Nader might get to debate!(Barr too!)

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

If they(Any candidate) can get 10% Support they will be able to debate in a
Google and YouTube event.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080706/cm_thenation/45334812

If Nader was as Silly, irrelevant, an Ego-maniac, or crazy as the DNC, GOP, and news
media make him out to be why wouldn't they want the opportunity to EXPOSE all his
flaws ?????

I have seen Nader talk on C-Span and he made so much sense and was talking about
IMPROTANT issues that I have never heard either REP or DEM parties discuss in any
public forum. I know that if Nader were given the chance to go toe to toe with McCain and
Obama that all lot of Americans would get a very upsetting wake up call. Of course the
only way it can be proven is by an actual debate.

So if any of you REPS or DEMS want to see what your party is NOT doing you should
support a third party. Only two things will happen:

1) You will see that you still think your party is the best, and you would
have heard the ideas/platforms that the new parties want to add to government !

2) You will see that your party could be doing much more productive and
efficient things to make America a better stronger country. And with new
parties the REP&DEMS monopoly will not be able to avoid topics that they
both are guilty of supporting/sustaining.
(ie Corruption, ignoring/dismantling the constitution, wasting taxpayers
money, and the bebt they have given to the US voters)

[DamnYankee]

I don't have a problem with all candidates debating each other. It's a good idea. Bring it on.

[Condorman]

good luck getting that 10%, you're only, what, 8% away?

According to Gallup Poll, only 4% are considering not voting for either McCain or Obama.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

good luck getting that 10%, you're only, what, 8% away?

According to Gallup Poll, only 4% are considering not voting for either McCain or Obama.

CNN says Nader has 6%, Barr has 3% .
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/01/cnn.poll.matchup/?iref=mpstoryview

If the Media would interview Nader, Barr and Baldwin once in a while, I bet those numbers
would increase dramatically.

[preservanation]

As long as Obama tacks to the right on the Iraq war, (strictly for political expediency, or not), the more hard core leftists will flock to Nader.
6%, eh?
Not bad...I say he gets to 10%.
Laissez Les Bon Temps Roulet!

[apdst]

CNN says Nader has 6%, Barr has 3% .

They can add that together and share a podium.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

As long as Obama tacks to the right on the Iraq war, (strictly for political expediency, or not), the more hard core leftists will flock to Nader.
6%, eh?
Not bad...I say he gets to 10%.
Laissez Les Bon Temps Roulet!

I think the dissatisfaction of the US Voters will have more people looking for alternatives and
that might give Nader the 10%. If Paul ran as an Independent he would get 10% easy !
That would be great to see Paul go toe to toe with McCain ! When they had the
Rep Debates the Media all but shut out Paul from the debate, but as an Indy he would
have a fair playing field ! And he would school those WEAK P.O.S REP&DEM candidates !
So would Nader. Paul would work them over on the Constitution and Nader would work them
on Corporate Corruption.

[preservanation]

I think the dissatisfaction of the US Voters will have more people looking for alternatives and
that might give Nader the 10%. If Paul ran as an Independent he would get 10% easy !
That would be great to see Paul go toe to toe with McCain ! When they had the
Rep Debates the Media all but shut out Paul from the debate, but as an Indy he would
have a fair playing field ! And he would school those WEAK P.O.S REP&DEM candidates !
So would Nader. Paul would work them over on the Constitution and Nader would work them
on Corporate Corruption.Excellent analysis, though I don't share your enthusiasm on half of it.

But...
Obama is really opening up his flank for Nader...NAFTA and Corps are Nader's bread and butter...but he's also virulently anti war, always has been and his passion is palatable. This is what motivates the left base...the war. Trust me on that...even moderate libs want the hell out of Iraq yesterday. If Obama starts wavering on his commitment to end it immediately, Nader will pounce, and people will listen.

[heyjude]

I agree it would be a great idea, but as long as the Dems/Reps control and own the media, I don't think it will happen. The politicians have this all thought out. They control the media through licensing, making it all but impossible for any one to do what the politicians don't want done. And the politicians don't want to anyone in this country to hear about anyone but the Dems/Reps. And I am part of the people who will not vote for either party any more.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

I agree it would be a great idea, but as long as the Dems/Reps control and own the media, I don't think it will happen. The politicians have this all thought out. They control the media through licensing, making it all but impossible for any one to do what the politicians don't want done. And the politicians don't want to anyone in this country to hear about anyone but the Dems/Reps. And I am part of the people who will not vote for either party any more.

Yeah corporate America does own the media, but with the internet the Mass Media outlets
are now competing with bloggers, youtube and the like. So they will beforced to give the
people what they want or the people will go to alternative outlets for honset news!

If this Youtube debate draws a lot of attention/viewer, then all the Major news organizations
will want to have a multi-party debate to get high ratings. Most people who are use to the
REP vs. DEM debates will be amazed when a third party comes in and starts bringing up all
the inadequacies that both parties are guilty of.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Excellent analysis, though I don't share your enthusiasm on half of it.

But...
Obama is really opening up his flank for Nader...NAFTA and Corps are Nader's bread and butter...but he's also virulently anti war, always has been and his passion is palatable. This is what motivates the left base...the war. Trust me on that...even moderate libs want the hell out of Iraq yesterday. If Obama starts wavering on his commitment to end it immediately, Nader will pounce, and people will listen.

Nader is left on a lot of things but in this case (the Iraq war) he is actually on the side of
the Constitution (and Ron Paul). I think giving Nader 4yrs to focus on Corruption and waist
that the REPS&DEMS are guilty of is a fair deal. Nader is focusing more on corruption and
he has proven by his deeds that he is for fairness between Government, Business and the
American citizen ! You can't say the same for either the REPS or DEMS .

Reps want to exploit people so they can make money thus being powerful.
Dems want to make people weak and dependant on (Them) Government so they can be
powerful and get rich !

Either way "We the People" get screwed !
Look at the Condition that the REPS-DEMS Monopoly has put America in !
(Both are EQUALLY responsible)
If that doen't get Americans willing to vote for a 3rd party, America is in big trouble!!!

[william the wierd]

Just a query, I thought it was Barr that was at 6%?

[Alonzo]

If Nader does well and threatens the Democrats then there are a lot of things I can say with regards to him that will prompt the obligatory feigned outrage.

[preservanation]

Nader is left on a lot of things but in this case (the Iraq war) he is actually on the side of
the Constitution (and Ron Paul). I think giving Nader 4yrs to focus on Corruption and waist
that the REPS&DEMS are guilty of is a fair deal. Nader is focusing more on corruption and
he has proven by his deeds that he is for fairness between Government, Business and the
American citizen ! You can't say the same for either the REPS or DEMS .

Reps want to exploit people so they can make money thus being powerful.
Dems want to make people weak and dependant on (Them) Government so they can be
powerful and get rich !

Either way "We the People" get screwed !
Look at the Condition that the REPS-DEMS Monopoly has put America in !
(Both are EQUALLY responsible)
If that doen't get Americans willing to vote for a 3rd party, America is in big trouble!!!I see you're point.
I think I'll go find that "Nader For President, 2000" sign and put it back on my car.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

If Nader does well and threatens the Democrats then there are a lot of things I can say with regards to him that will prompt the obligatory feigned outrage.

You don't get it ! You shouldn't get mad if Nader "DOES WELL" !! That's good for you and
America ! It will FORCE all other parties to strive to be better too !!!!!!

You SHOULD be mad that your (Known corrupt, pathetic, can't beat retard Bush) Party
CAN NOT or WILL NOT do better than Nader !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!
(Same goes for the REPS)


It's like your mad that you lost a race, just because there were other racers in the race!?!?!?!?

[Elrathin]

You SHOULD be mad that your (Known corrupt, pathetic, can't beat retard Bush) Party
CAN NOT or WILL NOT do better than Nader !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!
(Same goes for the REPS)

Oh the Reps and Dems WILL DO BETTER than Nader, that much is sure. The only question will be will Nader supporters hurt the Dems so that a Republican is elected or will Nader hurt the Republicans to where a Dem is elected. That is the only thing that isn't decided yet.

Nader has about as much chance at winning the Presidency as a rain drop has in hell from evaporating.

[Alonzo]

You don't get it ! You shouldn't get mad if Nader "DOES WELL" !! That's good for you and
America ! It will FORCE all other parties to strive to be better too !!!!!!

You SHOULD be mad that your (Known corrupt, pathetic, can't beat retard Bush) Party
CAN NOT or WILL NOT do better than Nader !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!
(Same goes for the REPS)

They both do better than Nader in the elections. And him doing well is not good for me or America, him doing well got Bush elected, him doing well resulted in Bush ignoring terrorist warnings, him doing well resulted in the Iraq war, him doing well got two conservative SC Justices appointed, him doing well lead to ignoring environmental concerns, him doing well lead to massive spending increases along with tax cuts, him doing well, well you get the idea.

It's like your mad that you lost a race, just because there were other racers in the race!?!?!?!?

You treat elections as if they're simply games, like that it's no big deal if you lose.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Oh the Reps and Dems WILL DO BETTER than Nader, that much is sure. The only question will be will Nader supporters hurt the Dems so that a Republican is elected or will Nader hurt the Republicans to where a Dem is elected. That is the only thing that isn't decided yet.
Of course the REPS&DEMS will do better they have rigged the US Voting system so they
are guaranteed to win!
Remember in 92' Ross Perot got 19% of the American peoples vote but 0% Electoral College
votes! And Clinton only got ~42% of the peoples Votes( NOT A MAJORITY) but he got
70% of the E.C. ? Does that sound fair and Democratic to you?
The REPS&DEMS Made up the winner take all rule because it helps them stay in power !!!!


Nader has about as much chance at winning the Presidency as a rain drop has in hell from evaporating.

I agree America needs some divine intervention if we want to save America !
If Americans just voted out any and "all" corrupt parties we wouldn't be scraping the
bottom of the political barrel. But as it stands now ~half of Americans are willing to
over look their parties corruption and abuse just because they hate the other party !
And same goes for the other half of Americans ! They win we loose !!!!!

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

They both do better than Nader in the elections. And him doing well is not good for me or America, him doing well got Bush elected, him doing well resulted in Bush ignoring terrorist warnings, him doing well resulted in the Iraq war, him doing well got two conservative SC Justices appointed, him doing well lead to ignoring environmental concerns, him doing well lead to massive spending increases along with tax cuts, him doing well, well you get the idea.



You treat elections as if they're simply games, like that it's no big deal if you lose.

I though you stopped lying about Nader harming the DNC ? It was not Nader that made the
DEMS loose it was the DEMS !!!!!!!!

200,000,000 Registered Dem voters voted for Bush !! END of lie ! The DEMS could not even
keep their own supporters !!! NOTHING TO DO WITH NADER !!!!!!!!!

http://media.www.oredigger.net/media/storage/paper1162/news/2008/04/14/Opinion/Debunking.The.Nader.Nastiness.Why.The.Liberals.Are .Ruining.America-3323631.shtml

Also why didn't the DEMS Challenge the Vote? Gore got more Votes !!!!
http://www.maitreg.com/politics/elections/2000/results.asp

Why because the DEMS&REPS rigged the system to keep them in power and if the DEMS
motioned to change/fix the system they too would loose their grip on power !

I don't treat Elections as games! I just know that our government is broken and it won't fix
itself. We need to overhaul it, and going back and forth from REPS to DEMS to REPS is
not a fix! It's Not a Change! It not helping ! It just a perverted cycle of destruction for
America !

If a REP or DEMS wins WE ALL LOOSE !

[NIOSA]

I believe that any & all candidates should be allowed to debate. Why do we have to know who the candidates are 6 months in advance of the election? It used to be that the candidate was named at the conventions, & guess what, we still had the election & a president was voted in.

[william the wierd]

You don't get it ! You shouldn't get mad if Nader "DOES WELL" !! That's good for you and
America ! It will FORCE all other parties to strive to be better too !!!!!!

You SHOULD be mad that your (Known corrupt, pathetic, can't beat retard Bush) Party
CAN NOT or WILL NOT do better than Nader !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!
(Same goes for the REPS)


It's like your mad that you lost a race, just because there were other racers in the race!?!?!?!?
The current major parties can't even figure out what the issues are (see "High Wire" by Gosselin); what is controllable (the oil & gas markets) or how to run a political campaign (Obama driving himself down in the polls). If they were corrupt but effective that might be tolerable.

[Alonzo]

I though you stopped lying about Nader harming the DNC ? It was not Nader that made the
DEMS loose it was the DEMS !!!!!!!!

200,000,000 Registered Dem voters voted for Bush !! END of lie ! The DEMS could not even
keep their own supporters !!! NOTHING TO DO WITH NADER !!!!!!!!!

http://media.www.oredigger.net/media/storage/paper1162/news/2008/04/14/Opinion/Debunking.The.Nader.Nastiness.Why.The.Liberals.Are .Ruining.America-3323631.shtml

Also why didn't the DEMS Challenge the Vote? Gore got more Votes !!!!
http://www.maitreg.com/politics/elections/2000/results.asp

Why because the DEMS&REPS rigged the system to keep them in power and if the DEMS
motioned to change/fix the system they too would loose their grip on power !

I don't treat Elections as games! I just know that our government is broken and it won't fix
itself. We need to overhaul it, and going back and forth from REPS to DEMS to REPS is
not a fix! It's Not a Change! It not helping ! It just a perverted cycle of destruction for
America !

If a REP or DEMS wins WE ALL LOOSE !

Quick question, if Nader hadn't run would Gore have won?

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Quick question, if Nader hadn't run would Gore have won?

Let me answer your quick question with a quick question!
If Bush hadn't run would Gore have won ?

(Think about what you are asking for, Please!)

All those people who voted for Nader had the choice to vote for Gore!!!!
They had the Choice to vote for any candidate !!!!
Just because the US Voting system is rigged for only two parties that does
not mean Americans should ONLY vote for one of the TWO parties that Rigged
the system !!!!!!!!

You don't see the danger in supporting Less Democracy ?
Or where that will lead us as a country?
We effectively only have 2 parties we can vote for, and you want to help that be the
standard for America? Why not have only one party? Does that sound good to you?

If you haven't learned from history, let me tell you that very bad things happen when FEW
people hold all power !

Study the first chart again!
http://www.maitreg.com/politics/elections/2000/results.asp
Realize the neither party had a majority, and that no other party got any representation.
And note that the main reason that all the other parties did not get much of the
popular vote is not so much that they are bad parties (Although they are necessarily good)
but it's because Americans know that their vote is not counted if they do not
vote for the REP-DEM Monopoly !!!! It like political blackmail !

Now if your party was so good they could have already introduced Instant Runoff Elections !
Then we would get a Prez that "Most" Americans agree on !! Not just the "Lesser of Two
Evils"
http://instantrunoff.com/

[william the wierd]

The majors are the same party for all intents and purposes.

[Alonzo]

Let me answer your quick question with a quick question!
If Bush hadn't run would Gore have won ?

(Think about what you are asking for, Please!)

All those people who voted for Nader had the choice to vote for Gore!!!!
They had the Choice to vote for any candidate !!!!
Just because the US Voting system is rigged for only two parties that does
not mean Americans should ONLY vote for one of the TWO parties that Rigged
the system !!!!!!!!

You don't see the danger in supporting Less Democracy ?
Or where that will lead us as a country?
We effectively only have 2 parties we can vote for, and you want to help that be the
standard for America? Why not have only one party? Does that sound good to you?

If you haven't learned from history, let me tell you that very bad things happen when FEW
people hold all power !

Study the first chart again!
http://www.maitreg.com/politics/elections/2000/results.asp
Realize the neither party had a majority, and that no other party got any representation.
And note that the main reason that all the other parties did not get much of the
popular vote is not so much that they are bad parties (Although they are necessarily good)
but it's because Americans know that their vote is not counted if they do not
vote for the REP-DEM Monopoly !!!! It like political blackmail !

Now if your party was so good they could have already introduced Instant Runoff Elections !
Then we would get a Prez that "Most" Americans agree on !! Not just the "Lesser of Two
Evils"
http://instantrunoff.com/

The difference being that Bush's base was the opposite of Gore's. Gore's base was Nader's base, and they advocated many of the same causes.

So, for the causes that Nader advocated, how did his running, and the resulting loss of Gore due to it, help Nader's causes?

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

The difference being that Bush's base was the opposite of Gore's. Gore's base was Nader's base, and they advocated many of the same causes.

So, for the causes that Nader advocated, how did his running, and the resulting loss of Gore due to it, help Nader's causes?

You still have your RED-BLUE Blinders on......
Take them off and re-read all my posts, then try to ask a more relavent question.


You are missing the biggest differnce between Nader, Gore(DEMS) and Bush (REPS) !
Yes Dems are more liberal and Reps are more concervitive, but REPS&DEMS both support
political corruption and Nader dose not ! That's why so many Americans voted for him, it's
not because he's a liberal !!!!

[Babylon]

I cannot believe we are rallying for 10%...?

Why should We the People be Forced not to have the opportunity to hear the man, when we are voting for the highest office in the land..?

But that's just me..

[Alonzo]

You still have your RED-BLUE Blinders on......
Take them off and re-read all my posts, then try to ask a more relavent question.


You are missing the biggest differnce between Nader, Gore(DEMS) and Bush (REPS) !
Yes Dems are more liberal and Reps are more concervitive, but REPS&DEMS both support
political corruption and Nader dose not ! That's why so many Americans voted for him, it's
not because he's a liberal !!!!

So your solution to politics is not to vote for the person who will produce the best end results for the country. Bad idea in my mind.

[Osborn F. Enready]

Partisans always fear Open Debates between multiple parties.....

[Elrathin]

Partisans always fear Open Debates between multiple parties.....

Not really. I'm of the mind that if the guy isn't a major player than he shouldn't be allowed to sit center stage.

I will say this though, and I can't remember if it was you that brought up the idea, I would not have a problem with a third party candidate being allowed to debate IF they are on the ballot in all 50 states.

That is an exception that I think would be quite acceptable for allowing someone to debate.

[Osborn F. Enready]

So does that mean you are pushing for equalization of Ballot Access laws between all states Elrathin?

The big issue with ballot access, is the laws which have been perverted and manipulated by Republicans and Democrats to favor only those two parties.....

..and of course, then there is the gerrymandering, the electoral college, the voting machines, the voting system, the right to vote....etc.

The absolute treason displayed by the two major parties should disqualify them from running for office.

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

So your solution to politics is not to vote for the person who will produce the best end results for the country. Bad idea in my mind.

I never said that either! You are making things up again. I think Nader, Ron Paul and Baldwin
all would produce better end results than the DEMS or REPS !

You will not come to terms with the fact that the DEMS are ~50% responsible for
all the corruption, debt, un-constitutional law, and general waist the exists in the US
Government !

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Not really. I'm of the mind that if the guy isn't a major player than he shouldn't be allowed to sit center stage.
There are two major flaws in your statement that come to mind.
1) What if a minor player had a great idea that would help ALL of America. He should not
be able to share it because he is not a "MAJOR PLAYER" ?
2) If the REPS&DEMS have rigged the US system so only the REPS&DEMS can be "MAJOR
PLAYER" then they have effectively created a monopoly on the US political system!!!!!

Remember this is "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" not "THE UNITED STATES OF GOP"
or "THE UNITED STATES OF DNC". I think too many America have lost sight of that fact,
or have been brain washed or something.

And! If Nader and others were able to debate they might become "MAJOR PLAYERS" .
I think that's why they are not given the opportunity to compete with the REP-DEMS
Monopoly .



I will say this though, and I can't remember if it was you that brought up the idea, I would not have a problem with a third party candidate being allowed to debate IF they are on the ballot in all 50 states.

That is an exception that I think would be quite acceptable for allowing someone to debate.

Now what about the fact that the DEMS have already "PROVEN" that they (or any Major
party) can sabotage a candidate from even getting on the ballot?
Getting on all 50 states ballots is not a


While it would not be of much service to us to have 1,000 candidates debating, just because
of the time it would take for them all to answer one question. But it is also bad for us to
be spoon feed a REP-DEM subject limited debate.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=P23l6uyDVsc

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Why are the cards stacked against everyone out side of the REP&DEM MONOPOLY???
Oh that's right, that the way it is when you have a monopoly. What was I thinking...
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/07/federal-court-strikes-down-arizona.php


More third party analysis.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/mp_20080710_1658.php

[Osborn F. Enready]

Thanks for the updates NoMoreReps-Dems. :thumbsup:

[Alonzo]

I never said that either! You are making things up again. I think Nader, Ron Paul and Baldwin
all would produce better end results than the DEMS or REPS !

You will not come to terms with the fact that the DEMS are ~50% responsible for
all the corruption, debt, un-constitutional law, and general waist the exists in the US
Government !

Their ability to win is part of the end result. Do you think they can actually win? If not, then you are forsaking the best end result for an ideal candidate that you know can't win.

[william the wierd]

Their ability to win is part of the end result. Do you think they can actually win? If not, then you are forsaking the best end result for an ideal candidate that you know can't win.
Perhaps paraphrasing the words of the late great George Carlin (can't find the link); "When you help vote someone into office you are to blame for them."

[Alonzo]

Perhaps paraphrasing the words of the late great George Carlin (can't find the link); "When you help vote someone into office you are to blame for them."


So politics is about making yourself feel good?

Saying "Don't blame me, I didn't vote for him!" is good for no one other than your ego.

[william the wierd]

So politics is about making yourself feel good?

Saying "Don't blame me, I didn't vote for him!" is good for no one other than your ego.

So the non-ego stroking Russians in 1917/18 voted for Lenin and the non-ego stroking Germans in 33/34 voted for Hitler? A great number of ifs, ands, buts and maybes would need to added to this agenda item to raise it up to amoral, ego-tripping, I presume you miswrote.

[Alonzo]

Lenin wasn't voted into office.

And Are you honestly suggesting the Hitler was the lesser evil?

And if the choice on the ballot was Hitler or Mussolini, with one of those two certain to win, and you vote for Captain Nobody because he's a good guy, that's foolish.

[Osborn F. Enready]

Sad argument Alonzo......:shame:

I don't see how some poor soul could be TRICKED out of voting for their conscience.

[IndieVisible]

If they(Any candidate) can get 10% Support they will be able to debate in a
Google and YouTube event.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080706/cm_thenation/45334812

If Nader was as Silly, irrelevant, an Ego-maniac, or crazy as the DNC, GOP, and news
media make him out to be why wouldn't they want the opportunity to EXPOSE all his
flaws ?????

I have seen Nader talk on C-Span and he made so much sense and was talking about
IMPROTANT issues that I have never heard either REP or DEM parties discuss in any
public forum. I know that if Nader were given the chance to go toe to toe with McCain and
Obama that all lot of Americans would get a very upsetting wake up call. Of course the
only way it can be proven is by an actual debate.

So if any of you REPS or DEMS want to see what your party is NOT doing you should
support a third party. Only two things will happen:

1) You will see that you still think your party is the best, and you would
have heard the ideas/platforms that the new parties want to add to government !

2) You will see that your party could be doing much more productive and
efficient things to make America a better stronger country. And with new
parties the REP&DEMS monopoly will not be able to avoid topics that they
both are guilty of supporting/sustaining.
(ie Corruption, ignoring/dismantling the constitution, wasting taxpayers
money, and the bebt they have given to the US voters)

Barr and Nader are about the most boring, uninteresting candidates I have seen in a long time. Nader a what 5 time loser? keeps coming back. Barr a former republican, whoopie de doo! REAL change there! Nader talks a lot of sh*t but could never get the support to get any thing done. And lets not forget, he is even older then McCain!

Poor Obama, he would feel like he is at a senior citizen's home at that debate!

Barr 68, McCain 71, Nader 74?

That would be one debate I wouldn't care about missing lol.

[Osborn F. Enready]

Indie said:
That would be one debate I wouldn't care about missing lol.

So now age is a reason to disqualify someone from a debate?

[IndieVisible]

So now age is a reason to disqualify someone from a debate?

Age is a reason for me to disqualify them as a candidate, why on earth then would I want to listen to some old men ramble on?

I have to listen to McCain debate because sadly he does a slim chance to win. But the other clowns? May be for comic relief :madlaugh:

[Osborn F. Enready]

Indie said:
Age is a reason for me to disqualify them as a candidate, why on earth then would I want to listen to some old men ramble on?

Well, its obvious you have a firm grasp on equal rights for all born persons......(sarcasm)

Ohhh, wait, you don't respect rights at all, do you?

Indie said:
I have to listen to McCain debate because sadly he does a slim chance to win. But the other clowns? May be for comic relief

Judging by your expressed political IQ, you must be amused by a lot of things.....

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Barr and Nader are about the most boring, uninteresting candidates I have seen in a long time. Nader a what 5 time loser? keeps coming back. Barr a former republican, whoopie de doo! REAL change there! Nader talks a lot of sh*t but could never get the support to get any thing done. And lets not forget, he is even older then McCain!

Poor Obama, he would feel like he is at a senior citizen's home at that debate!

Barr 68, McCain 71, Nader 74?

That would be one debate I wouldn't care about missing lol.

What's wrong with you? I'm not asking you to date Nader or Barr ! If they have poor
stances on the issues then point them out! If they will harm America explain how and why!
I have no problem with that, But to say they are boring and old is a stupid tangent to go
off on ! It doesn't matter if they are the life of the party or wall flower !!!
WILL THEY HELP AMERICA GET BETTER is the only thing that you should consider !

Yes the REPS&DEMS have rigged the US Voting system so it is almost statistically impossible
for third parties to win, But that does not change the fact that WE AS AMERICAS should try
to give "AMERICA" the BEST leadership Possible !!!!

The REPS&DEMS have had more than 100yrs to prove themselves !!!!!!! Game Over ! Next !!!

Let them debate and stand by their Ideas and leadership !!!
Why are the REPS&DEMS so afraid of competition????
Isn't Competition a method of getting the best product ????

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Their ability to win is part of the end result. Do you think they can actually win? If not, then you are forsaking the best end result for an ideal candidate that you know can't win.

You are still missing the BIG PICTURE! (even though I've explained it before)
The fact that the US Voting system is rigged so NO CANDIDATE OUR SIDE OF THE REP OR
DEM PARTIES CAN'T WIN IS WHY WE NEED TO VOTE OUT THE REPS&DEMS !!!!

Do you think the candidate with the most votes should win or loose ?
Gore lost he had more Popular votes (Corruption by bad representation).
Should the ruling parties try to fix this flaw?
They haven't and won't because they are the beneficiaries of this corruption !
They have even made it worse by CREATING THE WINNER TAKE ALL RULE !!!!

Do you think (in America) the Prez winner should have a Majority of the votes to win?
(Greater then 50% ?) .....

You know what if you haven't caught on by now you can't, so I'll stop.

But let me point out some thing else you don't realize.
By you supporting the DEMS you are actually supporting the REPS !!!!
You know the DEMS&REPS jointly work together to keep a monopoly on the US Government!
As long as the DEMS stay in power they will not end or fix the problems that allow the
REPS to do as they have done ! i.e. Bush won with less votes, Bush stole the Election,
Bush illegally went to war and has not been tried for his crimes.....
The DEMS&REPS have a symbiotic relationship! So if you support one you are helping the
other !!!
Sorry if the truth hurts...

[william the wierd]

You are still missing the BIG PICTURE! (even though I've explained it before)
The fact that the US Voting system is rigged so NO CANDIDATE OUR SIDE OF THE REP OR
DEM PARTIES CAN'T WIN IS WHY WE NEED TO VOTE OUT THE REPS&DEMS !!!!

Do you think the candidate with the most votes should win or loose ?
Gore lost he had more Popular votes (Corruption by bad representation).
Should the ruling parties try to fix this flaw?
They haven't and won't because they are the beneficiaries of this corruption !
They have even made it worse by CREATING THE WINNER TAKE ALL RULE !!!!

Do you think (in America) the Prez winner should have a Majority of the votes to win?
(Greater then 50% ?) .....

You know what if you haven't caught on by now you can't, so I'll stop.

But let me point out some thing else you don't realize.
By you supporting the DEMS you are actually supporting the REPS !!!!
You know the DEMS&REPS jointly work together to keep a monopoly on the US Government!
As long as the DEMS stay in power they will not end or fix the problems that allow the
REPS to do as they have done ! i.e. Bush won with less votes, Bush stole the Election,
Bush illegally went to war and has not been tried for his crimes.....
The DEMS&REPS have a symbiotic relationship! So if you support one you are helping the
other !!!
Sorry if the truth hurts...
The one party system is comforting. Currently the Ds & Rs give the impression of some cosmetic differences but it is about as relevant as voting in the old Soviet Union to act like there is any significant differences between the major parties.

[IndieVisible]

What's wrong with you? I'm not asking you to date Nader or Barr !

Your asking me to watch a boring debate, I understand and awnsered turthfully.

If they have poor stances on the issues then point them out! If they will harm America explain how and why!I have no problem with that, But to say they are boring and old is a stupid tangent to go off on ! It doesn't matter if they are the life of the party or wall flower !!! WILL THEY HELP AMERICA GET BETTER is the only thing that you should consider !

What's the point? They have the same chance winning, ZERO!

But ok you want to know why I don't like them besides being too damn old to hold the highest office in the nation. Here goes. All Nader did was take on the auto industry in the 60's thats his claim to fame. Suddenly he became a politication with out every holding any political office. He has ZERO experience in any thing he talks about!

Barr actually has experience. A former Republican and ultra conservative--> SHOW STOPPER FOR ME! Hopped on the Libertarian Party to stroke himself this election. if your a ultra conservative, he's your man.

Yes the REPS&DEMS have rigged the US Voting system so it is almost statistically impossible
for third parties to win, But that does not change the fact that WE AS AMERICAS should try
to give "AMERICA" the BEST leadership Possible !!!!

How do they have it rigged? Explain? Is not Barr and Nader running, you can vote for one of them. I think rigged is a bad word.

The REPS&DEMS have had more than 100yrs to prove themselves !!!!!!! Game Over ! Next !!!

I think Kennedy did a fantastic job! You don't? Carter not bad! Reagan not bad! Clinton not bad. I think they have proven themselves. You know there was life before Bush? And there will be life after him too!

Let them debate and stand by their Ideas and leadership !!!
Why are the REPS&DEMS so afraid of competition???? Isn't Competition a method of getting the best product ????

I'm not trying to stop the debate. Hope it doesn't run in to Nader or McCain's nap time. I see no competition for the Dems there, but the Reps do have some competition with Barr. He really is ultra conservative, not like McBush. So sure enjoy the show! I catch the highlights of it on comedy central.

I wish there was a REAL third party to liven things up. It's not the Libertarians. The last Independent candidate that actually got over 10% was Ross Perot. I respected him even though I didn't support him. These guys are just clowns! Enjoy!