1
   

2006

 
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 05:23 pm
squinney wrote:
I would also say no support from Moveon.org, Swiftboaters or other "outsiders" with their own agendas.


you know it baby ! i'll gladly drop my membership in moveon for this cause.

we're looking for a clean slate. a fresh start.

see ? in less than to pages, we are creating ENERGY !!!
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 05:36 pm
So, which way are we leaning... Adopt an existing third party...? Form a new grassroots party with use of the net and PR work locally by members...? Something else...?

Throw out all ideas, everybody.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 05:47 pm
PIDDLY **** MY ASS... DIVISIVNESS MY ASS.... I STARTED A THREAD ABOUT GETTING THE BUMS OUT...IF YOU'D LIKE A THREAD ABOUT REPLACING THEM WITH MORE IN THE SYSTEM BUMS PLEASE GO START YOUR OWN....
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 05:50 pm
I wouldn't know where to start on selecting a third party that doesn't already have some stigma / image that would cause people to pause.

I wouldn't want a Nader or Perot association.

Also, not sure who "owns" the other parties or runs them. Would they allow use of their party for such a movement?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 05:54 pm
When you put it that way, squinney, I agree. It should be new.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 06:43 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
PIDDLY **** MY ASS... DIVISIVNESS MY ASS.... I STARTED A THREAD ABOUT GETTING THE BUMS OUT...IF YOU'D LIKE A THREAD ABOUT REPLACING THEM WITH MORE IN THE SYSTEM BUMS PLEASE GO START YOUR OWN....[/quote

btw I wasn't yelling... I typed the whole thing out and noticed I was on caps locked... and was too lazy to redo.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 01:10 am
squinney wrote:
I wouldn't know where to start on selecting a third party that doesn't already have some stigma / image that would cause people to pause.

I wouldn't want a Nader or Perot association.

Also, not sure who "owns" the other parties or runs them. Would they allow use of their party for such a movement?


would we want to co-op an existing party ? that would defeat the purpose.

shouldn't the vision be to collect the moderates from both of the major parties, along with straglers(sic?) from others, such as the libertarian party i'm registered with, and create an entirely new party ?

surely theres a lot of us who like some of our party's platform, but wonder what the hell they were thinking on other things ?

and to follow up on bear's comments... of course, we will need to seek out our own,new candidates. really... in a nation of nearly 300 million people, we have only a couple of thousand that are qualified for public office ?

the whole point of this party would be to set up a tent for those of us who've had enough of the partisan and social bickering.

it's only pie in the sky as long as we want it to be.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 06:15 am
It has to start at the local level. Remove all local POLS, mayors, State Reps, US Senators. That's where the change has to start.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 06:17 am
woiyo wrote:
It has to start at the local level. Remove all local POLS, mayors, State Reps, US Senators. That's where the change has to start.


yes indeed.
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 06:44 am
(CLUNK!)

Bear, Lash, Woiyo and I agreeing?

Now THAT is progress!

Can we start with deciding a name for the party?
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 06:48 am
NO PARTY!!! That leads to the same mess we have now when the candidate is alligning themselves for the "good of the party" rather than the good of the people.

NO FUND RAISING!! - Not like it is now. Top donation is $5.00 by anyone or any corporation.

I want people who actually want the job because they care, not because of the "power" it brings.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 06:52 am
Not even people who want the job... just people who are willing to take it out of a sense of duty and stewardship for ONE TERM, do their best and go home.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 11:10 am
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Not even people who want the job... just people who are willing to take it out of a sense of duty and stewardship for ONE TERM, do their best and go home.


is one term enough to get anything done, bear ? the wheel doth slowly turn, no ?

yes. no power lusting weenies. one of the things i liked about our old mayor, riordan, was that he took only one dollar a year in pay. and that only because of the regs. he was already rich, there was no real reason for him to take on the post riot mess of l.a. other than the sense of duty you mention.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 04:51 pm
I think two terms. Anyone else? You really can't get anything done with one. Anyway, we can hammer that out.

If we don't call ourselves a party--how to identify our...'group' and how to get them on a ballot?

We might want to wait on the name--and give it a name (if it has one) after we decide what we stand for. Just a suggestion.

I'll throw some things out. Add, subtract, discuss...

Term limits TBA (one or two terms)
very severe campaign finance limits
reduce perks of elected officials
no millionaires allowed to run for office. (sounds silly, but you get my drift--or would less rich people be more susceptible to bribes...?).
No PACs
no influence peddling
mandatory time in prison for those caught doing this--and I don't mean Club ******* Fed.
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 11:02 am
probably could eliminate a lot of the problems you mention by putting economic pressure on the networks and cable folks to donate time for real live debates, townhalls and firesides in the interest of public information.

can't remember for sure, but it seems like they did a fair amount of this when i was a kid.

i mean, really... as much cash as they pull in through commercials and affiliate placements and such, they could certianly donate a couple of day's worth of revenue every couple of years.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 11:05 am
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
probably could eliminate a lot of the problems you mention by putting economic pressure on the networks and cable folks to donate time for real live debates, townhalls and firesides in the interest of public information.

can't remember for sure, but it seems like they did a fair amount of this when i was a kid.

i mean, really... as much cash as they pull in through commercials and affiliate placements and such, they could certianly donate a couple of day's worth of revenue every couple of years.


I too recall but do not remember how they actually funded this.

However, seems to me the FCC can place as part of the licensing that they MUST make XX hours available for this purpose.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Sep, 2005 11:09 am
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
probably could eliminate a lot of the problems you mention by putting economic pressure on the networks and cable folks to donate time for real live debates, townhalls and firesides in the interest of public information.

can't remember for sure, but it seems like they did a fair amount of this when i was a kid.

i mean, really... as much cash as they pull in through commercials and affiliate placements and such, they could certianly donate a couple of day's worth of revenue every couple of years.


From whoever gives him his orders to GWB, from GWB to Colin Powell, from Colin Powell to Michael Powell, from Michael Powell to the networks and cable broadcasters... " No time alloted for live debates, townhalls and firesides any more. It is not in the best interest of our agenda".
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2005 09:19 pm
Re: 2006
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
It's my opinion that in 2006 we need to vote the bums out and by bums I mean republican and democrat alike.

We elect the people who have f*cked us. We need for independent candidates to rise up and we need some REAL new blood in Washington or I believe we are on the way to civil insurrection in this country.

There's one year to do it. It could be done. We could take back our country starting in 2006, followed by 2008. Our system is broken IMHO.

Again, no links, no fancy studies to post. This IS an opinion forum, and I'm throwing it out there. All you smart people discuss it.


Yeah, and lets find Spiderman and The Fantastic Four to knock the bad guys out of the park.

Somewhere there must be unknowned mutants who can govern us perfectly if only we will acknowledge and vote for them.

Yeah! Let's throw the bums out and find the new (cool) bums!

Hey, but if we vote for Bi-po for president won't it be so cool?

Let's face it. You and I know a vast number of people who would make great presidents (Hey. Bipo for one!), and so let's harken back to the 60's and chant for PEACE!

Bi-po, son of the 60's, it's good to see you haven't lost your way.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2005 06:17 am
Re: 2006
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
It's my opinion that in 2006 we need to vote the bums out and by bums I mean republican and democrat alike.

We elect the people who have f*cked us. We need for independent candidates to rise up and we need some REAL new blood in Washington or I believe we are on the way to civil insurrection in this country.

There's one year to do it. It could be done. We could take back our country starting in 2006, followed by 2008. Our system is broken IMHO.

Again, no links, no fancy studies to post. This IS an opinion forum, and I'm throwing it out there. All you smart people discuss it.


Yeah, and lets find Spiderman and The Fantastic Four to knock the bad guys out of the park.

Somewhere there must be unknowned mutants who can govern us perfectly if only we will acknowledge and vote for them.

Yeah! Let's throw the bums out and find the new (cool) bums!

Hey, but if we vote for Bi-po for president won't it be so cool?

Let's face it. You and I know a vast number of people who would make great presidents (Hey. Bipo for one!), and so let's harken back to the 60's and chant for PEACE!

Bi-po, son of the 60's, it's good to see you haven't lost your way.


snappy repartee from Finn, and it only took him 14 days after the thread was started to come up with it. I'll put you in charge of disaster relief.
0 Replies
 
Francisco DAnconia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2005 06:58 am
All right, it's pretty obvious that it's been too long since I've visited the politics forum - I love this thread.

Count me in. When do we write our Manifesto?

Taxes should be lowered as much as possible. One percent flat sounds good to me. This will allow the government to pay for such things as priting money, which will be necessary in order for commerce - not a big fan of the barter system.

Stuff like electricity, clean water, mail service, and military protection can be paid for by communities in specific if they choose to vote for continuing to ...

gotta go, will finish this in a few.
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
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » 2006
  3. » Page 3
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 02:01:36