BigSqwert Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 10:12 AM) Amen. For the information age, people as a whole are more stupid then ever before. I disagree and I'll tell you why. But first let me get back to this Jerry Springer episode. Edited October 24, 2007 by BigSqwert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 24, 2007 Author Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 03:13 PM) I disagree and I'll tell you why. But first let me get back to this Jerry Springer episode. Uh huh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 10:13 AM) I disagree and I'll tell you why. But first let me get back to this Jerry Springer episode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I fundamentally agree with "one person, one vote," but find it troubling that Britney Spears' opinion on who should be President holds as much sway as someone with a PhD in Political Science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 12:21 PM) I fundamentally agree with "one person, one vote," but find it troubling that Britney Spears' opinion on who should be President holds as much sway as someone with a PhD in Political Science. Take heart, most studies reveal the "Britney Spears" of the world do not vote as much as the "FlaSoxBaltas" of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 The matchups: Hillary Clinton, 45% Rudy Giuliani, 35% Stephen Colbert, 13%. Hillary Clinton, 46% Fred Thompson, 34% Stephen Colbert, 12%. Yes, this is a national poll. And Stephen is in double digits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I can't wait for the who is he stealing votes from debates. Hint: It is always "my" candidate who would have won except for the "third party" candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 12:40 PM) The matchups: Hillary Clinton, 45% Rudy Giuliani, 35% Stephen Colbert, 13%. Hillary Clinton, 46% Fred Thompson, 34% Stephen Colbert, 12%. Yes, this is a national poll. And Stephen is in double digits. Is this a poll of likely voters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 10:52 AM) Is this a poll of likely voters? Yes. Check the link, full details are there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 12:54 PM) Yes. Check the link, full details are there. Insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 24, 2007 Author Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 06:09 PM) Insane. Which re-empahsizes the whole dumbing down of America thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 01:09 PM) Insane. When the President has a 25% approval rating, and Congress is at 11%, it accurately portrays people's view of the current policital enviornment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 12:38 PM) When the President has a 25% approval rating, and Congress is at 11%, it accurately portrays people's view of the current policital enviornment. Agreed. I don't see how anybody can justify the performance of either party. They are both being controlled by the same puppeteer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 11:41 AM) They are both being controlled by the same puppeteer. Stephen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 12:41 PM) Stephen? If Stephen's last name is Rothschild or Rockefeller, then yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 01:41 PM) Agreed. I don't see how anybody can justify the performance of either party. They are both being controlled by the same puppeteer. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 The Facebook.com group dedicated to Stephen's campaign is now the fastest growing group in Facebook history. The company reportedly had to suspend the group to allow its servers to catch up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 The truth is, if you put anyone that isn't immediately stuck to one party or the other on a poll ballot these days - I think they'd get 10 or 12 percent of the vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 02:41 PM) The truth is, if you put anyone that isn't immediately stuck to one party or the other on a poll ballot these days - I think they'd get 10 or 12 percent of the vote. In that same poll, if you just filter to the 18-29 year old voters...Stephen actually comes in 2nd, beating either Republican option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 06:29 PM) In that same poll, if you just filter to the 18-29 year old voters...Stephen actually comes in 2nd, beating either Republican option. Given the desertion of the GOP by people under 30, that doesn't surprise me. Four years ago, voters under 30 voted for the Dem nominee 54-45. Truth is that the GOP is losing its party for at least a generation right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 06:51 PM) Given the desertion of the GOP by people under 30, that doesn't surprise me. Four years ago, voters under 30 voted for the Dem nominee 54-45. Truth is that the GOP is losing its party for at least a generation right now. The GOP, like any party is going to have to adapt. If you remember, the Democrats used to have a large pro-segregation faction. ** Dem states used to be colored red by the media. States Rights Democratic party in orange. ** http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...e1948-Large.png Edited October 25, 2007 by mr_genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 QUOTE(mr_genius @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 06:12 PM) The GOP, like any party is going to have to adapt. If you remember, the Democrats used to have a large pro-segregation faction. ** Dem states used to be colored red by the media. States Rights Democratic party in orange. ** http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...e1948-Large.png One could, if one were so inclined, make the argument that the Democrats' loss of the Southern/Segregationist Democrats really starting with Nixon's southern strategy helped make the Democrats into a minority party for the better part of 30 years, with only Watergate and Ross Perot giving the Dems even a shot at the White House until the nations' demographics finally began to reach a point in the past few years where they could stage a comeback. With the fact that the Republicans are also in the process of losing the Hispanic vote for a long time, if the strength the Democrats show in my generation winds up holding to some extent, then the Republicans as they exist now will have no constituency left on which to build a majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 08:25 PM) One could, if one were so inclined, make the argument that the Democrats' loss of the Southern/Segregationist Democrats really starting with Nixon's southern strategy helped make the Democrats into a minority party for the better part of 30 years, with only Watergate and Ross Perot giving the Dems even a shot at the White House until the nations' demographics finally began to reach a point in the past few years where they could stage a comeback. With the fact that the Republicans are also in the process of losing the Hispanic vote for a long time, if the strength the Democrats show in my generation winds up holding to some extent, then the Republicans as they exist now will have no constituency left on which to build a majority. After the Democrats finally abandoned segregation as a policy, then southern voters were up for grabs. Obviously the Republicans wouldn't tolerate those policies in their party either, but they did realize a lot of one issue voters now had to abandon that issue and would be available. The Democrats still continued to win southern states, even up to Clinton. As far as your dreams of having one political party (the super dems) , it's not going to happen . Voters are more loyal to issues and ideals than a Donkey or Elephant logo. I would see more outside parties gaining momentum. For example, you would have the evangelicals and there ilk all voting together, a center-right GOP, a center-left Dems, and far left party. Also, G.W. Bush is a huge liability for the GOP. After a flop of a presidency, like Jimmy Carter or GW Bush, the opposition party always gets much stronger. Edited October 25, 2007 by mr_genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 more 2008 polling info http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/20...t/national.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 QUOTE(mr_genius @ Oct 24, 2007 -> 08:37 PM) Also, G.W. Bush is a huge liability for the GOP. After a flop of a presidency, like Jimmy Carter or GW Bush, the opposition party always gets much stronger. The BFD is ending. A strong 8 years and Jeb would have had a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts