Fisher
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2012
- Messages
- 17,002
- Reaction score
- 6,913
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
Agreed, even if you're dumb or mislead go out and vote...
That is the DNC motto isn't it?
Agreed, even if you're dumb or mislead go out and vote...
The person who only votes for a candidate based upon 'party affiliation'. The uninformed is the most dangerous voter, followed closely by the apathetic non-voters who don't even give a crap enough to educate themselves and at least VOTE for a third party candidate so that maybe at SOME POINT - third parties will be given a snow balls chance in hell to try and change things if people would pull the stick out of their rear ends and put their vote where their mouth is.
As long as we have the two parties (and I use two = separate very loosely!) we are going to be stuck in the ****hole of the same ****, different election year here in the U.S
Sorry, but Democrats/Republicans - there is no difference and if tonights 'debate' doesn't prove that, I don't know what will. :?
I'm so sorry, but not hating anyone is not an available option.
LOLOL.
Well, damnit Pinkie, what's a girl to do when she doesn't hate anyone? :lol:
I hear this a lot -- do you people who fling that poo stop and think that voting for a guy who promises tax cuts for the rich is just as selfish when a rich voter does it?
Definitely the uninformed person, followed by the single issue voter.
I don't mind if people choose not to vote. I'd certainly prefer it if ignorant people chose not to vote.
Move to Canada.
LOLOL.
I'd consider it, if it weren't so freakin cold.
That really isn't a valid comparison, as the one who is voting for himself to benefit by the labor of others, is different from he who votes to keep the fruits of his own labor.
The rich man is voting to keep some of the fruits of the labor of working men. The government appetite for cash must be fed; when the wealthy avoid some of their share of that obligation, who do you think picks up that tab?
The wealthy are already paying the lion's share.
In raw dollars, maybe. In proportion to the tax burden other classes of taxpayers carry?
No, not even close.
That doesn't really matter, if consistency and equal treatment are of any concern. The top one percent of income earners pays around 40% of the federal income taxes, and around 50% pay no federal income tax, and a portion of those get earned income tax credits, without having even paid in. Imo, everyone should have an equal tax percentage debt period. Everyone should have some skin in the game, because if you're a recipient, and you can vote to have money from other people given to you, when you aren't contributing, then the system is corrupted already.
The political illiterate. I have a friend who places himself above voting for a candidate. He didn't even know what Romney looked like until a few weeks ago (be it known that I post this at the end of October). If he does end up voting it will be for whomever the advertising tells him to vote for. It is quite sad.
It's not an option but for me it's someone without a stake in the game voting for wealth redistribution.
Incidentally, they tend to be college students.
Another vote for establishment of a monarchy, eh?
I wonder how many voters we have like this -- in such a close race, they may well choose our next president all by themselves.