Maybe the party should pay for their primaries instead of the states, primaries shouldn’t be funded by taxpayers anyway, they are a tool for the party to determine who will represent their party in the real election. Looks like the superdelegates are going to decide it anyway (on the dem side), what a waste of time and money.
Maybe the party should pay for their primaries instead of the states, primaries shouldn’t be funded by taxpayers anyway, they are a tool for the party to determine who will represent their party in the real election. Looks like the superdelegates are going to decide it anyway (on the dem side), what a waste of time and money.
I AGREE!! The amount of money wasted on these campaigns is ridiculous! Think of all the problems that the candidates say they ‘want’ fixed (health care, homeless, economy, etc.) - and think of how many they could ‘actually’ fix if they routed all those millions of dollars in a different direction.
Plus, six months of primary voting is just too much. Get it all over with in a month. (Personally, I’d like to see one day, but I’ll give you a month) Pick one, doesn’t matter to me which month, but all states have their primaries in a month’s time. No arguments about “ours is too early/late” or “We feel ours doesn’t count”. The primary season is over and you can focus on the general.
Who needs all that extra time anyway? I mean, it’s not like they haven’t been campaigning for this election since November 2004........
If Ron runs as an independent, I’ll probably vote for him. Our other choices are just pathetic.
If he runs as an independent that would be my reason NOT to vote for him. If you lose the game with the rules that were set out then you abide by the rules and the game is over for you.
You mean the rules created by the Republicans & Democrats that ensure that 3rd parties will never be able to compete on an even playing field and so ensure their own power?
Nader may get in again and cancel out any affect Paul would have running as an independent. For me, I either vote for a 3rd party or not at all. I can’t bring myself to vote for Obama, Clinton, or McCain. BTW, I’ve been a life long registered independent.
I think I agree with Mark but my thought is Ron Paul’s NOT an independent. He’s a Republican that will use the independent ticket if (well when) he fails on his own ticket. Obviously, people didn’t vote for him to give him the Republican nomination, how does he think it will work for him as an independent?
Although, it did work for Joe Lieberman, I don’t agree with it. And Ralph Nader....if you’ve proven that many times that you’re not going to be elected - let it go!
Until there’s a “viable” independent candidate that can carry some mainstream fervor and not just be “who else is that on the ballot?” to most people, you’ve got a snowballs chance in you-know-where of anyone other than a Dem/Rep making it to the White House.
I would love to see a powerhouse Libertarian give it a run. When ABC Radio was on Sirius, I used to listen to Larry Elder religiously. He is out of L.A., and he is very Libertarian in his views. A friend sent me a link to test myself to see how much of a Libertarian I really was. I took the test and to my surprise, my views are very much in line with their platform.
Go to this site when you get a minute and take the quiz. It does not take long and it is insightful.
I think I agree with Mark but my thought is Ron Paul’s NOT an independent. He’s a Republican that will use the independent ticket if (well when) he fails on his own ticket. Obviously, people didn’t vote for him to give him the Republican nomination, how does he think it will work for him as an independent?
Until there’s a “viable” independent candidate that can carry some mainstream fervor and not just be “who else is that on the ballot?” to most people, you’ve got a snowballs chance in you-know-where of anyone other than a Dem/Rep making it to the White House.
I believe Ron Paul was a Libertarian first and became a Republican just to get elected. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,45231,00.html As long as Democrats and Republicans control the process, there will never be a viable 3rd party candidate. So we’ll continue to get more of the same ol, same ol. I also don’t think taxpayers should pay for the primaries. And I think they should have the primaries all on the same day, just like the general election. They won’t need to keep raising money and you won’t have candidates dropping out which will disenfranchise the people who voted for a candidate only to see them drop out later.
I think I agree with Mark but my thought is Ron Paul’s NOT an independent. He’s a Republican that will use the independent ticket if (well when) he fails on his own ticket. Obviously, people didn’t vote for him to give him the Republican nomination, how does he think it will work for him as an independent?
Until there’s a “viable” independent candidate that can carry some mainstream fervor and not just be “who else is that on the ballot?” to most people, you’ve got a snowballs chance in you-know-where of anyone other than a Dem/Rep making it to the White House.
I believe Ron Paul was a Libertarian first and became a Republican just to get elected. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,45231,00.html As long as Democrats and Republicans control the process, there will never be a viable 3rd party candidate. So we’ll continue to get more of the same ol, same ol. I also don’t think taxpayers should pay for the primaries. And I think they should have the primaries all on the same day, just like the general election. They won’t need to keep raising money and you won’t have candidates dropping out which will disenfranchise the people who voted for a candidate only to see them drop out later.
I believe that it is OK for states to fund primaries, but the problem is that the states are controlled by 2 parties and like you said 3rd parties do not stand a chance. I wish we could throw the whole lot of them out down to the local level and start over again. I am sick of all of these career politicians.
Thomas Jefferson said, “Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. “
I think I agree with Mark but my thought is Ron Paul’s NOT an independent. He’s a Republican that will use the independent ticket if (well when) he fails on his own ticket. Obviously, people didn’t vote for him to give him the Republican nomination, how does he think it will work for him as an independent?
Until there’s a “viable” independent candidate that can carry some mainstream fervor and not just be “who else is that on the ballot?” to most people, you’ve got a snowballs chance in you-know-where of anyone other than a Dem/Rep making it to the White House.
I believe Ron Paul was a Libertarian first and became a Republican just to get elected. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,45231,00.html As long as Democrats and Republicans control the process, there will never be a viable 3rd party candidate. So we’ll continue to get more of the same ol, same ol. I also don’t think taxpayers should pay for the primaries. And I think they should have the primaries all on the same day, just like the general election. They won’t need to keep raising money and you won’t have candidates dropping out which will disenfranchise the people who voted for a candidate only to see them drop out later.
I believe that it is OK for states to fund primaries, but the problem is that the states are controlled by 2 parties and like you said 3rd parties do not stand a chance. I wish we could throw the whole lot of them out down to the local level and start over again. I am sick of all of these career politicians.
Thomas Jefferson said, “Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. ”
I don’t have a problem with the states paying for the primaries, but I think they need to be consolidated.
And I’d be all for the premise of the top TWO vote getters as nominees for Pres/VP in the general election.
I think I agree with Mark but my thought is Ron Paul’s NOT an independent. He’s a Republican that will use the independent ticket if (well when) he fails on his own ticket. Obviously, people didn’t vote for him to give him the Republican nomination, how does he think it will work for him as an independent?
Until there’s a “viable” independent candidate that can carry some mainstream fervor and not just be “who else is that on the ballot?” to most people, you’ve got a snowballs chance in you-know-where of anyone other than a Dem/Rep making it to the White House.
I believe Ron Paul was a Libertarian first and became a Republican just to get elected. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,45231,00.html As long as Democrats and Republicans control the process, there will never be a viable 3rd party candidate. So we’ll continue to get more of the same ol, same ol. I also don’t think taxpayers should pay for the primaries. And I think they should have the primaries all on the same day, just like the general election. They won’t need to keep raising money and you won’t have candidates dropping out which will disenfranchise the people who voted for a candidate only to see them drop out later.
I believe that it is OK for states to fund primaries, but the problem is that the states are controlled by 2 parties and like you said 3rd parties do not stand a chance. I wish we could throw the whole lot of them out down to the local level and start over again. I am sick of all of these career politicians.
Thomas Jefferson said, “Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. ”
I don’t have a problem with the states paying for the primaries, but I think they need to be consolidated.
And I’d be all for the premise of the top TWO vote getters as nominees for Pres/VP in the general election.
Excellent point about the top 2 vote getters. I also agree that we should have a primary day. I think the current system was set up to give them a chance to “press the flesh” in every state as much as possible. Now with 24 hour cable news and other media outlets a 1 day primary is in order.
Until there’s a “viable” independent candidate that can carry some mainstream fervor and not just be “who else is that on the ballot?” to most people, you’ve got a snowballs chance in you-know-where of anyone other than a Dem/Rep making it to the White House.
do you reallly think Ron Paul is only a “who else is that on the ballot?”
i think he’s actuallly prettty welll known. seeems the independent party is the largest it’s ever beeen before… and it should be!
regardlesss, waiting for a “viable mainstream” 3rd party candidate is what got us in this rut of Dem/Rep… it neeeds to change. but it won’t. without the Dem/Rep Big Businesss money bakking up the campaigns, the 3rd party drowns. it takes tooo much money to run for President.
i vote independent everytime. and i know my vote counts for something. even if alll i can say is, “told ya he would sukk as President” when they do :-D
i vote independent everytime. and i know my vote counts for something.
Me too. I was talking to a friend the other day who said she shares values with Paul, but doesn’t want to ‘waste’ her vote. I reminded her that *if* Paul was a spoiler and the Republicans lost the election, that they would be forced to get right with conservatives ( or die. )
To me, that’s not a wasted vote, that’s a very powerful one.
Chalk me up as a third party guy through and through—at least for the foreseeable future.
Until there’s a “viable” independent candidate that can carry some mainstream fervor and not just be “who else is that on the ballot?” to most people, you’ve got a snowballs chance in you-know-where of anyone other than a Dem/Rep making it to the White House.
do you reallly think Ron Paul is only a “who else is that on the ballot?”
i think he’s actuallly prettty welll known. seeems the independent party is the largest it’s ever beeen before… and it should be!
regardlesss, waiting for a “viable mainstream” 3rd party candidate is what got us in this rut of Dem/Rep… it neeeds to change. but it won’t. without the Dem/Rep Big Businesss money bakking up the campaigns, the 3rd party drowns. it takes tooo much money to run for President.
i vote independent everytime. and i know my vote counts for something. even if alll i can say is, “told ya he would sukk as President” when they do :-D
No, to me, I know who Ron Paul is. But yes, in the ‘grand scheme of things’, I think the majority of people know nothing about him. Everyone knows McCain, Obama and Clinton.
And yes, it takes WAY too much money to run for President. It’s ridiculous and shouldn’t. That’s why I think primaries should be consolidated. You have to start somewhere.
What happened to voting for the person you thought was the best candidate for the job? Lately, elections have turned into ‘Who do I dislike the least?’
