Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Ted Cruz

7 (6.5%)

Rick Santorum

16 (14.8%)

Michelle Bachmann

13 (12%)

Chris Christie

23 (21.3%)

Rand Paul

49 (45.4%)

Total Members Voted: 107

[lemon10]

[colbert's sister]“When we talk about fiscal spending and we talk about protecting the taxpayers, it doesn’t mean you take the money we saved and leave the country for a personal purpose.”

That was a reference to Sanford’s use of state funds to fly to Argentina to visit his mistress and now fiancé, an affair that derailed his political career four years ago.

“She went there, Governor Sanford,” one of the debate’s moderators responded.

With much of the crowd hooting and hollering, Sanford seemed shaken.

“I couldn’t hear what she said… repeat it, I didn’t hear,” he said.

“Answer the question,” Colbert Busch interjected.

“What was the question?” Sanford said, appearing stunned.“Ok, but anyway, ah ah, on the sequester, I’ll go back to the sequester…”

Oh god, that's just comedy gold.

[FearfulJesuit]

Remind me again why the GOP nominated such a doofus? Someone more competent would likely have a much easier time beating her.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I had to look up the exchange to see if that actually happened, I couldn't believe such a pitiful snippet. I enjoy how he apparently wasn't mentally girded for the mere mention of his extremely hot current-wife ex-mistress. I mean, did he really not expect that?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

He's so screwed it isn't even funny. If he was smart he'd drop out and stop doing active damage to the GOP, but he won't because he isn't.

[FearfulJesuit]

I assume the Democrats are only running her because it's such a red district they only have a chance of winning against someone like Sanford?

[MaximumZero]

[colbert's sister]“When we talk about fiscal spending and we talk about protecting the taxpayers, it doesn’t mean you take the money we saved and leave the country for a personal purpose.”

That was a reference to Sanford’s use of state funds to fly to Argentina to visit his mistress and now fiancé, an affair that derailed his political career four years ago.

“She went there, Governor Sanford,” one of the debate’s moderators responded.

With much of the crowd hooting and hollering, Sanford seemed shaken.

“I couldn’t hear what she said… repeat it, I didn’t hear,” he said.

“Answer the question,” Colbert Busch interjected.

“What was the question?” Sanford said, appearing stunned.“Ok, but anyway, ah ah, on the sequester, I’ll go back to the sequester…”

Oh god, that's just comedy gold.

Dang. Burrrrrrnnnnnn!

[Jervill]

Remind me again why the GOP nominated such a doofus? Someone more competent would likely have a much easier time beating her.

$$$

He beat some no name in a primary.  You'd think primary voters would be more competent in who they nominate, but money speaks louder than words in politics.

[Descan]

I don't like primary voting.

No real reason, I just don't. It seems... undemocratic.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Voting for your party's candidate is undemocratic?

[Sheb]

The problem is that coupled with your dang two-party, first-past-the-post system, it gives an extremist minority an outsized influence.

[Descan]

It's mostly the closed primaries that I have problems with...

And the whole "If you aren't a[n approved] Democrat or Republican, your name isn't on the list for the general election".

[Sheb]

Descan, third parties candidates can (and do) run for the general elections. No one vote for them, but they do run.

Actually, could somone explain why other countries with first-past-the-post systems, like Britain or france, manage to have more than two parties?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

They still have two very clearly dominant parties. Simply put, the US just doesn't have splintered party allegiances. The Democrats encompass the entire Left, and the Republicans encompass the entire Right.

[Descan]

Magic.
 
Uh, I thought that there were a lot of reports of people not being put on the ballot beyond the Big Two? o-o

[palsch]

Actually, could somone explain why other countries with first-past-the-post systems, like Britain or france, manage to have more than two parties?

Mostly a combination of elections being more local, political campaign style and laws, the nature of the parties, etc.

And to expand on what MSH said;

In Britain at least till 2010, the big two had fairly strong party discipline and ran on party recognition while the third/smaller parties were either regional or had weak enough party discipline that a South West Lib Dem would be a conservative alternative to the local Tory while a Northern Lib Dem would be running to the left of Labour. Labour and Conservative candidates had less flexibility in this area while getting tagged by the high profile party leadership.

Arguably Nick Clegg destroyed this by running the charismatic leader role as a national campaign. Combine that with the coalition and arguably the Lib Dems will never get to run that play again.

In the US both of the big parties are Lib Dem style coalitions, so they already run the chameleon role in each constituency and leave no room for a local interest or flexible-interest national party to fill in such gaps.


FPTP messes up election results and hurts smaller parties, sure, but I don't think it's even mostly to blame for their lack in US politics.

Uh, I thought that there were a lot of reports of people not being put on the ballot beyond the Big Two? o-o

It can be tricky in places, but usually that's more about being frozen out of debates and things like that. Usually you need to either pay a fee or gather a given number of signatures to run for office. Even most joke candidates can pull that off. Getting into debates usually means you are over a certain polling threshold, that threshold usually being high enough that no third party candidate will meet it. Even 5% is a deal breaker, but I'd bet a 10% 'spoiler' candidate would see thresholds set at 15%.