Do you think a REP or DEM will be good for America?

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Given that, no matter who a candidate is, if they are tied to the DEM or REP
party do you think they will be able to make good choices if those choices
are not appealing to their Corporate SIG P.A.C. Lobbyist, Cooperate Donors
etc...

So in General :
1) What party do you think will stop the corruption in D.C. ?

2) Is it possible for anyone in the REP or DEM party to stop Corruption?

3) Or do you just support Corruption (Just as long as it's your party being
corrupt)?

[bishop]

1. no party in d.c. will stop corruption because they have a proven track record of being supported by legions of sheep voters. they've been able to get away with corruption for years and have still managed to win reelection

2. only people on the outskirts of their parties like paul and kucinich.

3. nope, and i have no plans on voting for an establishment candidate.

[Elrathin]

1. No party will stop the corruption in DC. The presidency is just one part. You need a good president and a good congress. Since you will never have a full Dem or Rep Congress it will take both to do it.

2. Yes, it is. Either side can do it, but they are not going to be able to do it alone. They will have to work with each other, which after the Bush "dividing" years will be a long time away assuming another president doesn't come in and divide further.

3. Nope, Corruption is corruption. Right now I feel the biggest problem is with Congress and I will vote Reid out whenever I get the chance and I hope everyone in their respective states votes their current Senator/Congressmen out as well regardless if it puts someone other then their party affiliation or different views in to congress.

Change does need to happen and we need to hold our leaders responsible and vote them out until we get a congress we can be proud of.

I cannot answer the poll though, because I don't believe in those absolutes. I believe it will take both parties working together to end corruption since neither party is above corruption right now.

[Deadshot]

1. I concur, no party will stop corruption. But I would add this caveat. The Dem's corruption usually involves screwing around with a boy or girl. The Rep's corruption usualy involves big payoffs and death.

2. Anything is possible and both sides have attempted it from time to time, but Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely.

3. I don't support corruption, I don't think anyone does...or at least none of us will admit it. But in today's age when one mistake, be it a sex scandal or bad business deal, can ruin one's career, I can say that I UNDERSTAND the corrupt.

[bishop]

1. No party will stop the corruption in DC. The presidency is just one part. You need a good president and a good congress. Since you will never have a full Dem or Rep Congress it will take both to do it.

if i read this correctly, as i believe i am, you're saying that one-party rule would result in less corruption...

that is completely incorrect, as the consolidation of power always results in greater corruption - hence why this country was intended to be a republic of states.

[Truth_and_Power]

1. I concur, no party will stop corruption. But I would add this caveat. The Dem's corruption usually involves screwing around with a boy or girl. The Rep's corruption usualy involves big payoffs and death.



This is just a stereotype that is reinforced through the media, but it does not paint a true picture. Both sides are knee-deep in corpses and dollars, both sides carry with them all the sex, drugs and hypocrisy sins that many powerful people do. Don't believe the hype.

[Elrathin]

1. No party will stop the corruption in DC. The presidency is just one part. You need a good president and a good congress. Since you will never have a full Dem or Rep Congress it will take both to do it.

if i read this correctly, as i believe i am, you're saying that one-party rule would result in less corruption...

that is completely incorrect, as the consolidation of power always results in greater corruption - hence why this country was intended to be a republic of states.


You read it incorrectly, hence why I clarified my statement with "it will take both to do it" right after I explained it.

I am not for a one party system.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Change does need to happen and we need to hold our leaders responsible and vote them out until we get a congress we can be proud of.
After the primaries all REPS & DMES should re-register as Independent
voters. This will put the fear of Death in to DNC&GOP. and they might start to work for "WE THE PEOPLE". And remember you can
always change back by next election. !

I cannot answer the poll though, because I don't believe in those absolutes. I believe it will take both parties working together to end corruption since neither party is above corruption right now.


Since it hasn't happened in the last 3 decades do you think it will
happen with the REPS&DEMS ? Do you think they want to stop their
"CASH COW" set up in Government ??????

Or do you think they just might be stringing us along with promises
the they will never keep, just to stay in power.........?

Because, you know, those American Citizens don't have a very long
attention span, and they will most likely forget everything that was
promised to them anyways.....

[Elrathin]

Since it hasn't happened in the last 3 decades do you think it will
happen with the REPS&DEMS ? Do you think they want to stop their
"CASH COW" set up in Government ??????

Or do you think they just might be stringing us along with promises
the they will never keep, just to stay in power.........?



It is allowed to happen because the PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ALLOW it to happen.

So like I said, with my plan, people would vote the hogs out of congress and replace them. I plan to do just like I have and vote people in my state out of office that are part of the "status quo" even if they happen to follow a "political ideal" close to mine, because they have proven to be the problem.

[Osborn F. Enready]

This is a one party system for all effects and purposes, seperated in name and "spoken mantra" only.

[firefox]

My bid for the best would be Ron Paul or the LP, but the chances of either being successful are slim :'(

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

This is a one party system for all effects and purposes, seperated in name and "spoken mantra" only.


Yeah the REP&DEM Duopoly.

[Mia]

This is a one party system for all effects and purposes, separated in name and "spoken mantra" only.


:thumbsup:

What's ever really different? A few more social programs here, a few more morality laws there,,,,,,:ponder:

[Elrathin]

Sorry, but for those saying Ron Paul, I have to say I disagree. I mean let's take a long hard look at Ron Paul. He cares so much about changing America that he decided not to run as an independent just so he can save his current job now.

A true politician.

[preservanation]

A conservative will be good for America.
The way I feel now both parties can take a flying f^^k at a rolling doughnut.
We're screwed, no matter who wins.
I don't trust McCain, Obama is a dunce liberal who reminds me of cotton-candy on a stick, and Hlillary scares the bejesus out of me.
Maybe something will happen is the next months to avoid our collective screwedness, but it's a long shot and I hate to speculate what that might be.

[Elrathin]

The key thing to the madness is not the presidency, but congress IMO.

People need to clean congress out. And that means voting "your" guy out if he happens to be in to get the other side in. Then if change hasn't happened or the new guy is just as bad, you vote them out again. You keep doing this till people get the message you aren't going to stay in congress unless you serve the people, not have the people serve you.

The problem is congress, IMO. A good congress and you won't even have to worry about the presidency. With a good congress, laws can get passed, spending can be cut, and yes whether you like it or not, a good congress will have to work together and not against one another. That means stop focusing on hurting the other side instead of doing what's best for America.

The career politicians in congress are the ones that generally (not all the time) go for the presidency. So a bad career politician means a bad president.

[bishop]

A conservative will be good for America.

that's funny, because there was a true conservative on the ballot and republicans voted against him.. "conservatives" need to come up with a new term to label themselves, because conservatives they are not. some term that can incorporate this love of empire.. actually, i think there is such a term - neo-conservative. that's what the proverbial base is really looking for..

[Mia]

A conservative will be good for America.

that's funny, because there was a true conservative on the ballot and republicans voted against him.. "conservatives" need to come up with a new term to label themselves, because conservatives they are not. some term that can incorporate this love of empire.. actually, i think there is such a term - neo-conservative. that's what the proverbial base is really looking for..




I agree completely! Some have lost sight of what conservative IS.

[preservanation]

There is a philosophy out there that says we need another Carter to finally get another Reagan.
IMO, our Gov is so huge and out of control that this would be a very dangerous tactic.
We are in danger of losing the will of the people and I can't ascribe to taking a chance on a lib, be he or she a dem or a rep, who may be able to wrest the Constitution out of our hands.
The Right got what it got with McCain being nominated by Moderates, Indies, Cross over dems, big Gov republicans and the media.
Oh, well...the Lib-Dems are tearing each other apart and I guess that'll have to be good enough for now.

[bishop]

the right won rinos control over both congress and the white house, and what have they done? continue the watering down of the the constitution, drastically grow government, etc... and there was a candidate with trustworthy credentials in both defending the constitution as well as limiting the size of government, and all the intellectually bankrupt "conservatives" went running for the hills.

must be a hard pill to swallow.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Sorry, but for those saying Ron Paul, I have to say I disagree. I mean let's take a long hard look at Ron Paul. He cares so much about changing America that he decided not to run as an independent just so he can save his current job now.

A true politician.


Not so much.

Look at what happened to Ross Perot in 1996. He got ~19% of the
peoples Vote but 0% of the Electoral College's vote. The system
is so rigged that unless you are a REP or DEM it is almost statistically
impossible for you to win. I think that R.Paul just has a better
understanding of that and he knows if he wanted to be effective he will
have to run as a REP.
He also said it's far more effective to have him in congress than not
so he was focusing on his congressional seat.

At least he got the GOP (and Media) to see how far the GOP has
moved away from the Constitution ! That's some thing you will not hear
from the DEMS REPS or Media by their own free will.
So thumbs up for R Paul !

[Elrathin]

If Ron Paul cared so much about change he would have tried. Even if he failed, as many said about his run in the primaries, his message would have lived on. Her cared more about appeasing career Republicans than he did about his so called change.

Ron Paul is a sad disappointment considering the commitment some of his followers went through to campaign for him, the least he could have done was run third party.

He cares more about his job and money than he does for changing America. That is what Ron Paul made clear to people. We got the message.

What Ron Paul proved is he is no better than a career politician.

[Mia]

the right won rinos control over both congress and the white house, and what have they done? continue the watering down of the the constitution, drastically grow government, etc...




That's not very conservative!

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

If Ron Paul cared so much about change he would have tried. Even if he failed, as many said about his run in the primaries, his message would have lived on. Her cared more about appeasing career Republicans than he did about his so called change.

Ron Paul is a sad disappointment considering the commitment some of his followers went through to campaign for him, the least he could have done was run third party.

He cares more about his job and money than he does for changing America. That is what Ron Paul made clear to people. We got the message.

What Ron Paul proved is he is no better than a career politician.


He did try and he fail to get enough votes to be a contender.
Some times it's better to loose one battle so you can win a war.
Paul is still technically in the race. His message is still being push
by his supporters, and he will still be have a voice in congress.

[Truth_and_Power]

If Ron Paul cared so much about change he would have tried. Even if he failed, as many said about his run in the primaries, his message would have lived on. Her cared more about appeasing career Republicans than he did about his so called change.

Ron Paul is a sad disappointment considering the commitment some of his followers went through to campaign for him, the least he could have done was run third party.

He cares more about his job and money than he does for changing America. That is what Ron Paul made clear to people. We got the message.

What Ron Paul proved is he is no better than a career politician.


So you voted for Paul and you were disappointed with his effort?

[bishop]

If Ron Paul cared so much about change he would have tried. Even if he failed, as many said about his run in the primaries, his message would have lived on. Her cared more about appeasing career Republicans than he did about his so called change.

Ron Paul is a sad disappointment considering the commitment some of his followers went through to campaign for him, the least he could have done was run third party.

He cares more about his job and money than he does for changing America. That is what Ron Paul made clear to people. We got the message.

What Ron Paul proved is he is no better than a career politician.


interesting... were you a paul supporter yourself, or one of the rinos/democrats who can't stand his anti-statist, anti-empire views?

i supported and still support paul, and from all i see on this forum, tv, and in talking to people day-to-day, his ideas still resonate.

rather than blow the money on a 3rd party campaign, he is instead using that money to finance campaigns of like-minded individuals across the country. if someone like paul can't win against the corporate media and the two-party borg/voters, then the only way to make progress is through a grassroots revolution - seat by seat..

i wholeheartedly agree with that approach, and am very pleased that he's exercising good judgement with the donations (i donated twice), rather than piss it down the toilet on a 3rd party campaign as some seem to prefer.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

So you voted for Paul and you were disappointed with his effort?


No, I was not allowed to vote for Paul or a democratic candidate
because I do not support or am affiliated with those two
corrupt parties!

But I believe his leadership/message will steer America in the right
direction! i.e. the Constitution is far superior than the backwards
ideology of the REP&DEM "POLITICAL PARTIES" !

[brien]

Unfortunately things in the USA will have to get a lot worse before they could ever get better. The average voter is scared to death of real meaningful change because they are clueless as to what really goes on down in Foggy Bottom. When one is ignorant, how can they make informed decisions?

The grass roots campaign is the answer. One similar to what is happening now in NH with the Free State project. Libertarians now hold more statewide offices in NH than in any other state in the Union. When people witness the success of the LP in NH, they will then begin to trust the LP in government positions.

Keep in mind, this nation took almost 50 years to evolve from a number of colonies that protested the impressment of colonials in 1741, up until 1789, to establish a government born from those rebellions that began in Worcester and Boston back in 1741-42. Wise people know that meaningful changes in government comes slowly but nevertheless comes surely.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Unfortunately things in the USA will have to get a lot worse before they could ever get better. The average voter is scared to death of real meaningful change because they are clueless as to what really goes on down in Foggy Bottom. When one is ignorant, how can they make informed decisions?

The grass roots campaign is the answer. One similar to what is happening now in NH with the Free State project. Libertarians now hold more statewide offices in NH than in any other state in the Union. When people witness the success of the LP in NH, they will then begin to trust the LP in government positions.

Keep in mind, this nation took almost 50 years to evolve from a number of colonies that protested the impressment of colonials in 1741, up until 1789, to establish a government born from those rebellions that began in Worcester and Boston back in 1741-42. Wise people know that meaningful changes in government comes slowly but nevertheless comes surely.


I thought that having Bush was the "GET A LOT WORSE" that would
bring Americans aournd to making change for America.
And the REP&DEM Monopoly has been in power for the last >120yrs !
That's too long. I think it's just taking longer because the R&D-Duopoly
has rigged the system very well (over the last 120yrs).