Kifle wrote:Dlur wrote:Now me personally, I think they're both idiots and that both mainstream political parties, with all their members should have been able to find someone better to put on the ballot other than these two f*#$tards, but hey, what do I know I'm just a Centrist leaning towards libritarian that voted like a retard to "throw my vote away" along with the other less than 1% of the population that voted my way. I'm just trying to make you die-hard Kerry fans understand why he sucks a little bit worse than GWB sucks.
Me, I am a moderate...even if my opinions in this thread do not show it, that is what I am. I am not one of the liberals that does not understand the need for some form of capitalism, or the need for some pollution, etc... You sometimes have to break a few eggs to make an omlette, and I'm sure most of the people who voted for Kerry think much the same. We have been labeled wrongly because we would rather strive towards a better world than be content with what we have been given. As far as being die-hard Kerry...I doubt many people who voted for him are -- on these boards and across the country. He wasn't a good candidate. He has just as many flaws as Bush. Namely the outsourcing of the Heinz corperation. What we understand, though, is that Bush, in every venture he has ever been a part of, has failed. This is what he does. He had is education bought, he has had life given to him on a silver platter, and can only communicate with the average american public because he is an idiot...that is his charisma. He's one of those dogs you feel sorry for because they continually run into walls because they think there's a door there...it's a sad form of cute. It's just a shame that so many people can connect with that rather than an intelligent candidate.
Dlur, my views and your views are not very far apart. Sure, we disagree on quite a few things, but given the actual opportunity to talk, I'm sure we would easily see each other's side of things and come to some sort of compromise.
Nope, probably are pretty close as my political compass reads dead center when you go on the Liberal-Conservative axis and just a hair towards Libritarian instead of Authoritarian on that axis. I'm liberal when it comes to the "War on Drugs" and that's about it, and I'm conservative from a fiscal standpoint and that I believe the Constitution should be upheld. I'm libertarian from a standpoint that I believe in individual rights and freedoms, but not so much on a few of their free market ideas. I'm not very authoritarian at all as I hate "the man" as much as the next guy.
Now, if you could get me a candidate on the ballot that sat in generally the same area of the political compass I'd vote for them in a second, and I think a large portion of the US population would feel the same way, IF they knew that candidate had a chance to win.
Unfortunately you're not going to see a valid 3rd party candidate that is going to be able to pull that many votes for many years unless it is a person of celebrity status (such as Ahhrnold having the constitution modified so he can run), and even then he's not going to be a Centrist (although more-so than most republicans might be).
What needs to happen is that people need to continue to consider 3rd party candidates. The 3rd parties need private funding to get ads running in all states, not just battleground states. We need to get _some_ 3rd party to get 5% so that even though they loose, they still win by getting federal funding and a spot in the debates the next election.
Unfortunately, everyone and their mom has tunnel-vision and is unable to see past the two parties. So, year after year, election after election, we are going to continue to see two utterly crappy candidates from two utterly crappy political parties. 3nj0y.