PDA

View Full Version : If dems are libs and reps are cons,


BroWhippendiddle
10-21-2004, 01:20 PM
What are Libertarians?

Left Out?

David.
10-21-2004, 01:34 PM
they're nonfactors? :shrug: I don't care, I'm still voting Badnarik

David.
10-21-2004, 01:36 PM
I even went to www.ontheissues.org and took the president match quiz. I was 73% in agreement with Badnarik, 50% Bush, and 35% Kerry. soooo..yah

siberian khatru
10-21-2004, 01:38 PM
Mairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle lamzy divey
A kiddley divey too, wouldn't you?

Lightning Rod
10-21-2004, 01:45 PM
Were Libracons

KCN
10-21-2004, 02:36 PM
I even went to www.ontheissues.org and took the president match quiz. I was 73% in agreement with Badnarik, 50% Bush, and 35% Kerry. soooo..yah

I took that quiz and ended up most in agreement with Dick Cheney followed by Peter Camejo...how does that happen....

|Zach|
10-21-2004, 02:38 PM
Libitariots.

|Zach|
10-21-2004, 02:39 PM
What are Libertarians?

Left Out?
Whetver their name ends up being I home they can change it time after time for no good reason.

BroWhippendiddle
10-22-2004, 08:36 AM
Whetver their name ends up being I home they can change it time after time for no good reason.

What point are you trying to make?

el borracho
10-22-2004, 10:33 AM
[QUOTE=BroWhippendiddle]What are Libertarians? QUOTE]
The only ones with enough courage to actually vote for what they want instead of the lesser of two evils.

Do you, BroWhippendiddle, think that it has always been and will always be a two horse race?

BroWhippendiddle
10-22-2004, 02:18 PM
[QUOTE=BroWhippendiddle]What are Libertarians? QUOTE]
The only ones with enough courage to actually vote for what they want instead of the lesser of two evils.

Do you, BroWhippendiddle, think that it has always been and will always be a two horse race?

Until a multiple party system is in place we will never have a true 3rd party candidate that has a chance to win an election. Those that currently vote for the "also rans" are only taking votes that might be used to determine a close race. The problem we have is trying to determine which of the two major candidates is the person we want to lead our country.

At this point in time the race is only showing 3 people in the polls, Bush-49%, Kerry-49% and Nader-1%.

I beleive that Bush is the better man for the job, not because he is better than Kerry on all of the issues, but he has proven to be a strong consistant leader in a time when this country needed leadership. If you think back to the 4 attacks that were laid on the U.S. during the Clinton administration you will see that the leadership chose to be transparent at best. There was no credible leadership from that administration. Kerry seems to be promising more of the same.

Vote your heart, and we will see who is President after Nov. 2nd.

BTW, this whole thread was a joke..

|Zach|
10-22-2004, 02:28 PM
What point are you trying to make?
It has treated you well hasn't it?

el borracho
10-22-2004, 03:14 PM
1)Until a multiple party system is in place we will never have a true 3rd party candidate that has a chance to win an election. Those that currently vote for the "also rans" are only taking votes that might be used to determine a close race.

2) The problem we have is trying to determine which of the two major candidates is the person we want to lead our country.

...

3) BTW, this whole thread was a joke..

1) What it really takes to establish a multiple party system is money which is why Perot might have had a decent chance had he not dropped out and re-entered.

2) The problem I have is that most people will not inform themselves (which I consider a civic duty) and will not vote for a candidate that they consider not viable. Imagine the results if everyone truly voted their conscience.

3) OK, I don't hang out here in DC too often so I didn't know.

listopencil
10-22-2004, 08:44 PM
Reps aren't necesarily Cons. Bush isn't conservative. Dems aren't necessarily Libs. Kerry isn't anything at all.

Taco John
10-22-2004, 08:52 PM
Libertarians are centrists.

Fiscally conservative. Constitutionally conservative. But believe in socially liberal freedom. You should have the right to do whatever you want to do so long as it doesn't infringe on the liberty of another citizen. The minute you infringe on someone else, you should be dealt with swiftly and harshly.

listopencil
10-22-2004, 09:02 PM
Those that currently vote for the "also rans" are only taking votes that might be used to determine a close race. The problem we have is trying to determine which of the two major candidates is the person we want to lead our country...



What a load of shit. This argument is self-contradictory. One the one hand our single votes couldn't possibly be worth anything if cast for a third party, but on the other we are wasting our valuable single votes by not casting them for a Dem or Rep. This is campaign rhetoric handed down by both parties because "undecideds" and "independants" are actually the most volatile group of voters. They are also the ones with the most potential influence on the election. With Dems and Reps voting for their parties rather than a candidate, everyone else puts someone over the top in a close race. Guess what? You're individual vote doesn't actually matter any more than mine does. All you are getting is the feeling that you're guy won, even though you didn't really believe in your guy. Not exactly what I would call a victory.

listopencil
10-22-2004, 09:08 PM
Libertarians are centrists.

Fiscally conservative. Constitutionally conservative. But believe in socially liberal freedom. You should have the right to do whatever you want to do so long as it doesn't infringe on the liberty of another citizen. The minute you infringe on someone else, you should be dealt with swiftly and harshly.

I have tried to explain the Libertarian Party so many times I'm getting sick of it. The problem is that people are used to the party names not really meaning anything. Republicans want a Republic? We have one. Democrats wnat Democracy? It'll never happen here.