TexasCHLforum.com

sjfcontrol wrote:

clarionite wrote:
This is not the 2008 election. Romney/Biden is not McCain/Palin. Republicans that didn't make it to the polls in 2008 will make it this time. And people who supported Obama in 2008 are weaker in support, and in some cases non supportive of him this time. In 2008, my neighbor two houses down had an Obama yard sign. This year, there's one at the far end of our street, but that's it. We had quite a few Romney signs until some jerk stole them all last week. Now we have a few back, and one 4'x8' sign with a light on it at night. That one happens to be in my yard. <G>

I'm nowhere near unbiased. I honestly fear for your 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights with a second Obama term.

Romney/Biden???

Still had Biden on the brain from the dog poo comment.

I appologize profusely to Ryan. My gaff was unforgivable.

RoyGBiv wrote:Why polling data showing a dead heat is WRONG.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I wish Fox would allow linking/embedding.

I can only hope they're right. My gut tells me the polls are padded quite a bit for Obama.

This is not the 2008 election. Romney/Biden is not McCain/Palin. Republicans that didn't make it to the polls in 2008 will make it this time. And people who supported Obama in 2008 are weaker in support, and in some cases non supportive of him this time. In 2008, my neighbor two houses down had an Obama yard sign. This year, there's one at the far end of our street, but that's it. We had quite a few Romney signs until some jerk stole them all last week. Now we have a few back, and one 4'x8' sign with a light on it at night. That one happens to be in my yard. <G>

I'm nowhere near unbiased. I honestly fear for your 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendment rights with a second Obama term.

Jim Beaux wrote:

clarionite wrote:

Jim Beaux wrote: Logic tells me that my efforts will be better rewarded trying to push a rope then trying to help with your misconceptions.

I've typed 4 responses and then reworded them in an attempt to respond to this in a manner in which it deserves but still give an active member of this forum some respect. But I don't believe it's possible.

If you're not going to participate in a debate with reason, the please don't participate with snide remarks.

1. You have the option to ignore any here you wish.

2. You are confusing being snide with being indifferent and btw, it is clearly an exercise in futility to "participate" in accordance to your definition of "reason". Sorry to disappoint ya, but I will dance to my choice of music.

3. Today's referendum is to remove obama and try to repair our country. We can not afford the luxury of the self indulgence you "3rd party guys" advocate.

4. I think most here agree that Texas electoral votes will go to Romney. But that is not what you have argued:

clarionite wrote:
Do you care to explain how voting for anyone other than Obama or Romney for this election will cause someone other than Obama or Romney to win?

I'm not arguing for 3rd party guys. Quite the contrary. I've asked how voting for a 3rd party guy in the election amounts to anything other than a vote for Obama.
At this point, I see the election as you do in #3 above. If 3rd party candidates are going to have any effect, it's going to have to be at the local level first.

as far as your #2, I didn't confuse anything. You started with a comment to me about my lack of logic (a personal attack that I ignored). I earnestly asked you to attempt to educate me. You made a snide remark about pushing a rope. That's not indifference. I'm more than willing to listen to another's viewpoint. I've learned more than I'd care to admit from listening to others argue their case. It pains me to admit that until the 2000 Election, I voted ... It's embarrassing... Democrat. When I looked at Al Gore, something didn't add up. His beliefs were so polar opposite to mine that I started talking to more and more people about their beliefs.

Jim Beaux wrote: Logic tells me that my efforts will be better rewarded trying to push a rope then trying to help with your misconceptions.

I've typed 4 responses and then reworded them in an attempt to respond to this in a manner in which it deserves but still give an active member of this forum some respect. But I don't believe it's possible.

If you're not going to participate in a debate with reason, the please don't participate with snide remarks.

WildBill wrote: I will try. Let's say a poll shows Obama with 49% of the vote and Romney also at 49%, with 2% undecided. Of course polls have a margin of error.

Let's say that another candidate [Ron Paul for example] is running. Since most of the Ron Paul supporters would be conservative, voting for him would be likely take away votes from Romney. So if the 2% undecided voted for Paul and other 2% moved from Romney to Paul, then Obama would get 49%, Romney 47% and Paul 4%. Therefore Obama would win. Some people claim this is what happened with Clinton and Ross Perot.

Bill,

You're arguing the same point I am. <G>

Marty

Jim Beaux wrote:

clarionite wrote:Do you care to explain how voting for anyone other than Obama or Romney for this election will cause someone other than Obama or Romney to win?

One could only explain this concept to someone who has a firmer grasp of logic.

Then make an attempt at educating me.
I may not agree with you, but program logic day in and day out. If I can teach a computer, I'm sure I can be taught.
I'm truely interested in how someone believes that a vote for someone other than the two front runners does anything other than helping Obama.
Surely you can't argue that someone other than Obama or Romney will be the next president.

Edited: To fix my quote blocks.

smoothoperator wrote:Thank you for demonstrating my point.

What point? You didn't make one.

Do you care to explain how voting for anyone other than Obama or Romney for this election will cause someone other than Obama or Romney to win?

If someone supported Obama, they'd vote for him. A vote for anyone else (who if you're honest with yourself, you know won't win) is nothing but a vote being taken from the Romney bucket.

I support your right to do so, I'm just not naive enough to think it accomplishes anything.

smoothoperator wrote:

baldeagle wrote:Republicans aren't the answer but neither are Democrats. Elected officials who adhere to the Constitution are the answer.

Exactly correct!

Also to blame are the people who won't vote for friends of the Constitution "because they can't win" in a circular argument that would be very familiar to Captain John Yossarian.

Get one of those friends of the Constitution on the ballot with a chance to win... Then maybe we'll vote for them. Either Obama or Romney will be the next president. Any vote for another candidate in this election has the same effect as a vote for Obama IMO.

RoyGBiv wrote:

APynckel wrote:The political party system in this country needs to be dissolved. It is what is wrong with everything. They are the ones battling for more and more power, not the candidates. Term limits for every office, and make it the worst offense imaginable to be found in violation of your oath of office. If you sign or endorse a bill that is found unconstitutional, you are sent to prison, or exiled from the country as a traitor.

Practically speaking, affiliations between legislators with common agendas are a useful, necessary and unavoidable thing. I could argue both for and against a viable third party, or fourth... The craziness that is "forming a government" in multi-party countries is a great source of both amusement and consternation.

The problem in THIS country is VOTERS.

Wrong headed politicians are easily removed from office, if the people who vote for them pay enough attention. THE problem, IMO, is that voters are lazy, uneducated, easily swayed by platitudes or irrelevant arguments, have an "issue of the day" mindset (global warming) and are satisfied to suffer fools as long as they can keep their Starbucks and some illusion of freedom and security. I definitely do not blame politicians for our current malaise. Politicians are merely a symptom. I blame "We The People".

Bread and Circuses... Things haven't changed so much since Roman times. (panem et circenses)

The Annoyed Man wrote:U.S. Prepares Economic Aid to Bolster Democracy in Egypt
By STEVEN LEE MYERS
Published: September 3, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/04/world ... ml?_r=1&hp

WASHINGTON — Nearly 16 months after first pledging to help Egypt’s failing economy, the Obama administration is nearing an agreement with the country’s new government to relieve $1 billion of its debt as part of an American and international assistance package intended to bolster its transition to democracy, administration officials said.

So basically, Obama is going to borrow money from China, increasing our debt, so he can give money to Egyptians.

And we should reelect this guy why?

What's one more billion? It's not a drop in the bucket.

http://beforeitsnews.com/economy/2012/0 ... 49770.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I posted that on another thread.... We're so mislead it's not even funny.