Print

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

[Nadaka]

I don't know if any of you guys have heard of this, but it's an effort to put a third party candidate on the national ballot for President, which will be totally awesome if it works, though I do have my doubts.

I've read about this elsewhere.

It is funded by hedge fund managers and other big money bankers and is simultaneously not a political (so it can shield the identity of its donors) and a political party (so it can get on the balot in certain states). Its "democratic" aspects are also a sham because they are non binding and those at the top can override every decision if they want. I wouldn't put any faith at all in the idea.

[RedKing]

The Libertarians already have national ballot status in all 50 states. And the Greens and Reform Party have had it in the past. The two-party system is just incredibly entrenched into the electoral system.
 
FWIW, I'd love to see Gov. Brian Schweitzer make a run (maybe in 2016?).

[Karlito]

I don't know if any of you guys have heard of this, but it's an effort to put a third party candidate on the national ballot for President, which will be totally awesome if it works, though I do have my doubts.

I've read about this elsewhere.

It is funded by hedge fund managers and other big money bankers and is simultaneously not a political (so it can shield the identity of its donors) and a political party (so it can get on the balot in certain states). Its "democratic" aspects are also a sham because they are non binding and those at the top can override every decision if they want. I wouldn't put any faith at all in the idea.

Actually I hadn't looked at the site in a few months until today, and aside from some awful site design, the fact that the top three trending public figures are already in the race kind of makes it pointless effort. I'm currently looking through their bylaws to verify your last claim. If there's a news article you could point me to with verification, that'd be cool.

EDIT: Yeah, a cursory glance at the bylaws shows that the board of directors appoints itself and they pretty much retain exclusive power over the organization. Oh well.

[Dutchling]

I don't know if any of you guys have heard of this, but it's an effort to put a third party candidate on the national ballot for President, which will be totally awesome if it works, though I do have my doubts.

That site.
My laptop is not an iPod, thank you very much.

[Aqizzar]

EDIT: Yeah, a cursory glance at the bylaws shows that the board of directors appoints itself and they pretty much retain exclusive power over the organization. Oh well.

Yeah, they've managed to score a few appearances on TV to talk about themselves, with a pretty slick stable of paid spokesmen.  Needless to say, "third party activism" is on the verge of being the next sellout industry.  When there's demand for a product, a product will be delivered.

[RedKing]

I think McCain/Palin was a forerunner of that, what with Maverick(TM) speeches and YouBetcha rallies. All the pre-packaged grassroots support you could ask for.

[Eagle_eye]

They seem to think that Bernie Sanders opposes gay marriage... I don't recall hearing anything remotely suggesting that from him.

[Capntastic]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/30/how-candidates-fared-truth-o-meter-Iowa11/

Hell no, that site is a load of crap.  They named their "lie of the year" democratic statements that republicans "want to end end medicare as we know it." 

The site seems to be an aggregator for all sorts of "is this thing true?" stuff, so it's not really wise to dismiss an entire site of perhaps vaguely unrelated people because you disagree with the aim of one of the articles- especially when the statistics they're using are laid bare.  I'm not familiar with the thing you're talking about though- it would be a nice good faith gesture for you to link it instead of telling others how they should feel about it, sight unseen!

[G-Flex]

One idea floating around is that they named that their "lie of the year" partly to offset perceived bias on their part in terms of them assigning "lie of the year" status to mostly conservative/republican lies in recent years. I'm not sure, though.

Of course, the problem with any site whose idea it is to discern truths is that they can be wrong just like anyone else, or at least have a perception of things that not everyone shares.

[Zrk2]

So did I miss the necessary Ron Paul appreciation/hate gush?

[Nadaka]

So did I miss the necessary Ron Paul appreciation/hate gush?

yes.

[SalmonGod]

Progressives and the Ron Paul Fallacies

[Frumple]

Progressives and the Ron Paul Fallacies

Leaves me equal parts despairing and enraged, yaay
E: Especially considering previous discussion on how Mr. Paul is mostly the way he is because he wants to effectively rape us on the local level instead of nationwide. Wheefrakdamnthisfecalmateraltohadesarglebargle

I think I'm going to take a nap, then try to come back to actually trying to get invested in the election process in a couple days.

[Jackrabbit]

Aqizzar made a political thread? I know what I'm reading tonight! I know bugger all about pretty much anything, so I'll just post this for the updates.

[MaximumZero]

As soon as Aqizzar is of eligible age for presidency, he will have my vote from that time onward.