Jump to content
Islamic Forum
SaracenSoldier

Us Elections 2012

Recommended Posts

I joined this forum to learn more about Islam and the people who ascribe to that faith, and I have learned quite a bit from the people here. I suspect your intentions are less about understanding and more about sowing discord.

Is that directed at me? Because I don't sow discord!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
Off-topic: Is there some reason that I cannot embed YouTube videos anymore? It used to work for me, but now all I get when I try to do it is a large blank area in my posts.

when you are writing a post click insert special item > youtube video > then give the video code

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is that directed at me? Because I don't sow discord!

Oh no, that wasn't directed at you. Gawaher had a new member (troll) named jyoti7 who signed up yesterday and within 12 minutes of signing up posted some rehashed old "racist" newsletters that went out under Ron Paul's name back in the 1980s and 1990s that Paul has disavowed time and time again. Every other post this new member made was roughly one line long and with little substance, 8 out of the 10 posts made were negative, and all these posts were made in either this thread, general chat, or the welcome forum; none of them in any Islamic discussion forum. The poster clearly had an agenda, and it wasn't a positive one.

 

This has happened on other forums whenever Ron Paul's name is brought up. I would venture a guess that there are people out there who search for any mention of Ron Paul online and post the same garbage that he's a racist again and again, based upon a handful of newsletters that he didn't write over 20 years ago. It's unfortunate such things were written under his name back then, but he has taken moral responsibility for them and has disavowed them.

 

One of the mods must have seen jyoti7's posts and cleared them out, leaving my response post.

 

--------------------------------

 

As for the YouTube video embedding, I've been inserting the special code for YouTube videos, but I still only get a blank screen. I've tried using the entire url for the video, the short version of the url, and just the "watch=XXXXX" portion, but to no avail. I feel sort of silly since normally I get how to make things like that work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh, there we go. I feel rather dumb now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol well you got the YouTube thing. Also surprising to see them boo him and then cheer within a matter of seconds :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lol well you got the YouTube thing. Also surprising to see them boo him and then cheer within a matter of seconds :/

From what I've heard, only part of the audience booed his mention of the Golden Rule; another part applauded his later line. In any case, that crowd was cheering just about everything anybody was saying, with some boos here and there. They even booed the mere mention of the name "Mexico." I wonder what it takes to get into an audience like that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick Perry has ended his presidential campaign and endorsed Newt Gingrich today.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetlatimes(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/news/politics/la-pn-rick-perry-to-end-presidential-campaign-20120119,0,4552822.story"]LA Times - Rick Perry to Quit Presidential Race[/url]

 

ABC also apparently has a devastating 2-hour interview with Newt Gingrich's ex-wife that will air tonight.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetwashingtonpost(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/politics/abc-to-air-interview-with-newt-gingrichs-ex-wife-050/2012/01/19/gIQA95zQAQ_video.html"]Washington Post - ABC to air interview with Newt Gingrich's ex-wife on Thursday night[/url]

 

This now leaves Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum for the debate tonight on CNN.

Edited by Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron Paul debate highlights from 1/19/2012

I haven't seen any uploads of the full debate yet. Not really any discussion of foreign policy. Probably the most interesting part of the debate starts at 15:38, where the audience demands that the moderator allow Ron Paul to answer a question about abortion.

Edited by Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gingrich victory throws US primary race wide open

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetirishtimes(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/newspaper/breaking/2012/0122/breaking3.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetirishtimes(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/newspaper/breaki.../breaking3.html[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expected Gingrich to win, but not by such a wide margin. South Carolina is known as a heavy military and Evangelical Christian state, yet over 40% of those who voted in the primary voted for Gingrich, a man who did not fight in the Vietnam War yet wants to go to war with everybody else in the world; a man who was voted out of the Speakership due to ethics violations; a man who cheated on his first wife with his second wife; a man who cheated on his second wife with his current wife; a man who received millions from the lending agencies that brought us the housing bubble that burst. Then again, this is the same state that had people in the FOX News debate boo the Golden Rule and by extension, Jesus and the whole message of the Bible.

 

Florida won't be much better, but I can see Romney declaring all-out war on Gingrich in an effort to shut him down; he's the only one with enough money to plaster the expensive Florida market with anti-Gingrich ads. Gingrich and Santorum aren't on the ballot in Virginia; only Romney and Paul are on the ballot. In head-to-head matchups, only Romney and Paul have a chance to beat Barack Obama in the general election; Gingrich and Santorum lose by double-digits.

 

Gingrich winning South Carolina, however, does put a big chink in Romney's armor of "inevitability." This will probably mean that the primary fight will be long and arduous at least until April. If nobody can get the requisite 1144 delegates to secure a majority at the convention, then a brokered convention will probably happen. In a brokered convention, if nobody gets a majority during the first round of voting, many delegates are freed from voting for their original candidate and can vote for anyone else in order to give someone a majority.

Edited by Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a supporter of any candidate since I do not agree with the vast majority of any of their policies or personal beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty hard to find the full debates online so soon after they end. Ron Paul supporters seem to be the only ones who care enough to actually post debates on YouTube, and of course they only post Ron's responses. This excerpt is from the Jacksonville, Florida debate on 1/26/12.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this thread hasn't been running for a while...but it looks like Romney is going to win the republican race yea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did my latest post seriously not get posted? Ugh...I'll have to do a rewrite later.

Edited by Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Santorum's departure, only Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Ron Paul remain in the running for the Republican nomination. The media (and most of the public) do not know or care to know the details of how delegates are selected by the states to go to the Republican National Convention in Tampa. Take North Dakota, for instance. Santorum and Paul placed first and second there, respectively. But Mitt Romney wound up with all the delegates. In Washington state, Romney and Paul placed first and second, respectively, yet it may be that Paul grabs most of the delegates in Washington. Organization of each campaign at county, district, and state conventions in each state is more important than who won the straw polls that are reported on the news.

 

The only way for Romney to be guaranteed the nomination is if he goes into Tampa with at least 1144 "bound" delegates, meaning delegates that are pledged to vote for him at the national convention. Currently, Romney is only halfway to that point, and large states with numerous delegates, such as California, Texas, and New York, haven't even voted yet. In Texas especially, it doesn't seem there is much love for Romney, as Santorum was leading by quite a few points in recent polls before his exit from the race. It's uncertain where Santorum's currently pledged delegates may go after he releases them, as many of them voted for Santorum because he was the most "anti-Romney" conservative in their minds. They may not necessarily vote for Romney now, and may instead throw their support to Gingrich or Paul in order to deny Romney a majority of votes at the convention.

 

The other issue are the "unbound" delegates from states like Iowa and Minnesota. Unlike states where delegates are "bound" to the winner of their straw poll (or proportionally allocated based upon vote percentages), states with unbound delegates can vote for whomever they want at the national convention, regardless of the results of straw poll results. These delegates number into a few hundred, I believe. You won't know who they'll support until the national convention.

 

Now if Romney goes to Tampa with less than 1144 delegates bound to vote for him and he doesn't receive a majority on the first round of voting (or even subsequent rounds of voting), many of the states with bound delegates will "unbind" their delegates, allowing them to vote for anyone else in order to give someone a majority. In such a situation, Romney may receive more votes, but some of the delegates previously bound to Romney may instead vote for another candidate. In deadlocked conventions like this, anything can happen, including delegate swap deals made between campaigns or even nominations of people that never even campaigned.

 

Warren G. Harding, the man who eventually became the 29th president of the United States in 1921, went to the Republican National Convention in 1920 with less than 7% of the delegates, but no one candidate held a majority on the first round of voting. After 10 rounds of voting, Harding won the nomination with over 70% of the delegates.

 

The point of the story: it's not a done deal until Romney secures a majority of delegates, and we might not know until August when the convention is held whether or not he'll have a majority on the first round of voting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the actual election doesn't take place until November. What we've been witnessing for the past year has been the primary process, which is how the Democratic and Republican parties, which are private organizations, select the candidates that will represent each of them in the general election which starts after each party's national convention, which will be in August this year.

 

The actual, general election takes place after the candidates have been selected at the respective national conventions for each party. Besides the Republicans and the Democrats, there are also other third parties that hold conventions at various times before the general election season.

 

The general election itself is rather uncomplicated. Voting itself takes place in November, giving the general election season a length of about 3 months or so. All this primary stuff hasn't been quite this drawn-out in decades, but that's what makes it so interesting for me personally.

Edited by Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the actual election doesn't take place until November. What we've been witnessing for the past year has been the primary process, which is how the Democratic and Republican parties, which are private organizations, select the candidates that will represent each of them in the general election which starts after each party's national convention, which will be in August this year.

Yeah I meant to say the selection of candidates part,,it's so different compared to the Irish system but then we don't have a presidential system either..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we don't get the luxury of "votes of no-confidence" here. The two-party system we have right now ensures that we get trampled on every two years, regardless of who's elected, as the two major parties have very few fundamental differences between them.

Edited by Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you prefer if you had more choice other than a republican/democrat.....i.e more parties in the system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there are other parties, it's just that the Democrats and Republicans collude at the state level to keep other parties off the ballot. Many state laws automatically put the Republican and Democratic candidates on the ballot, but if the Libertarian Party, Constitution Party, Reform Party, Green Party, etc. want to get on the ballot, they need to gather thousands of signatures and spend lots of time and money: time and money that would be better spent actually campaigning.

 

When third parties do get on the ballot, their candidates receive next to no media attention, aren't invited to the debates in the general election, and aren't included in many polls leading up to the vote, severely limiting their exposure to voters. Many Americans also have this habit of "voting for winners" instead of voting their consciences, as if the elections are a sports game and they want to bet on the "winning" team, even if they don't particularly like that team. This attitude makes it extremely difficult for third parties to be taken seriously, even if a really good platform were offered by the third party candidate.

 

The last time a third party candidate was even invited to the debates was oil tycoon Ross Perot in 1992, and he was only able to get exposure on television by purchasing 30-minute blocks to showcase his ideas with his personal fortune. Over a billion dollars was spent in the 2008 election, and this election might prove even more expensive by the time it's all over.

Edited by Wanderer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the best speeches yet.

 

[media=]

[/media]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be at a meeting of Ron Paul supporters tonight discussing various items as it applies to Virginia. You see, even if he lost the primary here, many of the delegates to the National Convention from the Commonwealth are Ron Paul supporters. And the ones that weren't are being sold on his message.

 

While Romney might have to some locked up the nomination now, we will continue to push the boundary for the simple sake that as Wanderer mentioned earlier, there is no categorical difference between Obama and Romney really. Both the main parties continue to rattle their sabers and I just genuinely wish we had gotten rid of the control of both major political parties. George Washington warned us back at the beginning to beware political parties.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything, I think Ron Paul needs to speak at every single state convention he can until Tampa. Surely after that speech at the Texas convention, he must have changed a few minds. Speaking at the Nevada and Minnesota conventions turned out quite well for him, and hopefully it'll help when Texas elects their delegates. According to his wife Carol, he'll be speaking at the Iowa convention next Saturday. California, Montana, and South Dakota would be good ones to speak at.

 

Apparently someone will challenge the "binding" rules next week. They say federal law may trump any binding, which means every delegate to the national convention would be able to vote their conscience on the first ballot if true. Also the fact that a Utah Romney delegate bound to McCain in 2008 was allowed to cast his vote for Romney might put into question the rules regarding bound delegates.

 

But I agree that political parties merely wreck everything. Too many people put party over principle, and that attitude perpetuates the mess we're in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×