View Full Version : Perceived Need For Third Party Reaches New High
angelatc
10-11-2013, 07:54 AM
http://www.gallup.com/poll/165392/perceived-need-third-party-reaches-new-high.aspx (http://www.gallup.com/poll/165392/perceived-need-third-party-reaches-new-high.aspx)
PRINCETON, NJ -- Amid the government shutdown, 60% of Americans say the Democratic and Republicans parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed. That is the highest Gallup has measured in the 10-year history of this question. A new low of 26% believe the two major parties adequately represent Americans.
http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/itxconuee0g1qe8ruicc0a.png
http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/r3cbdw6lluow8wrnbc4k8q.png
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 08:01 AM
Wonder how many of those polled voted for that imbecile Perot.
angelatc
10-11-2013, 08:10 AM
Wonder how many of those polled voted for that imbecile Perot.
Really? That's what you got out of this?
Well, I think it's pretty safe to say that at least 25% of today's voting population isn't old enough to have voted for Perot.
tod evans
10-11-2013, 08:16 AM
The "name" of elected officials doesn't change the entrenched system.
One puppet is going to have the exact same results on day to day life as the next.
I wouldn't mind another "party" just for the sake of the talking points presented to John and Jane Q.
angelatc
10-11-2013, 08:17 AM
The "name" of elected officials doesn't change the entrenched system.
One puppet is going to have the exact same results on day to day life as the next.
I wouldn't mind another "party" just for the sake of the talking points presented to John and Jane Q.
Legislators gonna legislate. The third party sounds appealing only because it throws another wrench into the machine.
tod evans
10-11-2013, 08:20 AM
Legislators gonna legislate. The third party sounds appealing only because it throws another wrench into the machine.
I doubt it'd even slow the grind.
But we all know a good doctor who managed to put some new/old ideas in the minds of ol' John-n-Jane, think of the attention a "new" party would get.
angelatc
10-11-2013, 08:24 AM
I doubt it'd even slow the grind.
But we all know a good doctor who managed to put some new/old ideas in the minds of ol' John-n-Jane, think of the attention a "new" party would get.
Yeah, I'm curious about what the popular idea of a third party would look like. I am assuming not Libertarian, unfortunately.
phill4paul
10-11-2013, 08:26 AM
Yeah, I'm curious about what the popular idea of a third party would look like. I am assuming not Libertarian, unfortunately.
Probably a "Progressive" party made up of moderates from both sides of the aisle promising anything and everything to Boobus.
angelatc
10-11-2013, 08:27 AM
Probably a "Progressive" party made up of moderates from both sides of the aisle promising anything and everything to Boobus.
Yeah, all the spending with none of the wars.
tod evans
10-11-2013, 08:29 AM
How about the party of "Repeal and Fire"?
Repeal laws and fire government employees....
phill4paul
10-11-2013, 08:35 AM
Yeah, all the spending with none of the wars.
Progressives love themselves some "boots on the ground" if it's for "humanitarian" reasons.
kahless
10-11-2013, 08:36 AM
They see a Hillary loss and a Randslide coming. The establishment wants a third party to stop it.
kahless
10-11-2013, 08:42 AM
Wonder how many of those polled voted for that imbecile Perot.
I did since I certainly was not going to vote for Bush or Clinton. I believed it was a chance to break the two party system and if he did not screw it up by pulling out that summer he may have done some major damage rather than 19%.
angelatc
10-11-2013, 08:44 AM
I did since I certainly was not going to vote for Bush or Clinton. I believed it was a chance to break the two party system and if he did not screw it up by pulling out that summer he may have done some major damage rather than 19%.
Yes - I will say that's when he lost my vote. These days I would probably have still voted for him as a protest vote, but I was different then.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 08:48 AM
Really? That's what you got out of this?
Well, I think it's pretty safe to say that at least 25% of today's voting population isn't old enough to have voted for Perot.
They would if he ran again. I've been hearing this crap since Cro-Magnon man. Talk is cheap.
Never overestimate a person's ability to escape his comfort zone.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 08:51 AM
I did since I certainly was not going to vote for Bush or Clinton. I believed it was a chance to break the two party system and if he did not screw it up by pulling out that summer he may have done some major damage rather than 19%.
Perot could not have cared less about two party-two schmarty. Perot did not care about anything but himself and his ploy to keep Bush out. He was about as petty as it gets.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 08:53 AM
They see a Hillary loss and a Randslide coming. The establishment wants a third party to stop it.
Unless Biden has a stroke, there is no way Biden does not get the nomination. H. Clinton stories are nothing but entertainment for suckers who pay for cable TV.
kahless
10-11-2013, 09:18 AM
Perot could not have cared less about two party-two schmarty. Perot did not care about anything but himself and his ploy to keep Bush out. He was about as petty as it gets.
Which was really a selling point, keeping Bush out and hopefully not risking giving the election to Clinton. Even with a loss the hope was the Reform party was going to stick around to be a formidable adversary that may cause the Republicans to get back to their core values. The "Republican Revolution" came shortly after that but unfortunately a revolution of compromise and statism.
Unless Biden has a stroke, there is no way Biden does not get the nomination. H. Clinton stories are nothing but entertainment for suckers who pay for cable TV.
History has proven the majority of the country are suckers that will vote according for whomever the establishment media - cable TV leads them to vote for. Joe Biden is not being propped up by them nor has the capability of leading a national campaign. The polls show Hillary at 61% vs Biden's 11%. If it is not going to be Hillary they are going to want someone else besides Biden.
69360
10-11-2013, 09:31 AM
Unless Biden has a stroke, there is no way Biden does not get the nomination. H. Clinton stories are nothing but entertainment for suckers who pay for cable TV.
Hillary destroys Biden in every single poll by a 5 to 1 margin and has a vagina. She will be the nominee if she wants it.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 09:32 AM
The polls show Hillary at 61% vs Biden's 11%. If it is not going to be Hillary they are going to want someone else besides Biden.
You'd think that Clinton was some kind of hot guitar player with those numbers. She doesn't have a chance.
It's nothing but entertainment. Look at any numbers of these polls, and then look at the final results. It's like a transformation of supermodel into a banshee.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 09:33 AM
Hillary destroys Biden in every single poll by a 5 to 1 margin and has a vagina. She will be the nominee if she wants it.
Bet?
Clinton wins and I leave this forum. Biden wins and you leave this forum.
69360
10-11-2013, 09:35 AM
You'd think that Clinton was some kind of hot guitar player with those numbers. She doesn't have a chance.
It's nothing but entertainment. Look at any numbers of these polls, and then look at the final results. It's like a transformation of supermodel into a banshee.
You've got to be kidding me. 3/4 or more of voters are low information voters, democrats even more so. These boobuses voted for Obama because he had black skin and will vote for hillary because she has a vagina. Nothing else will matter to them.
69360
10-11-2013, 09:40 AM
Bet?
Clinton wins and I leave this forum. Biden wins and you leave this forum.
There is nothing to bet on. If Hillary decides to run the nomination is hers. If she doesn't Biden will likely win and likely lose to the GOP. Hillary and Biden will not face off, this will be decided beforehand, both will not run.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 09:49 AM
You've got to be kidding me. 3/4 or more of voters are low information voters, democrats even more so. These boobuses voted for Obama because he had black skin and will vote for hillary because she has a vagina. Nothing else will matter to them.
The only boobs are people who pay to watch this poll stuff on cable TV.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 09:51 AM
There is nothing to bet on. If Hillary decides to run the nomination is hers.
That's the bet. She doesn't have a chance.
ZENemy
10-11-2013, 10:15 AM
They see a Hillary loss and a Randslide coming. The establishment wants a third party to stop it.
For a Randslide to occur; voting and the media could no be rigged, that is not the case.
DIEBOLD is the only winner in elections.
thoughtomator
10-11-2013, 10:26 AM
Wonder how many of those polled voted for that imbecile Perot.
That "imbecile" was warning that the policies being implemented then would lead to today's disaster... and it did. Perot was far and away the best candidate on the ballot that year.
kahless
10-11-2013, 01:48 PM
That "imbecile" was warning that the policies being implemented then would lead to today's disaster... and it did. Perot was far and away the best candidate on the ballot that year.
I still remember his prime time infomercials on the major networks with his charts detailing it all.
angelatc
10-11-2013, 02:00 PM
Unless Biden has a stroke, there is no way Biden does not get the nomination. H. Clinton stories are nothing but entertainment for suckers who pay for cable TV.
No way. The media will destroy Biden for Clinton. He's a gaffe-a-minute joke now - wait until the Democrats start laughing too. My money is on a dark horse - Corey Booker.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 05:08 PM
That "imbecile" was warning that the policies being implemented then would lead to today's disaster... and it did.
A high school civics student could have told you that.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 05:09 PM
Perot was far and away the best candidate on the ballot that year.
That's like saying Moe Howard was the brains of the outfit.
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 05:17 PM
My money is on a dark horse - Corey Booker.
We've already had a dark wart. People will now be on to the next big thing. The successor to a colored man in the societal hierarchy is a white woman.
Whitey trumps blackie. Male trumps female:
1.White man
2.Black man
3.White woman
4.Black woman
NorthCarolinaLiberty
10-11-2013, 05:40 PM
I don't know how anybody over 25 years of age keeps falling for this nonsense year-after-year. I don't really even follow this crap, but it's all more predictable than the sun coming up in the east.
The Republicans have always been insecure about being hip. They'll float some more coloreds for the next election. "Conservative" negroes with brass on their lapels, or some shit like that. They'll really aim for somebody from Tacoville, but the hot sauce can't be too spicy. After all, the current white house resident is only light chocolate.
The "liberals" will end up sticking with Biden because it's against the playbook to show any fracturing. The Conserve-tards will end up with somebody who speaks better Spanish than a monkey. The portly man from the east coast will have withered long before that, and he will seriously consider the Atkins diet.
69360
10-11-2013, 06:12 PM
My money is on a dark horse - Corey Booker.
Absolutely not. He is damaged goods, his record as mayor, the real record not the publicity stunts is horrid, crime is way way up, money squandered, insider deals that made him rich etc. Plus he can't debate, Lonegan by almost every single report ripped him a new one. He's in a closeish race with a tea party candidate in NJ, that should have been a 30 point blowout with the NJ electorate. It doesn't say much for Booker.
ThePenguinLibertarian
10-12-2013, 01:35 AM
Really? That's what you got out of this?
Well, I think it's pretty safe to say that at least 25% of today's voting population isn't old enough to have voted for Perot.
I actually liked the guy. Had integrity but a horrible economic policy.
goRPaul
10-12-2013, 02:09 AM
I'd be on board with a third party, but it won't happen. I have a better idea- a political action committee that only supports independent candidates.
compromise
10-12-2013, 04:30 AM
The Rand Paul-led Tea Party/Liberty Caucus is pretty much a Third Party operating within the Republican Party.
Carson
10-12-2013, 06:15 AM
Perhaps first we need another branch or some sort of a functional justice system to clean up the electoral process?
Some really shady stuff has been happening.
Both parties were clearly boned with a rule blocking third parties.
(I can't find the video now. There are to many results coming up on election fraud to dig up the open vote fraud video that happened a both the Democratic Convention and Republican Convention concerning third party blocking.)
Oh. Here is one. I thought someone made a video showing both parties in the act.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJ_ylYNbAlY
Maybe I've got it wrong. Maybe these rules were more to block the people from nominating their choice.
The Rand Paul-led Tea Party/Liberty Caucus is pretty much a Third Party operating within the Republican Party.
Yeah! That's the ticket!
Stomped OUT by the Blue Meanies in 2012!
http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/presidentronpaul/TheBlueMeaniesgLOVE.jpg
cajuncocoa
10-12-2013, 06:45 AM
The Rand Paul-led Tea Party/Liberty Caucus is pretty much a Third Party operating within the Republican Party.
LOL
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.