Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 68

Thread: The Trump on Immigration

  1. #51
    Senior Member scottae316's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    North of Pittsburgh PA
    Posts
    172
    Thanked: 175
    Um... FT, remember Romney or McCain? Yes they led the polls for Republicans, but never a majority. If Jeb Bush is the Republican Party nominee, I'll walk from the Republicans again and not return until they get their house in order. Where will I go? Not sure, but if large numbers of Republicans bolt to a new party, I'll take a look. We all talk about wanting change, but we keep looking at a party that does not share are true interests and beliefs. Lesser of two evils is still evil.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to scottae316 For This Useful Post:

    FresnoJoe (09-20-2015)

  3. #52
    Senior Member Colonel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    13,670
    Thanked: 5305
    With the effective two party system in the US, a non-vote out of frustration with the side one naturally belongs to is really a vote for the other side.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Colonel For This Useful Post:

    curly sue (08-26-2015), FresnoJoe (09-20-2015)

  5. #53
    A vote for someone who has no chance of winning or not voting is a vote for the opposition.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to curly sue For This Useful Post:

    FresnoJoe (09-20-2015), krystian (08-26-2015)

  7. #54
    Senior Member Colonel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    13,670
    Thanked: 5305
    Quote Originally Posted by curly sue View Post
    A vote for someone who has no chance of winning or not voting is a vote for the opposition.
    If you think about it's sort of half a vote. Actually voting for the other side would double the effect.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Colonel For This Useful Post:

    FresnoJoe (09-20-2015)

  9. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Colonel View Post
    With the effective two party system in the US, a non-vote out of frustration with the side one naturally belongs to is really a vote for the other side.
    Practically speaking, I'd say that is true. But what it means is that the two parties have effectively locked in their dominant positions forever. That's a sad thing to say, especially about a country that's supposed to be a champion of democracy.

    One way to deal with this situation is through a referendum procedure - where people vote directly for or against proposed laws. This is what many states have implemented to bypass the parties and provide more power directly to the voters. I'd like to see this expanded to the national level, but that would require a Constitutional amendment.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to njtom For This Useful Post:

    FresnoJoe (09-20-2015)

  11. #56
    Senior Member Colonel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    13,670
    Thanked: 5305
    Quote Originally Posted by njtom View Post
    Practically speaking, I'd say that is true. But what it means is that the two parties have effectively locked in their dominant positions forever. That's a sad thing to say, especially about a country that's supposed to be a champion of democracy.

    One way to deal with this situation is through a referendum procedure - where people vote directly for or against proposed laws. This is what many states have implemented to bypass the parties and provide more power directly to the voters. I'd like to see this expanded to the national level, but that would require a Constitutional amendment.
    That would bring people out of the dilemma of having to vote for the party one agrees with 55% instead of the party one agrees with 45% (or worse, 20 vs 15 percent or something). And take issues away from the personality focus that the direct presidential election creates. It could also make populism more dominating at the detail level, meaning that someone might manage to whip up a 51% majority based on a view that is crazy yet marketable to the public. An other path is to leave the presidential elections entirely up to the winning party or coalition and get the election down to the more boring level of actual politics rather than personalities. Which implies that they can change presidents during their term since the election is party based.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Colonel For This Useful Post:

    FresnoJoe (09-20-2015)

  13. #57
    Senior Member Colonel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    13,670
    Thanked: 5305
    Ross Perot had a chance at winning as an independent from what I recall, until he dropped out of the race for a while. But it seems very unlikely by now that it would happen again, wouldn't you say ?

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Colonel For This Useful Post:

    FresnoJoe (09-20-2015)

  15. #58
    Senior Member Nikos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    8,072
    Thanked: 4564
    Blog Entries
    31
    I doubt if Ross Perot would have won. He was more of a critic than a true debater. Neither will trump win. He runs on emotions. He has nothing intellectual to offer. As a christian I am for either Jindal or Hackabee. The rest are worthless. I will not vote for the lessor of two evils. So it may be that I will ot be voting. I don't care for another Bush. Two was enough. The Dr/surgeon appears to be half asleep most of the time.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Nikos For This Useful Post:

    FresnoJoe (09-20-2015)

  17. #59
    Senior Member Colonel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    13,670
    Thanked: 5305
    Ross Perot did at least get into the lead at one point, as an independent.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot

    "At one point in June, Perot led the polls with 39% (versus 31% for Bush and 25% for Clinton)"

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Colonel For This Useful Post:

    FresnoJoe (09-20-2015)

  19. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by John View Post
    Have you ever followed along with a GOP primary? The establishment decides who gets the nod, the voting stuff is just for show.
    I think that is why Trump won't rule out a third party run. It will be like 1992 all over again.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Susan For This Useful Post:

    FresnoJoe (09-20-2015)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Be prepared for breakdowns with an extended service plan for your Buick. Many vehicle repairs can cost thousands of dollars in unexpected expense, now may be the time to consider an extended service plan for your vehicle.