• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Minor parties Presidential debate

Tactical9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
138
Location
Manchester, New Hampshire
Featuring:

Gary Johnson: Libertarian party
Jill Stein: Green party
Virgil Goode: Constitution party
Rocky Anderson: Justice party

Will take place on October 23, from 8:00 pm CDT to 9:30 PM CDT at the Hilton in Chicago.

Live online streaming of the debate WILL be available.

For further information (and to RSVP for streaming), http://freeandequal.org/events/presidential-debate/
 
Last edited:

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
I'd them to start with clips of the "other guys'" answers first, and then their answers. I assume this will not be on broadcast TV?
 

Tactical9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
138
Location
Manchester, New Hampshire
I'd them to start with clips of the "other guys'" answers first, and then their answers. I assume this will not be on broadcast TV?

I'm not sure if the mainstream media is going to cover it. Larry King is moderating the debate, so it is possible that CNN might air it.

If I find out anything I will update this thread.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
yawn

None of them will come even close to winning. Let's focus on the actual choice we have, pick the better candidate, and vote for him. Otherwise, for all the effect you will have, you might as well stay home.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
yawn

None of them will come even close to winning. Let's focus on the actual choice we have, pick the better candidate, and vote for him. Otherwise, for all the effect you will have, you might as well stay home.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Believe it or not these others are 'actual choices' . :rolleyes:
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
Otherwise, for all the effect you will have, you might as well stay home.
Likewise if you don't live in a swing state. What's the point in voting at all if you live in a state guaranteed to vote for a specific party? :rolleyes:
 

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
yawn

None of them will come even close to winning. Let's focus on the actual choice we have, pick the better candidate, and vote for him. Otherwise, for all the effect you will have, you might as well stay home.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

You're right, I should, and will, stay home.





Washington votes entirely by mail-in ballots.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Likewise if you don't live in a swing state. What's the point in voting at all if you live in a state guaranteed to vote for a specific party? :rolleyes:

I am going to vote Gary Johnson for a simple reason, in my state (not a swing state) if a libertarian candidate gets 5% of the vote for this election they are recognized by the state as a "major party".

Technically the republicans have failed to follow the rules or qualify as a major party in our last election in 2010. (Our State). http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/ar...e-to-have-romney-kicked-off-washington-ballot

but of course this is being ignored.

.
 
Last edited:

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Likewise if you don't live in a swing state. What's the point in voting at all if you live in a state guaranteed to vote for a specific party? :rolleyes:

Because, if you stay home (or vote for one of the non-viable "choices"), the State could swing the other way. I hope you can see the difference.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
If you do decided to leave and venture out to the polls. Do your country a favor and reject both of the major party, status-quo tyrants.
I'd much rather vote for the righteous underdog than inflict my fellow countrymen with more of the same.....
 

Tactical9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
138
Location
Manchester, New Hampshire
Update on October 23rd debate broadcasting

The mainstream media blackout is still in full operation, as no mainstream media outlet has yet to be confirmed to be giving any time to these debates.

Additional live streaming will be available from Google's youtube, Al Jazeera (English), Russia today, ORA-TV, and possibly on C-SPAN (still being discussed).

The relevant link for the above is http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/19/third-party-debate-al-jazeera-english_n_1988014.html

Details for the second (and final) debate on October 30th from Washington, DC have not yet been disclosed. As information on the second round of debates becomes available, I will update this thread.
 
Last edited:

Tactical9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
138
Location
Manchester, New Hampshire
Update for October 30th runoff Presidential debate

The mainstream media blackout is still in full operation, as no mainstream media outlet has yet to be confirmed to be giving any time to these debates.

Additional live streaming will be available from Google's youtube, Al Jazeera (English), Russia today, ORA-TV, and possibly on C-SPAN (still being discussed).

The relevant link for the above is http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/19/third-party-debate-al-jazeera-english_n_1988014.html

Details for the second (and final) debate on October 30th from Washington, DC have not yet been disclosed. As information on the second round of debates becomes available, I will update this thread.

October 30, 2012. 9:00 PM EST to 10:30 PM EST. Venue will be announced shortly.

Following the conclusion of the debates on October 23rd, there will be an instant runoff vote from debate viewers to determine which two candidates will progress to the final round of debates, on October 30th.

http://freeandequal.org/updates/second-2012-presidential-debate-october-30-in-washington-dc/

I'll update the thread when more details become available. As it stands right now, it looks like the only way to watch the debates will be via streaming. If anyone has heard of a live TV broadcast, please update the thread with the information.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
There's a reason they are called "minor parties".....Al Jazeera (English), Russia today, and I thought Larry King was dead.

.....too funny.

Sorry, this "debate" will be cutting into New Girl and The X Factor.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
This might be worth watching if these guys were just debating to share and explore ideas. However, by definition, this is an if-I-were-president debate, which is silly. None of these guys will ever be president. And there is a reason: These guys are so far out of the mainstream as to be unable, even if everyone fully understood these "candidates" positions, to earn more than a few percent of the vote.

So what is the rational way to bring about the change that any one of these "candidates" advocate? You have to move the country that way. Not jump, move. We got where we are over the last century. Some might even say that the path we are on was entered by the outcome of the Civil War. In any event, the acceleration was caused by progressives collecting in a single party, taking over that party, and giving that party control enough to ratchet up the government involvement in a way that is incredibly hard to deratchet. To undo this, Liberty-lovers, including both conservatives and libertarians, need to collect in a single party, take over that party, and give that party control enough to, step-by-step, deratchet the government control.

The ideals of smaller government and more Liberty are being embraced as never before by the Republican Party, not nearly enough, but more than ever before. We need to keep moving the Republican Party in the right direction, give it power, and make it drag the Republic back in the right direction. This is the precise strategy that was used to drag it in the wrong direction. We need to be as politically smart and effective as those who would take our Liberty.

In this election, that means voting for Romney and, more importantly, against Obama. It means voting for Republican house members and senators. It means being just as tough on them in town halls after the election as we were on their predecessors. It means being active in the candidate selection process in order to eliminate RINOs during the primary season. However, once our slate is settled, we must support the Republican (unless, miraculously, the Dems put up a more Liberty-loving candidate).

You can vote "principle" and let the country slide more in the wrong direction, probably over that cliff, because the more Liberty-loving candidate (who wasn't perfectly Liberty-loving) lost by a handful of votes. Or you can vote realistically and, step-by-step, move the party, then the nation, then the party, then the nation, etc. in the right direction.

Don't be so selfish as to want to do it now for you. Start the process in motion for future generations. "I want it now" is the mantra of the pawns of the collectivists. "I want to build it for the future" is how the Founders and Framers chose to think and how we should now.
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
What is selfish is wanting future generations to endure more of these two yahoo parties.

What people also seem to forget is the huge jumps this country took toward it's current state. It absolutely would do no harm to undo these jumps.

FDR major leaps in a short time, changing the way the court rules.
 

1245A Defender

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
4,365
Location
north mason county, Washington, USA
Well,,,

This might be worth watching if these guys were just debating to share and explore ideas. However, by definition, this is an if-I-were-president debate, which is silly. None of these guys will ever be president. And there is a reason: These guys are so far out of the mainstream as to be unable, even if everyone fully understood these "candidates" positions, to earn more than a few percent of the vote.

So what is the rational way to bring about the change that any one of these "candidates" advocate? You have to move the country that way. Not jump, move. We got where we are over the last century. Some might even say that the path we are on was entered by the outcome of the Civil War. In any event, the acceleration was caused by progressives collecting in a single party, taking over that party, and giving that party control enough to ratchet up the government involvement in a way that is incredibly hard to deratchet. To undo this, Liberty-lovers, including both conservatives and libertarians, need to collect in a single party, take over that party, and give that party control enough to, step-by-step, deratchet the government control.

The ideals of smaller government and more Liberty are being embraced as never before by the Republican Party, not nearly enough, but more than ever before. We need to keep moving the Republican Party in the right direction, give it power, and make it drag the Republic back in the right direction. This is the precise strategy that was used to drag it in the wrong direction. We need to be as politically smart and effective as those who would take our Liberty.

In this election, that means voting for Romney and, more importantly, against Obama. It means voting for Republican house members and senators. It means being just as tough on them in town halls after the election as we were on their predecessors. It means being active in the candidate selection process in order to eliminate RINOs during the primary season. However, once our slate is settled, we must support the Republican (unless, miraculously, the Dems put up a more Liberty-loving candidate).

You can vote "principle" and let the country slide more in the wrong direction, probably over that cliff, because the more Liberty-loving candidate (who wasn't perfectly Liberty-loving) lost by a handful of votes. Or you can vote realistically and, step-by-step, move the party, then the nation, then the party, then the nation, etc. in the right direction.

Don't be so selfish as to want to do it now for you. Start the process in motion for future generations. "I want it now" is the mantra of the pawns of the collectivists. "I want to build it for the future" is how the Founders and Framers chose to think and how we should now.


Well said Eye95,,, I agree!!

I thas to be done, thoroughly, slowly, and widely..
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Well said Eye95,,, I agree!!

I thas to be done, thoroughly, slowly, and widely..

Why?

This method of changed has been preached for many decades what it has led to is "compromise" and more tyranny.

Bob you ever make it up B'ham way? We'd love to have you at one of our Sunday meets and John is organizing/working on something special for veterans day.
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Courts are notoriously monolithic where precedent is concerned.....they hate reversing "themselves."

Huge jumps in public policy happen very rarely. Though it has happened less very rarely in since 9/11. We are a representative republic.....

The trick is to get the states "liberty loving" and the feds will follow or be dragged towards the light of liberty. The AZ immigration law is a prime example. Another is the SC voter ID law. Change the state and when the courts see the states move the courts are loath to drag the states into a federal fold.

2010 is an example of chipping away at the "two party" system. Tea Party candidates are Republicans but are not the typical republican. 2012 will determine if the Tea Party candidates have impressed or depressed their constituencies. The Tea Party will be a force to reckon with or be relegated to the ash heap of political history.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Courts are notoriously monolithic where precedent is concerned.....they hate reversing "themselves."

Huge jumps in public policy happen very rarely. Though it has happened less very rarely in since 9/11. We are a representative republic.....

The trick is to get the states "liberty loving" and the feds will follow or be dragged towards the light of liberty. The AZ immigration law is a prime example. Another is the SC voter ID law. Change the state and when the courts see the states move the courts are loath to drag the states into a federal fold.

2010 is an example of chipping away at the "two party" system. Tea Party candidates are Republicans but are not the typical republican. 2012 will determine if the Tea Party candidates have impressed or depressed their constituencies. The Tea Party will be a force to reckon with or be relegated to the ash heap of political history.

When FDR threatened the court the U.S. went through huge policy changes in very short time. The court suddenly had no problem reversing many of the Lochner era decisions.

Lincoln huge policy change from federalism to nationalism.

Teddy Roosevelt huge policy change giving President a lot more power than previously opening doors for progressivism. Giving rise to the modern myth that a president has to "Lead" has to leave a legacy.

Wilson huge policy changes toward socialism, used WWI as his crisis not to go to waste ignores constitution on many issues statist court judges agree.

FDR promised not to get us into Europes wars then manipulated us into war and used this as an excuse to dismiss many constitutional protections, also used a recession as an excuse for huge policy changes (then turning that recession into a major depression). Instituted many changes modeled after his socialist heroes Stalin and Hitler. (Gleichschaltung for example) Musolini declared him a dictator.

Since FDR everything a president does seems like a minor change, but it hasn't they all have been leaps toward tyranny. We have been conditioned to think its nothing to drop bombs or invade foreign countries without a declaration by congress. We accept governments and the presidents oligarchy rule and worship at the alter of nationalism, not much has been done by many presidents or politicians to reverse this continual power grab by the government and it's agents.
 
Top