My Confession
 

When I first registered to vote, I was repulbican. I bought into the retoric of how the "Great Society" had brought this country down. I voted for Nixon. When I saw his act,I began to question my leaders. Little things like how can they break the law or even try? They know the law, hell they are the law. Changed my affiliation. I'm not a crook either and won't harbor them.
I never thought that I'd miss Nixon. I've kept an open mind during elections and I've kept an eye on the tenure of the elected. After the last eight years of this administration, I will never vote or consider a Republican worthy of my vote again. Crying for change by the Republican Party is the most disingenous ploy possible. It might work, but I pray not. And I do mean pray...

:claps:

The only thing registering in a party gets you is the right to vote in a primary. I registered Democrat for the sole purpose of voting for Chris Gabrielli in the 2006 gubernatorial primary, because I thought he'd be preferable to either Coupe Deval or Muffy. I didn't bother changing it back to Independent. If the Republicans ever have a meaningful primary in this state--and I think that Halley's Comet will return before that happens--I might switch my registration.

Passing on Frick or Frack is one alternative----but there are other alternatives. Maybe the reason it always comes down to the lesser of two evils is because no one ever considers the fact that they have about 7 other choices in the average Presidential election. If more people did, maybe the Big Two would be forced to come up with better candidates.

As a tangent, some time ago I attended a scientific lecture where the person remarked that they indeed did have "Halley's Comet Fever".

I'd note that at the same lecture was James Van Allen, who should hold serious respect among the right people.

Additionally I have my own personal photos of Halley's comet. Do you? :)

-spence

Mike, i'm sorry but I saw what Nader did to an election. Split it just enough to schrod everything up to the nines. Then he threatened to do it again...May God say us from these fruitloops...

I could counter that by saying that if Al Gore had only managed to carry his own state---something that even George McGovern did--Nader wouldn't have screwed up anything.

There are also people who feel strongly that Clinton never would have won if Perot wasn't in the race.

Whether a third party candidate "screws up" an election is a matter of perspective. Truman managed to win re-elction with Henry Wallace splitting the liberal Democratic vote, and Strom Thurmond splitting the Southern Democratic vote. That's because Truman ran a fierce campaign--that's when the phrase "Give 'em hell, Harry" was born.

It's not Nader's fault that Gore ran a horrible campaign ;)

remember Ross Perot and that "giant s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g sound".... boy he was right. :(

I think this is a good point...

The GOP had a great convention this year by most all measures, but you really have to wonder what all those delegates were cheering about.

For the past decade we've only heard that the Dems are wrong and the GOP is right. Now McCain is saying that the Dems are wrong and the GOP is wrong. Right? Otherwise why do we need reform?

This is very confusing :hee:

-spence

I voted for Reagan in 84 and the first Bush in 88.
I know lifelong, blue blood, fiscally conservative republicans who are still republicans, but believe W has irreparably damaged the party.

Bush didn't do it alone, and I think it goes back to the Republican leadership in the House under President Clinton.

And the damage isn't just to the GOP, than could be repaired with the right leadership. The real damage is to our country.

You can say the Dems have done this, the Dems have done that...but there's really no comparrison.

-spence

I tend to agree with that. I think it all started when the GOP Congressional leadership made the fools' choice to impeach a lame duck president in the last year and a half of his term, for reasons that still escape me. Knowing that there wasn't a snowball's chance in hell of removing him from office on a 2/3rds vote in the Senate. :huh:

It was the ultimate political show trial :doh:

It hardened the party lines and made bi-partisanship almost impossible. It became more like a cultural war than a political debate.

We haven't recovered from it. The 2000 Florida fiasco might have been resolved without all of the personal rancor on both sides, absent the impechment sideshow. :hs:

Very true, but I'd go back a few years even to after the Contract with America. It was shortly after that the House started to centralize power and change the procedures to virtually eliminate Democrats from the legislative process.

They ramped up "K Street" and completely redefined how special interests would control our government and focus only on conservative interests.

Once Bush was elected the problem got even worse. According to a study by the Cato Institute, the number of lobbyists in Washington has doubled since 2000. Thank god the Abramoff story broke and put a spotlight on the entire affair.

Gingrich, Delay, Boener etc... all helped make this a reality.

-spence