party lies, excuses and ignores the issue.

Worse the MSM is often in their corner helping with coverup and/or excuses, or at best, ignores the issue.

Atop that, there is a significant element of the GOP that seems to be afraid to address the issues of the Democratic Party, and directly confront the abuses. It is not true of all GOP members, and the TEA Patriots seem to be the most outspoken, but the "Old Guard" Republican leadership seems reluctant to act and speak out at best, and sometimes there is evidence that they are complicit in the wrong doing.

The core of the problems within American Government is coming from a complete lack of accountability by the Democrats. This MUST change!

-

I think you're seeing what you want to see in this case.

Kurmugeon
10-23-2014, 07:02 PM
I think you're seeing what you want to see in this case.


Case? as in singular?

There been allot more than one issue of abuse of power, corruption, and lack of accountability by the Democrats!

-

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 08:55 PM
Of course you can vote for whoever you want.

but as I have pointed out the dems stick together while libertarians pull just enough votes from the GOP to elect only democrats.

Well, that's the GOP's fault for trying to push them out of the party.

Matty
10-23-2014, 08:57 PM
Well, that's the GOP's fault for trying to push them out of the party.
If the GOP wanted to be democrats they would be democrats!

Peter1469
10-23-2014, 08:59 PM
If the GOP wanted to be democrats they would be democrats!

As far as how they govern, they really are.

Mac-7
10-23-2014, 09:03 PM
Well, that's the GOP's fault for trying to push them out of the party.

You are such a liar.

Repubs did not push Paul and Johnson out of the GOP.

Paul stayed and Gary Johnson bugged out when he did not get to be Homecoming Queen.

Green Arrow
10-23-2014, 09:56 PM
If the GOP wanted to be democrats they would be democrats!

A lot of them were Democrats.