American Politics

[Obscure_Trash]

Holy crap I never knew there was so many. O_o

Yeah, there are a few more popular one - the ones I listed - and then tons of minor ones: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_polit...litical_parties

 

Mostly parties splitting off from other parties for minor differences in opinion and some are basically the same as other parties, but there were people who supported a different candidate and so they basically split off so their candidate could still be up for Presidential nomination. x3

[skauble]

Well, the press finally managed to find a way to get a copy of the secret debate agreements between Obama and Romney. You can check them out here.

 

I didn't read all 21 pages because a lot of it was boring minutia like podium construction and camera placement - although, as a nod to the importance of freedom in this country, the candidates demanded the right to use whatever type of pencil or pen they prefer when they jot down notes! However, we were discussing Gary Johnson's lawsuit to be included in the debates, and here are the parts that I think are pertinent to that (there are probably others, but these stuck out to me and, as I said, I haven't gone over the document extensively):

 

 

~*~

 

 

~*~

 

 

Whether he wins or loses the case, there is the growing argument being made that he could, possibly, swing the election: Spoiler Alert! G.O.P. Fighting Libertarian’s Spot on the Ballot

 

It's interesting the ways that the articles suggests the other parties may be reacting to that fact. The Democrats have been accused of secretly helping him get on the ballot in some states to try to cut into Romney's votes (although he could hurt them in Colorado), while the Republicans have been trying to keep him off ballots in various ways:

 

The fear of Mr. Johnson’s tipping the outcome in an important state may explain why an aide to Mr. Romney ran what was effectively a surveillance operation into Mr. Johnson’s efforts over the summer to qualify for the ballot at the Iowa State Fair, providing witnesses to testify in a lawsuit to block him that ultimately fizzled.

And it is why Republicans in Pennsylvania hired a private detective to investigate his ballot drive in Philadelphia, appearing at the homes of paid canvassers and, in some cases, flashing an F.B.I. badge — he was a retired agent — while asking to review the petitions they gathered at $1 a signature, according to testimony in the case and interviews.

Frankly, I think that if Johnson and Virgil Goode truly do impact this election, even if they don't tip it one way or the other, that may get third parties more recognition than anything else does.

[KageSora]

Paul Ryan pretends to wash dishes at soup kitchen, causes financial concerns for it as a result: washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/15/charity-president-unhappy-about-paul-ryan-soup-kitchen-photo-op/?wprss=rss_campaigns (Not linking directly due to some of the comments containg questionable and/or offensive things)

 

Basically, he stopped by a soup kitchen unannounced for about 15 minutes on his way to the airport. This happened after the food had been served and the place cleaned up. He then proceeded to apparently wash CLEAN pots for the photo op.

 

Additionally, the owner is Not Pleased because it puts his funding in jeopardy. They intentionally run an apolitical faith-based organization, and this kind of thing goes against their by-laws which means that some of their donors might reconsider funding them as a result of this. By forcing their way in (the Ryan group convinced a volunteer to let them in, didn't bother contacting the owner to get permission--owner says he would have denied it had it been asked, he'd have the same issue if it was democrats), they have now caused a great deal of grief for the owner and have put funding that the organization cannot afford to lose at risk.

 

The head of a northeast Ohio charity says that the Romney campaign last week “ramrodded their way” into the group’s Youngstown soup kitchen so that GOP vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan could get his picture taken washing dishes in the dining hall.

 

Brian J. Antal, president of the Mahoning County St. Vincent De Paul Society, said that he was not contacted by the Romney campaign ahead of the Saturday morning visit by Ryan, who stopped by the soup kitchen after a town hall at Youngstown State University.

 

“We’re a faith-based organization; we are apolitical because the majority of our funding is from private donations,” Antal said in a phone interview Monday afternoon. “It’s strictly in our bylaws not to do it. They showed up there, and they did not have permission. They got one of the volunteers to open up the doors.”

 

He added: “The photo-op they did wasn’t even accurate. He did nothing. He just came in here to get his picture taken at the dining hall.”

 

Ryan had stopped by the soup kitchen for about 15 minutes on his way to the airport after his Saturday morning town hall in Youngstown. By the time he arrived, the food had already been served, the patrons had left, and the hall had been cleaned.

 

Upon entering the soup kitchen, Ryan, his wife and three young children greeted and thanked several volunteers, then donned white aprons and offered to clean some dishes. Photographers snapped photos and TV cameras shot footage of Ryan and his family washing pots and pans that did not appear to be dirty.

 

According to a Romney aide not authorized to speak publicly about the event, the campaign followed its usual protocol for impromptu, on-the-road stops by candidates: A staffer was dispatched to the St. Vincent De Paul Society ahead of Ryan’s visit Saturday morning and spoke with a woman in charge on site, who said that it would be fine for the congressman to stop by. The campaign did not contact Antal ahead of the visit.

 

The woman on site told the Romney staffer that some of the volunteers had already left, but that most were happy to remain until Ryan arrived, according to the aide. After Ryan left the soup kitchen, the woman approached a campaign staffer and expressed gratitude for Ryan’s visit, the aide said.

 

Chris Maloney, Ohio communications director for the Romney campaign, said that the visit by Ryan had been intended to highlight the work of the soup kitchen volunteers.

 

“Our campaign and Congressman Ryan were pleased to bring attention to the meaningful charitable contributions the St. Vincent De Paul Society makes to people in need,” Maloney said.

 

Antal, a self-described independent voter, said that he “can’t fault my volunteers” for letting the campaign in but said that the campaign  “didn’t go through the proper channels.”

 

He noted that the soup kitchen relies on funding from private individuals who might reconsider their support if it appears that the charity is favoring one political candidate over another.

 

“I can’t afford to lose funding from these private individuals,” he said. “If this was the Democrats, I’d have the same exact problem.”

 

He added that the incident had caused him “all kinds of grief” and that regardless of whether Ryan had intended to serve food to patrons or wash dishes, he would not have allowed the visit to take place.

 

“Had they asked for permission, it wouldn’t have been granted. … But I certainly wouldn’t have let him wash clean pans, and then take a picture,” Antal said.

 

Additional links (breaking because not sure on comment content)

 

cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57532807/charity-president-paul-ryan-did-nothing-at-soup-kitchen-photo-op/

 

washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/13/reporters-barred-from-covering-paul-ryan-exchange-with-homeless-ohioans-outside-soup-kitchen/?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Edited October 16, 2012 by KageSora

[prairiecrow]

Paul Ryan pretends to wash dishes at soup kitchen, causes financial concerns for it as a result: washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/15/charity-president-unhappy-about-paul-ryan-soup-kitchen-photo-op/?wprss=rss_campaigns (Not linking directly due to some of the comments containg questionable and/or offensive things)

 

Basically, he stopped by a soup kitchen unannounced for about 15 minutes on his way to the airport. This happened after the food had been served and the place cleaned up. He then proceeded to apparently wash CLEAN pots for the photo op.

 

Additionally, the owner is Not Pleased because it puts his funding in jeopardy. They intentionally run an apolitical faith-based organization, and this kind of thing goes against their by-laws which means that some of their donors might reconsider funding them as a result of this. By forcing their way in (the Ryan group convinced a volunteer to let them in, didn't bother contacting the owner to get permission--owner says he would have denied it had it been asked, he'd have the same issue if it was democrats), they have now caused a great deal of grief for the owner and have put funding that the organization cannot afford to lose at risk.

Well, who cares, really? They're just poor people, after all! Dirty shiftless lazy bums... it's perfectly acceptable to throw them under the bus if it means some extra votes for the Republican Party!

 

 

I'm afraid that's really what's on the minds of Paul Ryan and his cronies. To them, poor people and the services that support them are utterly disposable.

[brairtrainer]

Not just poor people, remember they lump women's services in there as well. Limiting access to birth control and abortions and doctors visits for those who can't afford it.

[Vhale]

Remember Nathan Sproul? The guy the RNC fired for election fraud issues in 10 states. Well, they had him change his company name and now he's working for them again. Apparently he did the same trick in 2004. Even more fun, the company's address is listed as the same as Karl Rove's superpac.

 

Updating article Smaller Think Progress Article

 

And in the mean time, Republicans are suing to force Ohio to limit voting in areas that favor democrats. Article

 

And of course, while unions are not allowed to tell people how to vote, it's legal for corporations to. And they are. At will employment states of course. What's funny is this link is from a Russian news site.

Citation

 

Republicans. Repressing your rights, one state at a time.

[demonicvampiregirl]

And in the mean time, Republicans are suing to force Ohio to limit voting in areas that favor democrats. Article

This just sickens me. I do not understand why they want to limit peoples free will to choose for themselves. Selfish little brats!

[KageSora]

This just sickens me. I do not understand why they want to limit peoples free will to choose for themselves. Selfish little brats!

Simple--by giving people the freedom to choose, they risk that those people will make the "wrong" choice (read: will vote for somebody not from their party).

 

It's really pathetic...

[demonicvampiregirl]

Simple--by giving people the freedom to choose, they risk that those people will make the "wrong" choice (read: will vote for somebody not from their party).

 

It's really pathetic...

Yep! So much for the constitution giving us the freedom of speech if those idiots are going to just take it right back from us!

[brairtrainer]

Yep! So much for the constitution giving us the freedom of speech if those idiots are going to just take it right back from us!

Hence why we need to knock certain parties out of power. Republican's are scared they're gonna be thrown out and instead of listening to the people they are limiting them. How funny since they say Obama will do that.

 

Obama is a different set of worms. I've seen him spend more and more money but the only thing he has done to protect rights has been to get rid of DADT. Honestly i think he needed to fight more on the social issues and balenced the budget instead of spending it on stimulus.

[Obscure_Trash]

http://www.jillstein.org/mockumentary_debate

 

Not only are third parties not allowed in the debates, they're arrested for trying to be.

 

Which reminds me, I do need to watch the VP debate, as I still haven't done that.

[brairtrainer]

http://www.jillstein.org/mockumentary_debate

 

Not only are third parties not allowed in the debates, they're arrested for trying to be.

 

Which reminds me, I do need to watch the VP debate, as I still haven't done that.

Sock that is just horrible. Does anyone know if any of the major news sources covered it? I'm going to go check yahoo but I'm wondering how hush hush the dems and gops are keeping it

 

EDIT: Nothing about it on yahoo

Edited October 16, 2012 by brairtrainer

[Obscure_Trash]

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&t...iw=1280&bih=605

 

I don't see any big media names in there. =U

[skauble]

http://www.jillstein.org/mockumentary_debate

 

Not only are third parties not allowed in the debates, they're arrested for trying to be.

 

Which reminds me, I do need to watch the VP debate, as I still haven't done that.

Sadly, I doubt it's going to get much notice with all the hoopla surrounding the debate. I think that third parties should, in the next few years, focus on a really strong online, social networking base. It's what's helping the Democrats, and things spread so much faster and are so much less expensive online that I think it's probably their best shot at gaining a foothold in the next election.

 

Someone, (I think it was Sock) mentioned the Green Party earlier, and since we've talked about Gary Johnson and the Libertarians, I just want to throw out there, for those who may not be too familiar with third parties but have a more liberal bent, that the The Green Party is really worth checking out.

 

Of course, there are a large variety to investigate, but the Green Party tends to be the largest alternative party on the left.

 

Also, Obama/Romney debate in an hour. Johnson (Libertarian)/Stein (Green Party) debate online on Thursday, October 18th - info here.

[~Kat~]

What a great debate tonight between Romney and Obama.

 

Obama's lies finally caught up to him.

 

On the federal land issues of permits, shale, coal, natural gas and oil, he deliberately lied. About 63% of leases, permits and licenses were denied on federal land and federal water. We have oil and natural gas here in the USA we could depend on. Obama will not even let them drill in the ocean.

 

Obama also has investments in China. I did not not know that.

 

Obama finally admitted, the embassy was denied extra weapons, and he puts the blame on himself. I wonder what drugs Obama and his team were on by denying the embassy to have those weapons considering what country they were in, please. This should have never happened in the first place.

 

He said in his own white house rose garden that this was a terrorist attack a day after the attack, but went on the "VIEW" 14 days later and said they were still investigating and did not know. Most of us already knew this was a terrorist attack the day it happened. The democrats decieved us on this issue I feel. Obama and the White House kept wanting to blame it on the video.

 

We are 5 Trillion in debt, and 16 trillion national debt.

 

There are 17 Million Americans on welfare today, wow unreal.

 

There are 23 Million Americans out of work right now. There were more people working before Obama took office almost 4 years ago

 

Gas has doubled. Obama could not even answer it. I did not feel that was a question he liked at all.

 

Obama has not embraced the things he should have like the Canadian Pipeline.

 

Obama also admitted that he has a lot he has not accomplished. I do not feel if Obama is re-elected he will get anything accomplished, look at his record already.

 

Romney did say because of a lot of illegals here, it is stopping a lot of people who are wanting to come to the USA here legally, can't.

 

Romney is a business man, and knows how to get the economy going. Romney has already proved what a good business man he is and stated what he will do.

 

Romney is for women workers and contraception.

 

Obama still has not said much of anything about what he will do if re-elected!!! All Obama could do is to defend what he has done. Obama did not talk about any changes he would make if re-elected.

 

Romney even mentioned god, I don't think Obama mentioned god once.

 

A group of us on our lunch today were talking about Romney and Obama. One person said if because Obama approves gays and a womans body is her own to do with it as she sees fit, and lets the illegal aliens come here, then Obama is your ticket if that is what you see more important than people having jobs or the economy running back smoothly. If you are more worried about people having jobs and the economy running smoothly, then Romney is your ticket. I thought about it and I thought, how right she is. This country needs jobs and the economy to be running smoothly.

 

The people and the economy of the USA can not take 4 more years of Obama's policies that have not worked very well at all.

 

 

[Obscure_Trash]

Sadly, I doubt it's going to get much notice with all the hoopla surrounding the debate. I think that third parties should, in the next few years, focus on a really strong online, social networking base. It's what's helping the Democrats, and things spread so much faster and are so much less expensive online that I think it's probably their best shot at gaining a foothold in the next election.

 

Someone, (I think it was Sock) mentioned the Green Party earlier, and since we've talked about Gary Johnson and the Libertarians, I just want to throw out there, for those who may not be too familiar with third parties but have a more liberal bent, that the The Green Party is really worth checking out.

 

Of course, there are a large variety to investigate, but the Green Party tends to be the largest alternative party on the left.

 

Also, Obama/Romney debate in an hour. Johnson (Libertarian)/Stein (Green Party) debate online on Thursday, October 18th - info here.

Yeah, I doubt it will get any attention, but I thought I'd throw it places where people might see it and will perhaps care a little.

 

Thanks for the info on the Johnson/Stein debate. :3

 

Obama could not even answer it.

 

I didn't feel like either of them actually answered a question they were asked. Granted, I didn't see the whole thing yet, but I saw a large portion of it. I thought Romney was so unspecific it was useless for him to even answer and Obama kept answering questions he wasn't asking so it was pointless to even ask the questions.

 

Romney even mentioned god, I don't think Obama mentioned god once.

 

Separation of church and state.

 

Also, people don't have to be religious to have morals.

 

 

 

I will watch the whole debate before commenting further.

[skauble]

A group of us on our lunch today were talking about Romney and Obama. One person said if because Obama approves gays and a womans body is her own to do with it as she sees fit, and lets the illegal aliens come here, then Obama is your ticket if that is what you see more important than people having jobs or the economy running back smoothly. If you are more worried about people having jobs and the economy running smoothly, then Romney is your ticket. I thought about it and I thought, how right she is. This country needs jobs and the economy to be running smoothly.

Oddly enough, the fact that people still feel that gays need to be "approved" is actually pretty paramount in my view of things.

 

Let me ask you, if someone said that you could have a great job if you gave up your second amendment rights would you do it? Would you expect everyone else to?

[Syaoransbear]

Obama has not embraced the things he should have like the Canadian Pipeline.

I'm a Canadian who lives in the province that filthy pipeline would run straight through and I think the Canadian pipeline is a terrible idea. It would destroy so much wildlife and take away so much land. Everyone I know is against it. I honestly thought it was a joke when I first heard about it. The US needs to focus energy on sustainable resources, not support a huge, ridiculous pipeline to pump in more unsustainable resources.

 

A group of us on our lunch today were talking about Romney and Obama. One person said if because Obama approves gays and a womans body is her own to do with it as she sees fit, and lets the illegal aliens come here, then Obama is your ticket if that is what you see more important than people having jobs or the economy running back smoothly. If you are more worried about people having jobs and the economy running smoothly, then Romney is your ticket. I thought about it and I thought, how right she is. This country needs jobs and the economy to be running smoothly.

 

The people and the economy of the USA can not take 4 more years of Obama's policies that have not worked very well at all.

So you mean Romney supporters are people who want money, and Obama supporters are people who want freedom? I wonder which is the more noble desire, hmmmm.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Syaoransbear

[skauble]

Jill Stein Arrested Before Hofstra Debate, Campaign Reports The Huffington Post covered it in it's Huffpost Green section. There was a link to it on the front page of the HP. Also covered on the Politico website - Green Party ticket arrested at debate, both of which are high traffic sites.

 

We'll see if it hits other media soon.

 

ETA:

 

So you mean Romney supporters are people who want money, and Obama supporters are people who want freedom? I wonder which is the more noble desire, hmmmm.

 

What I love is how many of the people who are knocking Obama's policies as having "not worked well at all" seem to ignore the fact that they want to put back the party whose economic policies were worse by all measures.

Edited October 17, 2012 by skauble

[LascielsShadow]

 

Romney is for women workers and contraception.

 

Please, do explain how positions such as being for the Blunt Amendment, wanting to cut funding for Planned Parenthood (which BTW, allows millions of women access to birth control), and being in favour of a constitutional amendment that could cause the ban of certain forms of contraception make him IN FAVOUR of it. Paying lip service to the ideas that one, women should have access to contraception and two, employers should not dictate an employee's ability to access it does not equal ACTUALLY being in support of those things.

 

I would like to ask that you NOT insult my intelligence by trying to tell me that he doesn't want to do these things. He's said he would. He's running on a party platform that supports these things. He doesn't get to pretend that he's not in support of these actions just because it's inconvenient for him at a given moment.

 

 

BTW: This was not a church sermon. There was no reason to mention god except to score points with certain groups who might have been watching the debate. I don't give a rat's bum about the mention of god, because none of the questions were about god, christianity, the church, prayer, or anything even tangentially related to religion.

Edited October 17, 2012 by LascielsShadow

[skauble]

I would like to ask that you NOT insult my intelligence by trying to tell me that he doesn't want to do these things. He's said he would. He's running on a party platform that supports these things. He doesn't get to pretend that he's not in support of these actions just because it's inconvenient for him at a given moment.

That last part has pretty much been his campaign strategy throughout this whole thing. Don't get me wrong, I think he's doing it because he really believes that he'd be an incredible president and that's why it doesn't matter what he has to do to get there, but his complete commitment to "ends justifies the means" is, IMO, very frightening, because these situations never stop coming up, no matter which goals you reach.

 

BTW: This was not a church sermon. There was no reason to mention god except to score points with certain groups who might have been watching the debate. I don't give a rat's bum about the mention of god, because none of the questions were about god, christianity, the church, prayer, or anything even tangentially related to religion.

The best part was that he mentioned it while trying to walk back his remarks trashing of 47% of the country. I do believe that he's sincere in his belief in God, but the mention in this debate was not a "God is great and he's made America the greatest country ever", but rather more of use of his beliefs and belief oriented actions to prove that he actually does care about 100% of us rather than addressing why he actually said something like that. So, less inspiring and more as self-serving, IMO.

 

Also, for those who didn't watch the debate, there was a question on pay equality. This is part of Romney response (emphasis mine):

 

CROWLEY: Governor Romney, pay equity for women?

 

ROMNEY: Thank you. And important topic, and one which I learned a great deal about, particularly as I was serving as governor of my state, because I had the chance to pull together a cabinet and all the applicants seemed to be men.

 

And I — and I went to my staff, and I said, “How come all the people for these jobs are — are all men.” They said, “Well, these are the people that have the qualifications.” And I said, “Well, gosh, can’t we — can’t we find some — some women that are also qualified?”

 

ROMNEY: And — and so we — we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet.

 

I went to a number of women’s groups and said, “Can you help us find folks,” and they brought us whole binders full of women.

 

The internet has seized on the bolded part and there's actually a pretty hilarious and surprisingly active Tumbler account for it: Binder Full of Women.

 

I think my favorite is Captian of Finance...Binder of Women

 

Also, nod to Affirmative Action!

[LascielsShadow]

That last part has pretty much been his campaign strategy throughout this whole thing. Don't get me wrong, I think he's doing it because he really believes that he'd be an incredible president and that's why it doesn't matter what he has to do to get there, but his complete commitment to "ends justifies the means" is, IMO, very frightening, because these situations never stop coming up, no matter which goals you reach.

 

 

The best part was that he mentioned it while trying to walk back his remarks trashing of 47% of the country. I do believe that he's sincere in his belief in God, but the mention in this debate was not a "God is great and he's made America the greatest country ever", but rather more of use of his beliefs and belief oriented actions to prove that he actually does care about 100% of us rather than addressing why he actually said something like that. So, less inspiring and more as self-serving, IMO.

 

Absolutely. I think he does genuinely believe that, and that he somehow deserves the presidency. That "etch-a-sketch" thing was 100% accurate. He'll say anything to anyone he needs to in order to get what he wants, and has no qualms about doing so. It really is utterly frightening.

 

Agreed on the second part as well. It seemed incredibly self-serving to me.

 

 

 

I've been watching that tumblr, and I am snickering pretty hard at it IRL. Also, #bindersfullofwomen is trending on Twitter, which is fun as well.

[skauble]

I've been watching that tumblr, and I am snickering pretty hard at it IRL. Also, #bindersfullofwomen is trending on Twitter, which is fun as well.

Twitter is also being remarkably hilarious.

 

Alas, it might be possible that Mitt was inventing stretching finessing creatively presenting the facts of that story.

 

Mind The Binder

 

Hopefully this will be picked up so that we can get some confirmation on whether or not that's a more accurate recounting of the situation.

[Kestra15]

Romney even mentioned god, I don't think Obama mentioned god once.

What has God got to do with politics?

[Syaoransbear]

That last part has pretty much been his campaign strategy throughout this whole thing.  Don't get me wrong, I think he's doing it because he really believes that he'd be an incredible president and that's why it doesn't matter what he has to do to get there, but his complete commitment to "ends justifies the means" is, IMO, very frightening, because these situations never stop coming up, no matter which goals you reach.

 

 

The best part was that he mentioned it while trying to walk back his remarks trashing of 47% of the country.  I do believe that he's sincere in his belief in God, but the mention in this debate was not a "God is great and he's made America the greatest country ever", but rather more of use of his beliefs and belief oriented actions to prove that he actually does care about 100% of us rather than addressing why he actually said something like that.  So, less inspiring and more as self-serving, IMO.

 

Also, for those who didn't watch the debate, there was a question on pay equality.  This is part of Romney response (emphasis mine):

 

 

 

The internet has seized on the bolded part and there's actually a pretty hilarious and surprisingly active Tumbler account for it:  Binder Full of Women.

 

I think my favorite is Captian of Finance...Binder of Women

 

Also, nod to Affirmative Action!

Although I really hate it when people try to discredit someone and jump down their throats just because of how they worded a sentence...

 

...this one made me lol: http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc0n9qrW...8amio1_1280.jpg

 

I think if Obama had said the same thing the internet wouldn't have cared, but Obama is also globally much more well-liked so there you go. It took me a while to try and figure out exactly what people were making fun of in the sentence Romney said because I would have said the exact same thing.

 

I'm not sure how Americans think Romney is going to help their economy since the world is not going to look favorably upon the US for electing Romney. I'm sure the economy tanking even more sharply when Bush was elected into office for the second time while the whole world face-palmed at the US was no coincidence. What countries could have possibly felt comfortable investing in another country that thought having Bush in office again was a good idea? I'm sure the global reaction will be similar with Romney.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Syaoransbear