Was Tennessee voting rigged?

[Mike.357]

why would Dem's cross over and vote for Haslam? Wouldn't it make more sense to vote for whoever you thought your guy had the best chance of beating in the general election?

And it does not matter much what gets said here, unless Haslam turns out to be a cross dressing fairy he will be the next governor.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

At least there would be an entertainment factor in his governorship:D

After "I'm for Kim" McMillan decided to try to become mayor of Clarksville,

I think the Dems gave up on the governor slot. Well, I don't think she would

have won, anyway.

God, I hope she's not my next mayor!

[Guest HvyMtl]

Why did the Dems cross over and vote Haslam? Because they did not have a vote in their own primary. Because they know nothing about McW except his daddy was Governor. Because they wanted the election to be between the most left leaning candidates.

The Governor, to change anything, has to have legislation passed, including his budget. I would rather have the Republicans in the Legislature be directing than Haslam. Particularly considering Ramsey is in charge of the Senate.

As for McMillian, man don't let that happen...

Edited August 9, 2010 by HvyMtl

[Mike.357]

between the most left leaning candidates.

so they voted for Wamp?

[Guest CrazyLincoln]

I'm just glad Basil Marceaux didn't win...........

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I know her family. I don't want any part of her, but she has a good shot.

[Guest ROCK]

Imo. The republican primary was bought, any conservative can see right through haslam. He is a big city conservative mayor which means to common rural folk he's socially liberal. I'm a conservative and I will vote for a conservative canidate which means haslam won't get my vote.

[Armed Aviator]

This is how Willie Herenton managed to be Mayor of Memphis for roughly 20 years, lol. He'd run and win with 35-45% of the total vote because the "majority opposition" couldn't get it together to vote for one candidate and/or the opposition "pool" couldn't agree to drop out to allow a single, stronger candidate to lead the charge.

Well, that and he garners the lion's share of the buried-yet-undead voter demographic.

This is a good case for the argument for run-off elections. Must win by 50%+1!

[E4 No More]

If Haslam wins I'll get a laugh out of the first time the Republican legislature vetoes him.

[Guest KimberChick]

This is a good case for the argument for run-off elections. Must win by 50%+1!

We had them originally. It was, if memory serves, deemed to breed inequality(i.e. a racist practice to have a local primary) and ended up being struck down. The very FIRST election after the decision was when Herenton beat out Dick Hackett to be mayor.

[Mark@Sea]

Haslam is a dumicrat. I'm writing in Ramsey. Won't have to share the guilt.

[Good_Steward]

It is not a waste of vote to vote 3rd party when that 3rd party vote is a push for change in your party.

This, my friends, is the truth.

Edited August 10, 2010 by Good_Steward

[Guest 1010011010]

So you thinks its good to vote for someone who wont win, casuing the more evil one to win?

It's not a horse race, you don't get anything by voting for the eventual winner. When an evil candidate wins, you lose. Every time.

"I'd love so-and-so to win, but he can't, so I won't vote for him." "Why can't he win?" "Nobody'll vote for him." "Who won't they vote for him?" "He can't win." etc. Break out of that cycle. Start telling the major party candidates that they cannot rely on you to vote for them or to not vote at all. Shake them up and make them work to be a good representative.

[Guest 1010011010]

I'll see your intentions and raise you one result.

If there had been no H. Ross Perot, there would be no Bill Clinton presidency. If there had been no Bill Clinton, chances are there'd be no Obama and there certainly would be no Ruth Bader Ginsberg or Stephen Breyer. There would have been no asault weapons ban or Community Re-investment Act. See where this is going?

For most things actually appropriate to government interest, the Democrats and Republicans agree. Whether further government encroachment on my liberty is financed through taxes (D) or debt ® is hardly a choice. Detail might vary, but the large steps would likely have occurred regardless of which major party candidate wins the election. This comment from America Speaking Out sums it up quite well. The things we use to define the major party candidates as different from each other are showmanship. When it comes to statesmanship, they both serve the same master and it ain't the American people.

[Oh Shoot]

For most things actually appropriate to government interest, the Democrats and Republicans agree. Whether further government encroachment on my liberty is financed through taxes (D) or debt ® is hardly a choice. Detail might vary, but the large steps would likely have occurred regardless of which major party candidate wins the election. This comment from America Speaking Out sums it up quite well. The things we use to define the major party candidates as different from each other are showmanship. When it comes to statesmanship, they both serve the same master and it ain't the American people.

Yep. Time for my recurring quote:

"The Soviet Union had a single, entrenched, systemically corrupt political party, which held a monopoly on power. The U.S. has two entrenched, systemically corrupt political parties, whose positions are often indistinguishable, and which together hold a monopoly on power. In either case, there is, or was, a single governing elite, but in the United States it organized itself into opposing teams to make its stranglehold on power seem more sportsmanlike."

Dmitry Orlov

Post-Soviet Lessons for a Post-American Century

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Yep, look to a Russian for American ideas. Makes

a lot of sense in a post anything society. I guess the

fat lady sang and we didn't hear her.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FUJIMO]

Yep. Time for my recurring quote:

"The Soviet Union had a single, entrenched, systemically corrupt political party, which held a monopoly on power. The U.S. has two entrenched, systemically corrupt political parties, whose positions are often indistinguishable, and which together hold a monopoly on power. In either case, there is, or was, a single governing elite, but in the United States it organized itself into opposing teams to make its stranglehold on power seem more sportsmanlike."

Dmitry Orlov

Post-Soviet Lessons for a Post-American Century

There's your answer ! And it only took 9 and 3/4 pages to get there.

[Oh Shoot]

Yep, look to a Russian for American ideas. Makes

a lot of sense in a post anything society. I guess the

fat lady sang and we didn't hear her...

That's all correct, very astute.

- OS

[leroy]

Dear fellow opiners:_____________

I have read with great interest, amusement, and a bit of sadness the opining and musings of our brother and sister TGo’rs in regard to the recent results of the Tennessee Republican Gubernatorial Primary. I, like many of you, did not like the outcome of this race. Bill Haslam is my least favorite candidate. I have read with interest the pronouncements of those who say the process was rigged and those who have vowed to do write in candidates in the general election, not vote in protest of the poor candidate(s), or even vote Demorat to “teach the Republicans a lessonâ€. This issue of “protesting the vote†brings me to the subject of this little essay.

First of all, I (…like many of you…) would have preferred that my pet candidate have won this primary; but, sadly, he didn’t. That is the reality of things. I really like Ron Ramsey, because I prefer to think that he is a good man who has thought thru what he believes and who is willing to both articulate those principles and stand up for them if necessary. I also think that about my ole pet “State-Line†Wamp. Sadly, I do not think that about Bill Haslam. I think that Haslam has not thought deeply about what he believes on a personal level about freedom, the role of government, ect.; because he has not talked much about those things in other than general platidunious terms. There are two possible reasons for this silence; the first is that he has not taken the time; the second is that he does not want us to know them. My fear is that he may rely on others to do this thinking for him (…many politicians do…) and to form his opinions on the issues that are near and dear to all of us here. Whatever he has chosen to do, he has kept it a well-guarded secret. I fear that he has borrowed a page from the old Howard Baker playbook and has carefully avoided saying anything other than he will do the right thing. The fact is that we simply don’t know what he believes.

Having said all these things; all this opining and analysis is over; Haslam is, in fact, the Republican Gubernatorial candidate who will stand in the general election. He will run against a Demorat Gubernatorial candidate; most likely McWerter. The big question for each of us then becomes: Who will you vote for? The choice for me is easy – I WILL vote for Haslam. I simply will not vote for any Demorat.

Why then, would a gun toting Radical Libertarian like myself say such a thing? Why would I not do a “protest vote†or do a “write-in†for someone other than these two lothesome candidates who do not represent my perfect ideal of what the “right candidate†should be? Why would I not keep my dignity and my core beliefs in tact by voting for such a Philistine as Haslam? The answer is simple, here it is.

I fully understand what Mike McWerter is and I do not like anything that he believes nor do I prefer any of the policies he would implement. McWerter is a Demorat –pure and simple. He would be Phil Bredesen’s third term (…or worse…) if elected. If you didn’t like Bredesen; my opinion is that you sure won’t like McWerter. McWerter may be far more like Cohen than “Uncle Philâ€. That realization should sober everyone up. He has already said that he supports many of these things that we as a group are against. That being said, why would anyone vote for another Bredesen (…or worse; you know, it can be worse! …)?

As has been stated above, we simply don’t know about Haslam. Let us hope that he gets the message, grows a backbone, and grows into the job. He is at least a capitalist.

Everyone needs to consider that American politics is, from bottom to top, a “winner takes all propositionâ€. Governance at all levels is determined by which group (….read that political party….) is in the majority. This “majority†then dictates what issues will be debated and ultimately voted into law. It also determines what odious policies (…like prohibiting going armed…) will be reversed. It determines what fiscal policies will be followed (…read that taxation—income tax…, etc. …), what policies will be implemented, and ultimately how the citizens will be governed.

There are those that have said; “Why not a third party?†I (…like many of you…) like the third party idea, but I do not think it is time for it yet. I say let’s give the Republicans another shot. What, you say, is the reason for this thinking? Simple; third parties are not very successful (…although I will concede that if the Republicans don’t straighten up, it will become viable….). The fact is that the Republicans had better take heed to what most folks are saying and mend their ways. If they do not, they will simply morph into the Demorat party (….Demorat “liteâ€â€¦), fade away, and be replaced by a third party.

The fact is that politics and the political process in general are fraught with problems and shortcomings, and the Tennessee Republican party is not immune to them. However, it is my firm belief that these “problems and shortcomings†are much preferable to having men such as McWerter and his Demorat buddies calling the shots here in our home state. The Demorat party as it is currently constituted is the worst of the worst that can come from politics, and folks would do well to remember that.

It is about three months until the general election. During this three months a ton of lies and a little bit of truth will flood the airways, telephone lines, and the print media concerning who these two men are and what they stand for. I would much prefer having Haslam and a conservative state legislature than I would McWerter. Those are the two choices. There aint a third option. If you don’t vote, write-in vote, or protest vote; you are voting for McWerter and the Demorats. I don’t think that is what you want to do.

Food for thought.

Leroy the Libertarian (...voting Republican...)

[Guest SUNTZU]

why would Dem's cross over and vote for Haslam? Wouldn't it make more sense to vote for whoever you thought your guy had the best chance of beating in the general election?

And it does not matter much what gets said here, unless Haslam turns out to be a cross dressing fairy he will be the next governor.

They've done it in Knoxville for years. Go get a copy of the Metropulse, Mike. They love him. And they are most definitely not conservative.

[Guest SUNTZU]

The argument that the

two

parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the

two

parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.

- Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

Read the book.

[Mike.357]

i am guessing a lot of people vote for who they think will win. It is like people who jump on some sports teams bandwagon when they are going to win a title or two. No loyalty to anything except who they think will win any given time.

[tntnixon]

i am guessing a lot of people vote for who they think will win. It is like people who jump on some sports teams bandwagon when they are going to win a title or two. No loyalty to anything except who they think will win any given time.

Mike, you have completely missed the point.

I am casting my vote for Haslam with a sense of pure self interest, a thing most people sorely lack today. I know that I will have a better shot at losing what little freedom I do have with McMini Me than with Haslam. I am not a "bandwagon" guy by any stretch of the imagination. If I were, I would have been a Obama supporter, which I can assure you that I am not.

I would not vote for McMini Me if he had a 75-25% lead, nor would I vote for a 3rd party candidate that would push him over the top in a 3 way race.

I am a egocentric, self-interest seeking neanderthal that votes in his own self interest and I do not vote for people who are willing to take away what little I have earned or make it more likely.

[mikegideon]

They've done it in Knoxville for years. Go get a copy of the Metropulse, Mike. They love him. And they are most definitely not conservative.

Good to see you. We were starting to think you got eaten by coyotes or somethin'

[Mike.357]

Mike, you have completely missed the point.

.

no I don't think I did.

I was making a point unrelated to anything you have said. Actually I never had a thought about anything posted when I made my remark. I was stating what I believe to be fact. a certain percent of people vote for who they think will win, no matter who's best.