Who will vote Republican/Tea Party in 2012?

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Tea Party, no
Republican, maybe it would depend who the candidate is.
Democrat, maybe, it would depend who the candidate is, I will not vote Dem. if it's Obama. He has made too many missteps and too many of the downtrodden have been trod on even more. It's not just that he hasn't done many of the things which were on his CHANGE platform, he hasn't even addressed them.

I think you'd better take a very careful look at what the "hidden" agenda might be behind any Republican candidate before you give them your vote in ANY election!!
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I believe you have your parties confused -- the white hoods were, and are, the liberal Dems:

[FONT=arial, HELVETICA]The Democratic Party’s war against African-Americans continued after the Civil War (which many Democrats in fact opposed, often working actively to undercut the Union war effort). Democrats, both north and south fought the attempt to implement the equality for African-Americans gained at such a high cost. This opposition was often violent. Indeed, the Ku Klux Klan operated as the de facto terrorist arm of the national Democratic Party during Reconstruction.[/FONT]

[FONT=arial, HELVETICA]"Affirmative action" has become the touchstone of Democratic racial politics. Democrats portray anyone who opposes affirmative action as racist. But affirmative action, as currently practiced, is racist to the core. It is based on the assumption that African-Americans are incapable of competing with whites. It represents the kind of paternalistic racism that would have done honor to Calhoun. For the modern liberal Democratic racist as for the old-fashioned one, blacks are simply incapable of freedom. They will always need Ol’ Massa’s help. And woe be to any African-American who wanders off of the Democratic plantation. Ask Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, or Ward Connerly. Although they echo the call for a "color-blind society" that once characterized the vision of Martin Luther King Jr., they are pilloried as "Uncle Toms" of "Oreos" by such enforcers of the Democratic plantation system as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton.

[/FONT]The Democratic Party’s Legacy of Racism by Mackubin T. Owens
[FONT=arial, HELVETICA]
[/FONT]

Do you really want to go here, again?
Because this black man will have no problem putting you in your place... once again.

Affirmative Action is not just for black people... it's for all minorities including women:
The term "affirmative action" was first used in the United States. It first appeared in Executive Order 10925, which was signed by President John F. Kennedy on March 6, 1961, and it was used to refer to measures to achieve non-discrimination. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson issued Executive Order 11246 which required federal contractors to take "affirmative action" to hire without regard to race, religion and national origin. In 1968, gender was added to the anti-discrimination list. - Affirmative action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And it really doesn't matter which political party you feel is responsible for the Ku Klux Klan. Get your ass out of the 19th century and see who makes up that group TODAY?

Your link of victimizing propaganda is a bunch of ideological bullshit, and a bigot like you drinks this shit up like it's moonshine. Seriously... it's been "fun" for now, but for your own sake, don't start.
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I think you'd better take a very careful look at what the "hidden" agenda might be behind any Republican candidate before you give them your vote in ANY election!!


Indeed!

You might be serving the corporate interests like Obama and the lib dems:


"... Their original plan, which we told you about no later than last September (and we can point you on OpEdNews.com to our published article at the time to prove it), was to lull the liberal/progressive base into thinking a "public option" was some kind of mumbling substitute for a single payer reform system (that would have represented REAL change), with the INTENTION of throwing even that option over the side before final passage. We saw it all coming, and we tried to warn you how important it was to keep speaking out to demand better.

For the corporate special interests controlling the whole legislative process (but only in the absence of your voices of course) this was a heads they win, tails the people lose, proposition. By getting the Democrats to squander their mandate and political capital for actual change, by getting them to meekly abandon their professed principles in favor of a bill that would benefit as a bottom line the insurance corporations only, the people en masse would justifiably conclude that the Democrats had completely betrayed them. And the Republicans, who by the tactic of enfeeblement of government in fact just empower the same ultimate corporate agenda, even as disliked as they are themselves, would be swept back into office in the next election. Net result ... reform and change discredited, hopes dashed, defeatism rules, the corporations win again, one grand circular tag team.

That was the MASTER plan. ..."

OpEdNews - Article: The Democratic Party's Plan To THROW The Next Couple Elections
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Do you really want to go here, again?
Because this black man will have no problem putting you in your place... once again.

Affirmative Action is not just for black people... it's for all minorities including women:
The term "affirmative action" was first used in the United States. It first appeared in Executive Order 10925, which was signed by President John F. Kennedy on March 6, 1961, and it was used to refer to measures to achieve non-discrimination. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson issued Executive Order 11246 which required federal contractors to take "affirmative action" to hire without regard to race, religion and national origin. In 1968, gender was added to the anti-discrimination list. - Affirmative action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And it really doesn't matter which political party you feel is responsible for the Ku Klux Klan. Get your ass out of the 19th century and see who makes up that group TODAY?

Your link of victimizing propaganda is a bunch of ideological bullshit, and a bigot like you drinks this shit up like it's moonshine. Seriously... it's been "fun" for now, but for your own sake, don't start.

I would guess, dear fellow, that a racist is one who thinks, speaks, and strategizes using reified categories such as race or class, or other specified "minority" ... which is why I left the Democratic Party oh so long ago ...
 

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Indeed!

You might be serving the corporate interests like Obama and the lib dems:

"... Their original plan, which we told you about no later than last September (and we can point you on OpEdNews.com to our published article at the time to prove it), was to lull the liberal/progressive base into thinking a "public option" was some kind of mumbling substitute for a single payer reform system (that would have represented REAL change), with the INTENTION of throwing even that option over the side before final passage. We saw it all coming, and we tried to warn you how important it was to keep speaking out to demand better.

For the corporate special interests controlling the whole legislative process (but only in the absence of your voices of course) this was a heads they win, tails the people lose, proposition. By getting the Democrats to squander their mandate and political capital for actual change, by getting them to meekly abandon their professed principles in favor of a bill that would benefit as a bottom line the insurance corporations only, the people en masse would justifiably conclude that the Democrats had completely betrayed them. And the Republicans, who by the tactic of enfeeblement of government in fact just empower the same ultimate corporate agenda, even as disliked as they are themselves, would be swept back into office in the next election. Net result ... reform and change discredited, hopes dashed, defeatism rules, the corporations win again, one grand circular tag team.

That was the MASTER plan. ..."

OpEdNews - Article: The Democratic Party's Plan To THROW The Next Couple Elections

I was thinking more about the Republican Mantra of 2010 for the House "Where are the jobs Mr. Obama?" And the job plan from the Republicans? Oh excuse me -- they're too busy de-funding Planned Parenthood and discussing abortion rights, dismantling Federal Clean water acts etc. etc. etc. And in the STATES it's even far worse! Just don't remember the American people being TOLD that this was part of the plan for jobs!!
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
At this point in my humble perspective -- I'd like to see who's on the Board of Directors at Rasumussen and what their corporate connections are!:biggrin1::biggrin1:

Pay ZERO attention to Nicky and his Rasmussen polls:

Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly

...polls conducted by the firm Rasmussen Reports — which released more than 100 surveys in the final three weeks of the campaign, including some commissioned under a subsidiary on behalf of Fox News — badly missed the margin in many states, and also exhibited a considerable bias toward Republican candidates.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
I would guess, dear fellow, that a racist is one who thinks, speaks, and strategizes using reified categories such as race or class, or other specified "minority" ... which is why I left the Democratic Party oh so long ago ...

No... I just consider you to be one.
Let's not bring politics into it, because right now I don't care if you call yourself a Republican, a Teahadist, a Libertarian or whatever. Racism is immune to political affiliation, and it rears its ugly head when bigoted people (like you) have nothing else to say. Your twisted views on Affirmative Action (which you have voiced several times before), and that bullshit link that tries to position people like you as being the victim because of its implementation exposes this. Oh, boo hoo! Our country wants to be more diverse and balance out the fact that the mass majority of jobs go to caucasian men. How unfair is that?!

Absolutely no damn sympathies. And I'm self employed so don't even think about bringing my employment history into the spotlight. :rolleyes:

The more you hide behind labels like they're supposed to shield your ideological beliefs, the more I'll strip them away to expose the real you. Don't try to tread water where you know you can't swim.
 
Last edited:

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Pay ZERO attention to Nicky and his Rasmussen polls:

Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly

...polls conducted by the firm Rasmussen Reports — which released more than 100 surveys in the final three weeks of the campaign, including some commissioned under a subsidiary on behalf of Fox News — badly missed the margin in many states, and also exhibited a considerable bias toward Republican candidates.

thanks for the info -- I'm glad my red flag ESP is working properly!!
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Pay ZERO attention to Nicky and his Rasmussen polls:

Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly

...polls conducted by the firm Rasmussen Reports — which released more than 100 surveys in the final three weeks of the campaign, including some commissioned under a subsidiary on behalf of Fox News — badly missed the margin in many states, and also exhibited a considerable bias toward Republican candidates.

actually, other organizations come up with similar findings

do you have anything against Gallup?


"... Forty-four percent of registered voters say they are more likely to vote for "the Republican Party's candidate" and 39% for Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential election, according to Gallup's June update.
... The poll finds Republican and Democratic registered voters supporting their party's candidate at similar levels, with independents breaking more for the Republican than for Obama. [emphasis added] ..."

2012 Voter Preferences for Obama, "Republican" Remain Close
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
No... I just consider you to be one.
Let's not bring politics into it, because right now I don't care if you call yourself a Republican, a Teahadist, a Libertarian or whatever. Racism is immune to political affiliation, and it rears its ugly head when bigoted people (like you) have nothing else to say. Your twisted views on Affirmative Action (which you have voiced several times before), and that bullshit link that tries to position people like you as being the victim because of its implementation exposes this. Oh, boo hoo! Our country wants to be more diverse and balance out the fact that the mass majority of jobs go to caucasian men. How unfair is that?!

Absolutely no damn sympathies. And I'm self employed so don't even think about bringing my employment history into the spotlight. :rolleyes:

The more you hide behind labels like they're supposed to shield your ideological beliefs, the more I'll strip them away to expose the real you. Don't try to tread water where you know you can't swim.

oh, dear!

I see some not only drink their kool-aid, they relish it!

ah, well!
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
oh, dear!

I see some not only drink their kool-aid, they relish it!

ah, well!

It's better than the cyanide you call nourishment.
And I see that you completely avoided refuting anything I presented. Good to know you recognize your place. Now drop the racist bullshit and go defend your jolly ol' GOP.
 

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
In spite of my earlier defense of Republican core values (what were once core Republican values anyway), I feel like I need to add something for clarification and just... to get it off my chest. The Tea Party is so wildly off to the right, it had to be called something else so as not to create half a dozen new Democrats by shoving the moderate and centrist Republicans right out of the party. Their use of grandiose rhetoric makes for great fodder in Roland Emmerich movies but the policies they espouse as paramount (specifically domestic legislation of social issues) would significantly curtail if not outright eliminate the liberties enjoyed (or sought) by certain minority groups.

That's the Oxford Debating Societies way of saying the right has told gay people to go fuck themselves (Er... well, not themselves but you get what I mean.) Take away all of the half-truths, hyperbole, and outright lies and boil it down to one issue for the sake of why I'm posting; the right has a serious issue with homosexuality. I personally don't give a damn about marriage or what the right thinks of my orientation... but then, I'm not a Republican and don't have to stand in defense of anything they do or any of the policies they seek to enact.


I think the Tea Party is a group of seriously deluded citizens who, in their angst and confusion over how exactly a black man got to be the President, turned to a radical philosophy they themselves don't even fully understand. But when minorities get on board with and stand behind the GOP as backed by the Tea Party... scratching my head in consternation isn't enough. It's one of those moments in life where one is inclined to fall to their knees and demand of the heavens, "WHY!?"

It's one thing to be crazy. It's another thing to follow crazy... and in the age of information, where literally anything you want (or in this case desperately should know and could only not know out of blithe ignorance) is a simple click away, I'm not entirely sure the latter isn't worse.




JSZ
 

texas41-38

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
771
Media
0
Likes
87
Points
248
Location
Dallas-Ft, Worth
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
I did not vote for the President in either the Texas primary or the Causus, nor did I vote for him on election day (I wrote in Hillary along with 18,000 other Texans). With that said, I have an Obama-Biden bumper sticker on my car (it pisses off all of the right people). But at the rate that the current loyal opposition party is handling their Reagan/Bush/Cheney/Haliburton/Rinequist/et al business, for only the second time in my life I will truly be a Yellow Dog Democrat and vote a straight party ticket from the Court House to the White House.
 

Hoss

Loved Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Posts
11,801
Media
2
Likes
586
Points
148
Age
73
Location
Eastern town
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
I think you'd better take a very careful look at what the "hidden" agenda might be behind any Republican candidate before you give them your vote in ANY election!!

I always check the candidates as thoroughly as possible, thanks to the modern age of google and blekko and other data search tools I can access all kinds of information and then crosscheck the things listed as facts.

As to "hidden" agenda, people ought also to take a careful look at what "hidden" agenda a Democratic candidate might have as well. All candidates have agendas and most have something which they prefer to keep hidden.


(I placed the word hidden in quotation marks for 2 reasons, 1st is that you had and 2nd is that I never used the word hidden or agenda in my post, I only stated that I would not vote Tea Party and that a vote for a Dem. or Rep. would depend on what I had learned about the candidate and that I would not vote for President Obama next year.)
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Hoss said:
I only stated that I would not vote Tea Party and that a vote for a Dem. or Rep. would depend on what I had learned about the candidate and that I would not vote for President Obama next year.

So in other words, Hoss, you're gonna vote Republican, third party or not at all since we all know the chances of anyone trying to run (and win) against a presidential incumbent going after the nomination of their own party is next to impossible. No Democrat, as disgruntled as some of the progressives may be at him for not being as aggressive and forceful towards Republicans, will try and run against Obama for the Democratic Nomination for 2012. With a presidential incumbent success rate of over 90%, it's almost like committing political seppuku.
 

Hoss

Loved Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Posts
11,801
Media
2
Likes
586
Points
148
Age
73
Location
Eastern town
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
So in other words, Hoss, you're gonna vote Republican, third party or not at all since we all know the chances of anyone trying to run (and win) against a presidential incumbent going after the nomination of their own party is next to impossible. No Democrat, as disgruntled as some of the progressives may be at him for not being as aggressive and forceful towards Republicans, will try and run against Obama for the Democratic Nomination for 2012. With a presidential incumbent success rate of over 90%, it's almost like committing political seppuku.



When people go to vote and they purposely omit one position on the ballot it sends a message that the voters aren't happy with who they've been forced to pick from. It's clear the voters are interested in voting, they showed up and voted on everything else but they are indicating that they either don't see anybody they like or that they are all the same so why bother with any.

You may not approve of the method which I and many others have chosen are using, but it's our way of sending a message. If when votes are tallied and it's shown that 10 million voters showed up but only 9 million voted for all the presidential candidates combined it will be obvious that there is a growing frustration among the voters. Will the politicians see and make note and make changes? If they don't we know what can happen, uprisings take place throughout the world and have through the centuries when the people reach their breaking point. I'd rather the U.S. didn't land in that uncomfortable place.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
When people go to vote and they purposely omit one position on the ballot it sends a message that the voters aren't happy with who they've been forced to pick from. It's clear the voters are interested in voting, they showed up and voted on everything else but they are indicating that they either don't see anybody they like or that they are all the same so why bother with any.

You may not approve of the method which I and many others have chosen are using, but it's our way of sending a message. If when votes are tallied and it's shown that 10 million voters showed up but only 9 million voted for all the presidential candidates combined it will be obvious that there is a growing frustration among the voters. Will the politicians see and make note and make changes? If they don't we know what can happen, uprisings take place throughout the world and have through the centuries when the people reach their breaking point. I'd rather the U.S. didn't land in that uncomfortable place.

IMO, that would only send a message if voting "None of the Above" actually totaled more than the candidates provided. It may happen in "Brewster's Millions", but that doesn't happen in real life. More than 125 Million people voted in the presidential election in 2008. With those large numbers, one million omissions would be the equivalent of one million no-shows. And considering all of the efforts made by certain politicians to make voting more difficult, that's precisely what some of them want you to do. All this does is ensure that the person you dislike more has a better chance to get into office. It may make you feel morally superior to others who voted for either of the candidates, but beyond that it does nothing to help move the country forward. And the vicious cycle continues.

You owe it to yourself, if you really want to try and put the right people in office, to choose between the douche and the turd sandwich because even one of those is better suited for the job at certain times. Government is a reflection of its people anyhow, so if we don't care then why should they? That's how it was taught to me many moons ago by a wise old uncle of mine. But whatever.
 
Last edited: