The argument over leadership and leadership abilities, lost job, jobs sent overseas, economic policy, foreign policy, national and foreign debt, national banking and international banking issues, has raged... In listening to the candidates speaking, attacking, pointing fingers, I wonder why we accept either for the office of presidency? Consider: 1) How would you send a message to both parties? 2) What would you say... answers can be like open letters. 3) What characteristics are you looking for in a President? 4) Why do you dislike either candidate or both? So have at it. rant, rave, debate
sort by best latest
can you provide links or web information for people who may want to read up on either person?
Gary Johnson is here: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/record check out his principles of good government at the bottom. And here is Jill Steins official site: http://www.jillstein.org/ Both campaign pages are a good starting point for the candidates.
Very unlikely anyone will ever see Mitt sip champaigne or drink tea.
Sorry... I mean accepting... not excepting.. though I prefer the later in scrabble... I think there are options available before the election that is where the key to accepting comes into play... both assume we will just vote come Novemeber.
Ron Paul not running until 2016. Jill Stein M.D. is the Green Party. Gary Johnson is the Libertarian Party nomination. He is a Ron Paul revolutionary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrU6hTWyj6s
Johnson was governor of New Mexico for 8 years!
Reality Bytes: Great point that there are really more than two candidates... why not take this op to tell us MORE about Gary Johnson, how to vote for him.... and whatever else pops into your head....within reason of course.
Jill Stien as well, for the Green Party, and her message is a lot more realistic than Gary Johnson's.
@Nathan Orf: Can you offer a comparison? Tell us why Jill Stein is the go to person?
Stien wants to break up the big banks, increase funding for small, local banks, limit the role of Wall Street and corporations in government, and advance policies that protect the environment. She wants to take the money out of politics.
Wasn't it the Green Party that nominated Cynthia McKinney a time or two back? They lost my attention with that one.
And Gary Johnson will get less than 3% of the vote because most Americans do not believe what Gary Johnson believes.
Limited and efficient government, fiscal responsibility, personal freedom? Ya, nobody believes in that stuff.
I live in Louisiana. I have never heard of him. If I never heard of him, and since qualifying for the November elections in Louisiana ended this week, how am I suppose to know about him.
Good point... Voting is important... Why? Can you explain to readers why it is important... and maybe list a few alternatives to vote for...
awesome! I always love it when you visit and comment!!!!
It is the constant battle that has held back progress... if that battle is a tool, then control of the congress is essential for movement to go forward. Part of the problem I see in fixing the economy is the speed in which the government moves.
Obama had a Democrat controlled Congess for 2 years...and he did implement his plans and they have failed. How can you say, "had they been allowed to work"?
Obama's plans did work, as far as they have gone. He saved the auto-industry, in case you hadn't noticed. I didn't see any Republicans on his side then, and they have just stood in the way ever sense. The Republicans don't have a stellar record.
GM bailout was a farce. Tax payers are still on the hook, to the tune of over $42 Billion. A legal backruptcy would have allowed for either a restructuring or selling off. Ford & other would have picked up for the demand. Shell game is what it wa
Tell all of that to the millions who would have been unemployed if GM and Chrysler went into bankruptcy. It is apparent that you do not live in Ohio.
I find the whole auto bail-out interesting... we scream american made products...but those products are not really made in the USA... we can look at FLint MI to see that...Yes there are US workers but there should have been a lot more US workers.
Dealerships were closed. We still have a million less people working than when Obama took office. It bailed out the AUW and put Americans on the hook for $42 B. Bailouts failed. We are worse than 4 years ago.
Part of this is tied to the banking world too... much like the housing market where people are given loans they do not qualify for with high interest rates... either way the banks win....
Actually, I think its interesting that the stimulus was signed by George W. Bush. Typical Republicans. Blaming Obama for something that Bush did. Indeed, the individual pieces and parts were not American made, but the automobiles were.
assembled in America by foreign parts is not American made in my book. When I buy a Ford and it says Made in Mexico, Made in Canada... I want to send it back to the factory for something made in America...
When people say Obama has no record to run on, I wonder where they have been the last four years? I'm not voting for any more governors either, and I'm not willing to hand the government back to a party that has been only obstructionist.
Nathan, I was against both bailouts; those under Bush and under Obama, as there was more than one. The government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do what was don't and to boot...it failed. $42 billion still on the tax payer.
I have to disagree. I think Congress is the big problem facing our country right now. They are too partisan, too selfish and do not work hard enough at solving problems. The rules are ridiculous and need a complete overhaul.
I have to disagree with all your argument here because none of them are true.
Neither stimulus package that added up to over 1.5 trillion dollars did anything useful. It was suppose to stimulate the economy, and the economy is not stimulated
Hello Mitch Alan! I guess I don't want to vote for which ever is the least horrid... I would rather vote for someone I believe can make a difference and I do not see that in either candidate. I don't see much power in the pres. I see it in congress.
Why do you think only a democrat or a republican always wins? Can we change that or create a party that is both and yet neither?
I always forget about Colin Powell... hmmm this bears consideration.
Just because it has never happened is not a reason to think it can not happen... dilution of the voting populations would reduce the power the each camp have over the citizens and force comprimise in exchange for support.
Lol@ myself... yes... I meant accepting... damn my brain. I say it is never too late...I think we should stop voting row A and row B... and really start to think about what we want in terms of representation.
That's the argument we hear every four years, the one that keeps us in thrall to the two-party system. It's always that we have to take one or the other, that we have to accept the dismal choice of the lesser of two evils. We should rebel against it.
Some of what I wanted to fuel here was that there is still time for the voters to say NO... we are not taking another loser to the white house. Personnally I do not see either candidate as leadership material... able to fix the current mess. I say NO
I want to rebel against the two-party system, but the closest thing I've ever seen to an effective rebellion is the Tea Party, which I really hoped would become an independent party. Got any specific suggestions?
I think a lot about Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party) would appeal to Tea Party types. Jill Stein (Green Party) maybe not so much, but both are interesting candidates who will be on the ballot in most states.
The rebellion would be during the primaries...I agree things need shaking up, but now the biggest impact will be local and State elections.
I think the election could be delayed... six month or 1 more year of OB would be better then 4 more years of wichever one of them... not doing anything more than has been done. This is going to take someone who can deal with all of Washington...
I wish we had no parties. If we are going to have parties, two is enough.
chosen in primary elections that, again offer only limited choices. Do you feel that either of these candidates will make a difference following their election? The premise behind the original question is why do we allow the best poor choice?
davenmidtown, There were many option in the primary...I did not vote for Romney in the primary, but will in the general election.