Government - Left vs Right (Pic)

**salty99** · 10-21-09, 10:24 PM

Originally Posted by Consultant

Originally Posted by QuickLightning

What?!

You guys are crazy. Everyone knows all democrats are communists and all republicans want war. Come on people.

haha quick you are being silly

Well I guess this means me and my conservative buddies are off to beat my slave workers, torment homeless people, lay out six pack plastic rings in the forest for little animals to get caught in, and go throw rocks at people I don't like...

**CallousDisregard** · 10-21-09, 10:31 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd9IZlQAh58

**rock_lobster** · 10-21-09, 10:53 PM

Originally Posted by Hitch

We need a way to define candidates without the "D" or "R" bit.

Hitch

There is a way. It's called researching the candidates before you vote for them. Not trying to sound harsh or call you out personally, but I hear this a lot. Too many people vote the party, instead of doing their research on all candidates involved, then complain when it doesn't turn out the way they expected.

**Big_Boze** · 10-21-09, 11:36 PM

Vote me in on the "blue" side of that.

Too bad they made the colors backwards on that chart?

**Hitch** · 10-24-09, 09:50 AM

Originally Posted by rock_lobster

Originally Posted by Hitch

We need a way to define candidates without the "D" or "R" bit.

Hitch

There is a way. It's called researching the candidates before you vote for them. Not trying to sound harsh or call you out personally, but I hear this a lot. Too many people vote the party, instead of doing their research on all candidates involved, then complain when it doesn't turn out the way they expected.

I hear you. I guess it may be better stated if we ditched the R & D's so the candidates had to flagrantly define themselves by policy and past action. Voters would be given a short paragraph that defines a candidate, rather than the candidate's name.

Then they choose policy instead of popularity.

Just an idea!

Hitch

**GReYVee** · 10-24-09, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by Hitch

Originally Posted by Blakeman

Originally Posted by Imisnew2

Very Black and white, as consultant said... but it fits the stereotypes.

Yup and subjugates us to be in a category when the majority of us are in a gray area in between the two....

Propaganda for the bi partisan system!

Straight up! The bi partisan system is horseshit, pure and smelly! We need a way to define candidates without the "D" or "R" bit.

Hitch

I just see that as Dumbass and Retard. I'm tired of bi-partisan politics. It's why I just finally gave up on voting in presidential elections awhile ago. No more Jury duty for me!

Call me unpatriotic, or whatever you want for not voting -- but our system if FUCKED

**flame** · 10-24-09, 10:18 AM

In Texas they use also pull the driver license info to use for jury duty.
I am not a fan of the two party system. I am a fan of particular ideals, that are found in the conservative side. However some things I believe we need to balance and be more liberal on. It just sucks because these politicians line up along party lines and there is no balance and happy medium.

**GReYVee** · 10-24-09, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by flame

In Texas they use also pull the driver license info to use for jury duty.

Bah I forgot about that. They started that up in colorado. Even non-license ID cards count. I know they need someone, but why not just conscript bums off the street. I'm sure that counts as 'peers' for most of these trials.

***COMMANDER*** · 10-24-09, 11:20 AM

Good thing they use the DL, because after this last election, we would have Santa clause, peter cottontail and mary poppins in the jury box.

**CallousDisregard** · 10-24-09, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Hitch

Originally Posted by rock_lobster

Originally Posted by Hitch

We need a way to define candidates without the "D" or "R" bit.

Hitch

There is a way. It's called researching the candidates before you vote for them. Not trying to sound harsh or call you out personally, but I hear this a lot. Too many people vote the party, instead of doing their research on all candidates involved, then complain when it doesn't turn out the way they expected.

I hear you. I guess it may be better stated if we ditched the R & D's so the candidates had to flagrantly define themselves by policy and past action. Voters would be given a short paragraph that defines a candidate, rather than the candidate's name.

Then they choose policy instead of popularity.

Just an idea!

Hitch

That is racist, or at least that is what the DOJ said in a N. Carolina case.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/oba...lots_is_racis/

Similar case Missisippi
http://www.discourse.net/archives/20...ssissippi.html

But when I started to read another simialar case from 2007 in more detail I have to confess the legalese got to me and now really just don't know what to think.

The following facts are taken from the Ninth Circuit’s opinion, 460 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2006): the state of Washington employed a “blanket primary” system from 1935 until 2003. Blanket systems allow all voters, regardless of party affiliation, to vote for any candidate on the primary ballot. The top candidate from each political party then advances to the general election. Many other states have closed primaries where voters are required to have a formal affiliation with the political party to vote in the party’s primary and select the party’s nominee.

In Democratic Party of Washington v. Reed, 343 F.3d 1198 (9th Cir. 2003), the Ninth Circuit invalidated Washington’s blanket primary system because it was “materially indistinguishable” from California’s system -- which the Supreme Court had found unconstitutional in California Democratic Party v. Jones. Jones, 530 U.S. 567 (2000). The primary system at issue in Jones permitted voters to vote for any candidate from any party, and the candidate who received the most votes from each party would then appear on the general ballot. The Supreme Court held that the system violated the constitutional right of free association of the political parties because voters who were not formally affiliated with the party were able to participate in the party nomination process.

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/06-713