• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Poll shows Tea party more popular than Republican Party

You could scroll back a page. :shrug:

Well, now that you tell me, sure.

Your selective outrage is noted for its partisanism. :shrug:

I haven't expressed any outrage at all. I said I don't accuse people of racism unfairly. I didn't condemn anyone else's posts. Think this through.

You're trying to make something out of nothing. Nice try, but that stuff doesn't work on me.

Let me ask you. Do you approve of his tactics? YES or NO

Finally! You actually ask instead of ranting.

I found it, and no, I don't think it's fair.

Happy now? Can we get back on topic?
 
see what you did there? stereotyped liberals stereotyping republicans.

Not really. Pulling the racist card is particularly common among leftists in europe. I'm seeing it used more and more by american liberals/leftists. Pity. I should think they would seek american solutions to american problems. Europe has done little more than to give us both national socialism and communism this last century. I'd try not to look to them for inspiration.
 
right.....they are not all southerners, but they are 99% white.....

...yet you see no issue that 95+ percent of blacks voted for Obama.
 
...yet you see no issue that 95+ percent of blacks voted for Obama.

The real question is why would ANY minority vote for the Republican party?
I've never understood Log Cabin Republicans myself. Why support a party that would love nothing more than see your rights subbrogated.
 
The real question is why would ANY minority vote for the Republican party?
I've never understood Log Cabin Republicans myself. Why support a party that would love nothing more than see your rights subbrogated.

I'm a minority. I haven't voted for a democrat in years.
 
I'm a minority. I haven't voted for a democrat in years.

So am I - a male. :mrgreen:

You said you haven't voted for a Democrat. That wasn't the issue, it was voting for Republicans. Have you lately?
 
The real question is why would ANY minority vote for the Republican party?
I've never understood Log Cabin Republicans myself. Why support a party that would love nothing more than see your rights subbrogated.

because they want freedom to succeed and don't want to be part of a permanent lower class that the left insists on creating? just a thought.
 
So am I - a male. :mrgreen:

Same here. :mrgreen:

You said you haven't voted for a Democrat. That wasn't the issue, it was voting for Republicans. Have you lately?


Yes I have. I'm not satisfied with the republicans. However, I see them as the best way we have to block the democratic party which I truly believe represents a danger to this country, or at least my part of it.
 
Same here. :mrgreen:




Yes I have. I'm not satisfied with the republicans. However, I see them as the best way we have to block the democratic party which I truly believe represents a danger to this country, or at least my part of it.

i can understand that. it's really hard to find a party that has a chance of winning that you can get behind 100%.
 
i can understand that. it's really hard to find a party that has a chance of winning that you can get behind 100%.

The europeans have the parlimentary system. They normally have more parties than you can shake a stick at. I think it would be far easier to find a niche party that would promise to represent your values. Unfortunately, there are problems with this system. The europeans managed to give us both the national socialists and communists in the same century. All in all I think we're stuck with our two party system until such time as we can get a real conservative ([ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberals"]classical liberal[/ame]) party. The liberals (socialists really) already have one.....the democrats.
 
New poll shows 'Tea Party' more popular than Republican Party - Yahoo! News

"Okay, suppose the Tea Party Movement organized itself as a political party. When thinking about the next election for Congress, would you vote for the Republican candidate from your district, the Democratic candidate from your district, or the Tea Party candidate from your district?"

The response of all those who were polled was Democratic 36%, Tea Party 23% and Republican 18%.


Long live the tea party movement. We should all encourage their efforts.

We should encourage all third party participation in the system.
 
Yes I have. I'm not satisfied with the republicans. However, I see them as the best way we have to block the democratic party which I truly believe represents a danger to this country, or at least my part of it.

So you don't really vote for Republicans as much as against Democrats.
 
We should encourage all third party participation in the system.

Pointless. Third parties can't win. They only help or hurt the big two.
 
Pointless. Third parties can't win. They only help or hurt the big two.

It doesn't matter if you think it's pointless or not. The system must be kept free so that third parties can freely participate. The third parties are a servo mechanism by which we can control the main parties. And if a main party gets too far out of control, a healthy third party environment gives us the tools and infrastructure to replace one of the main parties. The whole "third parties can't win" crap is stupid and pointless because by playing to only two and thinking that those particular two can be the only possible ones, you ensure a system set up which is isolated from the people. Do you wonder why Obama is not much different than Bush? It's because of people saying "third parties can't win" and trying to not give them the time of day.

Not only is it dangerous as it closes off the system from fair participation, but it's stupid as well. My vote is an endorsement of my power and sovereignty into the government. And I will cast it for the person I feel is best fit and echoes my political platform and policies the closest. Doing anything other than that will assuredly cost us the Republic.
 
So you don't really vote for Republicans as much as against Democrats.

Pretty much. Voting for McCain was very painful. (He is essentially a Democrat who believes in a strong national defense. ) As much as I don't like where the Republican party is now, they are closer to my views than the Democrat/Socialist party. As such, I tend to vote for the Republican party. However, I would have voted for Hoffman in NY23. If the Republicans ever discover that being Democrat lite is a losing position, then they may return to the more classic fiscal conservative policies that I could get behind.

In the mean time, the Democrats are taking this president's term to try to move the country irrevocably left. I think you are seeing the push back from the American people against both the policies and the Democrat party that is trying to implement them.

The real interesting time will be the next 10 months leading up to the mid term elections. If the Democrats push through Cap and Trade, Insurance reform, etc., I think you will see many Democrats voted out and the Republicans and Independents who are voted in having a mandate to reverse these policies. Should make for an interesting next 3 years.

What is that old proverb/curse? May you live in interesting times.
 
It doesn't matter if you think it's pointless or not. The system must be kept free so that third parties can freely participate. The third parties are a servo mechanism by which we can control the main parties. And if a main party gets too far out of control, a healthy third party environment gives us the tools and infrastructure to replace one of the main parties.

Now that is true, and I agree completely.

The whole "third parties can't win" crap is stupid and pointless because by playing to only two and thinking that those particular two can be the only possible ones, you ensure a system set up which is isolated from the people.

I was only saying that the idea that you can have a three-party system, or more, is wrong. It won't happen. For a third party to succeed, it needs to replace one of the big two.
 
because they want freedom to succeed and don't want to be part of a permanent lower class that the left insists on creating? just a thought.

If you want "Freedom to succeed"...you shouldn't vote for the GOP.
And which party do you think wants a permanent lower class in order to provide cheap and ample labor for their wealthy corporate base? (Psst.....its not the Democrats).
 
If you want "Freedom to succeed"...you shouldn't vote for the GOP.
And which party do you think wants a permanent lower class in order to provide cheap and ample labor for their wealthy corporate base? (Psst.....its not the Democrats).

yeah we'll give you food stamps and health care now just go sit in your house and continue to vote for us. welfare programs are good at keeping poor people content so they don't feel like doing anything better.
 
yeah we'll give you food stamps and health care now just go sit in your house and continue to vote for us. welfare programs are good at keeping poor people content so they don't feel like doing anything better.

Two suggestions:

(1) Get the Corporations to pay a living wage and perhaps there would be an incentive to get off welfare and government assistance. Right now, Republicans fight every effort to pass legislation that allows for a living wage.
Gotta keep that cheap labor and keep people hungry.

(2) Maybe if the Republicans weren't so big on corporate welfare, the money could be diverted into providing education and training for people to be given the opportunity to raise themselves up.
 
The third parties are a servo mechanism by which we can control the main parties.

A servo mechanism? Can we have an example?

And if a main party gets too far out of control, a healthy third party environment gives us the tools and infrastructure to replace one of the main parties.

Can we have an example?

The whole "third parties can't win" crap is stupid and pointless because by playing to only two and thinking that those particular two can be the only possible ones, you ensure a system set up which is isolated from the people.

Stupid...even though a third party has NEVER won?

Do you wonder why Obama is not much different than Bush? It's because of people saying "third parties can't win" and trying to not give them the time of day.

In his war strategies, he's no different than Bush(exception the NY trials). But his domestic policies, health care, cap and tax, the 787 stimulus that didn't stimulate, the belief jobs are created by government...isn't anything like Bush, I'm starting to understand why you're confused about the issue here.

Doing anything other than that will assuredly cost us the Republic.

Your conscience and personal opinions ans swagger affect at the primary, state, and local levels. One yer fangs are sharpened, once the argument is over, once the platform is laid....you vote Republican. It's as simple as that. Want to change politics, change your party!
 
Two suggestions:

(1) Get the Corporations to pay a living wage and perhaps there would be an incentive to get off welfare and government assistance. Right now, Republicans fight every effort to pass legislation that allows for a living wage.
Gotta keep that cheap labor and keep people hungry.

(2) Maybe if the Republicans weren't so big on corporate welfare, the money could be diverted into providing education and training for people to be given the opportunity to raise themselves up.

1) the corporations would pass that cost on to the consumer thus accomplishing nothing.
2) because it's impossible for poor people to raise themselves up and succeed? give me a break. if you're willing to bust ass you can make it.
 
1) the corporations would pass that cost on to the consumer thus accomplishing nothing.
2) because it's impossible for poor people to raise themselves up and succeed? give me a break. if you're willing to bust ass you can make it.

1) Thats why deregulation doesn't work and why corporations have to regulated. Whoever came up with the "brilliant" idea that corporations could regulate themselves? Hmmm....oh yeah...Republicans.

2) In the real world that simply isn't true.
 
Back
Top Bottom