Nope.

 

But I also believed Obama wouldn't be a terrible President who caved in to Republicans at every turn, so who knows.

 

Regardless, you and I simply will not agree here. You think the Democrats are entitled to your vote because they're Not Republicans, and I disagree. You vote against Republican policies, I vote for progressive policies.

Nope.

 

But I also believed Obama wouldn't be a terrible President who caved in to Republicans at every turn, so who knows.

Oh, ok, so your comparison of Bachmann and Buchanan to Obama and a hypothetical Republican is a flawed comparison inapplicable to this situation because you've just accepted a difference.

 

So since you acknowledge that difference, why do you refuse to oppose mining near Grand Canyon National Park?

Oh, ok, so your comparison of Bachmann and Buchanan to Obama and a hypothetical Republican is a flawed comparison inapplicable to this situation because you've just accepted a difference.

 

So since you acknowledge that difference, why do you refuse to oppose mining near Grand Canyon National Park?

 

No, you keep mistating my position. I'd like you to highlight where I claimed Gore was no better than Bush, but first I'd like you to answer the hypothetical: if both major candidates are terrible politicians who do not represent you or your politics, would you still vote for the less bad one?

Democrat 2012 Slogans:

 

"Help us maintain the center-right status quo!"

 

"Progressives: This time, we really mean it!"

if both major candidates are terrible politicians who do not represent you or your politics, would you still vote for the less bad one?

 

Yep, because the less bad one = the better one for my perspective.

 

Its just a question of which one "more" represents my policies.

 

Im not sure what your center right stance means, because well Democrats are clearly left of Republicans.

they're somewhat left of Republicans, and the Republicans are far right on the overall spectrum

I won't vote for a terrible candidate who's done a crap job and stabbed his more liberal constituency in the back repeatedly for over 2 years by caving in to Republicans over and over and over.

 

That Obama is inevitably better than whatever terrible candidate the Republicans will offer is not an argument in favor of perpetuating our terrible, doomed system.

So, yeah that's basically anybody the Democrats will nominate

The government of Mexico has retained an American law firm and is apparently considering filing a civil suit

 

we should countersue.

And the overall spectrum is irrelevant as we neither have a communist party nor a fascist party.

 

Not to mention I thought most ideas on political spectrums had the spectrum as a graph with a X and Y axis, as composed to a straight line. So its not just where the party falls on the X axis, its also about where the party is on the Y axis.

 

I dont put a lot of weight into political spectrums, but Id definitely say that Republican's arent "far" right. They are slightly right, Im not even sure many Republican's know who Michael Oakeshott is or that every American is by default not conservative, because we dont believe in ideas such as:

 

“To be conservative, then, is to prefer the familiar to the unknown, to prefer the tried to the untried, fact to mystery, the actual to the possible, the limited to the unbounded, the near to the distant, the sufficient to the superabundant, the convenient to the perfect, present laughter to utopian bliss.”

 

True conservatism is not in the United States, it cant be, the creation of the United States was one of the biggest repudiations of conservative thought (if not the biggest). Prior to the US, conservative ideology believed that only the upper class or royals could lead, because they were the only ones who had lead before (prefer the familiar to the unknown, the tried to the untried), the US was a great experiment.

 

We are all truly liberal, some of us are more conservatively liberal than others. But no one in the US who supports anything other than a Monarchy can truly be called far right.

Boy it doesn't seem that long ago that Balta kept posting about the inevitable break up of the Republican party...

Boy it doesn't seem that long ago that Balta kept posting about the inevitable break up of the Republican party...

Did I really say "breakup"?

 

I guarantee I said that it was going to be interesting to see how they recovered from 2008, and it's been an interesting recovery/conflict, one that is, frankly, still going on. And you have to admit, outside of the people who were planning it and funding it at AFP in 2008, no one else really predicted that either.

I mean, 1/2 of the Republican party believes Obama wasn't born in the United states, and the guy leading the early Presidential polls for the party has decided to go the full-bore racist path. You at least gotta admit, you didn't see that coming.

I mean, 1/2 of the Republican party believes Obama wasn't born in the United states, and the guy leading the early Presidential polls for the party has decided to go the full-bore racist path. You at least gotta admit, you didn't see that coming.

What a joke of a person. Really.

To clarify on this whole 3rd party candidate thing... I am not saying you shouldn't vote for a 3rd party candidate. In fact I said that I hoped this current 2 party system falls apart.

 

What I said, that apparently didn't get across, is that you save your bullets for a candidate who has a chance to at least register on the scale.

 

 

Did I really say "breakup"?

 

I guarantee I said that it was going to be interesting to see how they recovered from 2008, and it's been an interesting recovery/conflict, one that is, frankly, still going on. And you have to admit, outside of the people who were planning it and funding it at AFP in 2008, no one else really predicted that either.

Well, and the GOP sort of is breaking up, right now.

 

Well, and the GOP sort of is breaking up, right now.

I don't know that they are. I've been somewhat surprised at how the people I thought would form the intelligent faction have just given up and let the Tea Party side take over everything.

I don't know that they are. I've been somewhat surprised at how the people I thought would form the intelligent faction have just given up and let the Tea Party side take over everything.

I don't think that's happening with the whole bloc. We'll see in 2012 though.

 

I mean, 1/2 of the Republican party believes Obama wasn't born in the United states, and the guy leading the early Presidential polls for the party has decided to go the full-bore racist path. You at least gotta admit, you didn't see that coming.

 

Obama should release his transcripts.

I don't know that they are. I've been somewhat surprised at how the people I thought would form the intelligent faction have just given up and let the Tea Party side take over everything.

 

the old GOP sucked. I like the new tea party GOP.

the old GOP sucked. I like the new tea party GOP.

They do rock for entertainment value.

 

Wick Allison, the former publisher of National Review who endorsed Obama in September 2008, now recants:

 

[it'

s

] clear that on the two fundamental problem

s

of

s

elf-government, there i

s

only one party in America. Tho

s

e two fundamental problem

s

were identified in the Federali

s

t Paper

s

a

s

money and power. With a few notable exception

s

s

uch a

s

Tom Coburn, Bernie

S

ander

s

, and Rand Paul in the

S

enate, and Paul Ryan and Ron Paul in the Hou

s

e, minor difference

s

on the

s

e two que

s

tion

s

s

pur mo

s

t of the public debate. But once in power, the two

s

ide

s

fundamentally agree. In office, Obama ha

s

accepted Bu

s

h

’

s

expan

s

ion of the executive a

s

a

s

ettled doctrine, ordered the military into a war without even the pretence of protecting national

s

ecurity, and continued hi

s

predece

s

s

or

’

s

ruinou

s

fi

s

cal policie

s

(and doubled down on them at that).

 

S

o, putting a

s

ide label

s

and parti

s

an loyaltie

s

and marginal

s

quabble

s

, a

s

k

your

s

elf a

s

I am a

s

k

ing my

s

elf: doe

s

it even matter who i

s

pre

s

ident now? Judging

s

olely by hi

s

action

s

, would there be any major difference on the two central que

s

tion

s

of American government if the pre

s

ident today were Bu

s

h, McCain, Clinton, or Obama?

 

via

 

Judging solely by his actions, would there be any major difference on the two central questions of American government if the president today were Bush, McCain, Clinton, or Obama?

Which of those names would have launched a full scale invasion of Iraq in 2003?

 

Do you honestly need me to go through the list of policies beyond that?

Which of those names would have launched a full scale invasion of Iraq in 2003?

At this point I could see the answer being "all of the above".

At this point I could see the answer being "all of the above".

And you're deluding yourself if you believe that. Really and truly.

 

Bill Clinton, for example, had probably more reason in 1998 to invade Iraq than Jr. had in 2003. He did not do so.

 

If that is your standard...under which presidents would Don't Ask, Don't Tell be the law of the land?

Why did your beloved Obama hire the same "economic gurus" that were instrumental in the financial collapse?

And you're deluding yourself if you believe that. Really and truly.

 

Bill Clinton, for example, had probably more reason in 1998 to invade Iraq than Jr. had in 2003. He did not do so.

 

If that is your standard...under which presidents would Don't Ask, Don't Tell be the law of the land?

 

3/4, including a Democrat