Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Are You Throwing Away Your Vote if You Vote for Someone Outside of the Two Established Parties?

Posted by   + Show Post

From the website, Butler on Business ...

Are you throwing away your vote if you vote for someone outside of the two established parties? Gary Johnson makes a strong case that we may be throwing away our future if we continue to elect these big-government politicians.

During today's interview with Butler on Business, Gary Johnson separates himself from both Obama and Romney and demonstrates that he is the clear alternative to the failed status quo.

Unlike Romney and Obama, former New Mexico Governor, Gary Johnson, wants to end the unconstitutional wars, repeal the Patriot Act, submit a balanced budget in 2013, end the Drug War, end cronyism, and fundamentally reform our tax system.

...and Gary Johnson promises to veto any legislation where expenses exceed revenue.

If Gary Johnson can poll 15% he will be on the national debate stage going heads up against Obama and Romney.


"Out of the three men running for president: Romney, Obama, and Gary Johnson...Governor Johnson is the only one of the three to have ever actually balanced a government budget."    - Alan Butler

Listen to Gary Johnson's complete interview with Butler on Business via the link below: http://www.butleronbusiness.com/2/post/2012/05/gov-gary-johnson-2012-presidential-nominee.html

by on May. 18, 2012 at 11:40 AM
Replies (111-120):
imamomzilla
by on May. 24, 2012 at 4:01 PM

 Don't flatter yourself. Really...it's a very unattractive quality.stick out tongue mini

Quoting paperorplastic:

 I have been typing quotes, and placing orders all day.  Not really worried about run on sentences in this forum.  But, so very thoughtful of you to point it out.  I love it when you show your character in these posts.  Sorry Jan, I have a few stalkers in this forum!

Quoting imamomzilla:

 Paragraphs are your friend, Party. smile big

Quoting paperorplastic:

 You're right, that is all you have:)

Quoting imamomzilla:

 going crazy

Sorry, that's all I've got.....

Quoting paperorplastic:

 Good answer!  But honestly you're talking to a few people who just don't get it!  It's the people like us who understand what "true" freedom really means.  One of their groupies actually gave me an answer yesterday that was so ignorant I had to laugh.  She said the people that need to worry about the NDAA, SOPA, etc. were probably the one's breaking the laws.  I laughed my butt off!  I couldn't even bring myself to answer such an ignorant question.  The average American can't seem to think out of the box programmed in their head regarding the government, let alone fathom Dr. Paul's platform.  I also think it's very funny these woman think Dr. Paul supporters are left wing, Obama lovers!  I have been a fairly conservative Republican my entire life.  Well educated, financially independent, and have worked very hard to get where I am in life.  They don't understand voting for Obama or Romney is voting for the same person.   

Quoting rachelrothchild:

The simplest answer I can give is before the creation of the Federal Reserve, or before 1913.  Before there was an IRS.  That's even further back.  

Of course, it depends on what you are talking about.  15-20 years ago was better than it is now.  You could go to college and get a well-paying job upon graduation.  It's not like that anymore.  My father supported a family of 6 in the 1980s with a HS education and a job in manual labor.  My husband can barely support a family of 3 with the same income, and he has a Bachelor's degree in management and has been working for 10+ years.  Thanks, Federal Reserve System.  The 1960s was "better" than it was in the 80s (well, for some things).  It certainly wasn't "better" for blacks.

As far as our basic freedoms eroding goes (in my lifetime/adulthood), before 9/11, the Patriot Act, the "war on terror", the TSA, the Department of Homeland Security, and most recently, the NDAA. 

Quoting asfriend:

When did they used to be?

Quoting rachelrothchild:

No RP supporter I know fits that description, or the one asfriend gave, so I don't know what to tell you.

My vote isn't a sympathy vote, and I don't believe in Utopia.  However, I do believe things can be much better than they are.  They used to be.

Quoting imamomzilla:

 Yes, the odds have been stacked against me....but my faith always seems to save me.:-). Praise God.

I admire your integrity and tenacity. :-) You're a Ron Paul supporter that doesn't come off as kooky.

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."




                          -Eleanor Roosevelt-

asfriend
by on May. 24, 2012 at 4:44 PM

I will make an attempt not to make fun of you, if you will make an equal attempt to not talk down to me.

I am very well aware of inflation - we had high inflation, high interest rates, gas lines during the Carter  years. I am familiar with all that.

We have had very little inflation from Reagan through GWB.

If inflation is the problem, that means everything except fixed rates go up. That would hurt people on a fixed income, such as retires (though they get cost of living increases yearly) but it should not hurt your husband. The problem does not sound like inflation, price of gas has up, price of groceries has gone, and wages have gone up.

The problem would seem that your husbands wages are too low. He should not be making the same anount of money as your father did. I certainly could not live on the amount of money that my father lived on, in todays market.

Ron Pauls polices regarding the Fed will not solve this problem.


 

Quoting rachelrothchild:

They print the money.  Ever heard of inflation?  That's why your money doesn't go as far as it used to.  That's why my father and my husband can make the same amount of money in two different decades.  One was able to save and the other is just paying the bills.  Also, there isn't transparency within that agency.  There's a lot of lying going on.

He already introduced a bill to audit the fed, and it has support.

It doesn't matter what I say-you are going to make fun of me.


Quoting asfriend:

I realize that the Fed. is Pauls' number 1 issue. So I will ask about that one.

In your opinion,what is the main problem with the Fed, what is it that you believe that Dr. Paul singularly will do?

 

 

 

asfriend
by on May. 24, 2012 at 5:08 PM

You might want to take a look in the mirror.  Your problem is that you are talking with realistic people and not idealistic people. I actually agree with most of the goals that Rachael has, I differ from her in two areas.

(1) Ron Paul can not and will not ever be President. (2) If he was President he can not do what he says.

I am unclear who thought that Paul supporters are left wing, who ever said that is I believe, very wrong.

Here is reality, our next President will be, Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. (deal with it)

The question is how do we make one of those better, because one of those will be President.

For Ron Paul to do the things that he says that he wants to do, Abolish the Fed, Become an Isolationist, remove Goverment from our daily lives, he can't do. It would take a dictator to do this things. He is an idealist, the things that he says that he wants to do, he can not do. I know how much supporters want this. It is impossible. Congress would never let him do those things.

So moving on, do we want to continue the path that we are on, because the path that we are on is 180 degrees away from Pauls' ideals, or do we want to work with someone closer to Paul's Ideals that can be President?

It doesn't make make any sense to come to my ice cream store, that sells chocolate and vanilla and demand strawberry and get mad at me for not selling strawberry.

Pick from the choices available.


 

Quoting paperorplastic:

 Good answer!  But honestly you're talking to a few people who just don't get it!  It's the people like us who understand what "true" freedom really means.  One of their groupies actually gave me an answer yesterday that was so ignorant I had to laugh.  She said the people that need to worry about the NDAA, SOPA, etc. were probably the one's breaking the laws.  I laughed my butt off!  I couldn't even bring myself to answer such an ignorant question.  The average American can't seem to think out of the box programmed in their head regarding the government, let alone fathom Dr. Paul's platform.  I also think it's very funny these woman think Dr. Paul supporters are left wing, Obama lovers!  I have been a fairly conservative Republican my entire life.  Well educated, financially independent, and have worked very hard to get where I am in life.  They don't understand voting for Obama or Romney is voting for the same person.   

 

 

 

jejstover
by Jan on May. 24, 2012 at 5:16 PM
1 mom liked this


Quoting rachelrothchild:

No, it's not.  Suggesting that third party candidates run only to be in the spotlight is ridiculous.  The fact that you would insult Jan's thoughtful and diplomatic reply with your garbage is sickening.  It's low even for you.  She is a respected member of this board (and a great person I might add) and has more sense in her little finger than you have in your entire being.  She has never been disrespectful to anyone here.  It's sad that you can't extend the same courtesy people give you.  Why don't you take your crap somewhere else and leave decent people to have a civil discussion?

Quoting asfriend:


Quoting jejstover:


Quoting asfriend:

No, there were 2 actual candidates and 11 clutter.

Quoting rachelrothchild:

Not surprising.  There were 13 candidates to choose from in 2008-6 of which were on the majority of states' ballots, including the Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, Green Party, and Independent.

To call these men and women who have often times put their personal lives on hold, have drained their own bank accounts dry, have devoted themselves to a cause they deeply believe in "clutter" is insulting.

Whether intended or not, this type of comment belittles the efforts of such citizens who have chosen to run for office as an Independent or Third Party Candidate as well as those who have chosen to actively support them.

As I have written in the group before ... just getting on the ballot as an Independent or Third Party Candidate can in some races and some states take an almost herculean effort considering the unfair ballot access laws that are on the books. And after accomplishing the task of getting on the ballot, the lack of media attention afforded non-status quo candidates and the frequent exclusion from debates and candidate forums takes its toll on the campaign as well. Such an effort is not usually taken on by the faint of heart -- and like it or not, I believe they are worthy of respect for their level of dedication and endurance.

Additionally, I believe all things being equal regarding ballot access laws, media coverage, etc, we would see a quick rise of several Third Parties into the mainstream political arena.

Jan


Actually "clutter" was a compliment. Most are egotistical narcissists, that know they have no chance of winning, they simply like the spotlight and the adoration of the kids that never fit in.


Thank you Rachel ... your kind and supportive words are much appreciated.

And asfriend ... the charges you make regarding the type of people who run for office under a Third Party banner surely show your lack of information -- brave men like Harry Browne, Michael Badnarik and, Ralph Nader (to name a few) have tirelessly and intelligently fought for what they have believed in often times to the jeopardy of their own personal health and well being.

Knowing Michael Badnarik (the 2004 Libertarian Presidential Nominee) personally, I can verify his dedication and integrity are beyond reproach and he has lived on less than most of us could even imagine as he criss-crossed the nation on behalf of liberty.

Jan


cedailey
by on May. 24, 2012 at 5:43 PM
2 moms liked this

Everyone acts like it always has been Dems and Reps, and it always will be. Through time, it was Federalists, Antifederalists, Whigs, Union, and Democratic-Republicans, They do change, just slowly. It's time for D & R to go down, and someone new to take their places

gammie
by on May. 24, 2012 at 5:43 PM
Quoting asfriend:




I called California my home for many years, had to move because of the liberaal agenda, taxes at so high and the gas prices, they were killing us.
We live in Colorado now.

Ron Paul 2012big smile mini

asfriend
by on May. 24, 2012 at 5:48 PM


Quoting gammie:

Quoting asfriend:




I called California my home for many years, had to move because of the liberaal agenda, taxes at so high and the gas prices, they were killing us.
We live in Colorado now.


Yeah, I saw my mistake, so you realize that only swing states matter. Colorado is a swing state, you could actually help be relevant if you will give up the Paul nonsense.

asfriend
by on May. 24, 2012 at 5:50 PM


Quoting jejstover:

 

Quoting rachelrothchild:

No, it's not.  Suggesting that third party candidates run only to be in the spotlight is ridiculous.  The fact that you would insult Jan's thoughtful and diplomatic reply with your garbage is sickening.  It's low even for you.  She is a respected member of this board (and a great person I might add) and has more sense in her little finger than you have in your entire being.  She has never been disrespectful to anyone here.  It's sad that you can't extend the same courtesy people give you.  Why don't you take your crap somewhere else and leave decent people to have a civil discussion?

Quoting asfriend:

 

Quoting jejstover:

 

Quoting asfriend:

No, there were 2 actual candidates and 11 clutter.

Quoting rachelrothchild:

Not surprising.  There were 13 candidates to choose from in 2008-6 of which were on the majority of states' ballots, including the Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, Green Party, and Independent.

To call these men and women who have often times put their personal lives on hold, have drained their own bank accounts dry, have devoted themselves to a cause they deeply believe in "clutter" is insulting.

Whether intended or not, this type of comment belittles the efforts of such citizens who have chosen to run for office as an Independent or Third Party Candidate as well as those who have chosen to actively support them.

As I have written in the group before ... just getting on the ballot as an Independent or Third Party Candidate can in some races and some states take an almost herculean effort considering the unfair ballot access laws that are on the books. And after accomplishing the task of getting on the ballot, the lack of media attention afforded non-status quo candidates and the frequent exclusion from debates and candidate forums takes its toll on the campaign as well. Such an effort is not usually taken on by the faint of heart -- and like it or not, I believe they are worthy of respect for their level of dedication and endurance.

Additionally, I believe all things being equal regarding ballot access laws, media coverage, etc, we would see a quick rise of several Third Parties into the mainstream political arena.

Jan


Actually "clutter" was a compliment. Most are egotistical narcissists, that know they have no chance of winning, they simply like the spotlight and the adoration of the kids that never fit in.


 

Thank you Rachel ... your kind and supportive words are much appreciated.

And asfriend ... the charges you make regarding the type of people who run for office under a Third Party banner surely show your lack of information -- brave men like Harry Browne, Michael Badnarik and, Ralph Nader (to name a few) have tirelessly and intelligently fought for what they have believed in often times to the jeopardy of their own personal health and well being.

Knowing Michael Badnarik (the 2004 Libertarian Presidential Nominee) personally, I can verify his dedication and integrity are beyond reproach and he has lived on less than most of us could even imagine as he criss-crossed the nation on behalf of liberty.

Jan

 

So do you believe that your friend Michael Badnarik, actually thought that he had a chance to win?

gammie
by on May. 24, 2012 at 5:51 PM
1 mom liked this
Quoting asfriend:



I was a state, and congressional delegate in CO. Trying to make my vote count.

Ron Paul 2012big smile mini

-Eilish-
by Johnson 2012 on May. 24, 2012 at 8:17 PM
1 mom liked this


Quoting asfriend:


Quoting jejstover:


Quoting rachelrothchild:

No, it's not.  Suggesting that third party candidates run only to be in the spotlight is ridiculous.  The fact that you would insult Jan's thoughtful and diplomatic reply with your garbage is sickening.  It's low even for you.  She is a respected member of this board (and a great person I might add) and has more sense in her little finger than you have in your entire being.  She has never been disrespectful to anyone here.  It's sad that you can't extend the same courtesy people give you.  Why don't you take your crap somewhere else and leave decent people to have a civil discussion?

Quoting asfriend:


Quoting jejstover:


Quoting asfriend:

No, there were 2 actual candidates and 11 clutter.

Quoting rachelrothchild:

Not surprising.  There were 13 candidates to choose from in 2008-6 of which were on the majority of states' ballots, including the Constitution Party, Libertarian Party, Green Party, and Independent.

To call these men and women who have often times put their personal lives on hold, have drained their own bank accounts dry, have devoted themselves to a cause they deeply believe in "clutter" is insulting.

Whether intended or not, this type of comment belittles the efforts of such citizens who have chosen to run for office as an Independent or Third Party Candidate as well as those who have chosen to actively support them.

As I have written in the group before ... just getting on the ballot as an Independent or Third Party Candidate can in some races and some states take an almost herculean effort considering the unfair ballot access laws that are on the books. And after accomplishing the task of getting on the ballot, the lack of media attention afforded non-status quo candidates and the frequent exclusion from debates and candidate forums takes its toll on the campaign as well. Such an effort is not usually taken on by the faint of heart -- and like it or not, I believe they are worthy of respect for their level of dedication and endurance.

Additionally, I believe all things being equal regarding ballot access laws, media coverage, etc, we would see a quick rise of several Third Parties into the mainstream political arena.

Jan


Actually "clutter" was a compliment. Most are egotistical narcissists, that know they have no chance of winning, they simply like the spotlight and the adoration of the kids that never fit in.



Thank you Rachel ... your kind and supportive words are much appreciated.

And asfriend ... the charges you make regarding the type of people who run for office under a Third Party banner surely show your lack of information -- brave men like Harry Browne, Michael Badnarik and, Ralph Nader (to name a few) have tirelessly and intelligently fought for what they have believed in often times to the jeopardy of their own personal health and well being.

Knowing Michael Badnarik (the 2004 Libertarian Presidential Nominee) personally, I can verify his dedication and integrity are beyond reproach and he has lived on less than most of us could even imagine as he criss-crossed the nation on behalf of liberty.

Jan


So do you believe that your friend Michael Badnarik, actually thought that he had a chance to win?

If you knew anything about Michael Badnarik, you'd know that he recognized the uphill battle that third parties have, but that even if he can only ignite the fire of liberty for future generations then he's accomplished something great. Unlike the two party system which is only about squabbling over who can run big government the best, third parties supporters realize that in order to change the paradigm, individuals must be enlightened one at a time. Winning isn't just about becoming President as it is for Reps and Dems, it's about changing hearts and minds in true grassroots fashion. People like Badnarik, Paul, Nader, and still others, agree that winning is not measured in who wins the Presidency, but rather is measured in the minds of the people. If the people are awake, then WHO sits in President's chair is subject to the people. The Republic isn't solely about the President or which party is in power, it's about the people. WHEN we finally win the Presidency, that will merely be the icing on the cake.


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN