Are Americans wising up?

Big Money said:
You could always vote third party and take a vote away from the GOP and benefit the Democrats.
Click to expand...

How do you figure my voting third party would "take a vote from the GOP and help the DemoQUACKS" when I never vote for either crooked fucking subdivision of the Duopoly Dictator Cartel? Unlike you the fucking thieves can't count on me to sanctify their fucking racket.
 
A third party candidate in the 1992 race siphoned off enough votes to give us BJ Clinton and his wife. God knows how many Democrats voted for Perot, but I suspect it wasn't many.
 
Big Money said:
A third party candidate in the 1992 race siphoned off enough votes to give us BJ Clinton and his wife. God knows how many Democrats voted for Perot, but I suspect it wasn't many.
Click to expand...

Where's your proof that a single Perot voter would have voted for either of the duopoly morons? I can't wait to see you provide that evidence. For all you know or can prove if it weren't for Perot, all of those voters would have simply opted out and stayed home, huh BM??? The idiotic accusation that third party votes take votes from some duopoly bastard is just that, "fucking idiotic!"
 
Since World War II, three third party or independent presidential candidates have drawn at least 5% of the popular vote.


The first three occurred at intervals of 12 years.


In 1968, George Wallace, the past and future governor of Alabama at the time, drew 9,906,473 votes (13.5% of the total vote) and carried five states (46 electoral votes) on his American Independent Party line.


In 1980, Rep. John Anderson of Illinois, who earlier in the year had competed for the Republican presidential nomination, garnered 5,720,060 votes (6.6%, 0 electoral votes) that fall as an independent.


In 1992, wealthy Texas businessman Ross Perot polled 19,741,657 votes (18.9%, 0 electoral votes) running as an independent. Perot ran again for president in 1996, taking 8.4% on the Reform Party line.



http://library.cqpress.com/elections/document.php?id=rcookltr-1527-89627-2588519#.UsliYz90nss
 
Big Money said:
Since World War II, three third party or independent presidential candidates have drawn at least 5% of the popular vote.


The first three occurred at intervals of 12 years.


In 1968, George Wallace, the past and future governor of Alabama at the time, drew 9,906,473 votes (13.5% of the total vote) and carried five states (46 electoral votes) on his American Independent Party line.


In 1980, Rep. John Anderson of Illinois, who earlier in the year had competed for the Republican presidential nomination, garnered 5,720,060 votes (6.6%, 0 electoral votes) that fall as an independent.


In 1992, wealthy Texas businessman Ross Perot polled 19,741,657 votes (18.9%, 0 electoral votes) running as an independent. Perot ran again for president in 1996, taking 8.4% on the Reform Party line.



http://library.cqpress.com/elections/document.php?id=rcookltr-1527-89627-2588519#.UsliYz90nss
Click to expand...

And the PROOF that a single one of those third party voters would have voted for a Duopoly crook instead of staying home on election day is WHAT?
 
Did I say there was proof?


I seem to recall saying "God knows how many Democrats voted for Perot, but I suspect it wasn't many."


How many Libertarians are left-leaning?
 
Big Money said:
Did I say there was proof?


I seem to recall saying "God knows how many Democrats voted for Perot, but I suspect it wasn't many."
Click to expand...

Ok, now that we’ve established that you can’t prove a single third party voter would have voted for a Duopoly crook if it weren’t for the third party, it should be perfectly apparent that there’s nary a dime’s worth of evidence that a vote for a third party ”TAKES A VOTE” from any Duopoly candidate.


How many Libertarians are left-leaning?
Click to expand...

True libertarians are truly aware of the right/left, liberal/conservative misnomers. True libertarians, (small l), conduct their principles and opinions by what is apparently right not what is rightist and reject everything leftist often misidentified as liberal. TRUE libertarians don’t lean right or left, they’re upright, sturdy and anchored in their righteous principles and wouldn’t vote for a corrupt Duopoly crook on a fucking bet!!! But I can only speak for the TRUE libertarians. You’ll have to PROVE which way others that call themselves libertarians lean, huh? When you can do that you can proudly repost your “vote taking away” irrational scenario and feel good about it.

BTW, I just had another thought. If your “vote taking away” accusation is correct, (it’s not), even then I don’t consider it a particularly bad idea to take away a vote from any fucking Duopoly crook since the bastards are all alike. Does it ever make any real difference which of them is fucking over the country?
 
OH Yeah! I reckon next I'll be hearing the old "self fulfilling prophesy" I don't vote third party because they can't win. Which translates to "They can't win because I don't vote for them." Such genius, huh????
 
BTW:


Detailed analysis of voting demographics revealed that Perot's support drew heavily from across the political spectrum, with 20% of his votes coming from self-described liberals, 27% from self-described conservatives, and 53% coming from self-described moderates.


Economically, however, the majority of Perot voters (57%) were middle class, earning between $15,000 and $49,000 annually, with the bulk of the remainder drawing from the upper middle class (29% earning more than $50,000 annually).


Exit polls also showed that Ross Perot drew 38% of his vote from Bush, and 38% of his vote from Clinton...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot
 
Big Money said:
LOL, so your thread announcing the futility of a third party vote is your surrender to the status quo?
Click to expand...

That’s might be your interpretation, but in reality it’s my sworn duty to oppose the status-quo and not surrender to the bastards ever. So how do you consider enlightening the citizens about the fucking corruption they’re voting for as a “surrender?”
 
Big Money said:
BTW:


Detailed analysis of voting demographics revealed that Perot's support drew heavily from across the political spectrum, with 20% of his votes coming from self-described liberals, 27% from self-described conservatives, and 53% coming from self-described moderates.


Economically, however, the majority of Perot voters (57%) were middle class, earning between $15,000 and $49,000 annually, with the bulk of the remainder drawing from the upper middle class (29% earning more than $50,000 annually).


Exit polls also showed that Ross Perot drew 38% of his vote from Bush, and 38% of his vote from Clinton...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot
Click to expand...

Keep trying BM, maybe you'll soon convince yourself that all of that shit is somehow proof that a single Perot voter would have voted for a Duopoly bastard rather than just staying home if Perot wasn't running.
 
Classic Liberal said:
Keep trying BM, maybe you'll soon convince yourself that all of that shit is somehow proof that a single Perot voter would have voted for a Duopoly bastard rather than just staying home if Perot wasn't running.
Click to expand...

I guess the 76% Perot voters who said they would've voted for Bush or Clinton otherwise were all lying when they were exit-polled.
 
Big Money said:
I guess the 76% Perot voters who said they would've voted for Bush or Clinton otherwise were all lying when they were exit-polled.
Click to expand...

According to who? What poll, conducted by who? Should we just take your word for that? Again I repeat if they did take a vote from a Duopoly Dork, why isn't that a better thing to do than encourage the corrupt fucking Duopoly Dork with a vote?
 
Big Money said:
How's that working for you?
Click to expand...

Much better than being without any moral standards or constitutional principles like the brainwashed, brain-dead DemoRATS and RepubliCON-ARTIST. How's that working for you? Oh! that's right you love BIG fucking government, huh? It's working great for you then, right? Have at it minion!
 
Big Money said:
I supplied the link. Too lazy to read? Or scared of what you might learn?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot
Click to expand...

Wikipedia ( i/ˌwɪkɨˈpiːdiə/ or i/ˌwɪkiˈpiːdiə/ WIK-i-PEE-dee-ə) is a collaboratively edited, multilingual, free Internet encyclopedia that the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation supports. Volunteers worldwide collaboratively write Wikipedia's 30 million articles

Wikipedia doesn’t prove a fucking thing. Its articles are contributions from God knows who and what their biases are. The only thing you.ve proven is you can find on the internet other people that say the same shit you say.

You have absolutely no way of proving that people that talk to exit poll takers aren’t fucking liars. If they would have voted for a Duopoly crook, why the fuck didn’t they?

Again, even if they did take a vote from a Duopoly crook, what’s bad about that? My hat goes off to them!!!
 
Big Money said:
How many of your candidates have been elected?
Click to expand...

What does getting elected have to do with principles? Who are you calling "my candidates?" How many of "YOUR" candidates have been elected? Would you care to tell us who they are/were?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top