24
   

The Republican Convention

 
 
parados
 
  3  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 04:50 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Rockhead wrote:
except when you disrupt the democrats primary system...


I do not disrupt the Democrats' primary system. The Democrats' efforts to disenfranchise Michigan, however, counts as a disruption.

According to Scalia and the majority on the USSC it is no such thing. There is no such thing as disenfranchisement in a primary. Unless you want to argue that Corporations can't let people vote according to shares owned.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 05:03 pm
@parados,
Parados is correct here. The political parties exercise a great deal of control over the democratic processes influencing the selection of their candidates and the formulation of their political platforms.

We all saw a remarkable example of the exercise in arbitrary control of the processes associated with politically expedient modifications to the Democrat platform document in the recent Democrat Convention.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 05:12 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
According to Scalia and the majority on the USSC it is no such thing. There is no such thing as disenfranchisement in a primary. Unless you want to argue that Corporations can't let people vote according to shares owned.


Corporations have nothing to do with it. What the Democrats did to me was wrong, and I'm going to be voting for Republicans in the general elections until the Democrats put it right, or until I die.
Rockhead
 
  3  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 05:12 pm
@oralloy,
can we vote on it?
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 05:17 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
Parados is correct here. The political parties exercise a great deal of control over the democratic processes influencing the selection of their candidates and the formulation of their political platforms.


They won't be able to stop me from voting for Republicans across the board in the general elections though.



georgeob1 wrote:
We all saw a remarkable example of the exercise in arbitrary control of the processes associated with politically expedient modifications to the Democrat platform document in the recent Democrat Convention.


You mean that bout of anti-Semitism?

I saw that. It was disturbing. Thought about starting a thread on it, but haven't bothered to go look up a link.

It would be good if the Democrats purged the anti-Semites from their party.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 05:22 pm
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:
can we vote on it?


I don't know. Your question was a little vague and unspecific.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 07:03 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

What the Democrats did to me was wrong, and I'm going to be voting for Republicans in the general elections until the Democrats put it right, or until I die.

But didn't the Republicans just do the same thing to the Maine delegation after the Ron Paul take-over? Face it, your delegation broke the rules, knowing in advance what the penalty was and was stunned when that penalty was enacted. It sounds like you are looking for an excuse to vote Republican and you don't need one. If you feel the Republicans best reflect your beliefs, vote for them. If you think the Democrats best represent you interests but you think that you will punish them by voting Republican, they you are really punishing yourself.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 08:09 pm
@engineer,
engineer wrote:
oralloy wrote:
What the Democrats did to me was wrong, and I'm going to be voting for Republicans in the general elections until the Democrats put it right, or until I die.


But didn't the Republicans just do the same thing to the Maine delegation after the Ron Paul take-over?


Don't know. If so, I would not blame any disenfranchised voters for letting it influence their subsequent votes.



engineer wrote:
Face it, your delegation broke the rules, knowing in advance what the penalty was and was stunned when that penalty was enacted.


That is far from an accurate (or fair) description of what happened.



engineer wrote:
It sounds like you are looking for an excuse to vote Republican and you don't need one.


No, I am just reacting to being disenfranchised.

You may wish that I was willing to just be quiet and allow the Democrats to violate my rights, but it's just not going to happen. I'll be voting a straight Republican ticket for a long time now.



engineer wrote:
If you think the Democrats best represent you interests but you think that you will punish them by voting Republican, they you are really punishing yourself.


Strange how it gives me a nice positive feeling of satisfaction. And strange how those who think it was OK to violate my rights, seem to have such consternation about it.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 09:11 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
I'll be voting a straight Republican ticket for a long time now.

lol.

When the door hits your butt on the way out, don't clack your teeth on Romney's dick....
mysteryman
 
  0  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 09:20 pm
@parados,
The supreme court said that bush won Florida, and that the recount attempt by Al Gore had to stop.

I don't remember you siding with the supreme court then.
Rockhead
 
  3  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 09:21 pm
@mysteryman,
this kind of non-argument gets really old after elementary school...
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 09:54 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:


No, I am just reacting to being disenfranchised.

You weren't disenfranchised since primary votes are run by parties that set the rules and have no requirement to even abide by them. You are just ignoring that fact so you can throw your childish tantrum. Maybe you should go get a an ice cream.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Sep, 2012 09:57 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

The supreme court said that bush won Florida, and that the recount attempt by Al Gore had to stop.

I don't remember you siding with the supreme court then.
I don't recall saying that the Supreme Court decision could be ignored. Nor do I recall claiming I was disenfranchised.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Sep, 2012 03:53 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:
The supreme court said that bush won Florida, and that the recount attempt by Al Gore had to stop.


They were just acknowledging reality. The December 12 deadline had been reached, and Bush had at that point won Florida.


Perhaps slightly more controversial that they halted the statewide recount on December 9, preventing it from being completed by December 12.

But there was a big appearance of impropriety on the part of the Florida Supreme Court, the way they kept allowing things to go just a little bit further every time it became apparent that Gore didn't quite win with the last step that had been taken. The US Supreme Court had clearly had enough of it.

And regardless, Bush still would have won that recount even if it had been allowed to proceed. So all in all I don't see how the ruling was all that big a deal.

Perhaps it would have looked better if the Supreme Court had let the statewide recount go up to December 12 before cutting them off, but it wouldn't have made any difference in the end.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sun 9 Sep, 2012 03:57 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
You weren't disenfranchised since primary votes are run by parties that set the rules and have no requirement to even abide by them. You are just ignoring that fact so you can throw your childish tantrum. Maybe you should go get a an ice cream.


No. I think what I'll do is go vote for a LOT of Republicans, and keep doing it over and over and over.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Sep, 2012 03:58 am
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:
When the door hits your butt on the way out,


What makes you think I am exiting anything?
DrewDad
 
  3  
Reply Mon 10 Sep, 2012 07:34 am
@oralloy,
That's kinda my point....

You regularly support even the craziest Republican positions, to the point you might as well be fellating the RNC chairman, and then you want to claim that you're some kind of independent.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 10 Sep, 2012 08:30 am
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:
That's kinda my point....

You regularly support even the craziest Republican positions, to the point you might as well be fellating the RNC chairman,


Aside from funding for the military, and respect for the Second Amendment, where do the Republicans supposedly hold the same position that I do???



DrewDad wrote:
and then you want to claim that you're some kind of independent.


I have never claimed to be independent. I was born a Democrat, and I'll die a Democrat.

The term you're looking for is: Blue Dog.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Sep, 2012 12:21 pm
@oralloy,
Is that the same thing as racist?
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Sep, 2012 12:23 pm
@RABEL222,
I think that's Yellow Dog.

"I'll vote for an old, yeller dog before I ever vote Republican!"
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 06/29/2022 at 06:39:13