
01-24-2007, 09:57 AM
|
 |
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Around Kansas City, Missouri
Posts: 1,144
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve k
Actually, the day before the election in Minnesota Ventura was down 12%. That was the day before. The problem with your analogy is that at least if I'm a vegetarian I can decide on my meal without it affecting the lives of otehrs. The other guys ordered what they wanted. There was a the freedom to eat whatever you want. My argument is that I don't believe that at this point in time either party gives a shit about what "we the people" want. There was an iteresting Gallup poll released yesterday which I'll try to find and post that was very revealing. I'll talk more about that later.
|
I agree that niether party really gives a shit. But I guess I didn't explain my analogy well enough. YOU HAVE TO EAT WHERE WE VOTE TO EAT!!! So you, a veggie dude, has got to goto Morton's Steak House where you're not going to get the type of meal you like. You DO NOT really get to eat what you want. Instead of having half a chance to eat at the Half veggie/half meat place, your vote let the ALL meat place win out. Your vote really hurt yourself.
As to Jesse, 12% down is, was, doable. Perot's person beat him 2:1, Naders guy beat him by over 20:1. Both third party's lost by a landslide and those votes were lost to history. If Perot wasn't there you'd have voted for Bush. If Nader wasn't there they'd have voted for Gore. Bush I and Gore lost because a third party ate away at their base. A third party that faded away and was blamed by Bush I and Gore supporters for their loss.
What did the third party gain? Was it more then what they lost? I don't believe it was.
__________________
Fear leads to Anger...Anger leads to Hate...Hate leads to Suffering.
|