Zorra
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-03-11 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #21 |
| -Serious question for third-party advocates: |
Robb |
Dec-02-11 08:56 PM |
#0 |
 -
There are no safeguards. All we can hope for is that people get sick and tired of the |
Sarah Ibarruri |
Dec-02-11 09:02 PM |
#1 |
  -
Yes, there is one safeguard --the policies supported are like Kryptonite to moneyed interests |
CreekDog |
Dec-02-11 09:11 PM |
#6 |
| -
Unless I'm mistaken any genuine response to this post would at least |
LeftyMom |
Dec-02-11 09:05 PM |
#2 |
| -
what? from the mod that told all of us that dared criticize Obama to just leave DU? |
CreekDog |
Dec-02-11 09:10 PM |
#4 |
| -
Yes, and it also is not serious since it is clearly a rhetorical question. |
Bonobo |
Dec-02-11 09:11 PM |
#7 |
| -
and from a mod at that |
G_j |
Dec-02-11 11:38 PM |
#35 |
| -
because those interests support the status quo --and a successful third party is not that |
CreekDog |
Dec-02-11 09:08 PM |
#3 |
| -
But how can it be successful without being influential and therefore a target? |
Robb |
Dec-02-11 09:11 PM |
#5 |
| -
I don't know except that the money seems to not work like it used to |
CreekDog |
Dec-02-11 09:13 PM |
#8 |
| -
It's the worst part of the notion of a "marketplace of ideas" |
Robb |
Dec-02-11 09:19 PM |
#14 |
| -
I don't know that money is the problem --I have money and I vote for the poor |
CreekDog |
Dec-02-11 09:31 PM |
#22 |
| -
That sounds like a good reason for just walking away from politics altogether.. |
Fumesucker |
Dec-02-11 09:14 PM |
#9 |
| -
Which is actually the beauty of OWS |
Robb |
Dec-02-11 09:17 PM |
#11 |
| -
There's a vast ocean of money, influence and political power sloshing around.. |
Fumesucker |
Dec-02-11 09:30 PM |
#20 |
| -
I'm also hopeful OWS becomes a huge voting block that wields a lot of |
RKP5637 |
Dec-04-11 07:17 PM |
#51 |
| -
and, for the sake of DU rules |
RetroLounge |
Dec-02-11 09:14 PM |
#10 |
| -
The threat that a corrupted party can be deposed and destroyed by voters |
jpgray |
Dec-02-11 09:17 PM |
#12 |
| -
Exactly. And were that threat credible |
Robb |
Dec-02-11 09:24 PM |
#16 |
| -
The problem is that non-voters are on no one's radar, and if you vote, you vote for corruption |
jpgray |
Dec-02-11 09:33 PM |
#23 |
| -
Well, except inasmuch as everyone wants non-voters to turn into voters. |
Robb |
Dec-02-11 09:50 PM |
#28 |
| -
Fix apportionment and it's fixed. We're way under-represented. |
joshcryer |
Dec-04-11 07:18 PM |
#52 |
| -
I'll go there. Let's suppose you are in an abusive relationship and decide to leave for someone else |
The Straight Story |
Dec-02-11 09:18 PM |
#13 |
| -
If we coud get the money out of politics we wouldn't even have |
Booster |
Dec-02-11 09:23 PM |
#15 |
| -
Bingo. |
Robb |
Dec-02-11 09:26 PM |
#17 |
| -
money and crapitalist.... |
unkachuck |
Dec-02-11 09:28 PM |
#18 |
| -
heh, was just listening to this and it reminds of politics (use some imagination) |
The Straight Story |
Dec-02-11 09:29 PM |
#19 |
| -
None. Therein lies the impetus behind the OWS movement. |
mmonk |
Dec-02-11 09:30 PM |
#21 |
| -
+1 |
Zorra |
Dec-03-11 12:12 AM |
#37 |
| -
Deleted message |
Name removed |
Dec-02-11 09:35 PM |
#24 |
| -
Deleted message |
Name removed |
Dec-02-11 09:43 PM |
#25 |
| -
No safeguards |
Cali_Democrat |
Dec-02-11 09:45 PM |
#26 |
| -
What would be an example of a country you would consider not broken for comparative purposes? |
NNN0LHI |
Dec-03-11 02:15 PM |
#44 |
| -
I'm not a third-party advocate but if I were, I'd say that 100% |
coalition_unwilling |
Dec-02-11 09:47 PM |
#27 |
| -
Too difficult because the establishment money sources |
Robb |
Dec-02-11 09:54 PM |
#30 |
| -
Well, that's true of course. But what I meant was that a 100% |
coalition_unwilling |
Dec-02-11 10:33 PM |
#31 |
| -
Candidate X gets 36% Candidate Y gets 34% Candidate Z gets 30%. |
FarLeftFist |
Dec-02-11 09:50 PM |
#29 |
| -
Real answer...citizens united need to be vacated |
nadinbrzezinski |
Dec-02-11 10:39 PM |
#32 |
| -
Not at all, I think you have the meat of the matter. |
Robb |
Dec-02-11 10:57 PM |
#33 |
| -
Of course that is what will happen. What's needed is a way to get rid of |
MADem |
Dec-02-11 11:30 PM |
#34 |
| -
A call-out, by a Mod no less. Okay, I'll bite. |
flvegan |
Dec-03-11 12:04 AM |
#36 |
| -
Well, not for a third party, maybe 20 or so. |
Rex |
Dec-03-11 12:43 AM |
#38 |
| -
There are lots of other serious questions, similar to that one... |
Shampoobra |
Dec-03-11 12:45 AM |
#39 |
| -
I'm not a 3rd party advocate |
loyalsister |
Dec-03-11 03:45 AM |
#40 |
| -
And with the 41st post of the thread... |
ellisonz |
Dec-03-11 04:00 AM |
#41 |
| -
Is there such a thing as "a former dingbat"? |
A-Schwarzenegger |
Dec-03-11 01:40 PM |
#42 |
| -
No. |
ellisonz |
Dec-03-11 01:52 PM |
#43 |
| -
We admitted we were powerless over dingbatism... |
A-Schwarzenegger |
Dec-03-11 02:15 PM |
#45 |
| -
Why are you so virulently against Dingbatism? |
Ikonoklast |
Dec-04-11 06:02 PM |
#50 |
| -
The next third party. n/t |
Junkdrawer |
Dec-03-11 02:16 PM |
#46 |
| -
I'm not for a third party I'm for a second party. |
sabrina 1 |
Dec-03-11 02:25 PM |
#47 |
| -
Exactly. |
Wind Dancer |
Dec-03-11 02:32 PM |
#48 |
| -
It would be nice to break the grip of the establishment parties and find out. |
Tierra_y_Libertad |
Dec-03-11 02:32 PM |
#49 |
| -
Your post, while I am sure was meant to push people to stick with candidates the Dem party runs.... |
Marrah_G |
Dec-06-11 10:05 PM |
#53 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread