A Last Minute Appeal To Libertarians And Non-Voters

[Worriedman]

[quote name='OhShoot' timestamp='1352144576' post='839468']
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
[/quote]

That document, and its intent are hard to beat.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352140196' post='839439']
It isn't an opinion. It is fact.


[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]



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.
[/quote]Yep, garbage in, garbage out. Please try to look at your links with a tad more scrutiny, strickj. You know?
Something called a Bull#### detector is a sometimes valuable tool. I'm not lambasting you for your link, just pay
closer attention to what is written and who wrote it before you take affiliation with it.

Polarization makes things confuzing, I know. I used to take snopes to heart. Not anymore.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352140196' post='839439']...It isn't an opinion. It is fact...Saying this stuff isn't his fault because Massachusetts is so liberal is nothing more than apologist excuse.[/quote]

And just saying stuff is his (Romney's) fault could be labeled as nothing more than rationalization.

Most of the "facts" listed are a bit one dimensional and one dimensional facts rarely tell the whole story....stats such as "lost 14% of its manufacturing jobs" is meaningless unless one is willing to look at all the relevant information and do actual analysis of data. Would they have lost 28% had Romney not be governor? Dose the governor of MA actually have any substantial control or measurable input into how many manufacturing jobs the state has or gains or loses? Were there trends happening nationally that were the driving forces behind that stats quoted?

Some of these questions may be unknowable but simply blaming Romney seems to a conclusion based more on convenience than evidence.

I understand you don't like Romney and that's fine but I would suggest that there is no candidate running who is both demonstrably better and can actually win the election. Further, the other choice is anathema to the ideas of individual freedom and liberty.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='OhShoot' timestamp='1352144576' post='839468']
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
[/quote]Not to get off topic but even though I've asked the question of proponents of repeal of the (I believe) 17th amendment, no one has been able to demonstrate to me that the legislature of each sate choosing its senators would provide "better" senators than we have gotten by electing them.

[Oh Shoot]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1352148527' post='839500']
Not to get off topic but even though I've asked the question of proponents of repeal of the (I believe) 17th amendment, no one has been able to demonstrate to me that the legislature of each sate choosing its senators would provide "better" senators than we have gotten by electing them.
[/quote]

The idea is that if your rep (who is the most local federal pol you have) had to answer to his constituency for [i]everything[/i], things would more likely be done according to the pervading will of that constituency, including choices of senators and the presidency/veep. And people would likely tend to be more involved than they are now, since there would be one point for input.

- OS

Edited November 5, 2012 by OhShoot

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='OhShoot' timestamp='1352148966' post='839506']
The idea is that if your rep (who is the most local federal pol you have) had to answer to his constituency for [i]everything[/i], things would more likely be done according to the pervading will of that constituency, including choices of senators and the presidency/veep. And people would likely tend to be more involved than they are now, since there would be one point for input.

- OS
[/quote]Maybe I'm just being dense but I don't quite see how that would really effect a change or to put it another way, many people (including me) are unhappy with Corker and Alexander but I'm doubtful...very doubtful...that if our senators were chosen by or legislature that we wouldn't still have Corker and Alexander as our senators.

As I understand it, the Senate was supposed to be less subject to the whims of the public...more deliberative...maybe if they were appointed that would be the case but I suppose I'm just cynical enough to believe it would be just as bad as it is now no matter how the senators got there.

[Oh Shoot]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1352151238' post='839527']
....As I understand it, the Senate was supposed to be less subject to the whims of the public...more deliberative...maybe if they were appointed that would be the case but I suppose I'm just cynical enough to believe it would be just as bad as it is now no matter how the senators got there.
[/quote]

Oh, I would imagine we'd tend to have fewer wanna be political rock stars and more bland, functional, worker bee type senators. Maybe even fewer career pols in both House and Senate.

But we'll never know, I guess.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Until the senate was taken away from control of the individual states, they had more usefulness. Now, they
are more concerned about views other than their intended role.

[Worriedman]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1352148527' post='839500']
Not to get off topic but even though I've asked the question of proponents of repeal of the (I believe) 17th amendment, no one has been able to demonstrate to me that the legislature of each sate choosing its senators would provide "better" senators than we have gotten by electing them.
[/quote]

The State Legislature had the ability to appoint, or recall at their whim, (or more correctly, the electorate's whim), the Senators.

I know my local Representative, on a first name, he sees me coming he runs, either to shake my hand or hide basis. I can instruct him as the Tennessee Constitution intends. Never get a chance to speak to Alexander or Corker, so my influence there is far less than it is with my State Representative. It was how it was intended to be.

[strickj]

[quote name='6.8 AR' timestamp='1352148150' post='839495']
Yep, garbage in, garbage out. Please try to look at your links with a tad more scrutiny, strickj. You know?
Something called a Bull#### detector is a sometimes valuable tool. I'm not lambasting you for your link, just pay
closer attention to what is written and who wrote it before you take affiliation with it.

Polarization makes things confuzing, I know. I used to take snopes to heart. Not anymore.
[/quote]

Any site showing a negative on Romney will be biased against Romney? Duh.
The numbers I posed are fact. Fact. Fact. Fact.

I do invite you to research the facts that I posted yourself. Post the results here. And I expect a totally unbiased link

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352157096' post='839600']
Any site showing a negative on Romney will be biased against Romney? Duh.
The numbers I posed are fact. Fact. Fact. Fact.

I do invite you to research the facts that I posted yourself. Post the results here. And I expect a totally unbiased link
[/quote]

So are you suggesting that so long as a source says what you need it to say, it doesn't matter where it comes from or what their bias might be?

It sure didn't seem to work that way for my master's degree....those professors always insisted on "competent sources"; the Huffington Post and Wikipedia were not acceptable! ROTFLMAO

[strickj]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1352148363' post='839498']
And just saying stuff is his (Romney's) fault could be labeled as nothing more than rationalization.


[/quote]
Why is it OK for everyone to blame the economy on O's failures but no one is allowed to blame the Massachusetts economy on Romney's failures?



[quote].stats such as "lost 14% of its manufacturing jobs" is meaningless unless one is willing to look at all the relevant information and do actual analysis of data. Would they have lost 28% had Romney not be governor?[/quote]
What did the Pope eat last night?


[quote]Dose the governor of MA actually have any substantial control or measurable input into how many manufacturing jobs the state has or gains or loses? Were there trends happening nationally that were the driving forces behind that stats quoted?[/quote]
He had an average that was double the national average.

When romney ran for governor, he called himself a "CEO governor" and made promises that he would turn their economy around.
He ran on the basis that he would have a huge impact on their economy and he failed. He's not allowed to say that a governor doesn't have an impact on economies now.


[quote]Some of these questions may be unknowable but simply blaming Romney seems to a conclusion based more on convenience than evidence.[/quote]
Kinda like blaming O for welfare phones and food stamps?


[quote]
Further, the other choice is anathema to the ideas of individual freedom and liberty.
[/quote]

Kinda like Mittens signing one of the largest (if not THE largest) and most sweeping piece of anti-gun legislation into law in history?
Or creating Romneycare which is the same thing as 0care?
Or the numerous religious opinion based policies and legislations that remove freedoms from everyone that doesn;t believe in the same bible?

[mikegideon]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1352158265' post='839612']
So are you suggesting that so long as a source says what you need it to say, it doesn't matter where it comes from or what their bias might be?

It sure didn't seem to work that way for my master's degree....those professors always insisted on "competent sources"; the Huffington Post and Wikipedia were not acceptable! ROTFLMAO
[/quote]

Folks hear what they wanna hear. I'm worn out on the whole damn thing. If somebody bought the picture the Obama campaign painted of Romney, they're just not gonna see it any other way. The 6 billion dollar election cycle did its magic.

[strickj]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1352158265' post='839612']
So are you suggesting that so long as a source says what you need it to say, it doesn't matter where it comes from or what their bias might be?

It sure didn't seem to work that way for my master's degree....those professors always insisted on "competent sources"; the Huffington Post and Wikipedia were not acceptable! ROTFLMAO
[/quote]
Laugh it up. At least I provided a backing instead of just laughing at you.

[b]If my numbers are wrong then provide the correct numbers.[/b]

I'll not hold my breath waiting on Fox news to say something negative about their poster child. Edited November 5, 2012 by strickj

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352158494' post='839615']...[/quote]
Look...I get it; Okay? You don't like Romney so you'll post anything that supports your opinion of him...it's only human nature to do so. Edited November 5, 2012 by RobertNashville

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352158737' post='839619']
Laugh it up. At least I provided a backing instead of just laughing at you.

[b]If my numbers are wrong then provide the correct numbers.[/b]

I'll not hold my breath waiting on Fox news to say something negative about their poster child.
[/quote]
You've made it overwhelmingly clear what you think of Romney and for at least the last six months you've ignored anything that anyone has posted that might tend to not support how you see him so what would be the point of me posting numbers or anything else for that matter - nothing is going to change your mind.

Tomorrow is election day so so go vote for whoever you want to vote for (if you haven't already) or don't vote; whatever you want to do. Edited November 5, 2012 by RobertNashville

[Raoul]

Dickie Weed sure is looking good about now.

[mikegideon]

[quote name='Raoul' timestamp='1352159231' post='839629']
Dickie Weed sure is looking good about now.
[/quote]

Dickie is on the road between NYC and Oklahoma right now. He's tired of this sh#t.

EDIT: Have some Dickie music while you wait. Warning... It's pretty much all R rated.

[url="http://www.myspace.com/dickieweed"]http://www.myspace.com/dickieweed[/url] Edited November 5, 2012 by mikegideon

[Raoul]

[quote name='mikegideon' timestamp='1352159421' post='839630']
Dickie is on the road between NYC and Oklahoma right now. He's tired of this sh#t.
[/quote]

Ain't we all...

[strickj]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1352159168' post='839627']
Chill out...you are taking this far too personally.
[/quote]Not taking anything personal. I

Just seems you want to laugh at the factual statistics that I posed instead of actual providing information to the contrary.


Going back to your professors comment.
Did you professors accept papers with no sources at all?

[Guest ThePunisher]

4 years of unsustanable debt that is going to bankrupt the USA, stagnant economy, high unemployment, bowing down to foreign leaders, embracing the Islamic countries over Israel, Marxist policies, polarizing the American people, destroying the best healthcare system in the world, creating high energy costs through green energy policy certainly seems to be enough evidence for one to be concerned about the commie Obama instead of an ex-repubican governor's record in a liberal commie state where 87% of state legislatures were Libtards. Hell, I bet even Ronald Reagan could not have done any better in Taxachusettes than Romney.

[LagerHead]

The reason a true constitutional conservative will never be elected in any of our lifetimes is because so many people are convinced that the tripe just spewed by Whittle, a man with whom I normally vehemently agree, is true. It's a self fulfilling prophecy; a catch-22. Oh well, such is life.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352159761' post='839635']Not taking anything personal. I

Just seems you want to laugh at the factual statistics that I posed instead of actual providing information to the contrary.


Going back to your professors comment.
Did you professors accept papers with no sources at all?[/quote] What my professors expected was for me to do a hell of a lot more research than just take the first couple of links from a Google search. LOL

[jtmaze]

Ok. Lets get back to voting and not arguing about candidates. Found this little tidbit of info on what one vote can mean.

Historical Facts On The Power Of Just One Vote
1645

One vote gave Oliver Cromwell control of England.

1776

One vote gave America the English language instead of German.

1868

One vote saved President Andrew Jackson from impeachment.

1875

One vote changed France from a monarchy to a republic.

1876

One vote gave Rutherford B. Hayes the Presidency of the United States of America.

1923

One vote gave Adolf Hitler leadership of the Nazi Party.

1941

One vote saved the Selective Service - just weeks before Pearl Harbor was attacked.

1990

One vote decided a state House race in Oakland County, Michigan.

http://www.usfca.edu/fac-staff/hancock/pol204/history.htm

[QuietDan]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352158737' post='839619']
Laugh it up. At least I provided a backing instead of just laughing at you.

[b]If my numbers are wrong then provide the correct numbers.[/b]

I'll not hold my breath waiting on Fox news to say something negative about their poster child.
[/quote]

Actually, salvaging your one misbegotten vote is not worth more than 100 posts.

Take your biased wiki-facts and check the context. What was the job loss in Massachusetts prior to Romney? What was the job loss after Romney? You don't know. It's pertinent. You didn't check. That makes you ignorant in the original meaning of ignorant. What's more, you are willfully ignorant.

You were presented with facts. You ignored them. You know what your own mind is, additional facts to the contrary. It seems that your desire to be right over-rides your desire to understand. Do your homework. Pay attention. Otherwise, stick with your view in spite of being presented with evidence to the contrary by people who lived through the time and were actually there. Stick with your view. Live with it. Choke on it.

You have now demonstrated that YOU ARE NOT WORTH correcting. You are a child and will apparently remain a child. Throw your vote away. Stomp your little foot in your rightness.

Once upon a time, in a different century, they used to say "Don't trust anyone over thirty." One day soon, you will be over thirty, and you'll actually find out how ignorant and narrow your thinking is, and you won't pay any attention to yourself because you'll be over thirty.

I've been in the military for well over three decades, longer than you've been alive apparently, and overseas a significant portion of my life in a combat zone "defending the country." And then, with other folks like me, we come home, and we come across silly little punks that make us think -- WHY DID WE BOTHER? We'd like to continue to "save the country" to the extent that we can, and little know-nothing, smart-ass punks stand up on their hind legs and spout self-righteous nonsense and refuse to be corrected.

Fine. Throw your vote away. Vote for Obama for all we care. When we all sink into a Socialist, Marxist, Communist Hell-hole of ignorance, brutality and depravity, deal with it. We who defended your right to be a complete moron will probably be dead, either of old age or at some cross-roads barricade, and you can go through all the sweat and heartbreak and fight your own damn battles and learn the hard way, if you learn at all.