A Last Minute Appeal To Libertarians And Non-Voters

[QuietDan]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352049817' post='838915']
This guy isn't voting.
I refuse to vote for a gun grabbing, pussy legislating ex-governor that left his state in economic ruins.
And I see no reason to waste my time voting for O (or 3rd party) in this state with this winner take all EC system.


[/quote]

You are certainly entitled to your own opinions regarding voting, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

I was in Massachusetts while Governor Romney was the sitting Governor of Massachusetts. He lowered the unemployment rate and he balanced the state budget, all the while working with a leftist Massachusetts Legislature that was 85% democrat. It's amazing that he got anything done at all. Regarding the gun legislation, Massachusetts got what Massachusetts wanted. I suppose he could have vetoed it, but the legislature always had the power to over-ride his veto.

It's absolutely fine that you are not voting for President Romney . . . because you dislike his looks, or that he wears a tie, or he's been successful enough to be wealthy, or because you think he has too many kids and grandkids. But it's not accurate to call him a bad or failed governor. He was a very successful Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in spite of all the odds.

Edited November 4, 2012 by QuietDan

[Oh Shoot]

[quote name='6.8 AR' timestamp='1352049494' post='838912']
The younger single women won't turn out like they did in 08....etc [/quote]

Admittedly, who shows up at the polls is a big variable, and largely speculation. All in all though, the Dem machine still is stronger for getting out the overall vote I think.

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352049817' post='838915']
This guy isn't voting.
I refuse to vote for a gun grabbing, pussy legislating ex-governor that left his state in economic ruins.
And I see no reason to waste my time voting for O (or 3rd party) in this state with this winner take all EC system.[/quote]

There are always other things at issue in Hamilton County. State rep if nothing else? You can always vote the independent guy against Corker as protest vote. I did. Hell, I also voted the independent against John Duncan Jr. and I don't have anything especially against him, just that he's a career pol just like his daddy.

There were about 10 city/county referendums on ballot up here also, looks like you only have one there, though.

[url="http://elect.hamiltontn.gov/1211%20Sample%20Ballot.pdf"]http://elect.hamilto...mple Ballot.pdf[/url]

- OS Edited November 4, 2012 by OhShoot

[strickj]

[quote name='QuietDan' timestamp='1352051995' post='838927']
You are certainly entitled to your own opinions regarding voting, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

I was in Massachusetts while Governor Romney was the sitting Governor of Massachusetts. He lowered the unemployment rate and he balanced the state budget,
[/quote]
He didn't lower the employment rate. The employment rate was forced down by his failed policies.
The unemployment rate was 4.7, but the US Census says that a quarter-million folks left the state during his governorship, largely due to his 14 percent loss in manufacturing (double nat avg). Kinda hard to have a high unemployment rate when everyone leaves!
He left Massachusetts ranking the third worst state for job growth in the US.
He "balanced the budget" but left the sate with the highest debt in the country.

These are facts.

Out of curiosity, did you leave Massachusetts because of a job loss by chance?

[quote name='OhShoot' timestamp='1352052346' post='838929']

Aren't there other things at issue in Hamilton County? State rep if nothing else? You can always vote the independent guy against Corker as protest vote. Hell, I voted the independent against John Duncan and I don't have anything especially against him, just that he's a career pol.

There were about 10 city/county referendums on ballot up here also, bound to be some down there too.

- OS
[/quote]
Yes.
Just do not see much change coming from the populars is all.
This year truly sucks. I think I will sleep in and save what's left of my sanity.

[QuietDan]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352053317' post='838939']
He didn't lower the employment rate. The employment rate was forced down by his failed policies.
The unemployment rate was 4.7, but the US Census says that a quarter-million folks left the state during his governorship, largely due to his 14 percent loss in manufacturing (double nat avg). Kinda hard to have a high unemployment rate when everyone leaves!
He left Massachusetts ranking the third worst state for job growth in the US.
He "balanced the budget" but left the sate with the highest debt in the country.

These are facts.

Out of curiosity, did you leave Massachusetts because of a job loss by chance?

[/quote]

Sorry. Just untrue. I understand how you could be mis-informed, being so far from the scene and all.

Massachusetts has been bleeding people and jobs for years. Remember that 85% leftist State Legislature I mentioned to you earlier? Massachusetts has such a high tax rate they've called it Taxachusetts for years.

Do you know where a lot of those manufacturing jobs go? Some of them turn white-collar in the natural scheme of things. But do you know where a lot of the MANUFACTURING jobs go? Right across the border to NEW HAMPSHIRE and some to other bordering states. New Hampshire has NO sales tax and NO income tax, and is decidedly business friendly.

Governor Mitt Romney did everything he could to save Massachusetts from itself, but some leftists are just incorrigible.

I know this because, after years of travel with the military, my father went to work for electronic & defense contractors in Massachusetts. At the time, the contractors could site their factories in some of the closed Mills, built at a time when the waterpower of Massachusetts was used to run huge water-powered fabric mills. The electronics firms could pick up these huge, stoutly-constructed stone and masonry buildings for a song and work with the educated workforce. My father's work was in several of these old mills. But, we lived across the border in New Hampshire. You didn't buy a house in Massachusetts unless you were crazy or otherwise trapped. That's why people in these areas commute as much as TWO HOURS -- ONE WAY!

Now, the defense and electronic contractors are wising up, and moving their factories into New Hampshire, with a much more business-friendly climate. They are now nearer their employees, and nearer the retail and commerce that has grown up around their employees living in Southern New Hampshire.

Massachusetts continues to bleed its productive and educated workforce into bordering states and to flail around due to its high taxes and repressive business environment, and they don't have a smart Republican Governor like Mitt Romney to save themselves from themselves.

I'm sure you mean well, but you just don't have the facts at hand. Being in Tennessee, it's probably a little hard to comprehend all this Massachusetts foolishness.

And, on a personal note, my career as a military officer took me to Massachusetts, and my military career took me from Massachusetts to Iraq. A good transition. And then, to Texas, a very good transition, with another excellent Republican Governor, Rick Perry. And, now in retirement, to Tennessee, the best transition of all. Another Republican Governor, and the Music Industry, and the properly managed Town of Smyrna in Republican Rutherford County.

Edited November 4, 2012 by QuietDan

[Guest 6.8 AR]

[quote name='SlapChopDonkey' timestamp='1351990269' post='838568']
Because at the township / county level, at least years ago in Indiana, many of the local republicans were well entrenched incumbents who couldn't even spell conservative. A lot of great young candidates were able to run under the local democratic party in an effort to unseat them. They mostly failed due to lack of money to campaign with. But, they had good, community instead of govt. based approaches to our problems.
I don't care which party a candidate belongs to, I care about their ideas and policies. Voting solely based on party just doesn't make sense to me.
[/quote]This happens in either party, and has nothing to do with party affiliation. The closer and smaller the crowd, the
more that involvement is recognized, as opposed to what Chucktshoes thinks is funny. Involvement is always the key
to good governance at any level. When you let it slip away due to neglect or lack of interest, or plain old cynicism, this
is what takes place. It can happen at any level. It's called tyranny, even when it is slow and painless.

Save this one for posterity, also, because it will be the Republic's downfall, and you can gloat when it happens.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Quarter of million sane people finally realizing there is freedom in other states escaped from the second most liberal/ commie state in the union. Good move on their part.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352053317' post='838939']
He didn't lower the employment rate. The employment rate was forced down by his failed policies.
The unemployment rate was 4.7, but the US Census says that a quarter-million folks left the state during his governorship, largely due to his 14 percent loss in manufacturing (double nat avg). Kinda hard to have a high unemployment rate when everyone leaves!
He left Massachusetts ranking the third worst state for job growth in the US.
He "balanced the budget" but left the sate with the highest debt in the country.

These are facts.

Out of curiosity, did you leave Massachusetts because of a job loss by chance?


Yes.
Just do not see much change coming from the populars is all.
This year truly sucks. I think I will sleep in and save what's left of my sanity.
[/quote]
I love your "facts" also, strickj. "Because of his failed policies" is your interpretation of the "facts", unless you are a
Democrat in disguise. Do you still hang on to the belief that his gun policies will carry over to the Fed as well?
Why don't you come on out and say you just don't like him?

And as far as your not voting goes, you are certainly within your rights to do that, but it makes it difficult for you to
complain about the outcome, at least credibly.

[strickj]

[quote name='6.8 AR' timestamp='1352055578' post='838964']
I love your "facts" also, strickj. "Because of his failed policies" is your interpretation of the "facts", unless you are a
Democrat in disguise.[/quote]
It is not an interpretation. What I posted is\ how he left Mass.
I welcome you to dispute these facts without without questioning my political leanings or using apologist excuses.


[quote] Do you still hang on to the belief that his gun policies will carry over to the Fed as well?[/quote]
Yes, I fear that he might. I do not believe there has ever been another governor that has signed such a large and sweeping anti-gun bill into law, [u]ever[/u].
It is a reasonable fear, is it not? Just four years ago we decided that he was an anti-gun politician and he dropped out of the running.
And I believe it was 2008 when the NRA debunked his NRA endorsement claim.

Buying an NRA lifetime membership is not enough to cover what he is.
Jimmy Naifeh tried buying the R vote with an NRA membership, too, and everyone laughed him right off his majority throne.


[quote]And as far as your not voting goes, you are certainly within your rights to do that, but it makes it difficult for you to
complain about the outcome, at least credibly.[/quote]
How come?
Because I refuse to vote for the bunbag named Romney and Obama?

[gun sane]

Not for nuthin', but have you Libertarians ever considered why your guy didn't make the cut? Either it's the man or the message. Money will naturally follow the candidate and the policies that people think are winners. Or maybe it's the way in which the message is delivered....

[Guest 6.8 AR]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352056826' post='838981']
It is not an interpretation. What I posted is\ how he left Mass.
I welcome you to dispute these facts without without questioning my political leanings or using apologist excuses.



Yes, I fear that he might. I do not believe there has ever been another governor that has signed such a large and sweeping anti-gun bill into law, [u]ever[/u].
It is a reasonable fear, is it not? Just four years ago we decided that he was an anti-gun politician and he dropped out of the running.
And I believe it was 2008 when the NRA debunked his NRA endorsement claim.

Buying an NRA lifetime membership is not enough to cover what he is.
Jimmy Naifeh tried buying the R vote with an NRA membership, too, and everyone laughed him right off his majority throne.



How come?
Because I refuse to vote for the bunbag named Romney and Obama?
[/quote]It isn't a fact just because someone posts their opinion. Quiet Dan already posted more relevant tidbits
of information than saying all of those things you want to say are faulted by the last governor. There are more
relevant pieces of information out there that will include demographic and economic shifts. MA is decidedly
liberal if you haven't forgot. Romney was the governor. He had to deal with what the people of that state wanted,
which I'm sure you and I wouldn't have wanted to deal with or live by.

[DaveTN]

We will wake up Wednesday morning and someone will have been elected President. It will not matter what the margin was and it will not matter what percentages the losers had or what Party they are in.
God help us.

[RobertNashville]

People have a right to vote for anyone they want but the idea of a "protest vote" is about as ill-conceived as a screen door on a submarine...I guess it just goes to prove that some folks would rather believe in fairy tales than get their hands dirty doing the real work of effecting change.

If anyone thinks voting for some meaningless third-party hack or writing in someone who isn't even good enough to be picked up by a third party is going to make a difference to the "two party system" or make "Republicans take notice" they are fooling only themselves (assuming they actually believe it).

If Obama wins reelection, either because you voted for him or effectively voted for him then we'll all be getting exactly the kind of country we deserve.

[Guest Drewsett]

[quote name='gun sane' timestamp='1352066310' post='839050']Not for nuthin', but have you Libertarians ever considered why your guy didn't make the cut? Either it's the man or the message. [/quote][quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1352068913' post='839080']...I guess it just goes to prove that some folks would rather believe in fairy tales than get their hands dirty doing the real work of effecting change.

If anyone thinks voting for some meaningless third-party hack or writing in someone who isn't even good enough to be picked up by a third party is going to make a difference to the "two party system" or make "Republicans take notice" they are fooling only themselves (assuming they actually believe it).

If Obama wins reelection, either because you voted for him or effectively voted for him then we'll all be getting exactly the kind of country we deserve.[/quote]

If any of you could name more than two third parties; or more than one third party candidate's name, I'd be surprised.

Gun sane, the reason our candidates didn't make the cut is because they weren't Democrat or Republican. Between the fact that the DNC/RNC control the access to the debates through imposition of arbitrary percentages and the fact that the mainstream media are in the business of appealing to the... mainstream, you won't hear anything about these so called "fringe" candidates.

If you were less adherent to the utter control of your independent mind by punditry, you might have noticed that these so called "fringe" candidates are rather moderate.

The aforementioned argument about the Electoral College makes this argument in this state absolutely pointless, but the simple fact remains: the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. ..

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2

[Dennis1209]

Well, I'm not going to berate anyone for who they vote for, at least him / her cared enough to go out and exercise their Constitutional right to elect our government. I won't even talk about politics or our problems with people to lazy to exercise their right to vote.

But I will state this undisputed fact, either a Republican or Democrat will win the Presidency and most state seats, period, end of story!

A protest vote is a vote that doesn't go to a "lesser of two evils". It's simple math.

I would love to vote for a candidate better than Mitt Romney, but the numbers are just not there. I personally don't want to endure another four years of Obama, but what other logical choice is there is you don't want to waste your protest vote?

The politicians and news media are always going to "spin" the election results to favor their views, not the protest. At any rate, we're still stuck with the results of the election and have to endure the consequences.

Remember... We're not a Democracy, we're a Constitutional Republic, and there's a world of difference.

Regardless of your political beliefs, at least go out and vote and be heard while we still can.

I would implore you to use logic and math before you submit a protest vote.

When there is only two viable candidates to assume power over this nation, is it not best to elect the candidate that will lead us down the path of destruction at a slower rate?

Just my logic guys...

[SlapChopDonkey]

[quote name='Dennis1209' timestamp='1352074310' post='839124']

...Regardless of your political beliefs, at least go out and vote and be heard while we still can...[/quote]

THIS!

Go vote. For whoever you want, for whatever reason you want. But at least exercise what is not only your right, but your responsibility. A right not exercised is a right that is lost.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

[quote name='Drewsett' timestamp='1352074109' post='839120']
If any of you could name more than two third parties; or more than one third party candidate's name, I'd be surprised.

Gun sane, the reason our candidates didn't make the cut is because they weren't Democrat or Republican. Between the fact that the DNC/RNC control the access to the debates through imposition of arbitrary percentages and the fact that the mainstream media are in the business of appealing to the... mainstream, you won't hear anything about these so called "fringe" candidates.

If you were less adherent to the utter control of your independent mind by punditry, you might have noticed that these so called "fringe" candidates are rather moderate.

The aforementioned argument about the Electoral College makes this argument in this state absolutely pointless, but the simple fact remains: the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. ..

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2
[/quote]Off the top of my head: Green, Objectivist, Libertarian, Rent is too damn high Party

[daddyo]

You know, you guys who lambast libertarians for their support of Johnson or Paul are no different from the ones who lambast you for supporting Mutt.

[mikegideon]

[quote name='6.8 AR' timestamp='1352077173' post='839163']
Off the top of my head: Green, Objectivist, Libertarian, Rent is too damn high Party
[/quote]

Don't forget the "I'm pissed off, so I'm gonna poop in my own hair" party

[mikegideon]

[quote name='DaddyO' timestamp='1352078201' post='839171']
You know, you guys who lambast libertarians for their support of Johnson or Paul are no different from the ones who lambast you for supporting Mutt.
[/quote]

True. Hope nobody's taking it personally.

[gun sane]

[quote name='Drewsett' timestamp='1352074109' post='839120']Gun sane, the reason our candidates didn't make the cut is because they weren't Democrat or Republican. Between the fact that the DNC/RNC control the access to the debates through imposition of arbitrary percentages and the fact that the mainstream media are in the business of appealing to the... mainstream, you won't hear anything about these so called "fringe" candidates.

If you were less adherent to the utter control of your independent mind by punditry, you might have noticed that these so called "fringe" candidates are rather moderate.[/quote]

Quite the contrary. I did listen to the message which was more popularly espoused by Ron Paul, who chose to present himself as a Republican, rather than a Libertarian. Two planks of the platform are for me a deal breaker.

(1) I cannot support an isolationist view of dealing with terrorism, as this is akin to living in a dangerous neighborhood and believing that hanging a No Trespassing sign will keep the perps at bay.

(2) I will not support the legalization of marijuana for recreational use. I won't bother you with the reasons, only to say that my wife is a medical professional and I trust her judgment on this issue as well.

Lest you think I'm whistling past the Republican graveyard, rest assured I have concerns with their policies as well, but there are none so reckless as the two mentioned above. Money wastefully spent can be restored through better management, lives thrown away are irreplaceable.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='Drewsett' timestamp='1352074109' post='839120']If any of you could name more than two third parties; or more than one third party candidate's name, I'd be surprised.[/quote] I can but it has no impact on how I voted because I won't throw my vote away by voting for a non-viable candidate (plus I have at least as many, and in ssome cases many more, philosophical problems with these third and fourth tier candidates as I do with Romney, although not the same ones).


[quote name='Drewsett' timestamp='1352074109' post='839120']...the reason our candidates didn't make the cut is because they weren't Democrat or Republican. Between the fact that the DNC/RNC control the access to the debates through imposition of arbitrary percentages and the fact that the mainstream media are in the business of appealing to the... mainstream, you won't hear anything about these so called "fringe" candidates.[/quote]
They didn't make it because none of them have ever appealed to more than a fringe percentage of the population...their message doesn't resonate...supporters of these third party candidates can blame everything from sun spots to unfair treatment in the press but at the end of the day, these candidates have no chance because THEY don't have a message that works.

As to the debates, I don't want to see a presidential debate with 10 candidates who, if you took the eight who were not the R or D nominee and combined their votes together, they won't get more than 1-2% of the vote - why the hell would I want to wast time hearing them in a debate.


[quote name='Drewsett' timestamp='1352074109' post='839120']...but the simple fact remains: the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. ..[/quote]
You mean like RP running for president multiple times without ever gaining any ground?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

[quote name='DaddyO' timestamp='1352078201' post='839171']
You know, you guys who lambast libertarians for their support of Johnson or Paul are no different from the ones who lambast you for supporting Mutt.
[/quote]
You know why I'm supporting Romney. If others don't, it's because a libertarian can't get enough traction, nationally.
When there is a local libertarian groundswell that starts, and catches on, I will happily support it. Running for president
only always nets the same result, though. What's that saying about doing the same thing over and over expecting a
different result?

[strickj]

[quote name='6.8 AR' timestamp='1352067671' post='839063']
It isn't a fact just because someone posts their opinion. Quiet Dan already posted more relevant tidbits
of information than saying all of those things you want to say are faulted by the last governor. There are more
relevant pieces of information out there that will include demographic and economic shifts. MA is decidedly
liberal if you haven't forgot. Romney was the governor. He had to deal with what the people of that state wanted,
which I'm sure you and I wouldn't have wanted to deal with or live by.
[/quote]
It isn't an opinion. It is fact.

[quote]
[indent=1]
[b]1. Ranked 47th in job growth[/b]: Despite Romney’s professed expertise in creating jobs, Massachusetts [url="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/06/02/232040/romney-obama-massachusetts-jobs/"]ranked 47th in job growth[/url] during his time as governor. The state’s total job growth was just 0.9 percent, well behind other high-wage, high-skill economies in New York (2.7), California (4.7), and North Carolina (7.6). The national average, meanwhile, was better than 5 percent.
[b]2. Suffered the second-largest labor force decline in the nation[/b]: Only Louisiana, which was ravaged by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, saw a bigger decline in its labor force than Massachusetts during Romney’s tenure as governor. The US Census Bureau estimated that between July 2002 and July 2006, 222,000 more residents left Massachusetts for other states than came to it. That decline largely explains the state’s decreasing unemployment rate (from 5.6 to 4.7 percent) while Romney was in office, according to Northeastern University economics professor Andrew Sum. At the same time, the nation as a whole [url="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/07/29/romneys_economic_record/"]added 8 million[/url] people to the labor force.
[b]3. Lost 14 percent of its manufacturing jobs[/b]: Massachusetts lost [url="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/07/29/romneys_economic_record/"]14 percent of its manufacturing jobs[/url] during Romney’s time in office, according to Sum. The loss was double the rate that the nation as a whole lost manufacturing jobs. In 2004, Romney vetoed legislation that would have banned companies doing business with the state from outsourcing jobs to other countries.
[b]4. Experienced “below average” economic growth and was “often near the bottom”[/b]: “There was not one measure where the state did well under his term in office. We were [url="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/02/08/421055/massachusetts-economy-romney-below-average/"]below average and often near the bottom[/url],” Sum told the Washington Post in February. As a result, the state was more comparable to Rust Belt states like Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio than it was to other high-tech economies it typically competes with.
[b]5. Piled on more debt than any other state[/b]: Romney left Massachusetts residents with $10,504 in per capita bond debt, the [url="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/05/16/485035/romney-debt-massachusetts/"]highest of any state[/url] in the nation when he left office in 2007. The state ranked second in debt as a percentage of personal income. Romney regularly omits those statistics from his Massachusetts record, instead touting the fact that he balanced the state’s budget (he was constitutionally required to do so).[/indent]
[/quote]
[url="http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/06/04/494282/5-facts-about-the-massachusetts-economy-under-mitt-romney/?mobile=nc"]http://thinkprogress...mney/?mobile=nc[/url]

[quote][i]Census[/i] Bureau estimated 222,000 thousand residents [i]left Massachusetts[/i] for other states than came into it.[/quote]

Now, before you pile on me for the links.... they were simply the first in google search. You can search yourself if you do not believe these facts. They are admittedly biased against Mittens but the numbers are still correct.

Saying this stuff isn't his fault because Massachusetts is so liberal is nothing more than apologist excuse. He left Massachusetts with these problems while not even California or New York saw the same numbers.

[kieefer]

I don't think there's any room for a protest vote in a presidential election. I can't think of any previous time that that was the reason for me voting FOR a [u]presidential[/u] candidate. Ross Perot may be considered a protest vote by some but he had some ideas and visions that I think we needed at the time, if only he looked and sounded like George Clooney he may have made it. Reality had not yet set in at my young age during that voting season.

This time Brad Staats got my vote against the relic Jim Cooper and Kermit Steck got my vote against Corker, those two were my so-called protests votes this time. The likelihood that either of them winning is slim but those two,IMO, have a better chance of winning than GaryJ or any other 3rd party [u]presidential[/u] candidate. I feel good about both of them but feel Cooper and Corker will win it.
Will this vote make that big of a difference?, doubtful in this case. Not so much when it comes to the communist messiah.

Watching past elections I believe local elections are where you change the direction, not in national elections.

[Oh Shoot]

[quote name='kieefer' timestamp='1352144116' post='839465']
.....Watching past elections I believe local elections are where you change the direction, not in national elections.
[/quote]

The US Constitution agrees. That's why it only stipulated that people voted for their area representative. Not senators or even president.

The American Idol method of choosing the president has become an abomination. We'd do well with going back to what the constitution intended, which was to become more involved with politics by holding local reps' feet to the fire about everything in Washington. Including choosing the prez.

- OS