Romney and Obama are BOTH great people and strong leaders

Obama and Romney are simply Establishment picks. Both COULD be good leaders, if they would lead.

Ron Paul is the only one who isnt an establishment pick and it is obvious that the MSM and Establishment do everything they can to do to ignore him.


Obama is driving toward the cliff with his foot on the gas to the floor... if romney wins he will take his foot off the gas but he wont steer away from the cliff and he wont hit the brake.

Ron paul is the only one with the idea and values to actually turn the wheel against the establisment.

That title made me laugh out loud, thanks for the humor!

But seriously...

This election (assuming that's the lineup) is more than ever before a choice between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich.

Originally posted by Doalrite
Obama and Romney are simply Establishment picks. Both COULD be good leaders, if they would lead.

Ron Paul is the only one who isnt an establishment pick and it is obvious that the MSM and Establishment do everything they can to do to ignore him.


Obama is driving toward the cliff with his foot on the gas to the floor... if romney wins he will take his foot off the gas but he wont steer away from the cliff and he wont hit the brake.

Ron paul is the only one with the idea and values to actually turn the wheel against the establisment.

edit on 3-8-2012 by Doalrite because: (no reason given)

Ron Paul doesn't have enough Electoral Votes to win.

It will have to be President Mitt Romney.

America is still the greatest hope the world has. It is an evolving pluralistic democracy. Yes, it is a democracy. And it will continue to become more democratic. People who think democracy is on the downswing are wrong, the internet has provided an absolute revolution when it comes to free speech. We are finally at a time where enough of the population is educated enough to actually put into practice true democracy, and we have the potential to achieve new heights in the coming years. What we've had historically is a small group of people who are smart enough to organize a government and economy, and large number of mentally dormant peasants. Now, with growing numbers actively involved in the mental process there should be a gradual power shift toward greater equality. The people of the middle class just have to realize that the opportunities are there, and then take the initiative.

You are not being oppressed, the leadership at it's highest levels want to see you progress.

What do you want to do that you are being prevented from doing?

They are begging for the middle class to step up.

If the people of America can cooperate and function, then the world at large will follow suit.

Originally posted by MassOccurs
Is there anyone willing to be optimistic about both candidates?

They both suck equally. There. That's about as non-partisan as you can get.
I now am on perm. absentee ballot voting. (health issues).
I'll be filling in those with the (L) after their names this time around.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012

Originally posted by Doalrite
Obama and Romney are simply Establishment picks. Both COULD be good leaders, if they would lead.

Ron Paul is the only one who isnt an establishment pick and it is obvious that the MSM and Establishment do everything they can to do to ignore him.


Obama is driving toward the cliff with his foot on the gas to the floor... if romney wins he will take his foot off the gas but he wont steer away from the cliff and he wont hit the brake.

Ron paul is the only one with the idea and values to actually turn the wheel against the establisment.

edit on 3-8-2012 by Doalrite because: (no reason given)

Ron Paul doesn't have enough Electoral Votes to win.

It will have to be President Mitt Romney.

The Electoral College hasnt even begun to take place. I hope you meant delagates....? As for delegates a little known president named Ab Lincoln went to the National Convention with no delagates and won.

I know though that Ron Paul wont win. The system is way to corrupt and the Republican Establishment would rather see Obama in office again rather than Ron Paul.

reply to post by MassOccurs

Romney and Obama are BOTH great people and strong leaders

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.

Thank you so much. I really needed a laugh. Man, youre good. Very very good.

Originally posted by MassOccurs
America is still the greatest hope the world has. It is an evolving pluralistic democracy. Yes, it is a democracy. And it will continue to become more democratic. People who think democracy is on the downswing are wrong, the internet has provided an absolute revolution when it comes to free speech. We are finally at a time where enough of the population is educated enough to actually put into practice true democracy, and we have the potential to achieve new heights in the coming years. What we've had historically is a small group of people who are smart enough to organize a government and economy, and large number of mentally dormant peasants. Now, with growing numbers actively involved in the mental process there should be a gradual power shift toward greater equality. The people of the middle class just have to realize that the opportunities are there, and then take the initiative.

You are not being oppressed, the leadership at it's highest levels want to see you progress.

What do you want to do that you are being prevented from doing?

They are begging for the middle class to step up.

If the people of America can cooperate and function, then the world at large will follow suit.

The United States is not now, nor has it EVER been, a "democracy." It is and always has been a Constitutional Republic.

Democracy vs Republic

Part of the problem we have is that TOO many people erroneously believe we are a democracy. And another part of the problem is that the past few Presidents ALWAYS refer to "our democracy" or "this democracy" or "a stronger democracy" and we just do NOT stop hearing that in the media, either.

Our kids have been taught in school for the past 40 years that we're a democracy. WRONG! They are being taught wrong and now we have people in their 40s and 50s believing it to be the truth.

Please, please learn the difference. If people can learn the difference, it will help them to see that we don't even have the two party system that you're addressing in your OP. If we truly had a 2 party system, we would not be in the mess we're in.

Addressing the OP, I respect your opinion and your effort and I'm trying to see your point, but I just don't. Unfortunately, I've seen nothing for the past few Presidencies but men in power causing even greater divides among the People they are supposed to be accountable to. WE are not accountable to them; THEY are accountable to US - it's the way our Constitutional Republic was set up.

Of the two candidates everyone *assumes* we're being offered, I do not see either as a good choice. Other than physical characteristics, I see absolutely no difference between them other than what they're each willing to misrepresent to the public in order to pander for votes.

We do NOT have to choose between the two "choices" they give us. We DO have options.

reply to post by MassOccurs


No.

reply to post by SeesFar


Has there ever been a society that can fairly be described as democratic? Is America getting closer to that ideal or further away?

BAAAAAA-AAAAAAAAA

BAAAA-AAAAA-AAAAAAA

BAAAA-AAAAAAA

Originally posted by MassOccurs
reply to post by SeesFar

 

Has there ever been a society that can fairly be described as democratic? Is America getting closer to that ideal or further away?

Well, this says there are: Top 10 Democracies of the World (dated 2011)

If one is to go by the definition of 'democracy' given in the link I previously provided, I would say we are moving toward it rapidly; however, the form of it that we're moving toward is something I definitely do not see as an "ideal."

But this rather contradicts that, indicating that what we might have had of it, we've carelessly thrown away or turned into a mockery of it.

An article published in 2003, "When Democracy Failed: The Warnings of History" gives a pretty good idea to anyone willing to read the article. One also has to be both somewhat familiar with history *and* willing to learn from it, as well as see ugly truth for what it is.

That said, Republics are not necessarily long-lived, either, from a historical viewpoint.

reply to post by SeesFar


Read through the articles briefly, learned a good amount. Thanks a lot.

Regarding the top ten democracies, they are all low in population compared to the US and nowhere near as diverse. These countries are generally more unified in their political vision and avoid the gridlock that slows down American progress.

I think a problem is the attitude that is common toward the government in America. In a good democracy people should feel as if they are the government. In America it often plays out more like a battle: citizens vs. government. Because the prevailing attitude is a stern distinction between citizen and government, that is the reality that is created. If more people would participate in the system and take on the attitude that as an individual they are in fact a part of the government, maybe we'd have a more fluid policy progression.

There is a clear trajectory toward apathy and hostility toward American government and it seems to catch on and multiply like a virus.

Fortunately, all that is required is for a few citizens to lead an initiative aimed at increasing participation and this trend can be overcome.

If there's one thing people on this site know, it's that the majority of humanity is of the disposition to follow and not lead. So, it becomes very important for those that are willing to think in new directions to take an active role in political discourse.

As of 1776, a democracy in America was impossible. So, a republic was created. But clearly there was a vision toward a more educated population and an eventual trend toward increased participation and legitimate representation.

Originally posted by MassOccurs

Read through the articles briefly, learned a good amount. Thanks a lot.

Regarding the top ten democracies, they are all low in population compared to the US and nowhere near as diverse. These countries are generally more unified in their political vision and avoid the gridlock that slows down American progress.

My thoughts on the matter exactly. Our rampant diversity is killing us as a Country and we've lost any compass of community that we might have ever had. I've said it before in other posts - we can't even get folks here to agree that we're one RACE, so how are we going to get them to agree to see a picture much larger than the media-imposed political gridlock? As long as all the focus is on this, that or the other 'specialty' group - whether it's ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, religious preference, vegan vs hunter, gun vs anti-gun, etc. we cannot accomplish anything. We need a common denominator (or, as another poster on another thread put it, a catalyst) to get people to set aside their differences and focus on their commonalities.

Iceland recently did a great thing but they did it with 320,000 people. We have over 300 MILLION people.

Originally posted by MassOccurs
I think a problem is the attitude that is common toward the government in America. In a good democracy people should feel as if they are the government. In America it often plays out more like a battle: citizens vs. government. Because the prevailing attitude is a stern distinction between citizen and government, that is the reality that is created. If more people would participate in the system and take on the attitude that as an individual they are in fact a part of the government, maybe we'd have a more fluid policy progression.

Without doubt. That is what is NOT being taught - that WE are the government and WE must take a very active role, starting with School Board elections on up. Politics don't start in Washington, D.C.; they start in School Boards and City Councils. If we can regain control there and bring a sense of accomplishment and empowerment to people that way, we might have a chance. The 535+ in D.C. are OUR employees. We have the power of recall. We don't use it. One thing I believe needs to be overturned is Senate elections. We really blew it when we made the Senate selections a voter issue. Those need to go back to State appointments because they are MUCH easier to recall if they get forget who they're there to represent.

Originally posted by MassOccurs
There is a clear trajectory toward apathy and hostility toward American government and it seems to catch on and multiply like a virus.

And which is growing faster? The apathy or the hostility? Either one is a potential powder keg. This situation we find ourselves in CAN be solved peaceably. But how do we rid ourselves of the apathy? I've seen what apathy has done on the Reservations; it has now done the same thing in the deep inner urban and ghetto communities - what i call the Urban Reservations. And, as you said, it has spread like a virus - our gov't is the host. Who will bite the hand that feeds them?

Originally posted by MassOccurs
Fortunately, all that is required is for a few citizens to lead an initiative aimed at increasing participation and this trend can be overcome.

Any ideas? It would be a wonderful thing to come up with some ideas pre-powder keg. What IS the common denominator for all U.S. citizens? There simply mustbe one.

Originally posted by MassOccurs
If there's one thing people on this site know, it's that the majority of humanity is of the disposition to follow and not lead. So, it becomes very important for those that are willing to think in new directions to take an active role in political discourse.

Begging the question I've asked for years: Where are our warriors? We need strong leaders and, may the feminists of the Country forgive me, there IS a time for men to step up and now is that time. Not that women cannot or should not have a say in it - that's not what I'm saying at all. But our men need to take charge - the right form of masculinity needs to be returned to them as too many of them have been systematically stripped of it.

Originally posted by MassOccurs
As of 1776, a democracy in America was impossible. So, a republic was created. But clearly there was a vision toward a more educated population and an eventual trend toward increased participation and legitimate representation.

Absolutely. Washington and Jefferson, in particular, worried about just that - that a two party system would be our ruination. Hamilton was the fly in the ointment. Now we see.

reply to post by SeesFar


Yeah, yeah. I think an important development will be the beginning of the fall semester at colleges across the country. Young people who are experiencing their first major election cycle with a lot of passion toward making a better future and who are willing to socialize.

I expect some interesting stuff to happen on campus...