- Banned
- #61
brophy
Very Banned
Offline
And that brings up a fundamental point to this discussion, that on the federal level, independents candidates are frozen out of consideration. Had Paul ran as an independent, he HAD to remain a Republican just to be invited (though begrudgingly) to the debates.
The 'beat the party by BEING the party' was the method used.
Well, the system we have will not allow change to occur.
I'd embrace a Nader, Paul, Perot, Kuccinch, Pickens, Forbes, whatever....so long as it offered a path to rob/voice dissent with the 2-party system.
Is it weird to be a liberal and had actually been a part of THAT movement?
The 'beat the party by BEING the party' was the method used.
Well, the system we have will not allow change to occur.
I'd embrace a Nader, Paul, Perot, Kuccinch, Pickens, Forbes, whatever....so long as it offered a path to rob/voice dissent with the 2-party system.
There has always been two tea partys. This is what I want some of these liberals to understand. The original tea party is more the Ron Paul(and even Dennis Kuchinich) backers
Is it weird to be a liberal and had actually been a part of THAT movement?
Last edited: