[highball]

No, we should start getting the voting laws changed.

I respectfully disagree.

Trying to change the basic rules is a loser's tactic. It's what you do when you don't have a strong message or good policies.

If we focused on actually getting our best message out, if we tried as hard to reach the middle-of-the-road voters as we do talking to ourselves, we wouldn't fear high-turnout elections. I'm pretty sure Reagan never feared the electorate, because he knew how to talk to voters. He could cut through all the nonsense with a simple, common-sense message of optimism and faith.

Making it harder for people to vote isn't the answer. Giving people a positive reason to vote for us is.

[i_robot73]

Right back at ya :)

Sorry, but there’s no reason why 1 ‘major city’ (let’s say 5-10%) negates the will of the other 90-95% of the State. If anyone got the message out, it was the 90-95%.

If we still had a Constitutional Republic, it would not MATTER what the ‘message’ is....nobody could use the force of gov’t to rob another for their own benefit, ones’ own $$ could not be used to buy votes, etc.

Tell me, outside the static 40% for each party, what exactly did Romney bring to the table last round (aside from ‘ditto’ to everything O was yammering about)?

Now, WHY was there only the 2 party cartel in the debates? Because they have GAMED the system that no other voice(s) are allowed.

In the land of Capitalism, the electoral process is the ONLY place where more choices are a ‘bad thing’?!

Well, Bush was the last ‘hold my nose’ vote. The system and the message the GOP have aren’t swaying me from, at the least, a write-in.