Re: Joe...

[G. Morgan <usenet_abuse@xxxxxxxxx>]

mleuck <m.leuck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Not really.  Had Ralph Nader not run in 2000 those votes would have likely gone
>> to Gore.  A 3rd party can easily fracture a party, Ross Perot did it too.
>
>But that wasn't a real alternative, all it did was throw the election
>to one side or the other.

Right, so the votes were not "wasted".

I don't know why I bother to vote with the electoral college system that
basically makes my vote un-countable if I vote Democratic (for prez.) in Texas.
>
>> We need a "solid" 3rd party.  And the "Teabaggers" are not it.
>
>A 3rd party would make it worse,

Not a solid 3rd party, one that makes the regular politicians look like the
crooks that they are.  I envision a group that is made up of professionals whom
have no interest in long-term political careers.

> and insulting a large group of people
>with a sexual slur like that helps doesn't it? So "Bass-like"

You just couldn't hold on long enough huh?  I was wondering when you'd start
beating a "dead horse".  It's a little too early Mark.

And yeah, injecting a sexual slur may not be helpful, but it did grab your
attention.

>> Somewhere between the "New Progressives" and the Libertarian Party would do
>> well.  IMHO.
>
>Those people are called "Moderates" or a better term "people without
>any core beliefs or spines"

Moderates sound good to me in an era of blind party loyalty.   The majority of
our fellow citizens are just sheep doing whatever the politicians want them to
do.

--
You'll be Ok, Enjoy.  Life is nothing more than a bunch of mini
vacations all rolled into one. - Old Gringo