Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/23/2012 3:09:06 PM   
VideoAdminGamma


Posts: 2233
Status: offline
Fast Reply

Please refrain from straying off topic and making comments directed at other posters.

Thank you for your contribution to the forums,
VideoAdminGamma

_____________________________

"The administration has the authority to handle situations in whatever manner they feel to be in the best interests of the forum, at that moment, in response to that event. "

http://www.collarchat.com/m_72/tm.htm

(in reply to MasterDoc1)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 6:50:45 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Each state has their own rules in regards to that. Surely you arent going to argue that states dont have the right to make those rules.


I may have been unclear in my original response to your post:

I would love to see private donations and PACs disallowed. Give them money from the government, a set amount for every candidate.. and when its gone... its gone.

Instead of asking "Who decides who gets on the ballot?" perhaps I should have asked: "Who decides who gets the 'set amount' of money?"

_____________________________

1. Islam and sharia are indivisible.
2. Sharia is barbaric, homophobic, violent, and inimical to the most basic Western values (including free speech and freedom of religion). (Yeah, I know: SEE: Irony 101).
ERGO: Islam has no place in America.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 6:52:11 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
THat does make much more sense now

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 7:25:02 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Instead of asking "Who decides who gets on the ballot?" perhaps I should have asked: "Who decides who gets the 'set amount' of money?"


I agree, that does make more sense. And I can see your point. any tom dick or harry could run.

First come, first served? Sure would take away the wishy washy bs we have seen this year.. will I, wont I? oops... too late.. no funds for you!

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 7:29:20 AM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

I would love to see private donations and PACs disallowed. Give them money from the government, a set amount for every candidate.. and when its gone... its gone.

Instead of asking "Who decides who gets on the ballot?" perhaps I should have asked: "Who decides who gets the 'set amount' of money?"


The obvious abuse is when I apply to be a candidate and hand the government freebie to my brother and tell him to buy media time.  He spends 20% of the money on media buys and takes 80% as his consulting fee.

As you said, truckinslave, how do you decide who's legit?  How would Randall Terry and Gary Johnson be classified - serious candidates or not?


_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 7:52:09 AM   
DomYngBlk


Posts: 3316
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

All the current articles keep talking about who will end up with the majority of GOP electoral votes.  What if...

If NO candidate wins a majority of votes cast, it goes to multiple ballots.  That destroyed the Dems in 1968, and the Dems in 1968 were a lot stronger and more cohesive than the GOP is today.

The primary is damaging enough so far.  In order to attack Romney, Gingrich is turning the conventional GOP platform plank of free commerce on its ear.  He's also undermining the concept of capital gains being taxed less than ordinary income, by pointing out that Mitt pays only 15% taxes.  Ron Paul's supporters are complaining (correctly IMO) that Paul's not getting enough coverage.  Santorum's trying to establish himself as the sole true conservative and is trying to claim that a moderate would have no chance in the general.  In other words, each is peddling his peculiar brand of reality.  I expect Mitt to take off the gloves (har har) soon, and begin trashing Gingrich in negative ads.

Unless one of the Final Four withdraws, I expect Paul to pull in 10%-20%.  Santorum will pull 15%-25%.  That leaves Gingrich and Romney only 55%-75% between them, and it's not inconceivable that neither one will get the magic 50%.



I smell jeb bush coming to the "rescue"

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 8:25:42 AM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline
I made a mistake.  I had thought that the 1968 Democratic convention was not decided on the first ballot.  Per Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1968), Humphrey took it on the first ballot.  However, the Democratic primary was badly fractured.  Note that Humphrey, while winning the electoral vote, only received 2.21%  of the popular vote!

The similarities between the 1968 Dem primary and the 2012 GOP primary are striking.  The fields are bitterly factionalized.  in 1968, per Wiki:

With Johnson's withdrawal, the Democratic Party quickly split into four factions, each of which distrusted the other three.
  • The first faction comprised labor unions and big-city party bosses (led by Mayor Richard J. Daley). This group had traditionally controlled the Democratic Party since the days of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and they feared their loss of control over the party. After Johnson's withdrawal this group rallied to support Hubert Humphrey, Johnson's Vice President; it was also believed that President Johnson himself was covertly supporting Humphrey, despite his public claims of neutrality.
  • The second faction, which rallied behind Senator Eugene McCarthy, was composed of college students, intellectuals, and upper-middle-class whites who had been the early activists against the war in Vietnam; they perceived themselves as the future of the Democratic Party.
  • The third group was primarily composed of Catholics, African-Americans, Hispanics, and other racial and ethnic minorities as well as several antiwar groups; these groups rallied behind Senator Robert F. Kennedy.
  • The fourth group consisted of white Southern Democrats, or "Dixiecrats". Some members of this group (probably older ones remembering the New Deal's positive impact upon rural areas) supported Vice President Humphrey, but many of them would rally behind George C. Wallace and the Alabama governor's third-party campaign in the general election.
In the current GOP race, we have
the moderates, who support Romney;
the libertarians, who support Paul;
the social conservatives and the conservative wingnuts, who are split between Santorum and Gingrich;
those who simply want the candidate most able to defeat Obama, who are split between Romney and Gingrich although Santorum is actively courting them;
and the anybody-but-Romneys, who are split between the other three. 
Romney is trying to create an anybody-but-Gingrich faction, which presumably would give him most of their support. 

All we need is a massive protest at the GOP convention by Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters who feel marginalized, and the parallel would be complete except for the assassination.  We even have a weak sitting President and an unpopular war.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk

I smell jeb bush coming to the "rescue"


That would be political suicide for the GOP.  To have an outsider come and take the nomination away from the current four candidates would lay the GOP open to charges of political machine tactics and smoke-filled rooms.  The GOP cannot afford to alienate its voters further.


< Message edited by DarkSteven -- 1/24/2012 8:30:26 AM >


_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to DomYngBlk)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 8:31:37 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
If Jeb was electable, surely they'd have put him up as the candidate in 2000, rather than his idiot brother?

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to DomYngBlk)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 9:09:40 AM   
DomYngBlk


Posts: 3316
Joined: 3/27/2006
Status: offline
Supposedly, Bar wanted the idiot to be president first.......

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 9:25:38 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
That'd be as good an explanation as any I suppose.
Jeb had blotted his copybook a few times when he was governing Florida, though. There was quite a fuss about racist comments, iirc.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to DomYngBlk)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 9:42:35 AM   
RacerJim


Posts: 1583
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

All of these plans that I've seen are just ridiculously stupid.
Let's try this one....
Who decides who gets to be on the ballot?


Each state has their own rules in regards to that. Surely you arent going to argue that states dont have the right to make those rules.

Tell that to Obama. In his motion to quash a subponea compelling his appearance at a hearing before an Admistrative Law Judge to determine his eligiblity to be on the ballot Obama, via his lawyer, argued that States don't have the right to make that determination.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 10:07:57 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Well, this isnt a thread about Obama, its a thread about the GOP. I am sure the mods will overlook that though.

Second, did Obama get away with that line of logic? No, he hasnt. Georgia is refusing to squash the subpoena.

Third, the Constitution sets out the requirements for running for President. The Georgia law allows those to be challenged. It does not set the requirements.

Now, here is the basis for the Georgia challenge...

Next Thursday our argument will be very simple:

Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen
The Constitution requires that both of Obama’s parents be U.S. citizens
Obama is therefore not Constitutionally qualified to run for the office of President
Accordingly, the Secretary of State of Georgia can not place Obama’s name on the ballot


This is going to bite them in the ass.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 10:22:51 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen
The Constitution requires that both of Obama’s parents be U.S. citizens
Obama is therefore not Constitutionally qualified to run for the office of President
Accordingly, the Secretary of State of Georgia can not place Obama’s name on the ballot


Uhhhhhhhhhhhh it will probably be dismissed as frivoulous where it counts, there is no such injunctive in the constitution.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 10:24:41 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Our strategy is to keep it simple. The qualifications for President are that the candidate be:

a natural born Citizen
or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution (this no longer applies because there are no citizens that were alive at the time the Constitution was adopted),
and be the Age of thirty five Years,
and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

We concede Obama fulfills the last two qualifications. However, Obama can never fulfill the first qualification because his father was never a U.S. Citizen. Interestingly, the Senate website explaining these qualifications says,


http://obamaballotchallenge.com/atlanta-weldon-obama-ballot-challenge-status-one-week-to-go



_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 10:31:15 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
And the law pertaining to that is...

Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock

A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen, is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.) The U.S. citizen parent must be genetically related to the child to transmit U.S. citizenship.

http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_5199.html

But, there is also a back door. Recall, Obama's father was already married at the time he married Obama's mother, as the story goes.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 10:45:44 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
and he is natural born (since it has never been defined or argued and resolved what that is, and is unlikely to become other than a tortured definition that will insure there is no seminal case issuing from SCOTUS that would revoke citizenry and disenfranchise several million current US citizens, and is a citizen of the United States.

Note that the wording is OR, but other precedents have conspired to render it as AND. 

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 10:57:50 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
The problem, as I see it, is that a woman or a man who are US citizens must be in the US (this is assuming they are married to someone foreign) until they are 19.

What happens to the 18 year old who is traveling on her honeymoon and delivers while abroad? It can happen. So how long does one have to be out of the country to be considered violating this law?

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 12:00:44 PM   
VideoAdminGamma


Posts: 2233
Status: offline
Could someone direct me to where this topic is being discussed? If I do a search, I find several areas that the current discussion has derailed many topics.

Please remain on topic.

Thank you for your contributions to the forums,
VideoAdminGamma


quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

All the current articles keep talking about who will end up with the majority of GOP electoral votes.  What if...

If NO candidate wins a majority of votes cast, it goes to multiple ballots.  That destroyed the Dems in 1968, and the Dems in 1968 were a lot stronger and more cohesive than the GOP is today.

The primary is damaging enough so far.  In order to attack Romney, Gingrich is turning the conventional GOP platform plank of free commerce on its ear.  He's also undermining the concept of capital gains being taxed less than ordinary income, by pointing out that Mitt pays only 15% taxes.  Ron Paul's supporters are complaining (correctly IMO) that Paul's not getting enough coverage.  Santorum's trying to establish himself as the sole true conservative and is trying to claim that a moderate would have no chance in the general.  In other words, each is peddling his peculiar brand of reality.  I expect Mitt to take off the gloves (har har) soon, and begin trashing Gingrich in negative ads.

Unless one of the Final Four withdraws, I expect Paul to pull in 10%-20%.  Santorum will pull 15%-25%.  That leaves Gingrich and Romney only 55%-75% between them, and it's not inconceivable that neither one will get the magic 50%.




_____________________________

"The administration has the authority to handle situations in whatever manner they feel to be in the best interests of the forum, at that moment, in response to that event. "

http://www.collarchat.com/m_72/tm.htm

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 9:05:15 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
 

All we need is a massive protest at the GOP convention by Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters who feel marginalized, and the parallel would be complete except for the assassination.  We even have a weak sitting President and an unpopular war.




I'm still not buying the parallel to '68, Steve. I think your analysis of the current situation in the R primary is good, but that you are massively understating the social revolution of the day, and the role of that in the divisions. Nothing comparable exists in today's Republican environment, or on the national scene. The Tea Party? Pfft. They came, wore silly hats, and packed out their trash. It was hardly a turn on, tune in, and drop out, counterculture. Will Romney's moderate allies in Florida have the protesting Paulites beaten in the streets?



_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. - 1/24/2012 9:14:14 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
This was the 1968 convention. I just don't see where we have the makings of a repeat.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The possibility that the GOP does NOT want to face. Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.092