View Full Version : Unity Ticket: a democrat and a republican on the same 2008 presidential ticket
Ladewig
8th June 2006, 07:02 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/01/unity.ticket/index.htm
(CNN) -- A group that includes veterans of the Ford and Carter administrations is counting on public dissatisfaction with Washington partisanship to fuel an Internet campaign for a bipartisan "unity ticket" in the 2008 presidential election.
The group, Unity08, launched an effort this week to take the White House with either independents or with presidential and vice presidential candidates from different parties.
Founding member Angus King, a former two-term independent governor of Maine, said the movement can change the playing field in American politics.
"The whole idea is to take all the votes that would have gone to other parties and win the election," he said. "We're not in this as spoilers.''
Third parties never view themselves as spoilers and yet they always end up being spoilers.
While I agree with...
A poll commissioned by the group found that 85 percent of Americans think the two-party system has become too polarized to solve the nation's problems -- and 73 percent think more choices in the presidential election would be a good idea.
...I don't think that running a dem and rep on the same ticket will produce anything useful. As Glum was fond of saying in The Adventures of Gulliver, "It'll never work. We're doomed."
Luke T.
8th June 2006, 07:05 AM
Um. They say American politics have been destroyed by the two-party system of Democrats and Republicans. So as a solution, they are going to run one of each?
Boo-weeeeee!
Luke T.
8th June 2006, 07:07 AM
The link in the OP isn't working.
Try this one (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/01/unity.ticket/).
andyandy
8th June 2006, 08:25 AM
sounds like a reasonable idea - there should be space in the political spectrum for more than two parties....a unity ticket should be able to occupy the ground between Democrat and Republican.....
it gets my vote....oh wait....i can't :D
BPSCG
8th June 2006, 09:38 AM
Bah! Vote for General Zod in 2008! (http://www.zod2008.com/)
shemp
8th June 2006, 09:42 AM
YES! ALL KNEEL BEFORE THE MIGHTY ZOD! (and give him your vote)
brodski
8th June 2006, 09:46 AM
Um. They say American politics have been destroyed by the two-party system of Democrats and Republicans. So as a solution, they are going to run one of each?
Boo-weeeeee!
exactly, it's only logical, if a two party state is not working for Americans, why not try an alternative popular in many countries around the world, the one party state. And hey, it would cut down on all those pesky elections, such a pain to organize. :p
BPSCG
8th June 2006, 10:08 AM
YES! ALL KNEEL BEFORE THE MIGHTY ZOD! (and give him your vote)Anyone who can command (yes, command) the votes of both Shemp and BPSCG is worthy of being our only Supreme Deluxe Leader for Life.
corplinx
8th June 2006, 10:38 AM
The powerticket of Dan Quayle and John Edward can finally be created.
Luke T.
8th June 2006, 10:43 AM
The powerticket of Dan Quayle and John Edward can finally be created.
:D
I'd like to see Pelosi/Rove myself.
shemp
8th June 2006, 01:56 PM
I hope Zod chooses Gary Coleman as his running mate.
Tony
8th June 2006, 07:13 PM
exactly, it's only logical, if a two party state is not working for Americans, why not try an alternative popular in many countries around the world, the one party state.
Sadly, I think many conservatives would actually like that idea. As long as the one party is the correct party.
Rob Lister
8th June 2006, 07:47 PM
Sadly, I think many conservatives would actually like that idea. As long as the one party is the correct party.
Do you think a lesser, equal or greater number of liberals would fill the same?
If not equal, what do you put the persentage on lesser/greater?
Just curious. Seems to me that one side promotes competition more than the other. I seem to forget which is which. Can you help?
Art Vandelay
8th June 2006, 11:20 PM
"The group, Unity08, launched an effort this week to take the White House with either independents or with presidential and vice presidential candidates from different parties."
Well, that's just plain BS. If they're both in the Unity party, then they aren't from different parties, they're from the same party. And they aren't really independents, either. Which means that they're tryin to capitalize on public dissatisfaction with immoral Dems and Reps... by launching a dishonest campaign for a third party.
Tony
9th June 2006, 12:41 AM
Do you think a lesser, equal or greater number of liberals would fill the same?
Lesser.
If not equal, what do you put the persentage on lesser/greater?
?
Seems to me that one side promotes competition more than the other.
It "seems"?
I seem to forget which is which.
Lay off the weed for a bit.
Can you help?
I have yet to master the art of the Vulcan Mind Meld. Once I learn, I can help you recover your lost memories.
BPSCG
9th June 2006, 05:09 AM
Sadly, I think many conservatives would actually like that idea. As long as the one party is the correct party.And your evidence in support of this hypothesis is:
(please complete)
(please complete)
(please complete)
(please complete)
(please complete)
Tony
9th June 2006, 08:49 AM
And your evidence in support of this hypothesis is:
What hypothesis?
BPSCG
9th June 2006, 11:45 AM
What hypothesis?Your hypothesis that: Originally Posted by Tony http://www.randi.org/forumlive/images/misc/backlink.gif (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1694492#post1693546):
Sadly, I think many conservatives would actually like that idea. As long as the one party is the correct party.
Don't go Clausian on me, now, Tony.
Tony
9th June 2006, 11:49 AM
Your hypothesis that: Don't go Clausian on me, now, Tony.
Sorry for confusing you, but that wasn't a hypothesis. I was merely speculating, however, it appears that I touched a nerve. Perhaps because you know it to have a hint of truth.
BPSCG
9th June 2006, 12:11 PM
Sorry for confusing you, but that wasn't a hypothesis. I was merely speculating,...That's what a hypothesis is.
... however, it appears that I touched a nerve. Perhaps because you know it to have a hint of truth.I told you not to go Clausian on me, and then you go and do just that: Make a claim, deny you made it, then accuse the other guy of believing it. Your Sith Lord has taught you well, young Jedi.
So, do you believe your hypothesis to be true?
Tony
9th June 2006, 12:13 PM
That's what a hypothesis is.
No it isn't.
So, do you believe your hypothesis to be true?
What hypothesis?
I know for a fact that my speculation is true because I've heard and seen conservatives (whacko conservative Ann Coulter) express those and similar sentiments.
BPSCG
9th June 2006, 12:14 PM
No it isn't.
What hypothesis?Sorry, one Claus on this board is already more than I can stand.
Tony
9th June 2006, 12:18 PM
Sorry, one Claus on this board is already more than I can stand.
Ahh, anything else you wanna cry about?
UserGoogol
9th June 2006, 12:56 PM
"Claus moments" wouldn't happen if the other people in the forum could just respond with "Okay, you were just being a dick, whatever, let's move on." He wasn't neccesarily making a claim, he was just tossing an idea out for dramatic effect rather than to make any defiunite position on its veracity.
gfunkusarelius
9th June 2006, 02:00 PM
"Claus moments" wouldn't happen if the other people in the forum could just respond with "Okay, you were just being a dick, whatever, let's move on." He wasn't neccesarily making a claim, he was just tossing an idea out for dramatic effect rather than to make any defiunite position on its veracity.
haha, yeah sometimes you just have to drop it.
Art Vandelay
9th June 2006, 02:12 PM
"Sadly, I think many conservatives would actually like that idea. As long as the one party is the correct party." Isn't a claim?
The Central Scrutinizer
9th June 2006, 02:45 PM
The powerticket of Dan Quayle and John Edward can finally be created.
Who's on top?
The Central Scrutinizer
9th June 2006, 02:47 PM
"The group, Unity08, launched an effort this week to take the White House with either independents or with presidential and vice presidential candidates from different parties."
Well, that's just plain BS. If they're both in the Unity party, then they aren't from different parties, they're from the same party. And they aren't really independents, either. Which means that they're tryin to capitalize on public dissatisfaction with immoral Dems and Reps... by launching a dishonest campaign for a third party.
They probably won't set any third party records. Badnarik set the bar pretty high in 2004 with....um....zero percent of the vote.
Never mind.
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.