jump to last post 1-18 of 18 discussions (34 posts)

The parties? Are you tired of the Republicans and Democrats running?

  1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
    Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago

    We need more diversity in the runnings for the 2012 election, right?  Aren't we tired of a centralized one-party, two-way split president?

    1. maplethorpej profile image86
      maplethorpejposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The two-party system is pointless. Unfortunately, I don't really know if it matters who the US President is anymore... It's getting hopeless.

    2. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No, actually we need less diversity.   We should have the choice to choose between the better of two similar Candidates,  not between two polar opposites.   This is, after all, America;  not the international Olympics competition.

    3. Evan G Rogers profile image81
      Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Vote Ron Paul!

    4. profile image0
      erikjohnsonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      YES! So tired of it.  The problem is that all of our great leaders and innovators are not in politics.  They are making billions on the private sector.  They own fortune 500 companies.  I would like to see Warren Buffet run for president.

  2. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
    Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago

    maplethorpej if u an for el presidente I would vote for you!  We need a new party (or two or three) to make elections not only more people-oriented, but also more diverse.  As a Democrat, I am not even able to site the last time there was a good modern president.  I will run as your V.P.!

  3. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
    Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago

    *ran

  4. My Stories profile image60
    My Storiesposted 6 years ago

    I'm just sick of the bickering.  I just wish they would work together instead of thinking "I'm right, no I'm right."

    1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
      Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      But that's what's happened!!! 
      Instead of there being issues debated/argued to create resolve, there is now more or less only one idea or opinion that is being talked about...
      In other words, the American public would become unsettled in our past, causing debate by representatives of that particular side of opinion.  Now it is more like both sides agree before even convening to meet in Congress!  I say more bickering!  This would create more opinion, and lead to the evolution of politics!

      It seems to me the closest thing to your comment is for self-gain at the local and statewide levels.  The relevancy of party diversity is unavailable because there are still plenty of candidates competing in these smaller forums.

      Thank you My Stories!

      1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
        Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The follow-up would be more like- What are they working at together...?  Is it good for the American people?

  5. Paul Wingert profile image78
    Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago

    Actually there are numerous people running for president during the genral election. Some have better ideas and are better suited for office than the ones from the Rep & Dem parties. Unfortunately it's a money thing. The Republican and Democratic Parties are basically a name brand and get all the funding. It's like a mom and pop burger joint that has better tasting and cheaper hamburgers than McDonalds, which is located a block away. But guess who is going to get most of the sales?

  6. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
    Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago

    I was hoping you would the suggest someone like Taco Bell, lol, who has been around quite a while as well, or Arby's, who is fairly new to the market, but has made their own suited competitiveness viable to being ranked amongst the larger and more established. 

    The General Elections for candidacy, nomination, and presidency tend to look more like a group of bad respresentives for different ideas concerning a rebuttal.

    Thank you Paul Wingert!

    1. Paul Wingert profile image78
      Paul Wingertposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      lol. I'm more of a Jack in the Box and Arby's fan over McDonalds.

      1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
        Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        me too lol

  7. TMMason profile image72
    TMMasonposted 6 years ago

    There is only one party whether you want to call them, "Socialist Democrats" or "Progressives", they are the same thing, same party. big Govt, regulation, nationalization, and they own it all and you.

    1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
      Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The inviting and introduction of more varied parties should be a goal of the future presidential wannabees.  Nominees likeMr. Nader received enough voted to run in the election, but were also shredded to pieces before even being noticed or allowed into the governmental 'spotlight.'

      1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
        Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        *votes

  8. lovemychris profile image82
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    All the same, ey?
    I'll take Republican for 400 Alex.
    Q: Which party has it in their platform to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term against her will?

  9. Moderndayslave profile image61
    Moderndayslaveposted 6 years ago

    We can have a "I want tax cuts and no regulations so we can screw the death out of everyone" party, but we want a bailout at taxpayer expense when we screw up.

    1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
      Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      look more into 'bailouts'...

  10. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
    Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago

    Wrong!  The concept is that polar opposites may exist but do not end up being nominees!

  11. profile image0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    Sunfish!   Errr...Carp!

    If you were an employer interviewing candidates to fill a job, you'd want to be able to choose the best one out of the eligible,  after first weeding out the unqualified or ineffective or damaging.   Same concept with our paid Officials from either Party.

  12. Cagsil profile image61
    Cagsilposted 6 years ago

    Tired of politics in general. Most are wasteful and utterly garbage.

    Picking between the lessor of two evils is still promoting evil into office.

    Personally, it's time to put a cushion between citizenry and government. wink

    1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
      Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      yes i agree

  13. cydro profile image95
    cydroposted 6 years ago

    I think it's unfortunate we have basically two people to choose from in every election.  Even if you count the primaries, it still is only a handful. 

    I don't have a better solution to offer though. 

    Interesting fact:  George Washington hated political parties.

    1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
      Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      very interesting

  14. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
    Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago

    There should be mandatory of the number of parties!  Either 3 or more!  That is a suggestion...!

  15. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
    Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago

    To enforce this, legislation can be provided saying that if there are not at least three parties running, the president may remain in power (causing a severe outcry and demand by the people of our democracy) until the mandatory number is filled.

  16. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
    Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago

    Even an extension may be used to fulfill this as well.

  17. Ralph Deeds profile image71
    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago

    St Louis Post Dispatch editorial 6-26-11:

    Serious deficit reduction can't be — and shouldn't be — accomplished without tax increases and broad elimination of tax expenditures, which would have the effect of raising taxes. The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform last year acknowledged that.

    But tax increases, in whatever guise, fail the current Republican purity laws. Mr. Cantor, who will be running for reelection next year, understands that very well. So does Mr. Kyl, who won't seek reelection in 2012 — though he's generously offered himself as a vice presidential nominee.

    It's sad to see what has happened to the Party of Lincoln, and for that matter, the party of lesser mortals like George H.W. Bush of Texas, Bob Dole of Kansas and Jack Danforth of Missouri. No one ever would mistake them for liberals, but they were statesmen who put country before party.

    Today we have the spectacle of smart, patriotic men and women putting their brains and integrity on ice to please a party dominated by anti-intellectual social Darwinists and the plutocrats who finance and mislead them.

    Consider the mythology that makes up GOP orthodoxy today. Imagine the contortions that cramp the brains and souls of men and women of intelligence and compassion who seek state and national office under the Republican banner.

    • They must believe, despite the evidence of the 2008 financial collapse, that unregulated — or at most, lightly regulated — financial markets are good for America and the world.

    • They must believe in the brilliantly cast conceit known as the "pro-growth agenda," in which economic growth can be attained only by reducing corporate and individual tax rates, especially among the investor class, and by freeing business from environmental rules that have cleaned up America's air and water and labor regulations that helped create America's middle class.

    • Though rising health care costs are pillaging the economy, and even though health care in America is now a matter of what you can afford, Republican candidates for office must deny that health care is a basic right and resist a real attempt to change and improve the system.

    • GOP candidates must scoff at scientific consensus about global warming. Blame it on human activity? Bad. Cite Noah's Ark as evidence? Good. They must express at least some doubt about the science of evolution.

    • They must insist, statistics and evidence to the contrary, that most of the nation's energy needs can be met safely with more domestic oil drilling, "clean-coal" technology and greater reliance on perfectly safe nuclear power plants.

    • They must believe that all 11.2 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States can be rounded up, detained, tried, repatriated and kept from returning at a reasonable cost.

    • Even though there are more than four unemployed persons for every available job, GOP candidates should at least hint that unemployment benefits keep people from seeking jobs.

    • They must believe that the Founding Fathers wanted to guarantee individuals the absolute right to own high-capacity, rapid-fire weapons that did not exist in the late 18th century.

    By no means is this list complete. It almost makes you feel sorry for the people who pretend to believe this stuff. Almost.

    Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/co … z1Qia9XpAV

    1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
      Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      nice

  18. dutchman1951 profile image61
    dutchman1951posted 6 years ago

    no, not the Parties, just the progressive lies found in both.

    1. Johnathan L Groom profile image60
      Johnathan L Groomposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      the president is supposed to represent us!

    2. tshivley profile image60
      tshivleyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      The parties are worthless, I'm tired of the hatred, lies and aggression of the supporters of the parties.

 
working