Posted on 10/29/2014 7:49:52 AM PDT by jimbo123
I am advocating this: do not fall into the trap of the other guy's worse!
, instead vote for somebody.
Are you campaigning for UDALL?
Nope.
or are we to vote DEM against Cornyn? or for the Libertarian?
If the Dem or Libertarian is someone you can vote for by all means, likewise if the Republican is someone you can vote for.
My point is that you do not owe anyone your vote. Period.
In Iowa or SD, we can vote for the GOP candidate?
Are you doing public endorsements?
Nope — All I am doing is saying vote for someone, vote your conscience, don't let people scare/bully you into submission.
Why would I vote blank on Cornyn? Illogical. I’d vote for one of the other candidates.
That's right, vote for someone, write-in, Libertarian, whatever — but make sure it's not based on crap like the other guy's worse
, because that is the big lie in our politics: there is no other guy
because it's not just two.
The first Obama vote had a very large contingent of “being part of history by voting for a black man” in it. Notice that the 2nd vote had about 5M less voters for the R and 3M (need to verify that number) for the D’s. No one was excited by either big government candidate.
I believe that the number of votes cast in 2012 was aproximately 130M votes. Yet, there are upwards of 230M legal citizens 18 or older. Look at the numbers. The 2012 margin of victory was by 9M (again need to verify,) therefore you only need to swing 5M votes to change a presidential election.
5M/230M = 2.2% of the voting age population
The fact is that in the 2012 election, 5M fewer voters turned out for Romney than they did for McCain in 2008. I am highly doubtful that McCain was carrying a much more conservative message than Romney....so I’d wager that this vote difference can be credited to Sarah Palin, who carried a conservative message which brought excitement to the base.
Again, looking at history proves that a Conservative (liberty, freedom, capitalism) message resonates with Americans. When it is spoken plainly and with confidence, it wins. The problem is that the only Modern President to carry the message to the people, Reagan, was fought by the same GOP saps that are fighting the Tea Party today.
The answer is not to dampen the message and therefore drive your base AWAY from the polls, it is to DEEPEN the message and attract the Reagan Democrats.
However, I will admit that the GOP is following your suggested strategy of modifying the message to fit the media narrative. That is precisely why there is no excitement for this election season and why the GOP will likely get to 51 seats in the Senate, when they could have had 55 or 56.
Ask yourself why the tightest races right now are in KS and GA. The GOP should have double digit leads in those states....
I will also add that with the “footprint” of the Senatorial elections this season, if the GOP only gets to 51, they will lose it big in the next cycle. This cycle is HEAVILY favored towards the GOP and the next cycle is the exact opposit.
The GOP should consider a 51 or 52 seat result to be an abysmal failure, however they will celebrate it as a great win!
yeah, but if the REpublican is that bad, it is better to vote for the DEM.
Never leave it blank. What is all that about? A write in vote for Santa?
There are no horrible republicans in CT this year ... they got run out of town last cycle. So, there are zero DEMS votes necessary.
IF I lived in MS, different story ....
IN Cali, Brian Brown says vote for the DEM
Perhaps it is — at this point the Republicans have demonstrated that they stand for nothing.
I don't believe that there's any real difference between the Dem and Repub parties at this point.
(Just look at how both have reacted to IRS, NSA, etc.)
Never leave it blank. What is all that about? A write in vote for Santa?
What?
I never said leave it blank; I said only that your vote should be for someone.
There are no horrible republicans in CT this year ... they got run out of town last cycle. So, there are zero DEMS votes necessary.
I'm not in CT, I know nothing about who's running — I still maintain that voting your conscience, voting for somebody is applicable.
IF I lived in MS, different story ....
You'll note that I'm not telling you that you need to give your vote to so-and-so, that's your choice, but instead saying vote your conscience.
Susan “the bimbo” Collins of ME has been on record recently saying the GOP “has no intention of repealing the ACA but will work to make it better.”
Can’t make this crap up.
Sigh. We are destined for destruction as a Country.
Your Link's Title: Marriage Group Backs Liberal Dem over Gay Republican
So?
It seems to me like they're falling into the there are only two parties
lie, but they've got a bit of a point: the advice is consistent with their ideals if, and only if, the two-party assertion is true.
“I don’t believe that there’s any real difference between the Dem and Repub parties”
What does that mean? We don’t a party line vote here in my state! We cast votes for which of the persons we prefer to see win. The party didn’t recruit my local congress candidate. He’s his own man. If you’re for the Libertarians, CT is not a good place for them.
“but instead saying vote your conscience. “
My conscience has nothing to do with it! I vote with my intellect. Votes are almost always binary decisions. Very simple. We are required to use sound judgment and to make informed decisions.
“” It seems to me like they’re falling into the “there are only two parties” lie “”
There are only 2 people on the ballot! What does party have to do with it. Can you vote REPUBLICAN party and then vote for Peters, the DEM? How does that work?
Yeah, it is “there are only 2 candidates” lie. We tell that lie because it is the truth. Is this something new and radical that I never heard about?
Ok.
What does party have to do with it. Can you vote REPUBLICAN party and then vote for Peters, the DEM? How does that work?
Why would I vote for the Republican party? What have they done to earn my vote?
Yeah, it is “there are only 2 candidates” lie. We tell that lie because it is the truth.
Not for most elections — Libertarian Party, for example, has ballot access for most states, and the Constitution party was apparently on the ballot in most states, too.
Is this something new and radical that I never heard about?
Maybe.
The powers that be have a vested interest in keeping things presented as a two party system
because they control both parties — it's quire interesting that third-party access to ballots was restricted after Ross Perot got nearly 20% of the popular vote.
go for it, dude.
I’m against it. ENd of story.
Go for voting my conscience?
I'd planned on it anyway.
I’m against it. ENd of story.
Against voting your conscience, your principles?
we are not going to be HAPPY about a pub house and senate, but we'll sleep better....we might save our military....we might have actual voting on judges, and perhaps we can get control of our borders....maybe we'll have hearings on the IRS, etc...
we gots to do what we gots to do, and suck it up....
this country will never be as once it was, but I want to keep it somewhat sane for as long as we can....
and maybe by saving our country, we'll save the Ukraine and Israel and ever other country under duress from the obola's tyranny and muslim support...
They are not killing themselves they are killing us.
Who votes for them doesn’t matter, getting elected is all that matters. Thad Cochran
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”
-- John Quincy Adams
#4 or simply enforcing the law would get illegal immigration under control quickly and at little expense. Self funding and self deporting.
Worthless RINO
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
