Third Party & Independents Archives

What Can We Expect From the Upcoming Election?

Voters in Virginia are in somewhat of a quandary as to how to vote this election season. Both Cuccinelli and McAuliffe, candidates for governor, have been stigmatized as being corpocratic.

But, wonder of wonders, there is a 3rd party candidate in the running. A Libertarian, Rob Sarvis, with no political background is polling near 10%. While he has less than a snowballs chance in hell of being elected, I will send my protest vote his way.

Meanwhile, with congress enjoying an approval rating near 10% we can fully expect an 80-90% incumbent re-election rate. How is that possible, with some 51% of folks claiming to be 'in the middle' on most issues?

I believe that voting incumbents from office in large numbers would weaken the corpocracy for some period of time. Why not give it a try?

Otherwise - - -

Posted by Roy Ellis at October 15, 2013 10:09 PM
Comments
Comment #372859

Singing my tune, Roy. Yes, let them know we are not just fed up with everyone else’s representatives. Polls show record number are fed up with their own. The prevailing political winds may be about to shift. Especially if there is a repeat performance in January and February.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 16, 2013 10:24 PM
Comment #372902

Take heart Roy. Ted Cruz’s election has been described by the Washington Post as “the biggest upset of 2012 … a true grassroots victory against very long odds.”

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 17, 2013 7:26 PM
Comment #372907

Still singing a tune, David. Like, ‘looking for reform in all the wrong places, etc. Still pushing on three fronts:

Article V Convention

New 3rd party (but not just another party), and

Vote Out Incumbents Democracy, yeah!


Royal, re the shutdown - there was no way one could believe the corpocracy would let the gov’t default. One only had to watch the stock markets leading up to the final days.

Well, what with the debt, ACA, and jobs stats, plus people living longer and spending more on HC, folks are starting to get a sense of the NWO, IMO. Corpocracy and the top ten percent are in a win, win, win, win mode.

Stress on the folks, like the ACA pushing folks to part time and the fact that well paying jobs in quantity will not be returning, is indicative of the corpocracy gaining an even greater strangle hold on the citizens/grapes. Not likely many will find a hundred bucks laying around for their chosen candidate. Meaning, corpocracy and the status quo is here for the duration, IMO.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 17, 2013 9:24 PM
Comment #372914

So, what can we expect in the 2014 elections? Roy,

That would be great.

Not rewarding repeat offenders with perpetual re-election.

A more reasonable, more centrist, more tolerant 3rd party, and more voting choices would be great.

The Tea Party is sort of a 3rd Party that came along, but I don’t think it is the more-centrist 3rd-party some people were hoping for?

However, there is always one small consolation, and one small potential reason for hope.

The number of independents is growing, and eventually, too much failure will eventually lead to enough voters, regardless of party, to finally decide to try a new direction.

However, it can take years and decades to unfold.

Perhaps, things will start to move back to the middle, because the U.S. has had too much extremism and too many relatively-recent swings from the extreme right and the extreme left.

Also, many administrations in the last 30 years don’t seem to think debt is a big concern. Yet, the federal debt has grown about $12 Trillion since year 2000 (about 1.2 trillion per year, on average). It grew by record levels under BOTH Bush and Obama.

As a result, debt-to-GDP is higher than after World War II, but the federal debt per person ($17 Trillion or $53K per person in 2013) and the nation-wide-debt per person ($60 Trillion or $187.5K per person) has never been higher (in inflation adjusted dollars)ever (source: http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/assets_c/2011/07/debt%20per%20capita%202011-05-56188.php)

  • Federal Debt per-capita in year 2010 inflation-adjusted U.S. Dollars:
  • $60K |—————————————————————————————————————-
  • $55K |—————————————————————————————————————o
  • $50K |—————————————————————————————————————-
  • $45K |————————————————————————————————————o—
  • $40K |—————————————————————————————————————-
  • $35K |——————————————————————————————————-o——-
  • $30K |—————————————————————————————————————-
  • $25K |——————————o———————————————————-o—-o—————
  • $20K |—————————-o-o————————————————-o—————————-
  • $15K |—————————o——-o——o———————————-o——————————-
  • $10K |————————-o————————-o—-o——-o——o————————————
  • $05K |——-o——o——o—————————————————————————————-
  • $000 |o—————————————————————————————————————
  • ____1918___1934___1940___1952__1964___1978__1990___2002__2013

NOTE: The graph above is adjusted for inflation (shown in 2010 dollars).

That’s a very deep hole to dig out of.

A large part of every tax dollar is for interest on the debt, and the debt is now growing by almost $2 Trillion per year in 2010 inflation adjusted U.S. dollars.

So, what can we expect in the 2014 elections?
Probably not much change.
What can we expect in the 2016 elections?
Probably a little more change as growing problems continue to fester and worsen, making more voters less and less happy.
Enough voters have to be very unhappy before they will change direction.

However, it isn’t that simple any more either, because 99% of all federal campaign donations (of $200 or more) come from only the wealthiest 1% of the U.S. population, and the too many voters can be, and have been fooled. That gets worse as wealth is abused to influence elections and public opinion.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure and FOR-SALE, incompetent, corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 17, 2013 10:56 PM
Comment #372916

And if someone wants to also see inflation adjusted income, see this chart.

The ratio of income-to-debt in inflation-adjusted U.S. Dollars shows the ratio has been falling for over 30 years.

So, if you take into account some periods of increased income and national wealth, the graph still does not look good.

Numerous graphs of numerous economic studies (income growth, wealth concentration, debt, etc.) show things changing direction about 30 years ago, and it is still in a downward spiral. There was a small upward trend between 1995 to 2003, but it started downward again after 2003.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure and FOR-SALE, incompetent, corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 17, 2013 11:41 PM
Comment #372958

Agree d.. The numbers have been going against the working folks as far back as the Regan admin.

One can see the corpocracy has managed things very well since that era. They have been on a tear for some 30 plus years now.

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/the-one-percent-gigantic-government-gigantic-corporations-massive-wealth-inequality-in-america


The following is the definition of “corporatism” from the Merriam-Webster dictionary….

the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/corporatism-is-not-capitalism-7-things-about-the-monolithic-predator-corporations-that-dominate-our-economy-that-every-american-should-know

The above url’s bounce all around the idea of abolishing corporate personhood but they can’t seem to mouth/write the words. They do seem to realize the problem. Quoting:
“Corporatism is a collectivist system that allows the elite to accumulate gigantic amounts of wealth and power.

The answer to such a system is not to go to a different collectivist system.

Rather, we need to return as much power as possible to individuals and small businesses.

Our founding fathers intended for us to live in a country where power was highly decentralized.
Why didn’t we listen to them? End quote.

Agree, why not listen to the Founders? Abolish CP and implement REAL CFR. It could be done thru AVC, a new 3rd party w/a/dif/pol/att, or by Voting Out Incumbents for Democracy.


Otherwise, I believe Hillary will revert to a braid/pony tail for the 2016’s.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 18, 2013 6:00 PM
Comment #372979


The latest bipartisan dogfight - - did I say that? State officials in Va. Have removed some 40k from the voter rolls. The Dems have gone to federal court to restore the 40k. At least one county registrar has defied the elections board and refused to remove any voters. Some 38k of those booted off are registered to vote in other states.

Not sure if its significant but I’m seeing more newsprint relating to ‘centrists’, and ‘independents’. An article in the Richmond Times-Dispatch notest that “the challenge for the moderate middle is to create an organizing principle – all things in moderation? —- and produce a centrist, nonideological, pragmatic leader, preferably one un-indebted to billionaires or radio babbleheads. A dream, perhaps, but wouldn’t it be marvey?”

And, an opinion writer in my local paper wrote “ The gubernatorial contest of 2013 will be remembered as another negative campaign between entrenched parties with deep pockets. Unfortunately, it may also be remembered as a lost opportunity for a grand experiment by an independent candidate. Too bad, as many Virginians still tell pollsters they wish they had another chance on Nov 5.”

A WP writer suggested that the way to defeat gerrymandering and big money influence is for states to follow Calif and Wash state and allow 3rd party candidates easy ballot access in the primary’s with the top two candidates being selected to stand for general election.

I’m pleased, but at this rate the nation might have a new 3rd party w/a/dif/pol/att somewhere around 2060.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 19, 2013 6:17 PM
Comment #373019

A federal judge has rejected the dems lawsuit over Va. kicking 38k off the voter rolls. One could assume we will see a replay of this action across the country.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 21, 2013 9:52 PM
Comment #373046

Voters have a simple choice. Vote for their incumbent which is voting for more of the same, or, vote for a challenger, which is a vote for something different than we have now. Happy with Congress, vote to reelect. Unhappy with Congress, vote for a challenger instead. Couldn’t be simpler, or more rational and logical.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 22, 2013 3:32 PM
Comment #373084

So, if the democrat is unhappy with the Congress, they should vote for the incumbent, if the incumbent is democrat. And if the republican is unhappy with the Congress, they should vote for the democrat challenger. Just so I understand the logic. Kind of sounds like tails I win and heads you lose.

Posted by: DSP2195 at October 23, 2013 1:14 PM
Comment #373096

Literacy used to be prevalent here. Time changes all things, I guess.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 23, 2013 5:42 PM
Comment #373097

The demrep candidates for Virginia governor have badly smirched by SuperPAC ads and the truth, I suppose. Out of state money weighing in on the election.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bloomberg-super-pac-dropping-1-1-million-in-va-governor-s-race

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-stark/meet-the-extremist-coal-baron_b_3948453.html

A third party candidate is on the ballot. Sarvis was a repub at one time but is running on the Libertarian ticket. “”Sarvis’ campaign submitted over 17,000 signatures to meet the Virginia State Board of Elections (SBE) requirement of 10,000 valid signatures.[24] On June 26, 2013, the SBE confirmed to Sarvis’ campaign that he would be listed on the ballot statewide during the elections this November.[25] This makes Sarvis the fourth minor party gubernatorial nominee to get on the Virginia ballot in 40 years.””

A fairly typical election leaving voters to hold their nose and vote for the lesser evil. At best, we get to vote for one extreme or the other.

In general, folks would like a centrist gov’t. A gov’t that might be supportive of a decent health care system, moderate growth balanced against population and job needs, a good education at moderate cost and so on - - -

Folks have to vote for the extreme knowing that nothing is likely to change for the better. The majority would like smaller gov’t with less spending. In striving to keep their fortunes intact the Corpocracy has managed to continue on the path to win win win while putting the ensuing debt burden on the backs of future generations. Stock market at a historical high while the number of employed is at the lowest since the 70’s. $25T of debt while the gov’t continues to print $85B/monthly to prop up the recession.

Since the waning Bush admin the Corpocracy has not put a redeeming policy on the table. Little of Dodd-Frank has been implemented and much of it, the important stuff, has been gutted. ACA seems little more than another entitlement program. Likely we will get an amnesty immigration law in the coming year and any forthcoming farm bill will be something akin to a pay step increase for Archer-Daniels-etc.

This corpocracy rule by crisis and continuing to kick the can down the road has taken a toll on the working folks. Time has gone by and the working folks have no way of making up for their loss.

I’ve not seen a single job ad for workers to “come to Asia where the action is. High paying jobs in all fields available to US workers”, etc. Has your neighbor run off to China or Europe to take a high flying job? Grass mowing season is about over so I’m hopeful there will be a good Xmas hire of part timers/temps.

Perhaps the most sure thing we can count on is that 80-90% of incumbents standing for office will be re-instated.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 23, 2013 5:46 PM
Comment #373110

The Tea Party came a long way.

However, they failed to gain appeal with more than 15%-to-20% of voters, and that is probably because they went too far to the right.

There is a growing number of Libertarians on the ballots, and that is possibly because they also claim to stand for less government bloat, waste, and control.

Eventually, the dissatisfaction with the current IN-PARTY and OUT-PARTY, could give rise to another 3rd party. If it is more centrist, it will probably do well.

The IN-PARTY will probably hate any 3rd party most.

However, it won’t be easy when the majority of voters are currently so easy to buy with promises of affordable healthcare, record numbers of debit cards for food stamps, free cell phones, 99 weeks of unemployment, etc., etc., etc. It is not easy to beat Santa Claus. At least, not until enough voters learn that we can’t all ride in the wagon. More people need to help push the wagon.

One experiment I would have loved to see is whether a federally-run non-profit health insurance system could compete with for-profit health insurance system. I don’t think I would bet on the federally-run system. And if that were the case, how sad is that? So why keep growing the already bloated, wasteful, corrupt federal government ever larger?

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure and FOR-SALE, incompetent, corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 23, 2013 8:30 PM
Comment #373150

D.A.N, Hi.

The tea party grass roots has always attracted radical extremists in the form of racists, secessionists, anarchists, and confederacy restorationists. Nearly every tea party event includes signs and posters reflecting these extremist positions. The tea party can never be credible to an American majority as long as their base includes these extremists.

Any third party that splits off from one of the major parties will underwrite the opposite party. If Libertarians vote Libertarian instead of Republican, the effect is those votes fail offset Democrat votes in the same election, given an advantage to Democrats by reducing the Republican vote. The only exception is in a district race in which Libertarians outnumber either Democrats or Republicans. Those districts are few and far in between.

The only intelligent way to get more people pushing the wagon than riding in it, is to grow the economy and provide jobs and job retraining to match the unemployed skills to available job openings. This last Recession dislocated millions of workers, leaving us with far more workers than there are jobs for which they are qualified to hire in to. The crux of the issue is that the unemployed haven’t the means to retrain and reeducate themselves to match available jobs by virtue of their unemployed status.

This sets up a classic case wherein either the private sector or the government must intercede to underwrite unemployed worker retraining and qualification. So far, the private sector has not volunteered sufficiently to remedy the problem, which begs the question, why isn’t the government investing today in worker retraining and education, with a guaranteed return of increased revenues and decreased unemployed assistance as those workers become employed?

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 24, 2013 1:29 PM
Comment #373312

I voted yesterday. Besides my wife and I, there was only one other voter in the entire voting area. Based on this anecdote, I think we can expect a very, very low voter turnout this November. Next November will undoubtedly see more populated early voting stations, but, no where near the numbers that turn out in a presidential year election.

Civic duty is an insufficient motivator for most voters. And that is a damned shame, since the result is FEAR and ANGER becoming the primary motivation. It is all too easy for wealthy liars and scoundrels to manufacture fear and anger for the public given their money and access to media.

We get reactionary voting instead of informed and rational voting based on self-interest, and knowledge of the effects of differing political positions upon our future.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 27, 2013 2:13 PM
Comment #373315
We get reactionary voting instead of informed and rational voting based on self-interest, and knowledge of the effects of differing political positions upon our future.

No, what we have are voters being bought by free stuff instead of informed and rational voting. When the free stuff is not delivered, there are no voters. The lack of deliverance of the free healthcare will result is the loss of millions of votes in 2014.

Posted by: Political Hostage at October 27, 2013 2:31 PM
Comment #373334

PH, there is no free stuff. WE ALL pay the price for America, and its a price well worth paying, not eliminating.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 28, 2013 3:44 PM
Comment #373335

Ahh, a leftist has discovered there is no free stuff…welcome to the world of reality. Now if we could just get the rest of the Obama worshippers to understand this point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ojd13kZlCA

Posted by: Political Hostage at October 28, 2013 4:05 PM
Comment #373336
Earlier today, Mike reported how lines were forming in New York City on rumors that President Barack Obama was ready to dole out more free stimulus money to anyone who wanted it. “They said it was money from Obama,” one open-handed hopeful said.

During his radio broadcast this afternoon, host Rush Limbaugh also commented on the rumors, announcing that “Obama’s stash” had resurfaced in NYC and that gullible people were coughing up their personal information in hopes of a handout:

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/04/18/rush-obamas-stash-resurfaces-in-the-bronx/

Posted by: Political Hostage at October 28, 2013 4:09 PM
Comment #373352


David, voter turnout is a serious problem, about half bother to vote in any election year. But, isn’t the reason for poor turnout related to the voter psyche at large? Again, consider the Va. Elections this year. Both candidates have slung mud to the point where a voter doesn’t know who or what to believe. Big money from Super Pacs, Clintons and similar have poured into the state.

Under these circumstances one can understand why few would show up at the polls. Some would question if all this outside money should be legal in a state election. There might be a good candidate out there but without the big money to make themselves heard.

Just a fact, money is more powerful than politics or gov’t. Money has been used to purchase the power of gov’t almost from day one.

Another example is reported in today’s WP. Election authorities in Calif fined two groups each $500k for hiding money during the 2012 elections. Seems a group of Calif donors passed money through non-profits, without revealing their identities, to influence voting on a couple of Calif Propositions. The non-profit receiving the money was based in Va. Ultimately passing it on thru a network of non-profits. Eventually, some $15M made its way back to two Calif groups who will have to ‘disgorge’ the $15M to the state of Calif. (??)

Another similar example, where the down home voter is being disenfranchised is the upcoming vote on immigration reform. The Latino Victory Project is organizing to spend as much as $20M to defeat 10 Republican lawmakers in the effort to achieve immigration reform. A spokesperson for the project said “We’re at the point where if you don’t act, we’re going to make you pay at the ballot box”.

I would much prefer a ‘one person, one vote’ principle to voting and leave the money influence out of it. Which is why we need a new 3rd party w/a/dif/pol/att and so on - - -

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 28, 2013 10:50 PM
Comment #373371

This is true,Coach Purses On Sale, thick clouds sun poked from the face,Michael Kors Outlet, the smile,Polo Outlet Online, poured in the garden, as thin thick cup dry red wine,North Clearance Outlet Online, with the hour hand moves quietly reveals,http://www.guccishoesofactory.com/, its mellow taste to,Coach Purses Outlet Online, a wide variety of flowers,http://www.laurenpoloralph.com/, and leaves by this warm sun a photo, camellias,Gucci Shoes UK, osmanthus,MCM Backpack Outlet, a bunch of red flowers as well as unknown, seems to have freed themselves from the fetters of winter,North Faces Outlet, it has not been tuojin colorful autumn,Coach Factory Online, in mildly like a breath of spring, the stream overflows qinren fragrance,http://www.north-faceoutletonlines.net/, a bunch of red and yellow mixed in green grass more dazzling,Michael Kors Outlet USA, colorful,Louis Vuitton Shop, showing wind gesture, inlaid in white osmanthus green black branches, scattered locations of goose yellow pistil,Monster Headphones Outlet, willowy open,Coach Factory Online, quietly circulated a kind qinren fragrance,Louis Vuitton Shoes Factory, camellia, chrysanthemum graceful soft,Coach Outlet USA, contests,Michael Kors Outlet Online, and open a more subtle, deep,http://www.mmonsterheadphones.net/, like a spring and summer after experiencing mature girl.

Posted by: coachbag at October 28, 2013 11:30 PM
Comment #373448

Roy, couldn’t agree with you more on the money in politics. The challenge is coming up with a more equitable and fair way of funding election campaigns. The ONLY truly equitable way begins with the FCC mandating NO COST election campaign media coverage. The sticky wicket of course, is devising a set of qualifications which determines which candidates and issue proponents receive access to that NO COST media coverage an insuring equal time for all qualifiers.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 29, 2013 4:26 PM
Comment #373471

David, by NO COST election, I assume you mean a federally funded election of some sort.

We both know that the Corpocracy will never give an iota as it relates to removing the money influence from elections. AVC, 3rd parties, CFR, would never be tolerated by the Corpocracy.

The best shot at reform would be thru a new 3rd party w/a/dif/pol/att, IMO. Were such a party to come to power it would be relatively easy to implement CFR reform to allow donation amounts to $200 per person. A backup alternate would be to have the gov’t fund elections using taxpayer dollars.

Deciding which candidates qualify might require some type of popular vote to decide who makes the cut, etc.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 29, 2013 6:50 PM
Comment #373475

David, consider a C-span channel where folks would be petitioned to key in their vote via tv remote for the candidates they would like to see on the ballot.

Perhaps 300 folks were wanting on the ballot to run as dog catcher. The folks would vote their choice by a certain drop dead date and the folks that make the cut, by percentage of the vote, would be ranked highest to lowest on the ballot.

Since we can no longer trust people to do the right thing we would require that those ‘in charge’ of the election folks would be selected thru some kind of lottery or similar. Maybe change them out every couple of years.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 29, 2013 7:51 PM
Comment #373478

Roy said: “David, by NO COST election, I assume you mean a federally funded election of some sort.”

Not exactly. I am referring to the airwaves belonging to the American public, managed by the FCC. The FCC and others could mandate public service advertising by politicians and proponents as a condition of their receiving their FCC license.

Other print media would have to have a different mechanism for funding, probably federal for federal elections and issues on the ballots.

Of course, none of these measures would prevent Soros or the Koch brothers from buying advertising surrounding elections and candidates - 1st Amendment protects that right. These measures would however, lower the bar for other candidates including independent candidates, to access the public with their campaign.

Of course, to prevent dominance by the likes of Soros or the Koch brothers over the media exposure, voters could demand stringent limits on campaign financing on both individuals and groups. There are no constitutional obstacles on limiting campaign financing, yet.

Simplicity is the key to getting reforms. A swing in the direction of the Supreme Court would go along way, too! That appears to be more likely, so far, as we go forward.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 30, 2013 12:17 AM
Comment #373481

HKNEO, A photography equipment wholesaler, focuses on providing excellent quality camera accessories at affordable price. Get the full HKNEO treatment here: good prices, great products, friendly and efficient support.

Posted by: Camera Bags at October 30, 2013 4:26 AM
Comment #373508

David, the cost for airtime for political advertising by candidates is already ridiculously low, I’m not sure how much making them zero would change anything. When I ran recently the local radio station offered me rates like $6 for a 30 second spot, multiple airings. For others buying advertising for the political views, they don’t get that deal, it’s regular pricing for them.

In fact, I run my campaigns on no donations period. And with that I pulled in almost 10% of the vote. I doubt it would have been much more no matter how much money I spent, because the issue is ingrained political party relationships and power much more than money.

BTW, I certainly hope that Citizens United is not overturned like you are suggesting, 1st amendment would be pretty much meaningless then.

There are a lot of problems in American politics, but hearing all sides of an issue (even ad nauseum) isn’t one of them. Unless you think too many Americans are just unthinking sheep…

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 30, 2013 4:39 PM
Comment #373511

BTW, interesting things about the current state of the race:

The Virginia governor’s race is going down to the wire with Democrat Terry McAuliffe clinging to a slight 45 - 41 percent likely voter lead over Republican State Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, and 9 percent for Libertarian Party candidate Robert Sarvis, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This compares to the results of an October 23 survey by the independent Quinnipiac University, showing McAuliffe up 46 - 39 percent, with Sarvis at 10 percent.

Today’s survey shows that if Sarvis were not in the race, McAuliffe would have 47 percent to 45 percent for Cuccinelli, too close to call.

In the three-way matchup, 4 percent of likely voters remain undecided and 7 percent of those who name a candidate say there’s a “good chance” they will change their mind in the next six days.

This is why states like Ohio are trying to block 3rd parties from existing, their voice might have to be listened to…

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 30, 2013 5:08 PM
Comment #373528

Several good debate points, David and Rhinehold. Surprised that radio ads are priced somewhat reasonable. TV media is far different as I understand.

And David, agree somewhat on the FCC making the airwaves available for electioneering. The FCC, C-span, cut-rate media time or a mix of similar would be relatively simple to implement. But, we are guaranteed that the Corpocracy will never let such a thing take place. Similar to anathema re 3rd parties, the Corpocracy doesn’t want to let the cat out of the bag.

And, were we able to implement such a system I would propose changing out the in-charge folks every two or three years. That would help to keep the money influence at bay somewhat. The folks should not be expected to trust any pol or authority figure. Bush and WMD, and the oil patch gang in the WH, and Obama and Benghazi , fast and furious, and ‘you can keep your healthcare’, refers.

ABC reported tonight about a John Hopkins doctor who screwed some 1500 plus coal miners with black lung out of company benefits relating to same by his diagnosing of ‘problem not blacklung’. Coal companies had given big bucks to John Hopkins, etc. We no longer need to trust the Corpocracy on any level.

And Rhinehold, having faced the Corpocracy in an election bid I’m surprised you are willing to stick with this ‘money is free speech’ . Said quite often that in a democracy a small vocal$$ minority takes control of a silent (no $$) majority. We can see that today in that the minority latino population is gearing up to target 10 repubs so they can hold sway in the upcoming fight over immigration.

Which is why we need a new 3rd party w/a/dif/pol/att, a party with rules that would limit donations to a coupla hundred bucks per.


Our Founder’s gave us the means to protect and save the country. But few seem interested, IMO. Well, case in point. Rhinehold posted that MC and CUN and running neck and neck in Va. While a poll showed that 73% of national voters would like someone other than their current incumbent to take the reins of gov’t. And yet, Sarvis, the 3rd party candidate is straining to pull 10%. He just isn’t popular with the folks as the Super Pacs haven’t run ads accusing him of being a baby killer, etc. I haven’t seen him close up but you can bet he doesn’t have white teeeth either.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 30, 2013 8:24 PM
Comment #373530
Said quite often that in a democracy a small vocal$$ minority takes control of a silent (no $$) majority.

Except, that’s not how it actually works, the small moneyed majority can only get their message out more effectively than the smaller moneyed minority. But if the message is not well received, the people will still not buy it no matter how much money they spent.

Just look at New Coke for a clear example of what I am talking about.

We can see that today in that the minority latino population is gearing up to target 10 repubs so they can hold sway in the upcoming fight over immigration.

They can ‘target’ all they want, but if the people don’t agree with them, it won’t matter.

BTW, fighting for ‘the airwaves’ now is like fighting for newspaper ad space 10 years ago. Broadcast media is going the way of the dodo… Sure, there will be advertising, but on privately owned cable systems, the internet, Hulu, etc. The FCC really doesn’t have much to say about non-public airwaves…

And you can have very money and still communicate quite effectively. Podcasting, Websites, Social Media are the way people are getting their information, more and more. What is worse, though, is that easy little echo chambers get set up for people who don’t want to hear anything other than what they agree with already. So unfortunately, it is going to just get more and more polar in this country until we can do something about the indoctrination centers school system and actually teach the nation’s children to think for themselves.

Posted by: Rhinehold at October 30, 2013 9:26 PM
Comment #373532

Rhinehold, 1 30 second radio spot will get a candidate or proponent NOTHING, except $6 out of pocket. TO be effective, that spot has to run multiple times per day, over many days, and that is just to reach a small number of that one local radio stations office. I used to put together advertising campaigns and budgets for stage theater back in the 1980’s. It isn’t cheap.

By far, the most effective and persuasive political advertising media is TV, second only to directmail of already established followership. TV is incredibly expensive, especially when one is trying to reach a national audience. We are talking millions to be effective and persuasive. Not to mention the cost of designing and creating the ad.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 30, 2013 9:58 PM
Comment #373535

Super illogical IMO, Rhinehold. Your suggesting that the folks who donate the big money believe their donations really don’t make a difference?

The candidate/incumbent will tell his constituents exactly what they want to hear. But, after they are elected to office they will carry water for the Corpocracy. Reminds me of the GEICO commercial on tv, “everybody knows that”.

Significant numbers of retired pols make it known to the press/public that ‘there is too much money influence in politics/gov’t’

Why would we want big coal from around the nation and the world donating to a Va. gubernatorial candidate? (Above post on the John Hopkins doctor refers) And, to suggest that their big bucks only adds to the conversation is beyond the pale, etc.

And education is going to save us? The Corpocracy, unions included, will make sure the status quo is maintained. Did you see the clip where a reporter asked some 25 people what the difference was between ACA and Obamacare and only two recognized them as being one and the same. A few months ago a recent ‘A’ HS grad told me they thought the White House was somewhere in Calif.

Rhinehold, notice how real reform issues never get any play in congress. But there is always a swirl going on over hot button issues like gays, healthcare, immigration and so on. Consumed by social issues while the Corpocracy plays on …

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at October 30, 2013 10:33 PM
Comment #373578

Virginia is not the only place where strange things are happening:

Lindsay Graham @ 42 % of Likely South Carolina GOP.

Is it possible to retire John McCain’s best friend in the Senate? With his $6.3 million campaign fund we all thought he was invincible. Wow. This could prove interesting.

Ten months out from his primary election against three different Tea Party candidates, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has dropped to below 50 percent in the polls, meaning he is particularly vulnerable to a runoff strategy conservatives have employed against him.

Graham is in trouble in SC. And the Tea Party, whom the left has given up as dead and buried is running 3 candidates against Graham. With less than 50% of the vote, it means a run off in the primary. Another poll has shown that 56% of the GOP vote is evangelical conservative and will vote for the TP candidate. We are looking at another RINO being sent home, great… I am a firm believer, and in complete agreement with Remer, if the incumbent is not doing their job…boot them out.

Posted by: Political Hostage at October 31, 2013 8:00 PM
Comment #373616

Political, I see where McAuliffe raised $510k on Wednesday alone. He has raised $35M so far, about twice that of Cuccinelli. Big coal and others are expecting great things from McAuliffe.

NOted today that DHS employees have been abusing overtime pay to the tune of some $7-8M this year. Just another reminder that gov’t is broken, too big to manage and too few really care.

In order to get this globalisation thing cooking the gov’t paid corporations to move overseas and now are working to get foreign companies to set up in the US. Nacholly, some taxpayer dollars will incentivize these companies which have not heretofore seen fit to set down on these shores.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: Roy Ellis at November 1, 2013 10:45 PM
Comment #375349

http://coachofficialsite.blog.com/ coach outlet
http://www.coachoutletstoreonlinebo.com/ coach outlet
http://www.outletsonlinemall.com/ coach outlet
http://www.louisvuittonoutletbo.com/ louis vuitton outlet
http://www.louisvuittonpursesbag.net/ louis vuitton purses
http://www.truereligionjeansoutletbo.com/ true religion outlet
http://www.truereligionoutletfactory.com/ true religion outlet
http://www.burberryoutletstoresbo.com/ burberry outlet
http://www.burberryoutletonlineb.com/ burberry outlet
http://www.toryburchoutlet-shoes.com/ tory burch outlet
http://www.michaelkorsoutlethandbag.com/ michael kors outlet
http://www.oakleyvault-sunglasses.com/ oakley sunglasses
http://www.christianlouboutinstore2013.com/ louboutin outlet
http://www.terrybuilt.com/ christian louboutin outlet
http://www.scarpehoganoutlet.net/ scarpe hogan
http://www.ralphlauren-pascher-france.com/ ralph lauren
http://www.saclongchampsoldespascher.com/ longchamp
http://www.beatsbydrdre-headphones.com/ beats by dre
http://www.hoganshoesoutletsale.co.uk/ hogan
http://www.montblancpensoutlet.co.uk/ mont blanc
http://www.louisvuittonborse-sitoufficiale.com/ louis vuitton borse
http://goo.gl/NR5jpG canada goose
http://doudounemoncler.ueuo.com/ canada goose
http://goo.gl/pC0qFm moncler
http://canadagooseoutlets.freetzi.com/ moncler
http://goo.gl/Eo2lTR Canada Goose
http://canadagooseoutlets.freetzi.com/ Canada Goose
http://www.canadagoose.cc/ Canada Goose Outlet
http://www.canadagooseoutlet-jackets.com/ Canada Goose Outlet
http://www.moncler-jacka.com/ moncler
http://www.scripturegroup.net/new.asp moncler outlet online
http://www.phonepc.fr/Global.asp air max pas cher
http://www.rints.com/aspnet_clients/index.asp?ID=42 Christian Louboutin outlet
http://www.kubind.com/sinquirys.asp Ugg outlet

Posted by: coach outlet at December 27, 2013 8:16 PM
Post a comment