It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So which party are you voting for in November?

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Who are you voting for?

The shadow government candidate or the shadow government candidate?

For totalitarianism or for totalitarianism?

For slavery or for slavery?

For corruption or for corruption?

For planned genocide or for planned genocide?

For lies and deceit or for lies and deceit?

For war on the people by TPTB or for war on the people by TBTP.

For giving all the nation's wealth to the Banksters or for giving all the nation's wealth to the Banksters?

For America Inc. or for America Inc.?

For poisoning your children or for poisoning your children?




posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOneElectric
 



Like President Obomination?

So, to be specific, you will be voting for more of the same.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
I will be voting along new party lines in the next election. I am switching to the "Party of One" (i.e., ME). I will be submitting a write-in ballot in which I will be writing in myself for every spot.

Wasted vote? Not any more wasted that my vote has been in every prior election.


In Minnesota that would have been counted as a Franken vote.

I suggest that no matter who you vote for you might at least show a little emotion about the past treachery of some of the official vote talliers and the polling place chicanery that has taken place. I believe there is more than enough evidence to question some of the nonsense that has occurred in the past.

Call me an optimist but I still believe we, the people, can take our country back if we throw the bums out. If you want real change than enforce term limits on the incumbents.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   
If very few people voted, I guess that would mean they would have to do a quick rethink of the vote counts, which have probably already been prepared and passed to MSM, so they can rehearse their lines and read them out on the night.

On the other hand, it could be a good time and opportunity to use the process to tell more and more people what is really going on.

Don't know why the word heckling keeps coming to mind!



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by GrampsLEn
 



Yes, it's true, I hadn't thought of that, but I guess it's possible that an individual could use the ballot paper to write all sorts of messages.

Lol! I increasing dislike voting - it really makes me aware of how we are being succrd. Suddenly, I'm quite looking forward to it.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Well I just voted locally in our primaries and I only had 1 choice on most of the positions.


But in the final election I dunno past that I'm voting for Roy Barnes for governor of Georgia. I'll probably vote Democrat even though a lot of my principles are Republican. All the local republicans seem like religious fundies that want "a Christian Nation" which scares the crap out of me.

It's not that I WON'T vote for a Christian, but I don't want to vote for one that wears it on his or her sleeve. I never can tell if I am voting for them or their crazy preacher.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrampsLEn
Call me an optimist but I still believe we, the people, can take our country back if we throw the bums out. If you want real change than enforce term limits on the incumbents.


Call me a pessimist, but I believe that anyone that desires to be in political office is also someone who is not worthy of being in office. The desire to be in office is purely agenda driven.

I submit that political positions should be filled in much the same way a jury is selected....random drawing, then question the "presidential/congressional pool" to weed out the lesser candidates. This would certainly eliminate "tampering" and would give a much better chance of having an "average American" in a position of power.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
These guys would be a good start on who NOT to vote for..

CREW - Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

15 most corrupt CURRENTLY in congress

•Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-FL)
•Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL)
•Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA)
•Rep. Nathan Deal (R-GA)
•Sen. John Ensign (R-NV)
•Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)
•Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA)
•Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
•Rep. Alan B. Mollohan (D-WV)
•Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA)
•Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-NY)
•Rep. Laura Richardson (D-CA)
•Rep. Pete Visclosky (D-IN)
•Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA)
•Rep. Don Young (R-AK)
www.crewsmostcorrupt.org...

CREW's Crooked Candidates 2010

•Roy Blunt (R) U.S. Senate, MO
•Charlie Crist (I) U.S. Senate, FL
•Jeff Denham (R) U.S. House, CA
•Alvin Greene (D) U.S. Senate, SC
•Timothy Griffin (R) U.S. House, AR
•J.D. Hayworth (R) U.S. Senate, AZ
•Ed Martin (R) U.S. House, MO
•Kendrick Meek (D) U.S. Senate, FL
•Dino Rossi (R) U.S. Senate, WA
•Marco Rubio (R) U.S. Senate, FL
•Allen West (R) U.S. House, FL

www.citizensforethics.org...



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   
What absolutely cracks me up about this thread is all the "I'll never vote republican again posts. It's like you all have selective amnesia and have forgotten that the democrats have been the ones in control of congress for the last four years at least. Yet all the problems in this country are apparently the republicans fault.
I'm not saying the republicans are completely innocent, they're not. But the majority of the blame for the last for years belongs at the feet off the democrats who've been in control all this time.

As for the question posed, I'll vote for whoever most closely matches my political leanings regardless of their political affiliation. If they're a democrat, so be it. If they're a republican, so be it. If they're an independent, so be it. I'm apparently a lot less concerned with parties than most, and a lot more concerned with political records and leanings regardless of label.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by hadriana



But in the final election I dunno past that I'm voting for Roy Barnes for governor of Georgia. I'll probably vote Democrat even though a lot of my principles are Republican. All the local republicans seem like religious fundies that want "a Christian Nation" which scares the crap out of me.


Same here!!

They scare me too with their "holier than thou" arrogance and attitudes. And "I know what's best for you" platform. Religious Fascism!!

I take it back. I will be voting. I'll be voting AGAINST certain canidates but not for anyone.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa
Religious Fascism!!


Umm they're all fascists.

Maybe you can stomach one brand of fascism over another but I can't. Any vote you cast against "religious fascism" is a vote cast for another brand.

It's like somebody demanding you murder a family member. You get to choose who. But you still have to murder one.

I can't do that.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
What absolutely cracks me up about this thread is all the "I'll never vote republican again posts. It's like you all have selective amnesia and have forgotten that the democrats have been the ones in control of congress for the last four years at least.


I know you care about facts Jenna, so I will assume it was just errror..

"the democrats have been the ones in control of congress for the last four years at least."

The Dems took control "majority" in congress in January 2007 after not having control for the prior 12....sworn in Jan 4th 07.

That puts my math at 3 and half years...as opposed to "4 years at the least!"

In the Senate the Dems took only a 51 to 49 seat lead allowing the GOP to effectively fillibuster all legislation, so "Control"??...not so much.


As this chart shows the GOP immediately employed the fillibuster and halted any significant legislation that did not bend to thier will.



Less than two years later, Oct. 08, the GOP had employed the Fillibuster 98 times.
Here is a list...
www.dkosopedia.com...

Since then the GOP has made the fuillibuster standard policy regardless of the legislation, nominee etc.

What we get is the worst of both worlds, Dem iniatives contorted to serve corporate interests or face fillibuster.

That whole.."The Dems have been "in control" of congress for 4 years"...is just spin and BS and whatever side of the fence is feeding our worldview...we should sniff first before consuming.



[edit on 22-7-2010 by maybereal11]

[edit on 22-7-2010 by maybereal11]

[edit on 22-7-2010 by maybereal11]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 

.
Senseless sniping aside, the democrats won control of the house in 06. Before that they controlled the house for forty years straight from 1955 to 1995. With the exception of 1981 to 1987 they also controlled the senate during the same time period. After forty years of democrats being in control you really want to complain about 12 years the republicans were in control half of which was under a democrat president? Really?

As for your fence sniffing comment, I do my best to stay away from the collective political fence. You all do too much mud slinging for my tastes. So whatever it is you're smelling is coming from your own side of the fence from what i can tell.

Note: I'm typing on my phone so I cannot provide links right now. Nor can i go to them without changing pages til i figure this new phone out.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
I'm voting against anyone who voted for that 1500 page health crap bill. Plain and simple. If I have two candidates and both oppose the bill then my next benchmark is lower taxes.

I don't care about party lines.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Both parties are puppets controlled by the same corporate special interests. Both parties use intangibles like "patriotism" and religion to sway unsophisticated voters, and both are liars.

Second verse, same as the first.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by maybereal11
 

.
Senseless sniping aside, the democrats won control of the house in 06.


Seriouslly Jenna...Not Mud Slinging, but rather concerned with facts...

The Dems won in the Nov. 2006 elections, BUT WERE NOT SWORN IN UNTIL JANUARY 4th 2007.

3.5 years vs "4 years at least"

And duly noted that you ignored the historically unpercidented number of fillbusters that occured by the GOP post democratic win or the fact that the Dem advantage in the Senate was a mere 51 to 49 allowing the GOP to Fillibuster any and every little bit of legislation they chose. WHICH THEY DID AND STILL DO.

The GOP Fillibustered 98 times in less than 2 years post 06 elections...I provided links and charts above.

Care to dispute facts? Rather than repeat things I would expect Rush or Glen to ape?

Your choosing to ignore facts and repeat rhetoric without thought or research...without examining or acknowledging the evidence I provided...

Well, while you may think I do "too much mud slinging" for your tastes...you have too little concern for the truth or facts for my tolerance and we can leave it at that.

I used to think you were one of the more honest folks here regardless of political leanings, but here you have shown me that facts be damned you will simply bash away at any truth associated with a view not your own.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


I'm the same as I always have been. I notice you missed the part of my post where i said I'm typing on a phone and can't open or post links right now. That or you ignored it.

Edit: Meaning give me time to get home to my actual computer before you start slinging accusations st me.

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Jenna]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
I don't vote.
Never have.
Never will.



Okay, so if I stop voting, I have withdrawn my consent? That’s a bargain! I will stop voting, withdraw my consent and the tax bills will cease. Hurray! Yeah, but you could have played the game, they will say. Barnett replies: "It is a queer kind of ‘consent’ where there is no way to refuse one’s consent."


The Myth of Political Consent
by James Ostrowski

Direct Citizen Action:
How We Can Win
the Second American Revolution
Without Firing a Shot.
www.lewrockwell.com...


I speak.
I write.
I look people in the eyes.
I manifest my Will.

...I'm not interested in figure head popularity contests or the lesser of line item EVIL A or EVIL B.

It never had to be that way.

Sri Oracle

[edit on 22-7-2010 by Sri Oracle]



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 03:30 PM
link   
I am from NJ and I am voting against any representitive currently holding office. To me it doesn't matter which party they belong to. They have all failed the people and none of them deserve to keep their job. New blood can't do any worse representing the people.

I belong to no political party, I consider myself an independent that believes that the more government stays out of our lives the better off we will be. I will be looking for candidates that think along those lines.



posted on Jul, 22 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solasis
reply to post by Snarf
 


No, inaction bears as much responsibility as action. It is an action in itself. You ought to choose between the least of all possible evils, which is hopefully a good. If that choice, iln your eyes, seems to best result from inaction... well, good luck.


you're not even close to being correct.

When 2 actions that exist as separate choices both offer the same outcome, choosing to take part in neither action is the best route to take.

It doesn't matter who you vote for, they're the same person with the same goals.

It's like saying "You have 3 choices, i can punch you in the face, kick you in the face, or you can walk away, which will you choose?"

Hmm, gee, which will i choose?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join