The 2012 US presdential election

Discuss anything that has to do with this subject.

In my view the Republican party is bitterly divided between the Tea Party wing and the Moderate wing, If they elect a Tea Party candidate (Palin, Bachmann and Newt) they risk isolating themselves from the independents, but if they elect a Moderate candidate (Romney) they risk angering the Tea Party (and they could create their own political party and stifle votes from them)

http://s1.zetaboards.com/Conceptual_Evolution/ http://sagan4.com/forum/index.php

They need to split from the Tea Party. The Republicans may lose an election or two, but it's worth it to sever ties with the Tea Party and let them stew in their idiocy.

edited 26th Mar '11 12:59:05 AM by Pykrete

Sigh. The time has come again? I'm wondering about the merits of a Constitutional Monarchy now.

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

-face desk- After last few elections can't we install duels to the death with sticks and rocks for leadership of the country? We will still get assholes but at least we shall be entertained.

Who watches the watchmen?

It's not so bad if you can get another country to front for housing all the royals.

Plus in the Westminster systems the election period is usually less than two months. I can't fathom how the U.S. can spend more than a year in election mode - no wonder you all get fatigued by the whole thing.

edited 26th Mar '11 1:43:06 AM by TrapperZoid

Not to mention, as soon as you get elected, it seems like you're prepping for the next election immediately after taking office, or something.

It would be nice if they actually ran the country, ya know?

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

Didn't know anything about any of the Republicans running except for Gingrich, so I spent two hours analyzing each of them and writing about them. Then I accidentally clicked the wrong thing and lost it all (but learned how to get a new credit card.) Short version: I might switch parties for Pawlenty or Roemer, or Karger if I thought he had a snowball's chance in Hell of winning, but it looks like I'm stuck with Obama again.

That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something Awful

I don't have a god damn clue. South Park and their douche V turd sandwich episode comes to mind.

^^^^ Actually, it's usually almost two years for presidential elections. This season, things seem to be getting off to a slow start for some reason.

Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's Play

Because traditionally the loud noises surrounding the next Presidential election don't start until roughly Christmas the year right before the election.

The 2008 election season starting in 2006 by Obama and Clinton was an aberration not the rule.

I heard that Donald Trump is going to run for the Republican party. Is that true?

He better not. Election season is already enough of a media madhouse without him around.

edited 26th Mar '11 8:49:09 AM by MajorTom

I've heard the same.

I see that as a bit of a conflict of interest for big business though, not that it's stopped presidents from being elected before..

Is it possible to be so damn rich that you can't be bribed or lobbied to?

edited 26th Mar '11 8:52:49 AM by Barkey

^ Yeah, case in point George Soros notorious liberal activist. He doesn't take bribes or lobbying efforts on behalf of his side, he makes them.

He's throwing his hat in, but he can't start campaigning until after The Apprentice ends. I don't care if he runs, there's no hope of him actually getting elected, so who cares.

I think he's not serious about running for office, but simply using his presidential run to gain publicity and money.

It's not like Trump will split the vote, like Ross Perot. So, yep, he's behaving a like a circus act to get more publicity, again.

What's he campaigning on? Oh, right, the 9/11 mosque and how it makes him mad. It was enough to get him on Letterman.

I'm a skeptical squirrel

I'm so much of a cynic I think trump may win simply because everyone wants to see a "celebrity" in office.

Kind of like why the only reason the governator was elected.

Writing what though?

What, am I the only one who's all for Obama? He's not AWMFG HOPE AND CHANGE and actually it might make him stronger to run against some other democrats in a primary (I'd like to see him try and take on a Kuccinich/Weiner team, actually), but when you see state republicans doing crap like throwing away union rights and trying to impose "We can dissolve your city in order to install unelected officials and just ignore all your contracts," I can't imagine that you think Obama isn't the lesser of two evils...

Well, unless you agree with those things, obviously.

edited 26th Mar '11 2:08:04 PM by TheyCallMeTomu

Obama is the lesser of two very big evils.

I mean, he's done NOTHING to curb the social conservative agenda of Bush. It's taken him 3 freaking years to do a half-assed repeal of DADT, but that's been pretty much it. We've seen no changes on drug policy or a stop on the Fed war against vice, we haven't seen a restoration of privacy rights, we didn't do away with the Patriot Act, et cetera.

edited 26th Mar '11 3:12:53 PM by SavageHeathen

You exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it.

I'm with you on Obama, Tomu. I think a second term is where we'd really see him shine. He had a big mess to clean up, and uncooperative opposition to deal with.

Right now, though, the most interesting thing about the election is who he'll run against.

Even though I'm not American, I'd like to see Ron Paul run again, he wont win but I enjoy listening to what he has to say more than my own politicians.

"Si vis pacem, para bellum"

DADT was Clintons doing you know. Not his fault, but not Bush's fault.

Fight smart, not fair.

Until Ted Kennedy died he had an unblockable absolute supermajority in both Houses. Even after Kennedy died it a supermajority against the GOP 99% of the time. (And then you had the massacre at the polls last November because of those supermajorities not giving a damn about the opposition)

There's no excuse to blame the opposition on a chance they blew that only comes once every many decades.