Whats the Tea party about then?

Post Reply New Topic

I have preferred the Constitution Party previously, but I realize that with the American all-or-nothing voting system the closest I can get to voting for them would be the Republican party, still, which is unfortunate because there are so many RINOs in the Republican party but it seems they are the only possibility for voting my particular conscience with any chance of having my vote count for anything.

The constitution has been under attack for more than a 100 years by both of the major parties.

If your vote isn't for what you believe then does your vote really count for anything? All you're doing is merely putting your small bit of support behind causes you don't believe in.

If you notice what I actually said, the Republican party comes closest to doing that for me. If America were to adopt the Australian ballot, then my primary and secondary votes would go, probably, to Constitution party members and only the tertiary vote to the Republican party candidates.

Yes but you're not voting for your first choice so your opinion is never heard. It isn't a waste in that the main parties pay attention to what the others are saying and how popular some other opinions are getting. IE, they want the votes on their side of the political spectrum and don't want to lose votes to people who won't win. Your duty is to vote your opinion, not to win.

Vote third party as much as you like. I have no opposition to you voting your opinion.

Sorry, I'm just trying to say that voting for the status quo never influences politics.

How they are telling it over here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/paulmason/2010/10/the_penury_of_americas_middle.html

Is that all you're saying? Aren't you going to vote third party to voice your opinion or would you only advocate this for people who would otherwise vote Republican?

What I'm trying to advocate is to vote for what you believe in, not settle for someone who happens to wear the right label.

Take my instance, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to voting for a democrat but Charlie Melancon doesn't even represent middle views rather less left views on most issues and I'd consider him to be almost as bad as Vitter (except for the whole whores thing and trying to limit how much BP had to pay in damages to the residents, fishermen, and state). Politically, he represents nothing that I believe in and so I'll be voting against him (and Vitter) because conceding my vote to the label alone will just make me complicit in a maintaining of the status quo. In the end, Vitter and Melancon are about the same and represent viewpoints that I don't agree with in regard to their views on religion and state and all the associated views with that. I'll probably end up voting libertarian if at all this time around.

The Tea party movement is funded by billionaires who want to hold on to their money and not face responsibility for their multi-billion dollar conglomerate's transgressions against the people and the environment and they don't want lose a cent of their billions that they inherited from their daddy* to taxes.


http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010 ... fact_mayer

“The Kochs operate oil refineries in Alaska, Texas, and Minnesota, and control some four thousand miles of pipeline. Koch Industries owns Brawny paper towels, Dixie cups, Georgia-Pacific lumber, Stainmaster carpet, and Lycra, among other products. Forbes ranks it as the second-largest private company in the country, after Cargill, and its consistent profitability has made David and Charles Koch—who, years ago, bought out two other brothers—among the richest men in America. Their combined fortune of thirty-five billion dollars is exceeded only by those of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett."

“The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation. These views dovetail with the brothers’ corporate interests. In a study released this spring, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst’s Political Economy Research Institute named Koch Industries one of the top ten air polluters in the United States. And Greenpeace issued a report identifying the company as a ‘kingpin of climate science denial.’ The report showed that, from 2005 to 2008, the Kochs vastly outdid ExxonMobil in giving money to organizations fighting legislation related to climate change, underwriting a huge network of foundations, think tanks, and political front groups. Indeed, the brothers have funded opposition campaigns against so many Obama Administration policies—from health-care reform to the economic-stimulus program—that, in political circles, their ideological network is known as the Kochtopus.”



*Who also was pretty well off being the son of the owner of a regional newspaper.

I don't know what all your talk about "status quo" is about, but I salute you for saying that you might possibly vote for a third party instead of the Dem-wit Party.

This guy is more of a remican than a democrat.

Remican? Is that the Democrat version of a Republican R.I.N.O? I'd have thought D.I.N.O. would be a better title since at least it sounds cooler.