Is the GOP corrupt enough that you will vote democratic?

[Rogodin2]

The party is infested with neoconservative agenda. I perstonally would like to see them all exterpated.

Rogo

---

Troll thread calling for death of all Republicans.

Red Dawn
AnandTech Senior Moderator

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: Rogodin2
The party is infested with neoconservative agenda. I perstonally would like to see them all exterpated.

Rogo

Did you invent a new word today, or is the one you're looking for extirpated ?

 

[Legend]

Hillary is just as bad. I probably won't vote.

 

[Kadarin]

I will most likely vote against the GOP because they are the ones who trashed the Constitution over the last 8 years. However, I do not think that any of the current crop of candidates will do much to fix the situation (other than possibly Ron Paul).

 

[JD50]

The only way that I will vote for the GOP is if Hillary is the Democratic nominee.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: Kadarin
I will most likely vote against the GOP because they are the ones who trashed the Constitution over the last 8 years. However, I do not think that any of the current crop of candidates will do much to fix the situation (other than possibly Ron Paul).

Other than Ron Paul? Buwahahaha. You think others trashed the constitution? Wait til ya get a load of him! :shocked:

It wouldn't be pretty, but not to worry, it's not gonna go that far.

 

[rpanic]

Pick your poison, maybe one will kill you a little slower

 

[First]

As a Libertarian, I'd vote for a Dem before a GOP candidate in 08, even if it is Hillary. Which is saying a lot since Dems are anathema to the beliefs that many Libertarians hold WRT federal power. But Rudy clearly isn't fit to be President. I'd vote for Romney though, but he won't get the nomination I don't think.

Originally posted by: compuwiz1

Originally posted by: Kadarin
I will most likely vote against the GOP because they are the ones who trashed the Constitution over the last 8 years. However, I do not think that any of the current crop of candidates will do much to fix the situation (other than possibly Ron Paul).

Other than Ron Paul? Buwahahaha. You think others trashed the constitution? Wait til ya get a load of him! :shocked:

It wouldn't be pretty, but not to worry, it's not gonna go that far.

Huh? There's no reason to think Paul would do anything different than his voting record shows, which is consistently adherent to a strict reading of the constitution.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
As a Libertarian, I'd vote for a Dem before a GOP candidate in 08, even if it is Hillary. Which is saying a lot since Dems are anathema to the beliefs that many Libertarians hold WRT federal power. But Rudy clearly isn't fit to be President. I'd vote for Romney though, but he won't get the nomination I don't think.

Originally posted by: compuwiz1

Originally posted by: Kadarin
I will most likely vote against the GOP because they are the ones who trashed the Constitution over the last 8 years. However, I do not think that any of the current crop of candidates will do much to fix the situation (other than possibly Ron Paul).

Other than Ron Paul? Buwahahaha. You think others trashed the constitution? Wait til ya get a load of him! :shocked:

It wouldn't be pretty, but not to worry, it's not gonna go that far.

Huh? There's no reason to think Paul would do anything different than his voting record shows, which is consistently adherent to a strict reading of the constitution.

I agree, I really don't want to see Rudy get the GOP nomination. I have no idea what I'll do if its a Rudy vs. Hillary race. Even though I can't stand the thought of having Hillary as President, I would probably go third party if Rudy is the GOP candidate. If Hillary doesn't get the Dem nomination then I'll most likely go third party.

 

[KIRBYEE]

Gotta love the wording on that poll. It's like asking: "Did you stop beating your wife yet?".

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
Gotta love the wording on that poll. It's like asking: "Did you stop beating your wife yet?".

Considering the OP, its to be expected.

 

[PrinceofWands]

While it's true that the Republican party is infested with neocons which prevent me from supporting them, it is equally true that the Democratic party is infested with corrupt cowards and so I do not vote for them either.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
While it's true that the Republican party is infested with neocons which prevent me from supporting them, it is equally true that the Democratic party is infested with corrupt cowards and so I do not vote for them either.

:thumbsup:

Makes it kind of tough though, because as of right now, a vote for anyone other than a Dem or Repub is wasted.

 

[HeXploiT]

Ron Paul can save the GOP...if America will let him.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
While it's true that the Republican party is infested with neocons which prevent me from supporting them, it is equally true that the Democratic party is infested with corrupt cowards and so I do not vote for them either.

:thumbsup:

Makes it kind of tough though, because as of right now, a vote for anyone other than a Dem or Repub is wasted.

Exactly. Truly pathetic that we have to choose between these two sub-par parties.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
While it's true that the Republican party is infested with neocons which prevent me from supporting them, it is equally true that the Democratic party is infested with corrupt cowards and so I do not vote for them either.

:thumbsup:

Makes it kind of tough though, because as of right now, a vote for anyone other than a Dem or Repub is wasted.

Not really. It shows trends which, if self-preservation is operating in politicians (which it always is), will eventually cause a shift. So far that shift has been to pander to extremes in order to polarize, but that's now failing. If existing data is any indication we've reached a point where there are more neutral, unaligned, and moderate voters than there are extremists...the only plausible solution to that is support of third party options. Democracies usually begin with 2-3 parties, but they also evolve over time to encompass many. That's why most older democracies have evolved into parliamentary governments, or at least multiple representative party governments. The US is just stubborn so it's taking us a little longer.

The big downfall is that our independent parties aren't forming based on fully formulated separate political compass points...they're either extremist, single issue, or clone copies of existing parties. An easy fix is a clarification movement that seeks to educate the populace on the concepts and differences in political and economic theory in order to establish modernly applicable clear-cut areas of party support. The first move in this process should be a switch to a multiple axis party alignment system instead of the current single axis system. Until that happens we really can't get anywhere.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: Perry404
Ron Paul can save the GOP...if America will let him.

They won't and the GOP has gone the way of the Dodo. Dinosaur bones, just dust, my dear lad.

Perry, when are you gonna bury that dead horse, anyway? You make me laugh. You remind me of this other religious troll we used to have around here, named MrPalco, or are you him?

Sing after me:

Ron Paul is a repulsvlican, religious, texan, who is supported by a fringe group of internet lunatics.

 

[Craig234]

As I've said many times, the only viable fix for third parties in the US is a ranked voting system, where the votes are not 'wasted'. It's not about the third parties not having the right agendas, it's about the fact that to win, they'd have to overcome the splitting effect they have on one of the two big parties.

This is how Teddy Roosevelt ran on a third party and split the republican vote to defeat Taft, and elect the democrat.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: Craig234
As I've said many times, the only viable fix for third parties in the US is a ranked voting system, where the votes are not 'wasted'. It's not about the third parties not having the right agendas, it's about the fact that to win, they'd have to overcome the splitting effect they have on one of the two big parties.

This is how Teddy Roosevelt ran on a third party and split the republican vote to defeat Taft, and elect the democrat.

No!

Give the people the power of the common vote and kill the electoral college....and make it accurate, damnit!

Given the above, I'm absolutely convinced that Bush would have never been elected to the first term.

You guys watch, this SONOFABITCH is gonna find a way to extend his term. :|
He will do this under some kind of "war time exception".

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1

Originally posted by: Craig234
As I've said many times, the only viable fix for third parties in the US is a ranked voting system, where the votes are not 'wasted'. It's not about the third parties not having the right agendas, it's about the fact that to win, they'd have to overcome the splitting effect they have on one of the two big parties.

This is how Teddy Roosevelt ran on a third party and split the republican vote to defeat Taft, and elect the democrat.

No!

Give the people the power of the common vote and kill the electoral college....and make it accurate, damnit!

Given the above, I'm absolutely convinced that Bush would have never been elected to the first term.

You guys watch, this SONOFABITCH is gonna find a way to extend his term. :|
He will do this under some kind of "war time exception".

It's not that I doubt he'd love to, but he knows he'd be assassinated before he even finished his speech letting us all know about it.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1

Originally posted by: Craig234
As I've said many times, the only viable fix for third parties in the US is a ranked voting system, where the votes are not 'wasted'. It's not about the third parties not having the right agendas, it's about the fact that to win, they'd have to overcome the splitting effect they have on one of the two big parties.

This is how Teddy Roosevelt ran on a third party and split the republican vote to defeat Taft, and elect the democrat.

No!

Give the people the power of the common vote and kill the electoral college....and make it accurate, damnit!

Given the above, I'm absolutely convinced that Bush would have never been elected to the first term.

You guys watch, this SONOFABITCH is gonna find a way to extend his term. :|
He will do this under some kind of "war time exception".

The world some of you people live in must be scary for you.

 

[Jaskalas]

Only way I would vote for the GOP, is if a BIGGER pro-government slob is picked by the Democrats. Which they will do.

Originally posted by: Kadarin
I will most likely vote against the GOP because they are the ones who trashed the Constitution over the last 8 years.

The Democratic agenda lays the foundation for the destruction of the constitution. Do you honestly think people would put up with the patriot act if Dems didn't give the federal government so much size and power? The foundation was laid long before Bush took office, the Republicans merely took advantage of what was already there.

Every time you pay taxes you support the patriot act and the trashing of the constitution by various other means. The power should be with the states, not the central government. Until the Democratic Party supports these ideals voting for them only makes it worse. Republican betrayal on this issue leaves us no alternative, until we get angry enough to form a third party and place it in power.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
While it's true that the Republican party is infested with neocons which prevent me from supporting them, it is equally true that the Democratic party is infested with corrupt cowards and so I do not vote for them either.

Absolutely. And I stopped voting for Democrats long before I stopped voting for Republicans.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: rpanic
Pick your poison, maybe one will kill you a little slower

Yup, I'll vote for whoever's got the least damaging form of corruption, since there's no option on the ballot for "Send them on a free trip to Mars. Oxygen and return-rockets not included."

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
No!

Give the people the power of the common vote and kill the electoral college....and make it accurate, damnit!

Given the above, I'm absolutely convinced that Bush would have never been elected to the first term.

You guys watch, this SONOFABITCH is gonna find a way to extend his term. :|
He will do this under some kind of "war time exception".

The world some of you people live in must be scary for you.

And the fact that you seem to think it's impossible is also scary.

What will happen though is that we'll get a new figurehead on the same old monstrosity.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
While it's true that the Republican party is infested with neocons which prevent me from supporting them, it is equally true that the Democratic party is infested with corrupt cowards and so I do not vote for them either.

:thumbsup:

Makes it kind of tough though, because as of right now, a vote for anyone other than a Dem or Repub is wasted.

The only vote 'wasted' is the vote not made. My vote is NEVER influenced by the polls. I've voted for third party candidates plenty of times, and I'll probably be doing it again next year. Refusing to support 3rd party candidates because your vote would be 'wasted' is a stupid self-fulfilling prophesy. I'd rather 'waste' my vote with a candidate who actually reflects my views than vote for whichever idiots the two main parties dump on us.