So......Mike Bloomberg - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-11-2008, 03:05 PM   #16
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,290
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
mike bloomberg is not a republican or a democrat. he's someone who makes his decisions on his own, without having to have a party tell him what to do.
That doesn't change the fact that as an Independent he will have no chance in hell of winning. That doesn't change the fact that as an Independent he will accomplish nothing other than taking just enough votes away from one side to ensure victory for the other. It will skew the vote. It is an unneccessary excercise in self-ego-massage. Either run in one of the two sides where you have a chance and you won't skew anything or don't run. Period.
__________________

__________________
namkcuR is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 03:12 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Jeannieco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A HEART THAT IS BROKEN IS A HEART THAT IS OPEN
Posts: 4,954
Local Time: 01:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Harry Vest
The guy just doesn't "have it" - just look at him. A big wallet and a bigger ego. Just stay out of the race fool and let Obama become President. Geez, you Americans, you cease to amaze me.
Hey man, don't paint "us Americans" with the same brush.

I didn't vote for Bush in the last two elections... so I certianly don't belong in the category that voted a guy in office 2 times with the IQ of a chia pet.

I know you were speaking in general and didn't mean all of us, but still I hate to be categorized like that. I am speaking for myself, but I am sure there are others that feel the same way.

When I went to Europe recently I apologized left and right for our country and it's actions in the world of late.
So embarassing! I can't wait to be a proud American again.

Also, I think I would vote for Bloomberg before I'd vote for Hillary.
That's how much I dislike her.
__________________

__________________
Jeannieco is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 03:27 PM   #18
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,290
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Jeannieco
Also, I think I would vote for Bloomberg before I'd vote for Hillary.
That's how much I dislike her.
Seriously? If it were a three-person race with Bloomberg as an independent, Hillary as a Democrat, and whoever as a Republican, you'd vote for Bloomberg before Hillary? When voting for Bloomberg(or any Independent) is essentially flushing your vote down the toilet and making sure it doesn't count for anything? You'd rather give a spoiler a vote, and put the Republican candidate one vote closer to being elected, than just gritting your teeth and voting for Hillary because no matter how much you dislike her she can't be as bad as the Republican candidate?
__________________
namkcuR is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 03:28 PM   #19
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 01:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Jeannieco


Also, I think I would vote for Bloomberg before I'd vote for Hillary.
That's how much I dislike her.
Then you might as well vote for whichever Republican gets the nomination. It's the same thing.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 03:28 PM   #20
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 01:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dusty Bottoms
More options = a good thing
Vote splitting to get the Republican in office= good thing?
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 03:38 PM   #21
Blue Crack Addict
 
phanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in the darkness on the edge of town
Posts: 25,060
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by namkcuR


Seriously? If it were a three-person race with Bloomberg as an independent, Hillary as a Democrat, and whoever as a Republican, you'd vote for Bloomberg before Hillary? When voting for Bloomberg(or any Independent) is essentially flushing your vote down the toilet and making sure it doesn't count for anything? You'd rather give a spoiler a vote, and put the Republican candidate one vote closer to being elected, than just gritting your teeth and voting for Hillary because no matter how much you dislike her she can't be as bad as the Republican candidate?
I was thinking the same thing. I thought we learned this lesson back in 2000.
__________________
phanan is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 03:41 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Jeannieco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A HEART THAT IS BROKEN IS A HEART THAT IS OPEN
Posts: 4,954
Local Time: 01:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by namkcuR


Seriously? If it were a three-person race with Bloomberg as an independent, Hillary as a Democrat, and whoever as a Republican, you'd vote for Bloomberg before Hillary? When voting for Bloomberg(or any Independent) is essentially flushing your vote down the toilet and making sure it doesn't count for anything? You'd rather give a spoiler a vote, and put the Republican candidate one vote closer to being elected, than just gritting your teeth and voting for Hillary because no matter how much you dislike her she can't be as bad as the Republican candidate?
I know I know I know, I'd be helping the Republicans. accchhh.

I am just really miffed at her and Bill right now and praying I won't have to be forced to vote for her.

I shouldn't have said it that way... don't worry I will calm down by Nov. at least I hope so but I REAAAAAAAAALLLLY don't want to vote for her.
__________________
Jeannieco is offline  
Old 01-11-2008, 09:14 PM   #23
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:53 AM
Bloomberg has achieved an awful lot of admirable things in his life, and if the US is electing a chief executive then there aren't too many more capable people.

So if he wants to spend his money on a Presidential bid, then I say more power to him.

But this is a Presidential election, not a board election.

Unfortunately, on foreign policy issues he has his head stuck up his *** (though not quite as bad as that loon Giuliani).

He is the ideal 'Wall Street' candidate. I have the distinct impression that ordinary Americans don't want a 'Wall Street' President.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 01-12-2008, 05:14 PM   #24
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,400
Local Time: 04:53 AM
... and as long as we continue to have a simple two party system without more viable options, we'll continue to put ideological douchebag special interest butt boys (or girls) into office.

whoopity doo, yay america.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-12-2008, 05:55 PM   #25
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
... and as long as we continue to have a simple two party system without more viable options, we'll continue to put ideological douchebag special interest butt boys (or girls) into office.

whoopity doo, yay america.
If you want viable options and something that is not a 2 party system then you need to come up with a viable 3rd (4th, etc) PARTY which would have the funds, the organization, and the drive to get something done. Not these independent tickets that pop up once every 4 years and accomplish absolutely nothing in the long term.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 01-12-2008, 06:13 PM   #26
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 09:53 AM
If presidents were elected based on the popular vote, Bloomberg getting in the race could get interesting.

Since it's based on the electoral college he'll just act like spoiler for whomever (most likely the dems)
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 01-13-2008, 09:02 AM   #27
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,400
Local Time: 04:53 AM
fair enough points both... but he's still got my vote locked if he jumps in.

if we could have had a viable third party candidate every year since perot first popped up on the radar, perhaps by now they'd actually have a legit chance at winning the whole shebangybang. if we continue to discourage third party candidates from entering because we don't want them to be "spoilers" then we'll never get a viable third option. ya gotta start to chip away sometime.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 01-13-2008, 10:05 AM   #28
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
if we continue to discourage third party candidates from entering because we don't want them to be "spoilers" then we'll never get a viable third option. ya gotta start to chip away sometime.
But it's an asinine and ineffective place to chip away from. You should take a look at countries with a plurality of parties and take lessons from them. When a new party pops up (provided it isn't merely a faction of one party splitting up), they usually make inroads at the local level first. The point is to win a few seats, whether municipally or on a provincial/state basis. And then you start expanding outwards, because suddenly you have organized support and media coverage.

Third party presidential tickets are absolutely useless, both in the short and long term. People who run on them yammer on about choices but seem largely uninterested in actually making a change that goes beyond their own hide getting elected. You never hear them talking about how to succeed on a local or state level, or anything of the sort. I hesitate to say it's 100% about their vanity, but it sure looks like it a lot of the time.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 01-13-2008, 10:38 AM   #29
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,883
Local Time: 04:53 AM
I agree. Independents need a grassroots movement, from the bottom up.

Something comparable to the Christian fundamentalists, or the pro-choice crowd.

Now that's some political hor$epower.
__________________
Bluer White is offline  
Old 01-13-2008, 12:50 PM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Bluer White
I agree. Independents need a grassroots movement, from the bottom up.
But independents want to remain just that - independent of any party. The leading candidates of both parties are centrists for a good reason - to capture the vote of independents, who are much larger in number now than in the past. A good unaffiliated candidate is a real threat to the party-affiliated candiadtes.
__________________

__________________
ntalwar is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com