Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.

Author Topic: We Has Paul Ryan  (Read 24844 times)

FMJ

  • 7.62
  • Senior Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 14344
  • "A good black coffee is like a good liquid cigar"

  • Offline
Re: We Has Paul Ryan
« Reply #25 on: August 12, 2012, 01:18:57 am »
If they can keep the big-gov't; big taxes; pointless wars; big brother BS to a minimum that would be great.

But do you think those guys would cede power/authority?  I just want to be left alone and now that I'm starting to work more regularly, keep more of my money.
CaliforniaThere are many like it, but this one is mine.

WeTheArmed.com

  • Advertisement
  • ***

    Matthew Mayner

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 3946
    • (Moose42)
      • matthewmayner.wordpress.com

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #26 on: August 12, 2012, 03:35:26 am »
    As far as I see it there are two options here.

    1. Vote for Romney/Ryan.

    2. Vote against Obama, by punching the Romney/Ryan ticket.

    Anything else helps Obama. ANYTHING.

    If you stay home, you help Obama.  If you vote for some third party schmuck it helps Obama.

    So get off your high horses and vote for Romney/Ryan.  Why?  Because even though they suck, they suck way less than Obama.  What is it with many conservatives who think if the candidate isn't an EXACT match for your beliefs it's time to stay home.

    I like a lot of Ron Paul's ideas, but I know he will NEVER in a million years be president.  Because his afore mentioned 15% is too bat guano insane for middle of the road America to stomach.

    I don't like Romney. I went to the Republican caucus and voted for someone else.  I think Romney is too left, and too socialist, but... BUT he's no where near the level of horribleness as our current dear reader.

    So pull up your britches and go vote.
    IdahoCome check out my blog for more SCI-FI and Fantasy stories. I promise you lots of explosions!

    matthewmayner.wordpress.com

    Coronach

    • WTA Staff
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Armorer: Colt 1911, M16, Glock, M&P, Rem 700 & 870

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #27 on: August 12, 2012, 04:00:11 am »
    Yes, exactly.

    Folks, the primary is who you want to vote FOR. The general is who you must vote against. If you're very lucky, you'll have someone worth voting for in the general election. At the national level, I have never been so fortunate, but hope springs eternal. There is always some bunghole to vote against, however. We're up to our eyes in them.

    Mike

    Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk
    OhioNot stressed, but I am a carrier.

    mwcoleburn

    • Owner, Operator, Gun Pusher
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 2581
      • Coleburn Armory

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #28 on: August 12, 2012, 05:07:03 am »
    Anything else helps Obama. ANYTHING.

    If you stay home, you help Obama.  If you vote for some third party schmuck it helps Obama.

    So get off your high horses and vote for Romney/Ryan.  Why?  Because even though they suck, they suck way less than Obama.  What is it with many conservatives who think if the candidate isn't an EXACT match for your beliefs it's time to stay home.

    So pull up your britches and go vote.


    I'm sorry but this is flat out 100% WRONG, FMJ lives in California, that state is GOING Obama, no if ands or butts, it would be like living in Utah and voting for Romney, even though you hated him. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE if you arent in a swing type state.

    Also teaching people that they need to ignore there conscious when they vote is repugnant. As long as people believe and act this way we get exactly what we deserve from our governement, an endless parade of s___ty politians, s___ty ideas and more of our freedoms getting trampled,

    Rant off,

    I love all you guys, but politics gets me going.
    Coleburn Armory
    www.coleburnarmory.net

    booksmart

    • Token Left Leaning Idealist Libertarian
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6670
    • E. Pluribus Unum.

    • Offline
    We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #29 on: August 12, 2012, 08:49:57 am »
    +1 here, too - that's how this thing works. It's the first and easiest option for having your voice heard.

    Feud

    • Teller of bad jokes.
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 4986

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #30 on: August 12, 2012, 09:04:59 am »
    I like a lot of Ron Paul's ideas, but I know he will NEVER in a million years be president.  Because his afore mentioned 15% is too bat guano insane for middle of the road America to stomach.

    It was also pointed out to me today that Paul Ryan is 88% of Rand Paul, so for those Rand Paul supporters out there, there's that.

    scarville

    • Armed, Godless Heathen
    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1371

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #31 on: August 12, 2012, 09:21:14 am »
    It was also pointed out to me today that Paul Ryan is 88% of Rand Paul, so for those Rand Paul supporters out there, there's that.

    Unless you are planning on assassinating Romney right after the inauguration, what difference does that make? Raul Ryan could be 100% Rand Paul but Romney will still be President.
    CaliforniaOf course I carry a gun!  It gives me a chance against the sinners and protection from the righteous.

    If you are going through hell then don't stop. Keep going until you find the exit.

    onesmack4u

    • Heathen among the righteous.
    • Senior Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 995

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #32 on: August 12, 2012, 10:32:20 am »
    That wouldn't work if Romney is wearing his magic undies.  >:D
    AlabamaI have as much authority as the Pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it.

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 7211
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #33 on: August 12, 2012, 10:39:12 am »
    To be honest, guys, I'm disappointed in Romney's choice.  Portman would have won him the election, by delivering Ohio on a plate.  Rubio would have done the same with Florida.  Of course, Rubio might have also lost the election because of inexperience, but would have saved the GOP down the line, by bringing over Latinos - one third of the population right now.

    This guy?  What does he bring over?  The TEA Party?  They would have held their noses and voted for Romney anyway.  Ryan is not a guy to help reach across the aisle.  Remember the (almost) shut down of the government?  That was over Ryan's budget, was it not?

    With all of the issues coming to a head, with deficit spending out of control, with the possibility of four SCOTUS justices being up for replacement - including some of the most conservative - this is not the time to screw it up.  I would NOT have chosen Paul Ryan.

    ETA: I want to make clear that I personally like Paul Ryan - I just don't think he brings the right stuff to the ticket.  That said, I sure as hell will vote for Romney/Paul in November.  As a Pennsylvania resident, I have no other responsible choice.



    Kaso
    « Last Edit: August 12, 2012, 10:55:07 am by Kaso »

    Feud

    • Teller of bad jokes.
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 4986

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #34 on: August 12, 2012, 10:39:44 am »
    Unless you are planning on assassinating Romney right after the inauguration, what difference does that make? Raul Ryan could be 100% Rand Paul but Romney will still be President.

    It makes more sense if you get the joke. ;)

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 7211
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #35 on: August 12, 2012, 10:43:09 am »
    That wouldn't work if Romney is wearing his magic undies.  >:D
    Sorry, but that's not cool.



    Kaso

    Harm

    • WTA Staff
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 11414

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #36 on: August 12, 2012, 11:34:38 am »
    Kaso - with Florida & Ohio expect those 2 gents to continue campaigning for Romney otherwise the VP nominee hardly makes an election. 
    ArizonaIn Deo Confido

    Once more into the fray
    Into the last good fight I'll ever know
    Live and die on this day
    Live and die on this day

    strangelittleman

    • Small, Dark and Handsome
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 3155

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #37 on: August 12, 2012, 12:17:44 pm »
    I just watched a Romney campaign speech in Mooresville, NC and it was very well done, very Reaganesque.
    Semper Gumby.....Always Flexible.
    Vision without action is a daydream, Action without vision is a nightmare.
    Zol zayn azoy.

    Kaso

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 7211
    • WTA Hardline Antagonist (aka: Jerk)

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #38 on: August 12, 2012, 12:31:42 pm »
    Kaso - with Florida & Ohio expect those 2 gents to continue campaigning for Romney otherwise the VP nominee hardly makes an election. 
    Oh, I fully expect that they will, and their support might be pivotal.

    What my point was, that one should choose a VP to help turn as many Independent and Opposition (in this case, Democrats) to your side - Not cater to your own base.

    We will have to wait and see how it pans out.  I am hopeful, and I am optimistic, but I am not excited about this latest development.



    Kaso

    mwcoleburn

    • Owner, Operator, Gun Pusher
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 2581
      • Coleburn Armory

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #39 on: August 12, 2012, 12:47:26 pm »
    Oh, I fully expect that they will, and their support might be pivotal.

    What my point was, that one should choose a VP to help turn as many Independent and Opposition (in this case, Democrats) to your side - Not cater to your own base.

    We will have to wait and see how it pans out.  I am hopeful, and I am optimistic, but I am not excited about this latest development.



    Kaso

    That was my feeling as well
    Oh, I fully expect that they will, and their support might be pivotal.

    What my point was, that one should choose a VP to help turn as many Independent and Opposition (in this case, Democrats) to your side - Not cater to your own base.

    We will have to wait and see how it pans out.  I am hopeful, and I am optimistic, but I am not excited about this latest development.



    Kaso

    That was my feeling as well, Paul Ryan doesnt bring a key state or voting block, because as you said, the Tea Party will vote for  anyone that is NOT Obama.
    Coleburn Armory
    www.coleburnarmory.net

    onesmack4u

    • Heathen among the righteous.
    • Senior Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 995

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #40 on: August 12, 2012, 12:54:21 pm »
    There is a lot of apathy toward Romney as a candidate. Ryan appears to be helping that.
    AlabamaI have as much authority as the Pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it.

    scarville

    • Armed, Godless Heathen
    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1371

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #41 on: August 12, 2012, 01:02:30 pm »
    It makes more sense if you get the joke. ;)
    OK I get it -- seven of eight.  Cute.

    CaliforniaOf course I carry a gun!  It gives me a chance against the sinners and protection from the righteous.

    If you are going through hell then don't stop. Keep going until you find the exit.

    goatroper

    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1462

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #42 on: August 12, 2012, 02:06:50 pm »
    Yes, exactly.

    Folks, the primary is who you want to vote FOR. The general is who you must vote against. If you're very lucky, you'll have someone worth voting for in the general election. At the national level, I have never been so fortunate, but hope springs eternal. There is always some bunghole to vote against, however. We're up to our eyes in them.

    Mike

    Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

    I think you've captured the situation pretty well.

    Peter at BRM has a slightly different take, with some serious stuff to consider:


    The 2012 Presidential race is still way off-target

    The announcement today by Mitt Romney that his Vice-Presidential running mate will be Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin has made headlines, and has certainly stirred up both positive and negative partisan comments, but I find it fundamentally trivial.  The recent attack ads by the Obama campaign against Mr. Romney and vice versa are equally trivial, because neither campaign has even begun to address the real issue at stake in this election:  the future of America.

    Mark Steyn puts his finger on it.

        ... another four years of the present statist ascendancy will seal America’s fate. As noted here previously, the International Monetary Fund predicts that China will become the world’s dominant economic power by 2016. So the guy elected in November will be the first president since Grover Cleveland to know what it feels like to be the global also-ran. Even this, however, understates the size of catastrophe the United States faces. There are no precedents in history for a great power spending itself to death on the scale America is doing. Obama has added $5 trillion to the national debt, and has nothing to show for it. Do you know how difficult that is to do? Personal debt per citizen is currently about 50 grand, but at least you got a La-Z-Boy recliner and a gas-fired barbecue out of it. Obama has spent America’s future, and left no more trace than if he and his high-school “choom gang” had wheeled a barrow of 5 trillion in large notes behind the gym and used them for rolling paper. Right now, combined total debt in the United States is just shy of $700,000 per family. Add in the so-called “unfunded liabilities” that a normal American business would have to include in its SEC filings but that U.S.-government accounting conveniently absolves itself from, and you’re talking about a debt burden per family of about a million bucks. In other words, look around you: the paved roads, the landscaped shopping mall, the Starbucks and the juice bar and the mountain-bike store . . . There’s nothing holding the joint up.

        . . .

        Half the country is entirely unaware of the existential threat Obama-sized government represents, and Mitt seems in no hurry to alert them to what’s at stake, save for occasional warnings that if we’re not careful America will end up like Europe. We should be so lucky. The more likely scenario is something closer to the more corrupt and decrepit fiefdoms of Latin America. Look at the underlying assumptions of the Mitt-gives-you-cancer ad — that in America a businessman is somehow responsible not only for his employee’s health, but that of the employee’s family members years after said employee has left said employ. No Euro-socialist would even understand the basis of the attack: In its assumptions about the ever more tortuous and farther flung burdens the state can place upon private business, it is quintessentially American.

        This election represents the last exit ramp before the death spiral. (Yes, yes, I know: too long for a campaign button.) Obama has spent the last four years making things worse. More debt, more dependency, more delusion. For Act Two, he’s now touting the auto bailout as a model for . . . everything! “I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs, not just in the auto industry, but in every industry.” In the last three years, he has “created” 2.6 million new jobs — a number that does not even keep up with the number of (legal) immigrants who arrive each month. Obama does not “create” jobs, he creates disabled people: In the same period as 2.6 million Americans signed on with new employers, 3.1 million signed on at the Social Security Disability Office. Obama is the first president in history to create more disabled people than workers. He is the biggest creator of disabled people on the planet.


    There's more at the link.

    I'm not opposed to President Obama because he's a Democrat;  I'm opposed to him because he's both utterly incompetent (from a sound management point of view) and frighteningly competent (from a socialist/Marxist point of view).  He's also corrupt, dishonest and a statist from head to toe.  I'm not opposed to Mitt Romney because he's a Republican;  I'm opposed to him because he's as much of a statist as President Obama, albeit from a somewhat different perspective, and panders to the political elite rather than addressing the real needs of the country.  I firmly believe that either candidate may (and probably will) lead this country to complete and utter ruin;  the only difference is that President Obama can (and probably will) do it within his second term, whilst Mitt Romney may take a few years longer than that, probably leaving the 'end game' to his successor(s).  As such, I suppose Mr. Romney represents the lesser of two evils . . . but it's unutterably depressing to have to vote for anyone on the basis of "having the least negatives" rather than "having the most positives".

    As for their Vice-Presidential picks, I think Joe Biden (if he remains President Obama's running-mate, which isn't certain) is a bad joke.  Paul Ryan appears to have been growing more (and better) informed about US economic realities, but even so, he voted for TARP and other 'big government' initiatives.  I've heard that he's changed his views, but I have no evidence to confirm that.  I'd like to see him repudiate the views that led him to do so.  If he still holds those views, I have little hope that his budget proposals (a good beginning though they are) will be further developed, and/or followed by action in a Romney administration.

    As Peggy Noonan pointed out yesterday:

        What Americans are worried about, take as a warning sign, and are heavily invested in is California—that mythic place where Sutter struck gold, where the movies were invented, where the geniuses of the Internet age planted their flag, built their campuses, changed our world.

        We care about California. We read every day of the bankruptcies, the reduced city services, the businesses fleeing. California is going down. How amazing is it that this is happening in the middle of a presidential campaign and our candidates aren't even talking about it?

        Mitt Romney should speak about the states that work and the states that don't, why they work and why they don't, and how we have to take the ways that work and apply them nationally.

        Barack Obama can't talk about these things. You can't question the blue-state model when your whole campaign promises more blue-state thinking.

        . . .

        Both campaigns are afraid of being serious, of really grappling with the things Americans rightly fear. But there's no safety in not being serious. It only leaves voters wondering if you're even capable of seriousness. Letting them wonder that is a mistake.


    There's more at the link.

    Back in February I pointed out that the US presidential elections are essentially irrelevant.

        It no longer matters what either President Obama, or his Republican wannabe challengers, offer as policies for this country. All those policies depend on a functioning economy to underpin them . . . and our economy is teetering on the verge of ceasing to function. We're venturing into uncharted territory, dealing with numbers the like of which the world has never seen. Nobody knows for sure just how bad things might get, because no-one's ever had to deal with these levels of debt before . . . but we can be absolutely sure of one thing. This economic collapse will happen. It's as certain as the sunrise, because not one of the likely Presidential candidates in 2012 is facing this reality, and/or offering any workable solutions for it.

        . . .

        The only way to stop these consequences is to cut back US government spending, right now, to a level commensurate with its income. However, that isn't going to happen: because the electorate, deprived of its entitlement programs, would immediately vote out of office any and all Congressional representatives, Senators and the President who passed such legislation. Therefore, we're going to go on inching towards the edge of the economic cliff until we completely lose our footing and fall over it.

        All the Presidential campaigning that will plague us over the next year is completely and utterly irrelevant if it doesn't take this economic reality into account . . . but it won't. It can't, because none of the likely candidates, from either party, dares to face up to economic reality. They know they would never be elected if they did. As far as the Presidential election is concerned, we are truly screwed.

        Our only recourse is to seek out, nominate and elect Congressional representatives and Senators who understand economic reality, and who will have the courage to work towards policies that acknowledge and address that reality. I don't care what party they're from. If they're honest people, who will do what's right, I'll support them. They'll have to understand that if they do the right thing, they'll see the electorate turn against them: but they have to have the moral courage to do it anyway.

        That's our task in the coming year. It may not be enough to get us out of this mess . . . but it's the only hope we have.


    Again, more at the link.

    I've seen nothing thus far to make me change my outlook . . . more's the pity.

    From:  http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-2012-presidential-race-is-still-way.html

    Go to the website for supporting links.
    VirginiaGoatroper

    Coronach

    • WTA Staff
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Armorer: Colt 1911, M16, Glock, M&P, Rem 700 & 870

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #43 on: August 12, 2012, 05:34:07 pm »
    Portman would not deliver Ohio on a platter. Kasich misstepped BADLY when he pushed SB5, and he really alienated a lot of middle and working class folks who otherwise woukd be Romney allies. For example, the FOP, which hasn't endorsed a dem for president since Clinton's first term (and probably longer), just endorsed Obama. Portman may have helped that, but it would not be Ohio giftwrapped for the taking.

    Mike



    Sent from my Nook Tablet using Tapatalk
    « Last Edit: August 12, 2012, 06:25:33 pm by Coronach »
    OhioNot stressed, but I am a carrier.

    txgho1911

    • Junior Member
    • *
    • Posts: 53

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #44 on: August 12, 2012, 06:53:15 pm »
    Romney's choice of Ryan is markedly better than McCain's choice of Palin.
    Romney I think is a much better choice than McCain.
    In 08 I was voting for Palin even with all the blistering attacks by MM and SNL types. She still threatens them. She still scares them.

    Today we have Obama to vote against. 2016 we can try to put a real conservative up through the primary. This years primarys are done. The conservative field was split against the GOP's pick. We lost.
    We need every vote in every state for the conservative reps and senators. Even California state legislators.
    Every incumbent we can turn in the primary should be turned.
    We do not have the option to sit back and let the gov run as it will without our oversight.
    The campaign  we can promote now is for replacing the speaker of the house. Mark Levin mentioned Scott Walker as a good choice.
    socialnewswatchDOTcom instead of Drudge

    coyotesfan97

    • WTA LEO
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 3081
    • Life's Short Bite Hard!

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #45 on: August 12, 2012, 06:56:07 pm »
    Portman would not deliver Ohio on a platter. Kasich misstepped BADLY when he pushed SB5, and he really alienated a lot of middle and working class folks who otherwise woukd be Romney allies. For example, the FOP, which hasn't endorsed a dem for president since Clinton's first term (and probably longer), just endorsed Obama. Portman may have helped that, but it would not be Ohio giftwrapped for the taking.

    You know there's a reason why I don't pay FOP dues anymore. I was the Secretary of our lodge for five years and a member for 20.  Endorsements like that is just one of them.  If you have a problem with local politicians don't endorse them.

    Endorse someone who thinks cops are stupid and will do God only knows what harm to our country if elected again because you hate the Governor?  How about those Judges appointed in the first term  LE will be dealing with them for decades. 

    Way to go FOP slice your nose off your face yet again. :facepalm
    ArizonaThe bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding, go out to meet it.  Thucydides 471BC

    "Hey!  Let's be careful out there." Sgt Phil Esterhaus played by Michael Conrad

    GeorgeHill

    • Co-Founder
    • WTA Staff
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 22121
    • The Ogre
      • MadOgre.com

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #46 on: August 12, 2012, 07:50:10 pm »
    For a 3rd Party to become Viable:

    1.  They will have to have seats in the House and Senate.
    2.  They will have to have Governors.

    Until then... All 3rd Parties accomplish is Splitting the Vote to the Benefit of one of the two main Parties.
    South CarolinaCo-Founder of WeTheArmed.com
    The Ogre from MadOgre.com.

    Vires et Honestas
    Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.
    http://www.madogre.com/

    goatroper

    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1462

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #47 on: August 12, 2012, 08:00:04 pm »
    Romney's choice of Ryan is markedly better than McCain's choice of Palin.


    "Paul Ryan represents Obama's most horrifying nightmare: Math."

    Romney's choice of Ryan is markedly better than McCain's choice of Palin.


    "Paul Ryan represents Obama's most horrifying nightmare: Math."
                                                     - Iowahawk

    VirginiaGoatroper

    Nick Cage

    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1659

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #48 on: August 12, 2012, 08:35:08 pm »
    one should choose a VP to help turn as many Independent and Opposition (in this case, Democrats) to your side - Not cater to your own base.


    I'm sorry but that's horse hockey.
    A VP should be someone who your party (In this case Republicans) would be happy with running the country should something bad happen to the POTUS.
    He should be ideologically similar to the base of the party. 
    I am sick and tired of political gamesmanship. We need a ideological joust, the real issues with the people who hold them before the people.
    Freedom or slavery, government of liberty!

    Ryan was an excellent choice, its about time someone on our team had more balls than a mouse.

    Colin

    • Curmudgeon
    • Senior Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 920
      • Apocalypse Barbell

    • Offline
    Re: We Has Paul Ryan
    « Reply #49 on: August 12, 2012, 09:30:02 pm »
    For a 3rd Party to become Viable:

    1.  They will have to have seats in the House and Senate.
    2.  They will have to have Governors.

    Until then... All 3rd Parties accomplish is Splitting the Vote to the Benefit of one of the two main Parties.

    I agree its not the time to try third party, but isn't this kind of a catch-22?  Is ther any way to start a third party without eventually voting for some folks on third party tickets?  I ask because I'm really not sure how that would work.  I would guess we'd have to have some real third party candidates in a few major races, and for it not to be as crucial of an election as this one. 

    Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.