Poll: Who do you support in the 2012 US Presidential election?
Barack Obama - Democratic Party
Mitt Romney - Republican Party
Gary Johnson - Libertarian Party
Jill Stein - Green Party
Virgil Goode - Constitution Party
Andre Barnett - Reform Party USA
Tom Hoefling - America's Party
Rocky Anderson - Justice Party
Stewart Alexander - Socialist Party USA
Merlin Miller - American Third Position Party
Tom Stevens - Objectivist Party
[Show Results]
 
The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-06-2012, 10:14 PM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
(18-06-2012 10:41 PM)HDT Wrote:  
(18-06-2012 09:36 PM)Thomas Wrote:  Nice Straw man. Mischaracterize Libertarians as having an extreme position (no government..anarchists) then call them extremists and declare yourself the reasonable center position.
Nice try...
That wasn't my intention whatsoever. I went to extremes in that case solely to make my point more understandable and evident. The Libertarian position is one that I tend to feel that I have a little knowledge about. If you would believe me, I voted for Ron Paul in a primary, and used to to have a subscription to Reason magazine. I have since become disillusioned with modern American Libertarian politics for the reasons that I mentioned above. If you think I'm trying to con anyone here, I'm afraid you are mistaken. I will gladly say that I am far to the left, economically, of the US Libertarian Party. I never meant to criticize your politics or label you as an extremist. I simply do not see the free market as being as harmonious as say Gary Johnson does, and think it involves more regulation than is pushed by the likes of him; that is all I am advocating good sir.

If third parties meant two shits I would vote for Jill Stein, along with Nader in the previous two elections, but unfortunately since we have a complete winner take all in this corrupt system, the Greens & Libertarians of the country don't have much of a voice.
Hey dude. Just because I pointed out that you don't know what you're talking about, don't take it so personal. Laughat
I could imagine the first thing Nader would say after being elected, "Now what the fuck do I do?"
Corrupt system? I live in Chicago. You don't know shit about corruption. No

The old gods are dead, let's invent some new ones before something really bad happens.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thomas's post
19-06-2012, 11:58 PM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
Been in Canada halfway ignoring US politics =p I'll be voting though. I generally vote libertarian since I agree with parts f their tenets and see them as the most likely successful 3rd party. I'm seriously focused on the importance of a 3rd party winning a state. It's been so long since a different party has taken anything that I feel it could get a good shift for the next election when that party gets some actual coverage. Obama has made a lot of advancements for the lgbt issues which are some of my chief concerns. He's definitely someone who has made some big moves in office, even if he has been stonewalled from the start.

I'm sure Obama will win Missouri again though, can't see the state voting for a mormon. And anyway a large portion of the st. louis area was helped immensely by the temperary welfare programs he got out there. I come from a swing state that generally wants to be republican, but too often they have to acept that missouri isn't getting any help when a republican is in office. Not in the current climate.

I've never liked the idea of free market economies that much. Global trade should be a big part nowadays but a nation needs some sort of backing. It's too easy for people to make a simple error and end up broke. So what if you can work your way to millions if one injury might take it all away? I say without the government getting it's say in some stuff there's too many cracks in society and being someone who fits so many of the outcast tags I'm sure that sort of society would make my life pretty impossible.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2012, 07:42 PM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
(18-06-2012 10:41 PM)HDT Wrote:  
(18-06-2012 09:36 PM)Thomas Wrote:  Nice Straw man. Mischaracterize Libertarians as having an extreme position (no government..anarchists) then call them extremists and declare yourself the reasonable center position.
Nice try...
That wasn't my intention whatsoever. I went to extremes in that case solely to make my point more understandable and evident. The Libertarian position is one that I tend to feel that I have a little knowledge about. If you would believe me, I voted for Ron Paul in a primary, and used to to have a subscription to Reason magazine. I have since become disillusioned with modern American Libertarian politics for the reasons that I mentioned above. If you think I'm trying to con anyone here, I'm afraid you are mistaken. I will gladly say that I am far to the left, economically, of the US Libertarian Party. I never meant to criticize your politics or label you as an extremist. I simply do not see the free market as being as harmonious as say Gary Johnson does, and think it involves more regulation than is pushed by the likes of him; that is all I am advocating good sir.

If third parties meant two shits I would vote for Jill Stein, along with Nader in the previous two elections, but unfortunately since we have a complete winner take all in this corrupt system, the Greens & Libertarians of the country don't have much of a voice.
This idea that third parties don't mean shit is why they don't mean shit... If people stopped having that attitude toward the 3rd party movements, there could be progress enough to hopefully getting a third party candidate involved enough in the media coverage or poll coverage to be in debates via means of not already being a billionaire.

It couldn't possibly happen over night and I knew that it wouldn't with America Elect, but I was disappointment they made their rules and system without a seemingly wise failsafe and now they've blanked out... with a worthless, well thanks for the support and donations strangers, better luck next year in fed/local elections in which we will supposedly try getting involved.

It would be more logical to say you ought to be out there voting for Obama to protect rights most here should care about that clearly a right-wing candidate would fight against. We have the electoral college and depending on your state, your vote for the Dem/Rep may make up a faction of a percent.

I live right out of Chicago, and I know Obama has Illinois pretty secure. Now if I felt I was convincing dozens of my fellow statesmen of this movement to be more aware of 3rd parties, I would have some hesitations; however, my efforts in that field have failed to this moment. If I lived in a state much more boarderline in this or last election, I may of reconsidered. I voted for Nader in 08, and say what you will about what he could of/would of done... It's not a movement vote because the more support toward it, the better odds it can actually change that awful status quo.

I would have to say I was gunning for Rocky Anderson in the Americas Elect movement after some questionnaires from multiple places I went into, and videos I looked up on him, related him to best fitting my desired direction of the country. If he isn't on my ballot or a 3rd party candidate such as Gary Johnson takes off at least a bit to draw interest, I may go that route as my #2 choice.

BTW Thomas... implying you live in Chicago means you know more about coruption is the most absurd thing I heard all day. We may drown in it here but that's not giving anyone the upper hand.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-06-2012, 10:55 PM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
(20-06-2012 07:42 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(18-06-2012 10:41 PM)HDT Wrote:  That wasn't my intention whatsoever. I went to extremes in that case solely to make my point more understandable and evident. The Libertarian position is one that I tend to feel that I have a little knowledge about. If you would believe me, I voted for Ron Paul in a primary, and used to to have a subscription to Reason magazine. I have since become disillusioned with modern American Libertarian politics for the reasons that I mentioned above. If you think I'm trying to con anyone here, I'm afraid you are mistaken. I will gladly say that I am far to the left, economically, of the US Libertarian Party. I never meant to criticize your politics or label you as an extremist. I simply do not see the free market as being as harmonious as say Gary Johnson does, and think it involves more regulation than is pushed by the likes of him; that is all I am advocating good sir.

If third parties meant two shits I would vote for Jill Stein, along with Nader in the previous two elections, but unfortunately since we have a complete winner take all in this corrupt system, the Greens & Libertarians of the country don't have much of a voice.
This idea that third parties don't mean shit is why they don't mean shit... If people stopped having that attitude toward the 3rd party movements, there could be progress enough to hopefully getting a third party candidate involved enough in the media coverage or poll coverage to be in debates via means of not already being a billionaire.

It couldn't possibly happen over night and I knew that it wouldn't with America Elect, but I was disappointment they made their rules and system without a seemingly wise failsafe and now they've blanked out... with a worthless, well thanks for the support and donations strangers, better luck next year in fed/local elections in which we will supposedly try getting involved.

It would be more logical to say you ought to be out there voting for Obama to protect rights most here should care about that clearly a right-wing candidate would fight against. We have the electoral college and depending on your state, your vote for the Dem/Rep may make up a faction of a percent.

I live right out of Chicago, and I know Obama has Illinois pretty secure. Now if I felt I was convincing dozens of my fellow statesmen of this movement to be more aware of 3rd parties, I would have some hesitations; however, my efforts in that field have failed to this moment. If I lived in a state much more boarderline in this or last election, I may of reconsidered. I voted for Nader in 08, and say what you will about what he could of/would of done... It's not a movement vote because the more support toward it, the better odds it can actually change that awful status quo.

I would have to say I was gunning for Rocky Anderson in the Americas Elect movement after some questionnaires from multiple places I went into, and videos I looked up on him, related him to best fitting my desired direction of the country. If he isn't on my ballot or a 3rd party candidate such as Gary Johnson takes off at least a bit to draw interest, I may go that route as my #2 choice.

BTW Thomas... implying you live in Chicago means you know more about coruption is the most absurd thing I heard all day. We may drown in it here but that's not giving anyone the upper hand.
You're right that the lack of concern for third party politics leads to it's irrelevancy, but also I was referring to the fact that in some democratic countries you have a proportional representation system in that say if Greens received 10% of the vote for the a legislative body then they would receive 10% of the seats. This system allows for more diverse slate views to be accounted for. I don't object to what you are saying though, I agree totally. My vote for Obama is much less in support of him and much more against Romney. As much as Obama has disappointed me in certain areas, I fear what a totally GOP controlled US would look like.

"A man who dares waste an hour of his life has not discovered the value of life." - Charles Darwin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2012, 03:33 AM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
So I hear Obama used his executive power for the first time to cover up some government branch selling 1,300 guns to Mexican drug cartels.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Now with 40% more awesome.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2012, 02:55 AM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
I'd like to submit a write-in vote for Vermin Supreme.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2012, 09:40 PM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
(20-06-2012 10:55 PM)HDT Wrote:  You're right that the lack of concern for third party politics leads to it's irrelevancy, but also I was referring to the fact that in some democratic countries you have a proportional representation system in that say if Greens received 10% of the vote for the a legislative body then they would receive 10% of the seats. This system allows for more diverse slate views to be accounted for. I don't object to what you are saying though, I agree totally. My vote for Obama is much less in support of him and much more against Romney. As much as Obama has disappointed me in certain areas, I fear what a totally GOP controlled US would look like.
I think proportional representation doesn't work well. It allows the extremes a seat at the table. If one has any doubts, one can just refer to the recent Greek elections where both communists and fascists--for reals--get a voice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-06-2012, 02:57 AM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
(23-06-2012 09:40 PM)BryanS Wrote:  I think proportional representation doesn't work well. It allows the extremes a seat at the table. If one has any doubts, one can just refer to the recent Greek elections where both communists and fascists--for reals--get a voice.
But if that's how say 49% of your population feels - is it not better to include them, rather than exclude? You've got to work with them after all...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-06-2012, 10:51 AM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
(24-06-2012 02:57 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(23-06-2012 09:40 PM)BryanS Wrote:  I think proportional representation doesn't work well. It allows the extremes a seat at the table. If one has any doubts, one can just refer to the recent Greek elections where both communists and fascists--for reals--get a voice.
But if that's how say 49% of your population feels - is it not better to include them, rather than exclude? You've got to work with them after all...
Thankfully 49% didn't vote for Communists or Fascists--this time. At the risk of invoking Godwin's law, Hitlers party was a similar minority, and he was able to take advantage of economic distress and his platform as a minor party to propel himself into his Chancellorship. Notice the meteoric rise once his party got out of single digits on the heals of financial crisis : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler#Rise_to_power

People on both sides of the political aisle in the US lament how difficult it is to move their agenda really fast. And the two party political system reinforces this tendency in US politics. Our government is designed not to be efficient unless there is a war when the President is designated commander in chief--because in such circumstances decisive action is critical. Short of that, it takes a large amount of public will to enact big political changes.

A tilt towards stability is a good thing. Most new big ideas and new political parties are really, really bad ones, and proponents of third ways should be forced to overcome big barriers to prove themselves. In reality, those ideas from third parties in the US do tend to be incorporated into the main parties. The most recent case in point was the Ross Perot candidacy. We are all very lucky that crackpot didn't win, but his emphasis on debt was taken up by both the congressional GOP and Democrat president. Despite being a crackpot, Perot had a couple big issues the country agreed on. Perot's candidacy was one reason we had balanced budgets in the 90s.

The GOP was founded as an anti-slavery party that formed after the Whigs and Democrats failed to take up their motivating reason to exist. There was a need for this platform in national politics, and the failure of either major party at the time to take it up resulted in the GOP replacing the Whigs. However, we are all better off for the American Party (Know Nothing party) never gaining office. Today's minor parties in the US are all filled with crazies, though those parties may have some good ideas sprinkled among the crazy. The major parties will take on the few good ideas as they gain popular support, leaving the minor parties to languish when they are only left with crazy as their differentiation from the main parties. Third parties serve a useful purpose since they are the laboratories where new ideas develop. Thankfully, though, they usually don't win elected office.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BryanS's post
24-06-2012, 02:00 PM
RE: The OFFICIAL TTA 2012 US Presidential Election Poll
(24-06-2012 10:51 AM)BryanS Wrote:  
(24-06-2012 02:57 AM)morondog Wrote:  But if that's how say 49% of your population feels - is it not better to include them, rather than exclude? You've got to work with them after all...
Thankfully 49% didn't vote for Communists or Fascists--this time. At the risk of invoking Godwin's law, Hitlers party was a similar minority, and he was able to take advantage of economic distress and his platform as a minor party to propel himself into his Chancellorship. Notice the meteoric rise once his party got out of single digits on the heals of financial crisis : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler#Rise_to_power

People on both sides of the political aisle in the US lament how difficult it is to move their agenda really fast. And the two party political system reinforces this tendency in US politics. Our government is designed not to be efficient unless there is a war when the President is designated commander in chief--because in such circumstances decisive action is critical. Short of that, it takes a large amount of public will to enact big political changes.

A tilt towards stability is a good thing. Most new big ideas and new political parties are really, really bad ones, and proponents of third ways should be forced to overcome big barriers to prove themselves. In reality, those ideas from third parties in the US do tend to be incorporated into the main parties. The most recent case in point was the Ross Perot candidacy. We are all very lucky that crackpot didn't win, but his emphasis on debt was taken up by both the congressional GOP and Democrat president. Despite being a crackpot, Perot had a couple big issues the country agreed on. Perot's candidacy was one reason we had balanced budgets in the 90s.

The GOP was founded as an anti-slavery party that formed after the Whigs and Democrats failed to take up their motivating reason to exist. There was a need for this platform in national politics, and the failure of either major party at the time to take it up resulted in the GOP replacing the Whigs. However, we are all better off for the American Party (Know Nothing party) never gaining office. Today's minor parties in the US are all filled with crazies, though those parties may have some good ideas sprinkled among the crazy. The major parties will take on the few good ideas as they gain popular support, leaving the minor parties to languish when they are only left with crazy as their differentiation from the main parties. Third parties serve a useful purpose since they are the laboratories where new ideas develop. Thankfully, though, they usually don't win elected office.
That's a very, very good point. I think the main quibble with the American system is that we do not have a balanced system. Both major parties are right wing parties essentially despite what people would like to believe. The Dems are very near the political center, while the GOP is on further right. Today's GOP, however, is not moderately right wing, it's extreme. Socially and economically this party is legitimately becoming more and more radically right wing. This leaves the already centre to centre-right Democratic party and the centre-left Green party being the most legitimate, rational parties. Yet the Green party has absolutely no say whatsoever. I understand the proportional system leads to a less stable system, and I don't know that I would truly advocate for it if I had to decide, but my position is that we already have an extreme party playing a huge role in government. Disagree with me if you wish, but this GOP is more right wing than they ever have been as long as I can remember.

"A man who dares waste an hour of his life has not discovered the value of life." - Charles Darwin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: