This is why the Dems continue to lose elections

[valvano]

straight from mother jones

http://motherjones.com/news/update/2006/02/hackett_drops_out.html

"As word spread about the intra-party intrigue that helped bring down Hackett, supporters have reacted angrily. “If the Democratic Party continues with these suicidal decisions, we will continue to defeat ourselves,” declared Yolanda Parker, who recently attended a California fundraiser for Hackett. “The only strategy the Republicans need to stay in power is patience. They just need to wait while our party self-implodes through idiotic decisions such as the one to pressure an articulate Iraqi war veteran to pull out of the race.” "

:rolleyes:

[Ace42X]

Doh, and here was me thinking it was because of faulty Diebold machines, and a massive amount of apathetic and/or down-right stupid yanks...

[Medellia]

Mother Jones?!

[kaiser soze]

what would jesus do?

[Bob]

since when do you trust mother jones

[ms.peachy]

Don't presume that because I am thoroughly, sickeningly disgusted by the Republican party, that I am not thoroughly, sickeningly disappointed by the Democratic party.

[yeahwho]

It is pretty much may the best hack win.

You know that 1880's quote though, "There's a sucker born every minute", I think now that we are in the year of our lord 2006 it's more like 10 suckers a second.

[ASsman]

Don't presume that because I am thoroughly, sickeningly disgusted by the Republican party, that I am not thoroughly, sickeningly disappointed by the Democratic party.
Can't have one without the other. Not in this crap ass system.

[sam i am]

Just don't vote or participate anymore to protest your aversion to those in power.

We Republicans love it when you give up hope of making it better... ;) :p :rolleyes:

[ms.peachy]

Just don't vote or participate anymore to protest your aversion to those in power.

We Republicans love it when you give up hope of making it better... ;) :p :rolleyes:
Don't presume that my disgust and disappointment equate to apathy.

As long as there are people in the world who queue for hours and risk their lives to vote, I will consider it an honour and a privilege to be able to cast my ballot. Stick that up your smug ass.

[Ace42X]

Stick that up your smug ass.

There's no room up there next to his thick skull.

[ASsman]

Da-dun-dun-tiss

[sam i am]

Don't presume that my disgust and disappointment equate to apathy.

As long as there are people in the world who queue for hours and risk their lives to vote, I will consider it an honour and a privilege to be able to cast my ballot. Stick that up your smug ass.

Sorry you took it that way Ms. Peachy...I was being entirely facetious.

I guess the rolled eyes didn't give it away.

I actually do respect you and have stated so on many posts before - I find your point of view to be balanced and fair-minded, on whole.

Again, I apologize if you did not catch the sarcasm in my original post.

[Ali]

I will consider it an honour and a privilege to be able to cast my ballot. Stick that up your smug ass.Pity you have to vote for the Dems, who are just as bad as the GOP only slightly less good at raising campaign funds.

Great campaign slogan "vote for us, because 'they' are worse and if you vote for the party you REALLY believe in, 'they' will win!"

I think a voting system which forces you to choose two different candidates from two different parties might be a good thing, so that if neither of the two major parties gets a good enough majority, the party with the next-most votes wins!!!!

That'd give you the chance to vote for the party you want to win and the party which represents your views.

Oh, all right. Keep your two-horse race and see what happens :mad:

[ms.peachy]

Again, I apologize if you did not catch the sarcasm in my original post.
Apology accepted. You'll understand, however, if I don't find the notion of the party in power gloating over the isolation of the nation's citizens from the democratic process all that humourous.

[sam i am]

Apology accepted. You'll understand, however, if I don't find the notion of the party in power gloating over the isolation of the nation's citizens from the democratic process all that humourous.

I do understand.

I wish there were a means test, in the US, for voting. Apathy is rampant and the vast majority do not inform themselves on the issues and cadidates prior to stepping into the ballot box, if they bother to vote at all.

The disconnect between what happens in Washington, DC, let alone the state capitals or even county/city governments is a yawning chasm.

Really, on a day to day basis, the decisions and deliberations that occur on a national and international level have very little impact on the day to day lives of each individual "voter." Money, therefore, becomes paramount in driving and sustaining campaigns and ideas : much more than the efficacy of the ideas or campaigns themselves.

If we went back to a system where landowners (or "property owners" to stretch the point - in today's system that could include stockholders or those with mutual funds and/or 401(k)s and 403(b)s), who, by definition, have a vested stake in the outcomes, were the only voters, we'd have a much more accountable, reliable system.

[Ali]

I do understand.

I wish there were a means test, in the US, for voting. Apathy is rampant and the vast majority do not inform themselves on the issues and cadidates prior to stepping into the ballot box, if they bother to vote at all.

The disconnect between what happens in Washington, DC, let alone the state capitals or even county/city governments is a yawning chasm.

Really, on a day to day basis, the decisions and deliberations that occur on a national and international level have very little impact on the day to day lives of each individual "voter." Money, therefore, becomes paramount in driving and sustaining campaigns and ideas : much more than the efficacy of the ideas or campaigns themselves.

If we went back to a system where landowners (or "property owners" to stretch the point - in today's system that could include stockholders or those with mutual funds and/or 401(k)s and 403(b)s), who, by definition, have a vested stake in the outcomes, were the only voters, we'd have a much more accountable, reliable system.Do you remember the last time you made this suggestion?

Obviously not.

[sam i am]

Do you remember the last time you made this suggestion?

Obviously not.

I remember. It doesn't change the efficaciousness of the idea.

Are you just going to troll every response I make or are you going to engage the conversation?

[ms.peachy]

If we went back to a system where landowners (or "property owners" to stretch the point - in today's system that could include stockholders or those with mutual funds and/or 401(k)s and 403(b)s), who, by definition, have a vested stake in the outcomes, were the only voters, we'd have a much more accountable, reliable system.
Just so I'm clear on this, are you being sarcastic again, or are you actually seriously asserting that it would be preferrable if the poor and working classes were prevented from having an equal say in their own government?

[Ali]

Just so I'm clear on this, are you being sarcastic again, or are you actually seriously asserting that it would be preferrable if the poor and working classes were prevented from having an equal say in their own government?It's difficult to tell, isn't it?

P.S. don't troll the troll