Gore/Bush - A Proposed Solutiongreenspun.com : LUSENET : Countryside : One Thread
An Israelie solution: Leiberman drops off of the ticket to return to the Senate and Gore selects Bush as his VP for one term. Second term Bush runs for President with Gore as VP. In 2012 they can both run for President again.
-- Ken S. in WC TN (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 10, 2000
better solution, Gore drops Lieberman off in Israel. Gore goes to Brazil to prevent the destruction of the rain forest. Bush goes back to governing Texas, and Cheney,... well we'll find some place to send him. Both Clintons go to jail. Then we have a new election with honorable people running.
-- Rich (email@example.com), November 10, 2000.
Well, al gore has proven something I have suspected all along. There is nothing honorable about that slug.
-- Shooter (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 10, 2000.
Rich I'm with you on this one.Sounds like a plan.
-- sharon wt (email@example.com), November 10, 2000.
"If God had meant us to vote, he'd would have given us candidates." Still the best quote vis a vis this election that I have seen to date.
-- Soni (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 10, 2000.
Soni, where did you hear that one?!? LOL!!!
-- Kathleen Sanderson (email@example.com), November 10, 2000.
Go Rich!!! That is an excellent idea, John
-- John in S. IN (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 10, 2000.
Rich, really liked your post, Soni, rofl!!! You know, i am really disappointed that neither of the stronger third parties garnered the 5% for election funds for 2004. Isn't it obvious that we really need a strong third party?
-- Beth Weber (email@example.com), November 10, 2000.
Beth -- speaking from a country (Canada) that has a three party system, don't wish it on yourself. It's horrible. You have NO control over who runs the country, because two parties can join together to form a coalition against the third party, and throw them out of office. The three party system sucks. I'd much rather have two to choose from. That way maybe they'd be a little different in their outlook. Right now we have two parties that are both far-right (our "Liberals" are as conservative as the traditionally far- right "Tories"), and one "leftist" party that doesn't stand a chance in hell, because the woman heading the party is a dolt.
Stick with your two party system. It's less confusing, less costly, and, despite recent events, at least you're clear (generally) on who is running the country.
-- Tracy (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 10, 2000.
Last night on my way home I stoped at the gas station. The guy running the station was from Pakistine, he was watching the news about the dispute over the elections. I asked him what he thought about the mess in Florida. His solution was let Bill have the country for four more years since his pockets are already full. Imagine that!
-- Richard V.Miller (email@example.com), November 10, 2000.
I'm totally disgusted. On the bright side, the Green Party and the Libertarian Party got up to 19% in a lot of Texas Elections. Our part of Texas has only Democrats in the local elections. The 'real' election comes during the primaries...If you win the primaries, you don't have to face anyone in the fall election. This year though, a lot of positions had only the usual Democrat, but also a Green, Libertarian, or NLP candidate. And a lot of those 'uncontested' races had quite a showing for the 'third parties'.
BTW, a lot of Texas Democrats are actually more conservative than a conservative Republican. Newcomers are baffled that there ain't a Republican primary.
Remember the joke going around last week...Republicans vote tuesday, and Democrats vote Wednesday, and Greens vote Friday (or vice versa)...now it may come true.
-- Phil (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 10, 2000.
TRacey;what does one do when neither of the two parties truly represents me, as a citizen, or my vote? The Democrats have an incredible messianic complex; wanting to be larger than life and all things to all men. I come from a rugged sort of individualism---MUCH akin to Countryside Magazine's philosophy--that resents and questions a government that would bring a nation to apathetic bondage by way of statism. I DO NOT WANT the government beins so intimately connected-- nor corcerned--with myself and family. Don't have anything to be ashamed of or hide;but past regimes have shown "information" to be a key factor in CONTROLLING people. On the other side of the fence; the Republicans who are sold out to the interests of large, multinatiuonal corporations (look WHO hailed our giving PNTR to communistic China!!!!) and occasionally toss conservatives a little lip service now and then to abate them; these do not represent my interests as well. We need change in our leadership. As the Bible says; our system is so sick there is no sound spot upon it. We need change, we need it bad; read my post on the Deja'vu thread, every person deserves the regime he is willing to endure.
-- Beth Weber (email@example.com), November 11, 2000.
Tracy makes a very good point. I personally have voted third party in the last three elections. I did not vote third party because I actually expected my candidate to win, but because I believed that my candidate would best represent me. I would never vote third party just because I want to vote against the "big boys".
However, there are "many" third parties out there trying to get votes. In Indiana there were four parties on the ticket, and the Green party was not one of them. I read in another post that someone voted for Nader in hopes of helping the Green party get enough votes to qualify for fed monies. I must say, "that" made me sick. My impression of the Green party is "not" in line with my ideals. Also, In my opinion, "NO" parties should receive fed monies.
It made me sad to hear an old friend tell me he wasn't going to vote because to him it was a choice between syphilis and gonorrhea. I told him that I was going to vote for a chest cold.
We need a third party! We need a fourth party! We need to realize that the President is "NOT" the ruler of our country, and "IS" more simply our "face man" to the world. The little parties in this country, (yes even those evil communist ones) are very important in letting all citizens know that we are different people, with different ideas, and we have to find a way of getting along.
I doubt that any of you would want to live under the government that I would build. But I believe the government that I would build would be best for everyone. I am certain that you all believe that the government that you would build, would be the best for everyone also. Thank God that I am not in charge of building the government alone and Thank God that you are not either.
I believe that our founding fathers wanted everyoneBs opinion to matter to an extent, but noonBs opinion to be overshadowing.
Is our system corrupted? Hell yes it's corrupted. Should we do something about it? Hell yes we should do something about it.
As far as the Israeli solution...?
Sounds good. Then we can attack Canada, and claim that we have a sovereign right to build settlements there.
Sorry Tracey, but we're moving in.
-- Wayne (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 12, 2000.