I'm pretty disappointed in America.

[maledixtion]

Most people I know only vote in presidential elections. I've voted 4 times this year alone. I'm sick of seeing people who become leap year politicians and don't know what the fuck is going on the rest of the time. For all this talk of "change", "hope", and "progress", I've seen so few of you support any of those. How is voting for the same two gigantic parties, both with their hands filthy in dirty politics and corporate backing, who stand for the same things year after year, change?

America was given a chance for progress and change this year in Dr. Ron Paul, who, whether you agree with him 100% or not, actually had plans, rather than counterpoints and different shades of grey, to his opponents. He acknowledges that America has lost touch with the people, and that liberty is in danger. And because he wasn't backed by the two political giants and locked out of the media, his fight for freedom was shot down. I don't care if you vote for Ron Paul, but in the future if you are looking for a change in America, try voting outside the machine.

[viva la cymche!]

Ron Paul was a Republican, fyi.

[maledixtion]

Ron Paul was a Republican, fyi.

I don't give a shit what party someone signs up as. I'm a republican and I voted Democrat across the board today with the exception of Nader. Just another example of how ignorant you are. America isn't black or white, Democrat or Republican. America is about choice and freedom, something we aren't given, and our government has done a great job of brainwashing us to be okay with.

Edit: I see now that you're 14. That explains the ignorance.

[apoemtothedead]

lol

Ron Paul would never have won the Presidency. Ron Paul would never have been able to enact his policies had he won the Presidency.

[sdbrown]

Those registered as democrats couldn't have voted in the primaries and unfortunately without the backing of republican party he didn't stand a chance.

[maledixtion]

lol

Ron Paul would never have won the Presidency. Ron Paul would never have been able to enact his policies had he won the Presidency.

You know why? Because of the political giants that control our senate, representatives, and white house. And you seem to be completely okay with that.

[cheezwhiz]

lol

Ron Paul would never have won the Presidency. Ron Paul would never have been able to enact his policies had he won the Presidency.

that, and you're saying to vote outside the machine, yet he's a part of the Republican Party. He had plans that broke with their ideals and whatnot, but since he was running on the Republican ticket, he still had to respond to that party. I'm confused with your argument.

[oldwirehands]

i've been disappointed for quite some time now.

[maledixtion]

For the record this thread isn't about Ron Paul. It's about change in American politics. He just happens to be the only presidential nominee this year that actually stood for that.

[apoemtothedead]

You know why? Because of the political giants that control our senate, representatives, and white house. And you seem to be completely okay with that.
No, because a large majority of the American people don't agree with his ideals.

[maledixtion]

that, and you're saying to vote outside the machine, yet he's a part of the Republican Party. He had plans that broke with their ideals and whatnot, but since he was running on the Republican ticket, he still had to respond to that party. I'm confused with your argument.

Because he has to register with one of the two parties to even be counted in the primaries, another example of how broken our system is. If you think he's a registered republican because he likes the GOP, you're nuts/not educated on the matter well enough.

[Mike78098C]

I just found this "change" you desire:

African American guy got voted into the White house.
Boohyea achieved.

[maledixtion]

No, because a large majority of the American people don't agree with his ideals.

The majority of America doesn't follow politics at all until presidential candidates are chosen.

[maledixtion]

I just found this "change" you desire:

African American guy got voted into the White house.
Boohyea achieved.

Skin color doesn't matter. It's just as racist to say that someone with more melanin in their skin cells is a "political" change as it is to say they don't belong there.

[apoemtothedead]

The majority of America doesn't follow politics at all until presidential candidates are chosen.
Oh, so you're saying he did poorly among the politically educated people? I wonder why that is...

[Mike78098C]

Mmph. Racism...

[oldwirehands]

just for shits and giggles, i'd like to post this.


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

i thought it might be a good idea to have this along with the bill of rights and the constitution, in their entirety, put in sticky threads. i feel like people have forgotten or have no idea what these things are anymore.

[rob_mylo]

nothing is going to change. so why bitch.

[maledixtion]

Oh, so you're saying he did poorly among the politically educated people? I wonder why that is...

He was never a candidate. Think before you type.

[cheezwhiz]

Because he has to register with one of the two parties to even be counted in the primaries, another example of how broken our system is. If you think he's a registered republican because he likes the GOP, you're nuts/not educated on the matter well enough.

I never said he whole-heartedly joing the Republican Party, just wanted to clarify since the fact that he's a part of it contradicts what you were saying. He did joing though, and that makes him accountable to it. If he dislikes it as much as you're saying (I really don't know that much about him), he shouldn't have joined in the first place and followed in the Independents' footsteps.

[apoemtothedead]

He was never a candidate. Think before you type.
I thought he was a candidate in the Republican Primary. Hell, he probably still is.

[maledixtion]

just for shits and giggles, i'd like to post this.



i thought it might be a good idea to have this along with the bill of rights and the constitution, in their entirety, put in sticky threads. i feel like people have forgotten or have no idea what these things are anymore.

That line is my favorite, yet it's also one of the first freedoms of the American people that got stripped from us. I dare any large group of people in America to incite a revolution without our government trying to forcibly stop it.

[maledixtion]

I thought he was a candidate in the Republican Primary. Hell, he probably still is.

Learn the difference between a candidate and a nominee.

[maledixtion]

I never said he whole-heartedly joing the Republican Party, just wanted to clarify since the fact that he's a part of it contradicts what you were saying. He did joing though, and that makes him accountable to it. If he dislikes it as much as you're saying (I really don't know that much about him), he shouldn't have joined in the first place and followed in the Independents' footsteps.
He wouldn't be included in the primaries if he did that. Not to mention there are two different sects of the Republican party, and he associates with the true Republican party rather than the Neo-Conservatives who control it presently.

[Mike78098C]

Do we need a revolution?

[cheezwhiz]

a rEVOLution
that was my favorite campaign slogan.

[apoemtothedead]

Learn the difference between a candidate and a nominee.
...what?

[maledixtion]

...what?

Exactly.

[apoemtothedead]

Exactly.
I'm well aware of the difference. None of which has come up in this thread. Because of his policies, Ron Paul will always be a Republican candidate and never be a Republican nominee.

[maledixtion]

I'm well aware of the difference. None of which has come up in this thread. Because of his policies, Ron Paul will always be a Republican candidate and never be a Republican nominee.

You have them backwards. Obama and McCain were the only democrat or republican candidates this year.

[nfgrocker16]

You know why? Because of the political giants that control our senate, representatives, and white house. And you seem to be completely okay with that.

Not because of the fact that his ideas don't garner enough of a support to make him a viable candidate? Maybe because people don't think his plans will work?

[apoemtothedead]

You have them backwards. Obama and McCain were the only democrat or republican candidates this year.
Please forgive me. Ron Paul will always be a Republican PRIMARY candidate and will never be the Republican nominee.

[maledixtion]

Not because of the fact that his ideas don't garner enough of a support to make him a viable candidate? Maybe because people don't think his plans will work?

Again, this thread is not about Ron Paul, it's about the fact that Obama doesn't represent change or progress, and that the Democratic and Republican parties control the government, not the American people. Not to mention not enough people are even aware of Ron Paul's plans because he is barred from participating in debates because he wasn't a Republican or Democratic candidate.

[oldwirehands]

Do we need a revolution?

Yes, to an extant. If more civil liberties are stripped from us, then we are going to need an army...

[quirkily]

You're buying into the same self-indulgent bullshit that righteous third-party advocates spew every year. In some years (2004, definitely), this sort of opinion is justified. Without a doubt, there are major election years where the GOP and Dem candidates differ only slightly.

This is not one of those years. To claim that Obama "doesn't represent change or progress" is simply ignorant; you're ignoring his whole campaign when you make claims like that. Not only has his campaign itself been revolutionary (the first effective use of social networking and the internet to build support, 3 million different donors to the campaign), his policies represent a radical change from the status quo. True, it seems like he's had to modify some of his proposals to become more moderate. In order to have any chance at all, you have to do this. To deny that is unrealistic. But nevertheless, he represents change in both who HE is, and in how he affects the American PEOPLE. Try and convince someone that the enthusiasm for Obama's campaign ISN'T a change from normal politics. You can't argue that.

[open mind]

real political change is a slow and painful process taking decades.....and it almost always involves one of the 2 major parties coming around in the end to see it through.

[adam anything]

Again, this thread is not about Ron Paul, it's about the fact that Obama doesn't represent change or progress, and that the Democratic and Republican parties control the government, not the American people. Not to mention not enough people are even aware of Ron Paul's plans because he is barred from participating in debates because he wasn't a Republican or Democratic candidate.

How can you possibly be so dim witted to insist that Obama doesnt represent change and progress? Throughout this entire election process more and more people have become involved and interested in politics, more people are voting, and more people are making informed decisions about where this counry is headed. that sure sounds like change to me.

You are backing a candidate that never truly had a chance. His policies though brilliant are entirely unrealistic in the current political climate.

I guess what im trying to say is; get over it, Obama is the president elect. get used to it.

[CaryGrant]

This thread is slowly making my brain explode. I am completely sick of people my generation trying so hard to wear their cynicism on their sleeve--vote 3rd party for 3rd party's sake, use terms like "empty suit" and "one-party system". Look, I personally would love a system in which more candidates would get equal representation, especially among serious factions like Libertarianism and Peace & Freedom. Or no party affiliations at all. But this is a direct democracy, and we are trying to find several hundred people to represent the interests of 300 million. That is fucking complicated shit. So we have a system where we try to oversimplify common viewpoints into groups that can then pool resources to push a (generally) common agenda. As it turns out, most Americans are happy being either Liberals or Conservatives and only two parties have been necessary. I hate that this makes it a partisan "red vs. blue" situation but technically speaking it's a system that works because it makes it easier for citizens to find a candidate they can assume will pragmatically act according to their ideals.
But yes, two parties in charge leads to corporate fundraising and lobbying ties. That sucks ass. But whenever these guys in their 20's try so desperately to prove their free-thinking education, they demonize all politicians purely based on the fact that they are part of a successful majority. "Obama and McCain are the same! They're both part of the political machine!" Ideologically speaking the differences between the two are huge. Yes, they both supported the bailout and other antilibertarian concepts, so feel free to demonize that. But these days any member of the Democratic or Republican party gets labeled a monster while less successful candidates like Nader are lauded as overlooked heroes SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT PART OF A SUCCESSFUL PARTY. Ron Paul knew that his only viability was achieving major party backing. That is why, despite his disagreements with most of that constituency, he ran for the Republican nomination.
Essentially, STFU and GBTW. Vote for whoever you want to, but I am just freaking tired of pissing contests between disenfranchised young males who read about the Green party on Wikipedia and decide that everyone who votes for a major party is some sort of sheep.
Sorry. Had to get that off my chest.

[Mercy Medical]

The fact of the matter is you're never (well, maybe not never, but it's going to take some major changes in this country) going to get a third party candidate up to the level of the democrat and republican parties. I firmly believe, however, that there should be a viable third party candidate, but it's going to be a serious uphill battle to get that.

While voting for Ron Paul or another third party candidate this election would have been a great personal statement, it would have made absolutely no difference in the long run.

The fact of the matter is, at this moment in time the democrat and republican parties are the majority and based on that we need to make the best decision for this country.

[theguilt engine]

For the record this thread isn't about Ron Paul. It's about change in American politics. He just happens to be the only presidential nominee this year that actually stood for that.
So what are you saying? There is no hope?

[saysmydoctor]

Ron Paul wanted to institute the gold standard and abolish the Department of Education. That's not change, unless you like going from a crawl forward to full speed in reverse.

[Protested Hero]

Ron Paul wanted to institute the gold standard and abolish the Department of Education. That's not change, unless you like going from a crawl forward to full speed in reverse.

Yeah, I liked him until I realized his ideas were never going to work. Get rid of the FBI and CIA? Oh ok.

[jagermeister]

Just for you...

http://weblog.sinteur.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/worlds-smallest-violin.jpg

[nfgrocker16]

Again, this thread is not about Ron Paul, it's about the fact that Obama doesn't represent change or progress, and that the Democratic and Republican parties control the government, not the American people. Not to mention not enough people are even aware of Ron Paul's plans because he is barred from participating in debates because he wasn't a Republican or Democratic candidate.

He wasn't allowed to debate because he didn't have a large enough base of support to make him a viable candidate.

I'd like to know what you think would represent real change. I'm asking this in all seriousness.

[JJJ]

Just for you...

http://weblog.sinteur.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/worlds-smallest-violin.jpg

:crackup:

[open mind]

i know you didn't ask me but i think real change would be a government not so influenced by big buisness and the military industrial complex, strict enviormental standards being put in place, an accelerated pace on moving to alternative energies, and harm reduction becoming the main strategy in the war on drugs......it'd be nice if we could seriously question our blind allegiance to israel to.

[tambam]

Honestly, I couldn't be more proud of America. What's happening now is fantastic.

[CaryGrant]

Direct democracy is a real political system and it is the opposite of America's political system which is a representative democracy.

Yeah, I'd meant to say "but this isn't a direct democracy". Thank you for the correction.

[leifstar]

Most people I know only vote in presidential elections. I've voted 4 times this year alone. I'm sick of seeing people who become leap year politicians and don't know what the fuck is going on the rest of the time. For all this talk of "change", "hope", and "progress", I've seen so few of you support any of those. How is voting for the same two gigantic parties, both with their hands filthy in dirty politics and corporate backing, who stand for the same things year after year, change?

America was given a chance for progress and change this year in Dr. Ron Paul, who, whether you agree with him 100% or not, actually had plans, rather than counterpoints and different shades of grey, to his opponents. He acknowledges that America has lost touch with the people, and that liberty is in danger. And because he wasn't backed by the two political giants and locked out of the media, his fight for freedom was shot down. I don't care if you vote for Ron Paul, but in the future if you are looking for a change in America, try voting outside the machine.


I agree. However, I voted for Ralph Nader. I am tired of the two party system. We are not a real democracy. I feel third parties should have more of a voice and a chance to get their voice out there.

People want change? Apparently not.

[apoemtothedead]

I agree. However, I voted for Ralph Nader. I am tired of the two party system. We are not a real democracy. I feel third parties should have more of a voice and a chance to get their voice out there.

People want change? Apparently not.
We never have been.

[Machu505]

I stopped reading at Ron Paul. We've seen what Texas Republicans do to our country.

[Mercy Medical]

I stopped reading at Ron Paul. We've seen what Texas Republicans do to our country.
Oh come the fuck on, be fair. Ron Paul is nothing like George W. Bush.

To be fair, Ron Paul isn't even really a Republican...

[Cheesus]

Most people I know only vote in presidential elections. I've voted 4 times this year alone. I'm sick of seeing people who become leap year politicians and don't know what the fuck is going on the rest of the time. For all this talk of "change", "hope", and "progress", I've seen so few of you support any of those. How is voting for the same two gigantic parties, both with their hands filthy in dirty politics and corporate backing, who stand for the same things year after year, change?

America was given a chance for progress and change this year in Dr. Ron Paul, who, whether you agree with him 100% or not, actually had plans, rather than counterpoints and different shades of grey, to his opponents. He acknowledges that America has lost touch with the people, and that liberty is in danger. And because he wasn't backed by the two political giants and locked out of the media, his fight for freedom was shot down. I don't care if you vote for Ron Paul, but in the future if you are looking for a change in America, try voting outside the machine.
You are so right man... It feels impossible at this point though.

I stopped reading at Ron Paul. We've seen what Texas Republicans do to our country.
The most shit filled post I have ever read.

[Machu505]

The most shit filled post I have ever read.

I was kidding about the Texas thing, but I hate Ron Paul.

[snowtires]

a write-in candidate will never win the presidential office, because the majority of americans are too lazy and don't want to write anything more than they have to, especially after waiting in line for several hours.

[snowtires]

I stopped reading at Ron Paul. We've seen what Texas Republicans do to our country.

ron paul is the polar opposite of george w. bush

[Machu505]

ron paul is the polar opposite of george w. bush

See my above post regarding the Texas Republican comment.

[PoisonInMyVeins]

ron paul is the polar opposite of george w. bush

took the words right out of my mouth.

[saysmydoctor]

Who cares? He is still terrible for this country. Any man that clings to the constitution and treats it like a modernized document is a fool.

[Machu505]

Who cares? He is still terrible for this country. Any man that clings to the constitution and treats it like a modernized document is a fool.

This is basically what I'm saying without the poorly made, John Kerry-esque joke.

[xxmannequin]

I don't give a shit what party someone signs up as. I'm a republican and I voted Democrat across the board today with the exception of Nader. Just another example of how ignorant you are. America isn't black or white, Democrat or Republican. America is about choice and freedom, something we aren't given, and our government has done a great job of brainwashing us to be okay with.

Edit: I see now that you're 14. That explains the ignorance.


i'm only 14 too, but i really think politcal parties need to be done away with.

[Lueda Alia]

I'm actually very proud of the US right now. :-)

[splitsecond]

My mom works in Ron paul country, and they fucking LOVE him down there. I think if the economy was an issue in the primaries, he would have been a much more viable candidate, because he is extremely knowledgeable on the subject.

On the subject of "change", lets all keep an eye on Obama's picks for staff. Rahm Emanuel is not exactly "change". The rumors of John Kerry as a possible Secretary of State is not "change" either.

[Machu505]

My mom works in Ron paul country, and they fucking LOVE him down there. I think if the economy was an issue in the primaries, he would have been a much more viable candidate, because he is extremely knowledgeable on the subject.

On the subject of "change", lets all keep an eye on Obama's picks for staff. Rahm Emanuel is not exactly "change". The rumors of John Kerry as a possible Secretary of State is not "change" either.

I would kill someone. Bill Richardson or no care.

[splitsecond]

Who cares? He is still terrible for this country. Any man that clings to the constitution and treats it like a modernized document is a fool.

??

[splitsecond]

I would kill someone. Bill Richardson or no care.

If Kerry were picked for ANYTHING I would hope people would be up in arms. He had his chance, and Americans didn't want him. Selecting him would be a slap in the face to the people who have voted in the last two elections, and would not constitute anything but status quo liberalism, which I believe was voted down when Hillary lost.

[Duexy]

cry about it

[KidLightning]

I love Barack Obama, but it amazes me how people don't get his campaign. Yes, he campaigned on a platform of "change" but he wasn't advocating radical change of American politics or government, what he was advocating was a change from the policies of the past 8 years. In all likelihood he will lead a presidency very similar to Bill Clinton's, which is more than alright by me.

And regarding Ron Paul or any other 3rd party candidate, it'd be great for them to get more play in the elections, but there is no chance of them getting elected at this time. Even if they did, there's no way they could get Congress to work with them (especially not someone like Ron Paul). If you truly want change in the system and want to start supporting 3rd party candidates, start by campaigning for and voting them in at the local level. Build up their credibility, get them more exposure, and at the very least you will get the issues they care about into the debates of the 2 major party candidates, and eventually there will be a possibility of them winning.