zimmerman

[TMF]

I keep reading how everyone is pissed off at the Republicans and the Democrats, some sort of revolutionary change is needed, but nobody wants to start that revolution as the founders of this democratic republic intended, which is through the ballot box. We all know the two major parties aren't looking out for our interests nor are they going to change, but when it comes to Election Day, virtually everyone runs to the polls and votes for one of the two major parties anyhow. When anyone suggests a third party, like the Libertarian Party, nobody will vote because "they can't win." Well no frigging wonder. The overwhelming majority of Americans have voluntarily enslaved themselves to the two major parties, which is exactly where they want you. I'm a believer in the old saying, we get the government we deserve and anyone who votes for any Republican Party or Democratic Party member is getting the tyranny they deserve. Then there is the Tea Party, which is a bunch of establishment Republicans who know how to talk a good game and dupe people into voting for them. Even the caucus' former leader Michelle Bachman made it very clear that the Tea Party Caucus was nothing more than a "repository for ideas" and that the opinions of constituents was basically meaningless.


Keep drinking the two-party Kool Aid folks. That's what they are scaring you and paying you off with government benefits to do.

I think it would be setting our hopes too high to get third party candidates into the White House. However, I don't think it is far fetched to overthrow everyone in power when their term is up. It only takes a small percentage of voters to swing an election, but it would require that some folks who would otherwise vote for a republican would have to vote for a democrat and vice versa. If every (or at least a significant percentage) of incumbents were fired every time their term was up it would end the age of career politicians and force them to go to work for us.

Those corrupt bags of sh**, reps and dems, up in DC will do anything to hang on to power. We can use that against them to get what we want.

[RobertNashville]

I keep reading how everyone is pissed off at the Republicans and the Democrats, some sort of revolutionary change is needed, but nobody wants to start that revolution as the founders of this democratic republic intended, which is through the ballot box. We all know the two major parties aren't looking out for our interests nor are they going to change, but when it comes to Election Day, virtually everyone runs to the polls and votes for one of the two major parties anyhow. When anyone suggests a third party, like the Libertarian Party, nobody will vote because "they can't win." Well no frigging wonder. The overwhelming majority of Americans have voluntarily enslaved themselves to the two major parties, which is exactly where they want you. I'm a believer in the old saying, we get the government we deserve and anyone who votes for any Republican Party or Democratic Party member is getting the tyranny they deserve. Then there is the Tea Party, which is a bunch of establishment Republicans who know how to talk a good game and dupe people into voting for them. Even the caucus' former leader Michelle Bachman made it very clear that the Tea Party Caucus was nothing more than a "repository for ideas" and that the opinions of constituents was basically meaningless.

Keep drinking the two-party Kool Aid folks. That's what they are scaring you and paying you off with government benefits to do.

I'll ask you the same question I've been asking; what makes you think even the next ten or even 20 elections will actually make a difference regardless of who is voted in?

 

While I could, perhaps, point to an individual politician here or there who might hold to the founder's principles and might truly try to affect change, as a collective, I've seen nothing form any party that gives me any reason to think that either Congress, the Presidency or even the vast majority of their State equivalents has the courage or even the desire whatsoever to shrink government or try to return to the boundaries of the Constitution...as I noted earlier in this thread; they don't even have the balls to just keep the size and scope of government (and government spending) where it is today let alone actually shrink it.

 

I've studied our history and I've been voting since 1972...I've worked for candidates...knocked on doors...called...written letters...emailed...tried to get others to care...the only bright spot I've seen in 40 years was Ronald Reagan and probably half the people here think he was as bad of a leader as anyone else and part of the problem.

 

We've been heading down this road we are on since at least the days of Woodrow Wilson; maybe even Teddy Roosevelt so tell me, please, what difference is the ballot box going to make at this point?

Edited July 19, 2013 by RobertNashville

[Guest ThePunisher]

I keep reading how everyone is pissed off at the Republicans and the Democrats, some sort of revolutionary change is needed, but nobody wants to start that revolution as the founders of this democratic republic intended, which is through the ballot box. We all know the two major parties aren't looking out for our interests nor are they going to change, but when it comes to Election Day, virtually everyone runs to the polls and votes for one of the two major parties anyhow. When anyone suggests a third party, like the Libertarian Party, nobody will vote because "they can't win." Well no frigging wonder. The overwhelming majority of Americans have voluntarily enslaved themselves to the two major parties, which is exactly where they want you. I'm a believer in the old saying, we get the government we deserve and anyone who votes for any Republican Party or Democratic Party member is getting the tyranny they deserve. Then there is the Tea Party, which is a bunch of establishment Republicans who know how to talk a good game and dupe people into voting for them. Even the caucus' former leader Michelle Bachman made it very clear that the Tea Party Caucus was nothing more than a "repository for ideas" and that the opinions of constituents was basically meaningless.
Keep drinking the two-party Kool Aid folks. That's what they are scaring you and paying you off with government benefits to do.

You forget that voting third party is a democrat commie tactic of divide and conquer; divide the numbers between republicans and third party, and then the democrap commies get to conquer. Third party always sounds good, but it is a losing proposition as the Democraps party never gets divided up. The democrats win all the time b/c they keep demonizing the republicans with lies, plus the fact they control the majority of media information outlets. They keep telling propaganda lies long enough that the uninformed believe them. They've used the BS line of the democrats are for the poor and working man, and the republicans are only for the rich man ever since their inception as a party, and their minions believe it.

Remember that the '94 Republican revolution was started b/c of the tax hikes that a majority of the country was against, and the assualt magazine and weapons ban. There can be another revolution in 2014 and 2016 if the people not give up hope of turning around our country at the ballot box. Not all the republican party representatives are bad and evil. Some need to be weeded out, and replaced by better representatives. Nobody wants to talk about weeding out all the bad commie democrats that are on a fast track of destroying America. Unifying together to beat these commies is the only way to win and reclaim our country. Third party is what these Democrap commies are hoping for b/c they've mastered the divide and conquer strategy. Edited July 19, 2013 by ThePunisher

[East_TN_Patriot]

I think it would be setting our hopes too high to get third party candidates into the White House. However, I don't think it is far fetched to overthrow everyone in power when their term is up. It only takes a small percentage of voters to swing an election, but it would require that some folks who would otherwise vote for a republican would have to vote for a democrat and vice versa. If every (or at least a significant percentage) of incumbents were fired every time their term was up it would end the age of career politicians and force them to go to work for us.

Those corrupt bags of sh**, reps and dems, up in DC will do anything to hang on to power. We can use that against them to get what we want.

It is far fetched because the only candidates in the 2 party system (2PS) who even have a shot at winning are the ones who get the blessing of the state and/or national party. Without that support, the candidate is far less likely to get the campaign funds, endorsements, and logistical support needed to win. Add in the reality that these parties will actually work against people running under their party label whom the party does not like. When you vote for a Republican or Democratic candidate, you are almost always voting for one that has been vetted, bought, and paid for by the party. Since the Republicans (I'm going to presume that's the party most everyone on TGO supports as I did for my entire adult life until 4 years ago) are putting up candidates election cycle after election cycle that we don't like, that should tell you something. The Republican Party is like an old building. Sometimes it's just not worth trying to fix, but it's better to moves and build a better building. I'm arguing that the Libertarian Party is that building.

I'll ask you the same question I've been asking; what makes you think even the next ten or even 20 elections will actually make a difference regardless of who is voted in?

While I could, perhaps, point to an individual politician here or there who might hold to the founder's principles and might truly try to affect change, as a collective, I've seen nothing form any party that gives me any reason to think that either Congress, the Presidency or even the vast majority of their State equivalents has the courage or even the desire whatsoever to shrink government or try to return to the boundaries of the Constitution...as I noted earlier in this thread; they don't even have the balls to just keep the size and scope of government (and government spending) where it is today let alone actually shrink it.

I've studied our history and I've been voting since 1972...I've worked for candidates...knocked on doors...called...written letters...emailed...tried to get others to care...the only bright spot I've seen in 40 years was Ronald Reagan and probably half the people here think he was as bad of a leader as anyone else and part of the problem.

We've been heading down this road we are on since at least the days of Woodrow Wilson; maybe even Teddy Roosevelt so tell me, please, what difference is the ballot box going to make at this point?

The ballot box won't make any difference if people keep supporting the same 2 party system. The political parties are like any other entrenched social entity, whether it be political, governmental, or private. Once they exist, they will do what is necessary to maintain the status quo and preserve or expand their power and influence. Social institutions only change to survive. Until people bite the bullet and shift their money and support elsewhere, the 2PS is only going to change enough to keep people from leaving, dupe people into believing that their interests are being represented, or keep their political efficacy low so they don't vote at all and leave the policy-making process to favored individuals and groups.

You forget that voting third party is a democrat commie tactic of divide and conquer; divide the numbers between republicans and third party, and then the democrap commies get to conquer. Third party always sounds good, but it is a losing proposition as the Democraps party never gets divided up. The democrats win all the time b/c they keep demonizing the republicans with lies, plus the fact they control the majority of media information outlets. They keep telling propaganda lies long enough that the uninformed believe them. They've used the BS line of the democrats are for the poor and working man, and the republicans are only for the rich man ever since their inception as a party, and their minions believe it.
Remember that the '94 Republican revolution was started b/c of the tax hikes that a majority of the country was against, and the assualt magazine and weapons ban. There can be another revolution in 2014 and 2016 if the people not give up hope of turning around our country at the ballot box. Not all the republican party representatives are bad and evil. Some need to be weeded out, and replaced by better representatives. Nobody wants to talk about weeding out all the bad commie democrats that are on a fast track of destroying America. Unifying together to beat these commies is the only way to win and reclaim our country. Third party is what these Democrap commies are hoping for b/c they've mastered the divide and conquer strategy.

First, your premise that the Libertarian Party would only draw from the Republicans is false. Due to the Party's more liberal stance on social issues, it attracts many from the Democratic Party, particularly the fiscally conservative Blue Dogs. This is why you don't see or hear of the Dems pushing the Libertarians in any way. They know that the LP is a threat to them as well. You're buying into the fear mongering of the Reps. If the Democrats were really pushing a "divide and conquer" tactic, the Dems would be funneling money to the LP, trying to subversively drive Reps to the LP, they would be talking them up in a way that made them look attractive to Reps, etc. None of this is happening. Instead, Dems say the same kinds of things people here do about third parties. The Dems also know there is tremendous discord in their own party and they don't want to risk making third parties seem viable. If you really, I mean genuinely, want to see political change, then the third party is the only way to do it.

Tell me how this plan of weeding people out is going to work (see also my points above). Tell me why the Republican Revolution under Newt didn't change anything, or why the Tea Party has been generally a failure. The two parties are going to resist weeding out those elected officials or actively try to destroy those innovators who do get into office. If a significant portion of those who are fed up with the system we have now would stop drinking the two party Kool aid and vote for a third party, especially the same third party, the two parties would have to adapt or fall apart. This is why the Tea Party was able to shake things up as they did in the beginning. Their failure was partially due to their stance on using the power of government for controlling social morality (a direct contradiction to the ideology of a free society with smaller government) and their connection to the Republican Party (see again my earlier points on this). Of all people, Republicans should know that the Party came into existence over a split within the Whig Party over similar issues and was able to get Lincoln in the White House in less than a decade. Edited July 19, 2013 by East_TN_Patriot

[TMF]

It is far fetched because the only candidates in the 2 party system (2PS) who even have a shot at winning are the ones who get the blessing of the state and/or national party. Without that support, the candidate is far less likely to get the campaign funds, endorsements, and logistical support needed to win. Add in the reality that these parties will actually work against people running under their party label whom the party does not like. When you vote for a Republican or Democratic candidate, you are almost always voting for one that has been vetted, bought, and paid for by the party.

I agree, the two parties simply have too much power. So much that I don't think a third party can be successful in ousting these guys conventionally. I think an unconventional approach, one that we can realistically apply, could destroy the corrupt system and cause it to be reinvented.... maybe "for the people" and all that. We have to end the days of career politicians. That is the start, and we can launch from there. 10% of the voting population can swing the majority of elections. I'd say there are at least 10% of voters that do not identify with either party, and don't know how powerful they are.

[RobertNashville]

I disagree that the Tea Party is a failure; it's only a failure if the only measurement of "success" is a complete clearing out of every RINO/PROGRSSIVE/NEOCONSERVATIVE in government.  I would submit that, with VERY rare exception, the only members of the current Congress that are worth a damn at all are candidates that were found, vetted and supported by Tea Party groups across the country and often done in opposition to the party establishment.

 

Has it made a real difference? No...but in these cases the lack of effectiveness is mostly a result of there being too few of these types of candidates.

 

If you think the Tea Party movement (and make no mistake, it's a movement, not a "party") is a failure how much more so is the Libertarian Party or any other third party?  Historically, what's the best, percentage wise, that the Libertarian party has ever done in a presidential election?  Have they even broken 5%?  How is it that you think they can move to getting at least a plurality of the vote given their track history?

 

I still don't seen anything changing at the ballot box and so far, no one has actually answered my question directly.

Edited July 19, 2013 by RobertNashville

[TMF]

I still don't seen anything changing at the ballot box and so far, no one has actually answered my question directly.

There is no answer. They are simply too powerful. Our only bargaining chip is to flip sides to oust any incumbent on the ballot. It will be painful for everyone, but I bet it will get results that won't be soon forgotten.

[Worriedman]

There is no answer. They are simply too powerful. Our only bargaining chip is to flip sides to oust any incumbent on the ballot. It will be painful for everyone, but I bet it will get results that won't be soon forgotten.

 

I think you hit the nail on the head here, but it brings about an interesting situation with respect to a third party.  The advantage gained would be to force the Republicans to get off of their "Establishment" agenda and start to truly serve the People's interest.  Third Party candidates do not have to win to achieve a goal, they can just pull enough conservative votes to let the Democrat win, which might put the Republicans back in a mind set to work with conservatives instead of paying no attention at all to their entreaties.  Work with us, or face us...

Edited July 19, 2013 by Worriedman

[TGO David]

You know... this "neo-revolutionary" bravado is a cyclical thing.  It comes and goes on the Internet where talk is cheap and no one dies as a result of what they post, but I'm getting to the point where I'm tired of hearing it (again) and wish someone would either put up or shut up.

 

 

You are probably referring to the New Black Panthers.

 

 

No I am referring to you and the others making the "Become a good comrade or die!" type of comments.  If you truly believe that the electoral system is broken and that the political system is ineffective and worthless, that leaves two options:  Take up arms and revolt, or sit there and talk about it.

 

So far the tough guys say they're froggy, but no one's jumping.  It's like some of you are Neo-Revolutionary Fluffers, getting each other ready for it but not really sealing the deal.

[mikegideon]

Fluffers  :rofl: . Polish them guns, boys :)

[RobertNashville]

I think you hit the nail on the head here, but it brings about an interesting situation with respect to a third party.  The advantage gained would be to force the Republicans to get off of their "Establishment" agenda and start to truly serve the People's interest.  Third Party candidates do not have to win to achieve a goal, they can just pull enough conservative votes to let the Democrat win, which might put the Republicans back in a mind set to work with conservatives instead of paying no attention at all to their entreaties.  Work with us, or face us...

That sounds very reasonable but it seems to me Conservatives (or at least more conservative than the status quo) have tried to get the attention of the establishment Republicans at least a couple of times in the past 20 or 30 years and nearly a million of us marched on Washington in 2009 and I've seen nothing substantial really come of it....just a lot of platitudes and a lot of "activity" but nothing actually changed or didn't change for very long.

 

What is it that causes you to believe anything is going to change going forward?

 

I truly don't think anything is going to change until we crash...Detroit is, today, facing the choices it's made over the past many, many decades...I believe that same reality is eventually going to catch up with every city, every state and the Federal government as well.

Edited July 19, 2013 by RobertNashville

[mikegideon]

All I know is that if it wasn't for establishment conservatives, we would be screwed a lot worse than we are now. There is a LOT of opposition to most things in DC. "Real" conservatives, and "Real" liberals don't have the numbers to run the whole show, and they never will. You can only purify things so much before you lose critical mass. It's one of the factors in Obama's reelection. Would I take a "RINO" over Obama? Hell yes.

 

It's a big boat. Changes are gonna be small and slow. There is lots of opposing force. AFIK, it's always been that way. 

Edited July 19, 2013 by mikegideon

[Worriedman]

What is it that causes you to believe anything is going to change going forward?

 

 

 

The smaller group of informed Conservatives can not hope to beat the Republicans in the standard primary races across the State, too much money in the hands of the Caucus.  We can pick off one, maybe two each year, but at dear cost and a lot of work.
 

However, challenging them in the General may take that walk-out proof majority back away from them, target the really bad Establishment Republicans in the General, cost them enough votes to lose 8-10 seats and now you have a ball game again.  They start looking for Conservative support instead of disrespecting it.

These people love power, for its own sake, the mere possession of it.  Remember when we got all those gun laws passed 4 years ago, they were moving up to a super-majority, they did not have it at the time.  Now that they do not need us, they treat us like servants, tell us we have "Nowhere" to go if we do not lick their hands and take the leavings they will allow.

[Worriedman]

All I know is that if it wasn't for establishment conservatives, we would be screwed a lot worse than we are now. There is a LOT of opposition to most things in DC. "Real" conservatives, and "Real" liberals don't have the numbers to run the whole show, and they never will. You can only purify things so much before you lose critical mass. It's one of the factors in Obama's reelection. Would I take a "RINO" over Obama? Hell yes.

 

It's a big boat. Changes are gonna be small and slow. There is lots of opposing force. AFIK, it's always been that way. 

I agree on the Federal level, (though I need  a score card to keep up with who is an "establishment conservative") I do however feel we CAN affect change on the State and Local front.

Edited July 19, 2013 by Worriedman

[mikegideon]

I agree on the Federal level, (though I need  a score card to keep up with who is an "establishment conservative") I do however feel we CAN affect change on the State and Local front.

 

Sure. It's just always going to be a fight, with some wins and lots of losses. I don't pay as much attention to state politics. I'll take crappy Republicans over good Democrats any day :). We have our problems, but we ain't Colorado :)

[RobertNashville]

The smaller group of informed Conservatives can not hope to beat the Republicans in the standard primary races across the State, too much money in the hands of the Caucus.  We can pick off one, maybe two each year, but at dear cost and a lot of work.
 

However, challenging them in the General may take that walk-out proof majority back away from them, target the really bad Establishment Republicans in the General, cost them enough votes to lose 8-10 seats and now you have a ball game again.  They start looking for Conservative support instead of disrespecting it.

These people love power, for its own sake, the mere possession of it.  Remember when we got all those gun laws passed 4 years ago, they were moving up to a super-majority, they did not have it at the time.  Now that they do not need us, they treat us like servants, tell us we have "Nowhere" to go if we do not lick their hands and take the leavings they will allow.

Well, I hate to be this pessimistic but I really don't see anything changing no matter who gets elected...little "wins"...picking up a few seats here or there just isn't going to cut it in my opinion...the problems are far too big and too immediate for that kind of incrementalism to work anymore.

 

I don't even see one worthy leader out there who can spearhead real change; much less enough followers to make it happen.

[Worriedman]

Well, I hate to be this pessimistic but I really don't see anything changing no matter who gets elected...little "wins"...picking up a few seats here or there just isn't going to cut it in my opinion...the problems are far too big and too immediate for that kind of incrementalism to work anymore.

 

I don't even see one worthy leader out there who can spearhead real change; much less enough followers to make it happen.

 

I agree on the Federal Level, but, our firearms issues and LE issues are so far, handled on a State level, and there minor wins CAN affect the overall power structure.

 

Those things we have an opportunity to exert influence over we had dang sure better get after.
 

Or, we can sit on our hands and bemoan our fate and let someone else be the master of destiny.

[Guest ThePunisher]

No I am referring to you and the others making the "Become a good comrade or die!" type of comments. If you truly believe that the electoral system is broken and that the political system is ineffective and worthless, that leaves two options: Take up arms and revolt, or sit there and talk about it.

So far the tough guys say they're froggy, but no one's jumping. It's like some of you are Neo-Revolutionary Fluffers, getting each other ready for it but not really sealing the deal.

Obviously you didn't read all my posts here in this thread where I'm advocating not giving up hope at the ballot box. Being a good comrade or die might be an option if we don't win back our country at the ballot box, and I can dam well tell you that the good comrade option is not for me, and I believe for a lot of others here. My comment of " being a good comrade or die" was in response to a post that felt the ballot box process was hopeless, but I still have hope at the ballot box. As for the dying part, that's something everyone will participate in sooner or later, hopefully later.

Before you go go off on someone with accusations of being Neo-Revolutionary Fluffers, I suggest you read the post thoroughly. Edited July 20, 2013 by ThePunisher

[RobertNashville]

I agree on the Federal Level, but, our firearms issues and LE issues are so far, handled on a State level, and there minor wins CAN affect the overall power structure.

 

Those things we have an opportunity to exert influence over we had dang sure better get after.
 

Or, we can sit on our hands and bemoan our fate and let someone else be the master of destiny.

I agree, progress can be made at the state level but ultimately, I think we have to be extremely concerned at what comes out of Washington because at least right now; the axis of evil in TN would bend over and say "please sir may I have another" to pretty much anything the feds want TN to do.

[RobertNashville]

...My comment of " being a good comrade or die" was in response to a post that felt the ballot box process was hopeless...

I didn't take the comment personally....should I have???  ;)

Edited July 19, 2013 by RobertNashville

[Guest ThePunisher]

I didn't take the comment personally....should I have???  ;)

No

[Rightdefender]

Washington had it right. He served his term and returned to private life.
Jefferson said something like God help this country if we don't have a revolution every ten years. Meaning that a public official should go home and release the power to new citizens.
Congress was supposed to be a part time job.
. Instead we have a political monster that controls both major parties. There isn't a damned thing different between them.

[mikegideon]

Washington had it right. He served his term and returned to private life.
Jefferson said something like God help this country if we don't have a revolution every ten years. Meaning that a public official should go home and release the power to new citizens.
Congress was supposed to be a part time job.
. Instead we have a political monster that controls both major parties. There isn't a damned thing different between them.

 

There's a small difference. If it was all Democrats, NONE of us would own any guns.

[Rightdefender]

If it were all democrats we wouldn't have a country.

[mikegideon]

If it were all democrats we wouldn't have a country.

 

What I'm sayin'. They're all scumbags, but some are lots worse than others.