I will not be voting.

[jhu]

I didn't get my registration in in time. There's always 2012.

 

[Thump553]

Funny you mention that.
* * *
In general, I hate the whole fuckign system.

What system do you prefer?

I've voted in every election since 1972 and am proud of it. I don't vote in certain races where I don't know the candidates or don't like either of them, and I've voted third party candidates quite a few times. I'm proud to be an American and will not voluntarily relinquish my right-and duty-to vote.

 

[Zebo]

There's nothing 'partisan' in my comments in the wrong way you mean the word.

You're simply wrong. Progressive Democrats as a group have a far different agenda on corporatism than the others.

It's not just if they accept money interests hand out to anyone who gets power, it's what their agenda is on the issues.

You're simply ignorant about it, which results in your offensive, false attack.

No you're ignorant about progressives.

They support amnesty and unchecked immigration HB1s etc to undercut natives and enrich corps.

They supported a HC bill which is a subsidy to private insurance.

They support high taxes on the middle class to pay for non production and non productive people they have made via offshoring and unfettered immigration starting in 1965.

Not a word comes out of their mouth with regard to trading with police states and slave labor. ALL are on board with free trade.

 

[manimal]

This is probably the most important thread in P&N right now. Its essential that you give your voice a chance in these troubling times. To let others dictate our future has worked so well in the past hasn't it?

It really does not matter if your a republican or democrat. Is there some issue that is important to you? Is it getting out of foreign wars? Is it getting the debt under control? Is education?
No politician or party will have all the answers....just try to find someone who at least fits your world view or at the very least represents your values..

 

[Zebo]

I didn't get my registration in in time. There's always 2012.

Maybe...

There is the inevitable possibility is that the Federal Government will find it impossible to borrow and we will be faced with what is called a "sudden stop." The federal budget will have to be slashed by 60% immediately.. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment and Welfare will all collapse. Since half of American directly depend on a govt check to eat there will be massive civil unrest and martial law.

Quantitative easing, the other alternative, is worse. Hyperinflation. You still get paid but it's not worth anything and prudent savers are not worth anything as well.

It's already started. Many commodities are up 100% since last year. Gas is high despite a 15% curtail in demand.SS has been frozen for two years. Multiply this x1000 and you get massive civil unrest and martial law too.

Prepare.

 

[Fern]

I'm probably not going to bother either.

every race on the ballot is either unopposed or widely in favor of the democrats, who I'd be voting for anyways.

I don't think my district has voted for a republican candidate since Ike.

Are you in CA?

Isn't that prop to legalize pot on the ballot?

Fern

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

If you don't vote, then you don't get to complain.

That's horse crap...

I didn't vote in the last presidential election because I didn't have a candidate to vote FOR. I don't believe in casting a vote against someone. No fucking way was I voting for Obama and to this day I still can't fathom what the GOP was thinking when they picked McCain.

If the parties can't select a viable candidate why should I grant them my approval with a vote?

And then there's the first ammendment thing that all Dems conveniently forget about when opposing views speak up... (see above)

 

[nageov3t]

Are you in CA?

Isn't that prop to legalize pot on the ballot?

Fern

NJ

there's nothing significant on my ballot. all races are either uncontested or favoring dems in a landslide.

some constitutional amendment to stop the government from stealing from pension funds that I'm sure has a dozen loop-holes built into it regardless.

 

[McWatt]

If you want to reject both major parties, go vote for a third party. If there isn't one, write in a candidate. That at least sends a small message that you disapprove. Not voting sends the message that you approve of whatever the victor decides.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'll be voting against Cuomo for NY gov. I found out that he was responsible for shaking down practioners here for violations of obscure regulations. That way he and spitzer could get hundreds of millions back for services given in good faith and claim they were fighting fraud. Even spitzer said recently he wouldn't trust him and that's saying a good deal. Gotta toss the dems out this time.

 

[Homerboy]

Hmmm this has turned out much more interesting (and civilized) a discussion than I thought (and WAAAAAAAAAAY less OP bashing, which I am grateful for )

 

[PJABBER]

NJ

there's nothing significant on my ballot. all races are either uncontested or favoring dems in a landslide.

some constitutional amendment to stop the government from stealing from pension funds that I'm sure has a dozen loop-holes built into it regardless.

You guys just elected Chris Christie for Governor! That guy is a viable contender for Vice President or even President in the eyes of many people. Get in that voting booth and vote for anyone local that he endorses so that he at least has a fighting chance to fix one of the most corrupt, highly taxed states in the Union! And though NJ doesn't have a Senatorial election this year, you do have House seats in contention. Even in those gerrymandered districts there is a chance that some will move due to a broader national sweep effect.

 

[airdata]

and to this day I still can't fathom what the GOP was thinking when they picked Palin.

There, fixed it for you.

 

[Homerboy]

This is probably the most important thread in P&N right now. Its essential that you give your voice a chance in these troubling times. To let others dictate our future has worked so well in the past hasn't it?

It really does not matter if your a republican or democrat. Is there some issue that is important to you? Is it getting out of foreign wars? Is it getting the debt under control? Is education?
No politician or party will have all the answers....just try to find someone who at least fits your world view or at the very least represents your values..

HA! My mother always uses that argument towards me too. "Pick one, personally important issue and vote based on that" So I vote for the guy that is pro-whatever I agree with, but he's then anti-middle aged Pollacks from the Midwest and has me killed off

You get my point

 

[Homerboy]

Originally Posted by Whoozyerdaddy and to this day I still can't fathom what the GOP was thinking when they picked Palin. There, fixed it for you.

God that is sooooo right.

 

[nageov3t]

You guys just elected Chris Christie for Governor!

Hudson County sure didn't Corzine won here with 75% of the vote.

half the voters may or may not have been dead.

the last republican congressmen elected was in 1977; he served for 2 terms. prior to that, it was 1951.

 

[PJABBER]

Hudson County sure didn't Corzine won here with 75% of the vote.

half the voters may or may not have been dead.

the last republican congressmen elected was in 1977; he served for 2 terms. prior to that, it was 1951.

Yikes! I see what you mean. Hudson County is either the 10th or the 13th Congressional District and there is no way that those races will be competitive outside of the primaries.

Still, every vote counts, even if it is just to register a protest. If the opposition, any opposition, can get to 40% that does put some fear into the entrenched power and may make them do more right than wrong.

 

[Dissipate]

I don't like any single candidate. I don't like the party system. I don't believe anything any single one of them spews.

Try to convince me all you want. They don't deserve my time or energy.

"My back is spineless. My belly is yellow. I am the American non-voter."

Believe me, you are not alone. Not wasting even a minute of time/energy on a statistically insignificant act is 100% rational.

 

[Craig234]

No you're ignorant about progressives.

They support amnesty and unchecked immigration HB1s etc to undercut natives and enrich corps.

Funny enough, I'm not but you are ignorant about progressives.

There are different motives for supporting amnesty - some pro-corporate, and others humanitarian, for example. You don't know one from the other, it shows.

They supported a HC bill which is a subsidy to private insurance.

No, progressives supported a single-payer system to replace private insurance. Because not enough are in power to pass that, they faced a hard choice between some improvements, such as ending denial for pre-existing conditions, and a Republican-designed system (which Republicans dishonestly disavowed as part of their policy to deny any wins to Obama) that had a lot of benefits for private insurance.

You're 0 for 2. Have I mentioned 95% of the statements about progressives' positions by others here are wrong or lies, and I can't remember the other 5%?

They support high taxes on the middle class to pay for non production and non productive people they have made via offshoring and unfettered immigration starting in 1965.

That's too loaded to parse. Try posting basic factual information, not spin.

Not a word comes out of their mouth with regard to trading with police states and slave labor. ALL are on board with free trade.

Completely wrong again.

There are some benefits to free trade, more affordable goods, the poor of the world getting more chance to do better, some efficiencies that 'make the pie bigger'.

But progressives have major issues with free trade from the oppression of workers to the weakening of labor, especially in the US, to loss of sovereignity to corporations.

Here is the Progressive Caucus's position paper excerpt:

The Progressive Caucus opposes awarding China permanent Most Favored Nation trading status at this time. We believe that it would be a serious setback for the protection and expansion of worker rights, human rights and religious rights. We also believe it will harm the US economy. We favor continuing to review on an annual basis China�s trading status, and we believe it is both legal and consistent with US WTO obligations to do so. The Progressive Caucus believes that trade relations with the US should be conditioned on the protection of worker rights, human rights and religious rights. If Congress gives China permanent MFN status, the US will lose the best leverage we have to influence China to enact those rights and protections. At the current time, the US buys about 40% of China�s exports, making it a consumer with a lot of potential clout. So long as the US annually continues to review China�s trade status, we have the ability to debate achievement of basic worker and human rights and to condition access to the US market on the achievement of gains in worker and human rights, if necessary. But once China is given permanent MFN, it permanently receives unconditional access to the US market and we lose that leverage. China will be free to attract multinational capital on the promise of super low wages, unsafe workplace conditions and prison labor and permanent access to the US market.

Furthermore, giving China permanent MFN will be harmful to the US economy, since the record trade deficit with China (and attendant problems such as loss of US jobs, and lower average wages in the US) will worsen. For 1999, the trade deficit is likely to be nearly $70 billion. Once China is awarded permanent MFN and WTO membership, the trade deficit will worsen.

 

[Craig234]

I didn't get my registration in in time. There's always 2012.

Provisional ballot.

 

[Engineer]

If I vote democrats, they will fuck me.

If I vote GOP, they will fuck me.

As long as special interests control the system, they will fuck me.

Maybe I'll just let someone else choose who fucks me. I don't really care!

 

[PrinceofWands]

I understand your position too, but disagree. I think it comes from a misunderstanding of party support as being as baseless as sports teams, which is harmful in politics.

But you come to a point if you understand the differences between the parties that you might agree with one much more than another, and want it to win.

It does not mean you agree with them completely, or when they're wrong, or wouldn't abandon them if they changes for the worse (or another party became better).

It just means understanding that in politics, organization wins, and you have a preference overall for one party over another, and it *needs* organization.

You retain every bit of your 'independence' on issues. You just win elections, too.

My minor for my history degree was political science, with a focus on electoral systems. Wanna try me and find out how wrong you are?

 

[Theb]

Vote for a 3rd party candidate. You don't have to worry about them disappointing/betraying you after they're elected because they won't be elected.

 

[BoberFett]

My minor for my history degree was political science, with a focus on electoral systems. Wanna try me and find out how wrong you are?

What's even funnier is how Craig crows about how great the progressives are, only that just aren't enough of them. The party system is doing wonders for his "progressives." They win so many elections by teaming up with the Democrats that he can name a whole two of them in federal offices. They're literally the Ron Pauls of the Republican party, and their party tolerates them about as much as the Republicans tolerate Paul.

 

[colonel]

To vote is a civic duty, don't listen to Craig he s been "disappointed" lately.