Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Faction
Moderator: Moderators
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
Oh.. Biden... right.
Snowball, hell, etc.
Snowball, hell, etc.
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pmNobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
Yes, pretty much all of the Democratic candidates have waffled but supported Civil Unions. Kucinich was the only one to openly say he was for it.
That was probably the least important bit of information on the chart - and on a candidate that pulled out like four weeks ago.
-Crissa
That was probably the least important bit of information on the chart - and on a candidate that pulled out like four weeks ago.
-Crissa
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
So, the rest is accurate?
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pmNobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
-
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
sigma999 at [unixtime wrote:1202254839[/unixtime]]So, the rest is accurate?
Well, McCain waffled on the torture issue.
-Username17
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
I wouldn't say it is complete, but the seven remaining candidates are fairly well covered.
McCain has the most errors, I think. He actively voted against the constitutional amendment against gay marriage, but voted for the federal law. He changed his position on Guantanamo to pro. He voted for wire tapping last week. And he's waffled on ANWR drilling.
The remaining Democratic candidates are Clinton, Obama, Gravel. Gravel isn't campaigning, I like him, but voting for him is kinda pointless. Obama is as middle of the road democrat you can get, and Clinton is the establishment candidate. Saying that, Clinton has done more to be different than the establishment than Obama (most diverse hiring, promoting, and only non-sexist candidacy), although Obama has been more liberal on some points like censorship and drug enforcement (that being that it should be less invasive).
I feel like I'm choosing otherwise identical candidates in the Democratic Primary. I can't remember candidates so alike x-x Same federal experience, similar upbringing, same social status, same DNC sponsorship, same social work... And I'm not going to vote on the difference between working for a large state employer while doing pro-bono political activism vs working as a political activist and then ending up in the state legislature. That's pretty similar, honestly. One can't really run for legislature when your spouse is an elected official, and one does need to work if your spouse is a state legislator (or aspiring).
Clinton is projected to win the most delegates today, but I'd guess that Obama actually will eek out a win. A Clinton clear win will mean she'll choose someone not like Obama as a running mate. A less clear win might mean a coalition candidacy. And Obama win... I dunno. Lotsa promises, not much to show for it at the Federal level yet.
-Crissa
McCain has the most errors, I think. He actively voted against the constitutional amendment against gay marriage, but voted for the federal law. He changed his position on Guantanamo to pro. He voted for wire tapping last week. And he's waffled on ANWR drilling.
The remaining Democratic candidates are Clinton, Obama, Gravel. Gravel isn't campaigning, I like him, but voting for him is kinda pointless. Obama is as middle of the road democrat you can get, and Clinton is the establishment candidate. Saying that, Clinton has done more to be different than the establishment than Obama (most diverse hiring, promoting, and only non-sexist candidacy), although Obama has been more liberal on some points like censorship and drug enforcement (that being that it should be less invasive).
I feel like I'm choosing otherwise identical candidates in the Democratic Primary. I can't remember candidates so alike x-x Same federal experience, similar upbringing, same social status, same DNC sponsorship, same social work... And I'm not going to vote on the difference between working for a large state employer while doing pro-bono political activism vs working as a political activist and then ending up in the state legislature. That's pretty similar, honestly. One can't really run for legislature when your spouse is an elected official, and one does need to work if your spouse is a state legislator (or aspiring).
Clinton is projected to win the most delegates today, but I'd guess that Obama actually will eek out a win. A Clinton clear win will mean she'll choose someone not like Obama as a running mate. A less clear win might mean a coalition candidacy. And Obama win... I dunno. Lotsa promises, not much to show for it at the Federal level yet.
-Crissa
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
As I understand it, legislation in the US is typically made up into great big composite motions full of stuff unrelated to the title of the text (like 'pork-barrel' spending, added to get votes for something) - so how does a legislator deal with the problem of people claiming they are for or against some subject, because it happened to be one of several things on a bill that they voted for/against?
Or have I misunderstood?
Or have I misunderstood?
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
That's why Senators historically don't get elected President, Fwib. Compromise makes for bad slogans.
-Crissa
-Crissa
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
I look forward to seeing if Arnie can get the law changed so he can run for president. That would be interesting.
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
Fwib at [unixtime wrote:1202404699[/unixtime]]I look forward to seeing if Arnie can get the law changed so he can run for president. That would be interesting.
With Romney now out of the race that leaves only Arnie's Candiate and Chuck Norris' Candidate in the running. Now a "debate" between Arnie and Chuck ... that would be "interesting."
- Cielingcat
- Duke
- Posts: 1453
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
I wanna see that so bad.
CHICKENS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO COCAINE, SILKY HEN
Josh_Kablack wrote:You are not a unique and precious snowflake, you are just one more fucking asshole on the internet who presumes themselves to be better than the unwashed masses.
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
Has sly endorsed anyone? preferably a democrat?
-
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
Stallone is a staunch Republican and endorsed McCain. Most "action stars" actually believe some of the crap about cleaning up towns with two fisted justice and lean heavily towards knee-jerk republicanism. For example Bruce Willis, while a fun actor to watch, is personally a drunken idiot who is against taxes and for police states as long as it doesn't interfere in his own ability to spend his piles of money and drink heavily.
But all is not lost on the ultimate showdown.
Hulk Hogan supports Obama.
50 Cent endorses Clinton.
-Username17
But all is not lost on the ultimate showdown.
Hulk Hogan supports Obama.
50 Cent endorses Clinton.
-Username17
- CatharzGodfoot
- King
- Posts: 5668
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
Hogan would be a great vice president.
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
- the_taken
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 830
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Lost in the Sea of Awesome
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
CatharzGodfoot at [unixtime wrote:1202526523[/unixtime]]Hogan would be a great vice president.
He also makes a great giant monster.
I had a signature here once but I've since lost it.
My current project: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56456
My current project: http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56456
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
President: Obama
VP: Hogan
Team Kickass
VP: Hogan
Team Kickass
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pmNobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
- Josh_Kablack
- King
- Posts: 5318
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Online. duh
Re: Why only two-parties in the US? Electability trumps Fac
I'm going with etc. heresigma999 wrote:Oh.. Biden... right.
Snowball, hell, etc.
Also, as per http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washing ... obama.html
In past years, Biden received $1,000 checks from Sylvester Stallone, Ellen Barkin, and West Wing producer Aaron Sorkin, and $2,000 from West Wing actor Bradley Whitford. Michael J. Fox gave him $2,000 back in 2001. Cher gave him $2,100 in 2006.
Last edited by Josh_Kablack on Sun Aug 24, 2008 4:05 am, edited 1 time in total.