weather warning (765 hits)
Category: NoneRating: 0.72 on 36 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by loki (View user info) at 2005-11-02 09:54:54 EST
On Tuesday November 8, 2005 some time between 8:00 and 8:30 am Eastern Standard Time hell is going to freeze.
"why" you ask, "how can loki know this?"
or maybe you don't
the answer is that I, through an enormous amount of personal internal struggle and trepidation will, for the first time ever in the history of democracy intend to vote for a Republican
Sad to say but I think the current mayor is taking the city in the right direction and the Democrat whom I did not vote for in the primary would turn us back into a cow pasture if he had his way.
and oh yea I am pissed off at the local Democrat party for not coming up with someone better to pose some kind of challenge
Pat, you asshole don't make me regret this.
(completely unrelated Dr. Seuss cartoon that I found amusing)
User Reviews
Submitted by cleanfornow (user info) at 2005-11-03 11:55:09 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
How big of you
Submitted by munkeypants (user info) at 2005-11-02 19:24:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-02 19:21:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-02 13:40:06 (#)
Ranking: 0
All right, say you form a third party, what is your platform going to be?
------------------------
Here's my manifesto: http://www.ubersite.com/m/78261
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2005-11-02 18:23:48 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Dr. Seuss' wartime stuff is great - you should see his caricatures of Japs, so VERY un-P.C.!
Submitted by Average_Dan (user info) at 2005-11-02 15:48:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-02 15:34:41 (#)
Ranking: 2
This is going to get photoshopped.
you know that right?
It's just a matter of time
...and me getting home because I don't have photoshop at work
------------------------------
Play nice Loki!
Submitted by wookie (user info) at 2005-11-02 15:39:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:49:12 (#)
Ranking: 0
The cartoon seemed strangely appropriate and considering that Seuss drew this back in the 1940's, oddly prophetic.
--------------------------------------------
I have a whole book of Suess' political cartoons. It's an awesome awesome read.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-02 13:40:06 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
All right, say you form a third party, what is your platform going to be? You have to find a way to bridge the difference between the two parties in such a way as to pull people from both sides or all you will do is split one of the major parties allowing the other one to become entrenched.
So how are you going to do that?
The reason I am a Democrat is simple. Draw a line down the middle of a sheet of paper and jot down the major areas where the two parties diverge. On I'd say 90% of those issues, my personal beliefs fall in line with the Democrats. To bail out on the party would only serve to keep the Republicans in power sending the country even further down the spiral of shit we're heading down now. It's too risky.
change comes from within
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-02 12:48:05 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
b0bbieb0b: And you think that Republicans aren't Republicans because their parents were??? Please! Like I said, the Republican party has become the party of the hardcore conservatives who tend to be deeply entrenched in religion. As we all know, religion doesn't tend to change much. The last major change in religion was the 95 Thesis.
Loki: That's kinda the point. We need a little bit of chaos in there. Things seriously need to be shaken up. Aren't you tired of turning on your television on watching a 'debate' on NBC prior to the elections and seeing on two parties represented there, as if they're the only fucking ones running? What kind of hypocracy is that? There needs to be someone else there not only to keep both of them honest, but to drill it into people's minds that "Hey, it's not just about 'us' versus 'them'. It's about the betterment of the nation and the world as a whole, and holy shit, there is someone up there who is criticising both Democrats and Republicans alike for their failures, and boy, doesn't that just give me a more balanced view of my country!"
Fear of chaos will get us nowhere. I don't know about any of the rest of you, but I'm sick of shit not getting done in this country because of this interparty bickering and finger pointing. A legitimate third party would create an atmosphere, not of "it's our team against theirs", but instead one of "what's the best idea".
Look at Britain. There's your model. Let's learn from it. I know America is far more divided than Britain, but there are some people in the middle who are fans of what a little of what both parties are saying, but an enemy of what they stand for. Namely me.
I am hereby starting the 'ME' party, which will accurately reflect my personal opinions independant of party affiliations. A real revolution of politics in this nation will not occur without a third party. PERIOD.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-02 12:30:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Hillary is far too controversial a character to get elected to a national office. That realization will keep her from even winning the primary. I think the idea of Hillary running on the Democratic ticket is largely a Republican fantasy. I just don't think it will happen.
I also don't think there is a shot of a third party candidate doing anything except splitting the votes of the current party that it most closely resembles thus ensuring that the candidate they least agree with will land in office. The only way to go there is a third party to split the Republicans the same time as a forth party emerges to split the Democrats. Then you may have something.
most likely that something will be chaos
Submitted by b0bbieb0b (user info) at 2005-11-02 12:17:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Hillary doesn't stand a snowball's chance. More people will vote against her than will vote for her opponent.
Submitted by b0bbieb0b (user info) at 2005-11-02 12:10:45 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
As Winston Churchill put it, "If you're not a liberal when you're 18, you haven't a heart. If you're not a conservative when you're 30, you haven't a brain.
As far as blind party loyality, I'm from Minnesota. The vast majority of Dems up here are Dems because their parents were Dems and because Hubert Humphrey should have been president, damn it.
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2005-11-02 12:05:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I don't think that the Republicans will lose the congress that quickly. I don't think it will happen all at once, but it will happen. These things go in cycles.
As for a third party candidate in '08? I think you're nuts.
It is going to be Hillary versus Somebody, and I don't think ANYBODY is going to be able to stop her the way Bush's cabinet is falling apart.
Once the Senate hearings go further into the falsification of information prior to Iraq . . . well, that might just aleviate the need to even hold an election.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-02 11:50:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Teeph: My experience has been that Republicans are more likely to blindly vote Republican in every instance. Democrats are much more flexible in that respect. This is also reflected in the core beliefs and agenda of each party.
Republicans are more apt to be older, established voters, with deeply entrenched religious beliefs that sway their opinions, whereas Democrats tend to be younger people with idealistic views of the world and a willingness for change.
Not to turn this into a political debate, but this is generally true.
All this being said, I've got my eye on a Democratic Congress in '06 and a third party president in '08.
I'm sick of this backward-ass traditionalist leadership. We need a third party in contention in this country (like they have in Britain) if we ever hope to break out of the muck and mire of a bipartisan system that is reluctant to evolve with the times. Plus, we need another party in contention that can act as a stop-gap for these incumbant candidates who simply rest on their laurals and fail to capitulate on promises.
I think it's about time we scare the shit out of Washington. We don't have to get a third party president elected to be effective. We just have to show them we're willing to break the status quo. We had over 20 million under 30 voters in the last election, the most in history.
If that group can galvanize behind a third party candidate, it could send a serious message to those in power that the US voters will not tolerate the bullshit any longer, and they better fucking evolve WITH us, or they will end up like dinosaurs in the end.
Does that make any sense?
Submitted by ooQueso (user info) at 2005-11-02 11:45:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Republicans this, democrats that, blah blah blah. Buncha friggin hypocrites. Where are all the anti-generalization bitchings now? Do you want individuality or acceptance? Make up yer freakin minds.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-02 11:34:42 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Tis true, there are probably - just throwing this out there - 30% hard core straight party Republican voters; 30% hard core straight party Democrat voters; and the other 40% are swing voters.
That being said, there has been some shifting over the years. Once upon a time the Catholic church was solidly Democratic. They have never agreed with the Democrat party on abortion, but were willing to ignore it due to the other social issues that where more in line with the Democrats.
The south used to be solidly Democratic too, but it was more Dixiecrat than Democrat meaning that they only reason they voted Democrat was because they blamed the Republican party for the War of Northern Aggression oh yes they did, still do. We call it "the party of Lincoln" round these parts, old wounds die hard. The switch happened in the 1960's when large numbers of white southerners came down on the wrong side of the civil rights struggle and sided with the Republicans. That is why you see people like Strom Thurmond change party affiliation around that time.
That was also the time the Democrat party swept up the black vote and although in recent elections, the Democrat party has been accused of taking the black vote for granted, recent hurricane related issues appear to allow them to continue to do that.
The views of the parties have also changed over time. I was shocked SHOCKED to see some of the policies of Nixon that by today's standards are quite liberal.
odd really
But yea in terms of the mayoral race, the Democrat guy is against public funding for the arts, public transportation, light rail, and growth in general. Plus there have been a few comments he's made that make me think the man is somewhat mentally unstable. There are some things about the incumbent mayor that I don't agree with but the nature of democracy is that it always comes down to the lesser of two evils.
good times
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2005-11-02 11:16:17 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:48:31 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:41:19 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:26:51 (#)
Ranking: 0
One thing I can say about Democrats...they've always been more likely to vote for the best man for the job instead of simply voting for the one who shares their party affiliation.
Republicans tend to be way more one-track and herd-minded.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
No, party loyalists on either side tend to be one-track and herd-minded. There are about an equal number on both sides of the aisle.
THen you have your swing voters, and 'other party' members who think outside the box once in a while.
-----------------------------------
Rad, if that were the case, then you'd have just as many Republican voters swinging to third party candidates as Democratic voters.
Think about it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
It happened with Perot in 88 (or was that 92?), but Republicans learned their lesson quickly there and haven't had another third party vote stealer since then. I don't think Nader got nearly the votes in the last election as he did in the one before, that means that some of you liberal scum learned your lesson too.
But as to your original point, there are more blind party line voters on the Republican side than the Democrat side . . . I'd point you to poor southern or urban blacks and hispanics. Those are a couple of LARGE blind democrat ticket voters that the Republicans have done a good job of tapping into lately, which is a very important part of recent Republican electorial success.
But the point really is, historically, ever since the New Deal, there have been TONS of party-line Democratic voters. Your original statement was ignorant. (Ah-yee-hee. <grabs crotch>.)
Submitted by The_Yellow_Dart (user info) at 2005-11-02 11:00:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Suess is the next Nostradamus!!
I shall start buttering my bread up-side down!
Submitted by Grimm (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:52:16 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Republicans suck
Submitted by Xcuses (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:50:32 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
I voted for myself
I should have won!
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:49:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
The cartoon seemed strangely appropriate and considering that Seuss drew this back in the 1940's, oddly prophetic.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:48:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:41:19 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:26:51 (#)
Ranking: 0
One thing I can say about Democrats...they've always been more likely to vote for the best man for the job instead of simply voting for the one who shares their party affiliation.
Republicans tend to be way more one-track and herd-minded.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
No, party loyalists on either side tend to be one-track and herd-minded. There are about an equal number on both sides of the aisle.
THen you have your swing voters, and 'other party' members who think outside the box once in a while.
-----------------------------------
Rad, if that were the case, then you'd have just as many Republican voters swinging to third party candidates as Democratic voters.
Think about it.
Submitted by skrapmetal (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:45:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Go republicans WOO!
I looked at the cartoon first and thought it was going to be a rant about Bush and/or oil comapnies.
Submitted by The_Yellow_Dart (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:43:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
wot's wrong with a lil' cow pasture?
Cows can be more entertaining than a busy intersection of people bustling to nowhere any day of the determined yearly schedual.
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:41:19 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:26:51 (#)
Ranking: 0
One thing I can say about Democrats...they've always been more likely to vote for the best man for the job instead of simply voting for the one who shares their party affiliation.
Republicans tend to be way more one-track and herd-minded.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
No, party loyalists on either side tend to be one-track and herd-minded. There are about an equal number on both sides of the aisle.
THen you have your swing voters, and 'other party' members who think outside the box once in a while.
Submitted by freebie (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:27:52 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Mwahaahaahaaa, our vast right wing conspiracy of supporting loser democrats so liberals are forced to vote republican is working nicely....
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:26:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
One thing I can say about Democrats...they've always been more likely to vote for the best man for the job instead of simply voting for the one who shares their party affiliation.
Republicans tend to be way more one-track and herd-minded.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:26:46 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Harry Reid provided some rich entertainment yesterday.
good times
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:26:16 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
This post had no content. Plus, this Democrat VS Republican thing is getting fucking nauseating. Politics aren't the WWF.
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:16:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
So, by your own admission you are a blind sheep who is making an exception in this one case?
*ribs a sensitive EMO liberal*
Submitted by zoobie2000 (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:16:24 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
who cares!
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:15:05 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Hey Loki, you ready to hear this?
I voted for Harry Reid in the same election I voted for GWB.
*gasps*
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:10:14 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Oh this is the first and last time this will happen. I will blow a chip in my brain if the local Democrats can't come up with something better for the next election.
Ironically, the local Republican party has been giving ole Pat hell over the very things that are causing me to (cough cough sputter choke) vote against the other guy.
Cindy, this is a midterm election which means that it is not a Presidential election year. How important it is depends on where you live and what is on the ballot. Here in the Holy City of Charlotte, we have this mayoral race, a couple of bond initiatives, and a few city counsel seats. We'll end up with around a 30% turn out rate.
Submitted by Teephphah (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:07:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
sellout.
Submitted by Mike00295 (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:05:21 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Let's also not forget...Sunday, November 13th...my birthday.
Wooooooooooooooohoooooooooo
The big 2-4. Woooooooooooooooooo
Submitted by c1ndy (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:01:05 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
it's awesome that it rains swastikas in the cartoon.
is there an election that our British news neglected to mention or are you just informing us of the way you intend to vote next time?
Submitted by FartSmeller (user info) at 2005-11-02 10:00:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
There comes a time in every Democrat's life where they start thinking with their head and not their heart. Congrats on the switch! For more examples of how shitty the Dem. Party is, simply refer to Chuck Schumer's statements regarding the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court!