Election 2012 Predictions

[sandman]

Romney would be an utter disaster for the USA, and by extension, the world. Mainly because if Romney snags the White House, it will be by riding a wave of fear and anger that will almost certainly gain the Republicans the Senate as well, and that would give us a Federal government in which the GOP controls all three branches.

Romney would then proceed to rubber stamp the Republican agenda like a good little robot, and massive amounts of the tax burden will be shifted off of the wealthy and corporations and on to the shoulders of the poor and middle class. (It is an inescapable fact that Romney's "economic" plans would hand major tax cuts to the wealthy while actually increasing the tax burden on the middle and working classes.)

And with that you have what is likely the last nail in the coffin of the American middle class, and when we go, the entire US economy goes with us. The fact that Romney and his GOP puppeteers either do not understand this fact or do not care is utterly terrifying. If they don't understand, then they are willfully, deliberately, astonishingly stupid. If they don't care, then they are clearly evil in the classical sense of the word. Neither option is comforting.

[nickiknack]

There are many steps that would have to be taken to allow a third party to even compete on the same level as Republicans and Democrats.

Unfortunately, those steps have not been taken yet.

Those steps will never be taken. The two current major parties control all of the access paths by which such steps could be taken, and they will never allow serious competition for their base. Besides, the Electoral College can only be gamed with two parties, and they both know this.

Which is all the more reason we need some serious reforms done to the electoral process. I've been saying this like FOREVER...

[chad sexington]

Unfortunately that just reinforces the two-party status quo

No third party has ever come to power anywhere starting with the top office.

I agree we need a third party, and was going to vote for one until recently, but I've realized what we really need is a third party that aims for victories in local, state, and congressional elections before going for the presidency.

It doesn't necessarily have to be too long before seeking the presidency. The Republican Party began and took the presidency within a decade. But they did start out seeking other offices first.

Likewise Britain's Labour Party didn't start off right away capturing the Prime Minister's seat.

Rome wasn't built in a day, but every party third party seems to want that.

This is what I was referring to:

While I know many people might attack me for this, I feel I should point out that a vote for a liberal third-party candidate is a de facto vote for Mitt Romney. Just look at the 2000 and 1912 elections.

The idea that a third-party vote is wasted.

[Saturn500]

Really, when my dad knows Romney will be awful for America, yet will be voting for him anyway because he considers him the lesser of two evils (somehow), then there's probably a huge issue with the system.

[rookie]

Really, when my dad knows Romney will be awful for America, yet will be voting for him anyway because he considers him the lesser of two evils (somehow), then there's probably a huge issue with the system.

I know quite a few Republicans who take this stance. They really don't like Romney. He's too much a liberal pansy. But it's still a vote against the Kenyan commie socialist Muslim.

[Saturn500]

Really, when my dad knows Romney will be awful for America, yet will be voting for him anyway because he considers him the lesser of two evils (somehow), then there's probably a huge issue with the system.

I know quite a few Republicans who take this stance. They really don't like Romney. He's too much a liberal pansy. But it's still a vote against the Kenyan commie socialist Muslim.

Actually, my dad hates Romney because of his outsourcing and firing and whatnot.

[Distind]

This is what I was referring to:

While I know many people might attack me for this, I feel I should point out that a vote for a liberal third-party candidate is a de facto vote for Mitt Romney. Just look at the 2000 and 1912 elections.

The idea that a third-party vote is wasted.

The point isn't so much that the vote is wasted, but rather that it may as well be a vote for the guy you really, really didn't want in office, rather than the one that didn't live up to expectations of being a messiah.

[Qlockworkcanary]

Here's a meta-polling site on the Electoral Map that I've been following. Unsure of the accuracy really so take that for what it's worth:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

[Cerim Treascair]

Fivethirtyeight is FANTASTIC for accuracy.

[Patches]

Unfortunately that just reinforces the two-party status quo

No third party has ever come to power anywhere starting with the top office.

I agree we need a third party, and was going to vote for one until recently, but I've realized what we really need is a third party that aims for victories in local, state, and congressional elections before going for the presidency.

It doesn't necessarily have to be too long before seeking the presidency. The Republican Party began and took the presidency within a decade. But they did start out seeking other offices first.

Likewise Britain's Labour Party didn't start off right away capturing the Prime Minister's seat.

Rome wasn't built in a day, but every party third party seems to want that.

I kind of hope the Tea Party becomes a viable third party.  Much like the Republican Party sucking up the Dixiecrats and allowing the Democratic party to shift more liberal, if the racists, fascists, and theocrats split off the Republican party, it'll untie their hands to pander to the crazy and they'll be able to move back towards a level of viability.  Then we could have the Democrats on the left, the Republicans in the center, and the Tea Party hanging off the edge of the far right.

Ideally in a two-party system, you'd have the "Let's take some risks and innovate" party and the "Let's play it safe and stay where we are for now" party, but at the moment we've got the "Let's fix this with duct tape" party and the "Let's burn this and collect the insurance on it" party.

[StallChaser]

Unfortunately that just reinforces the two-party status quo

No third party has ever come to power anywhere starting with the top office.

I agree we need a third party, and was going to vote for one until recently, but I've realized what we really need is a third party that aims for victories in local, state, and congressional elections before going for the presidency.

It doesn't necessarily have to be too long before seeking the presidency. The Republican Party began and took the presidency within a decade. But they did start out seeking other offices first.

Likewise Britain's Labour Party didn't start off right away capturing the Prime Minister's seat.

Rome wasn't built in a day, but every party third party seems to want that.

This is what I was referring to:

While I know many people might attack me for this, I feel I should point out that a vote for a liberal third-party candidate is a de facto vote for Mitt Romney. Just look at the 2000 and 1912 elections.

The idea that a third-party vote is wasted.

You shouldn't take issue with that idea being expressed, as much as that it's factually true.  Without changing the election to some sort of runoff system, two major parties is the only stable equilibrium that exists.

[clockworkgirl21]

And with that you have what is likely the last nail in the coffin of the American middle class, and when we go, the entire US economy goes with us. The fact that Romney and his GOP puppeteers either do not understand this fact or do not care is utterly terrifying. If they don't understand, then they are willfully, deliberately, astonishingly stupid. If they don't care, then they are clearly evil in the classical sense of the word. Neither option is comforting.

I believe they just don't care. They have theirs, why should they care about those who don't? Romney knows full well what will happen to the middle class, but he doesn't care because he's rich, and everyone he knows is rich.

I'm voting for Obama. I don't think he's the "lesser of two evils", as many say. He's just an okay president trying to make the average American's life better by giving them healthcare and making those who have more pay a little more so the economy can recover and the middle class can get back on its feet. If Romney wins, who knows when that will happen? You're right, probably never.

[syaoranvee]

Even Theodore Roosevelt running on a 3rd party platform wasn't able to secure a victory(although he did beat the republicans) in his time. A 3rd party will never win.

[largeham]

I kind of hope the Tea Party becomes a viable third party.  Much like the Republican Party sucking up the Dixiecrats and allowing the Democratic party to shift more liberal, if the racists, fascists, and theocrats split off the Republican party, it'll untie their hands to pander to the crazy and they'll be able to move back towards a level of viability.  Then we could have the Democrats on the left, the Republicans in the center, and the Tea Party hanging off the edge of the far right.

Absolutely not, I would not fascists gaining a large level of support, enough to break a two party deadlock. And I'm not sure why you think the Democrats will ever move to the left.

Ideally in a two-party system, you'd have the "Let's take some risks and innovate" party and the "Let's play it safe and stay where we are for now" party, but at the moment we've got the "Let's fix this with duct tape" party and the "Let's burn this and collect the insurance on it" party.

Ideally in a two party system you would have parties that actually stand for different things. However that hasn't existed for decades, depending on where you live.

[Vypernight]

Romney would be an utter disaster for the USA, and by extension, the world. Mainly because if Romney snags the White House, it will be by riding a wave of fear and anger that will almost certainly gain the Republicans the Senate as well, and that would give us a Federal government in which the GOP controls all three branches.

Romney would then proceed to rubber stamp the Republican agenda like a good little robot, and massive amounts of the tax burden will be shifted off of the wealthy and corporations and on to the shoulders of the poor and middle class. (It is an inescapable fact that Romney's "economic" plans would hand major tax cuts to the wealthy while actually increasing the tax burden on the middle and working classes.)

And with that you have what is likely the last nail in the coffin of the American middle class, and when we go, the entire US economy goes with us. The fact that Romney and his GOP puppeteers either do not understand this fact or do not care is utterly terrifying. If they don't understand, then they are willfully, deliberately, astonishingly stupid. If they don't care, then they are clearly evil in the classical sense of the word. Neither option is comforting.

Not to mention the GOP's plan to improve the economy is to drop regulations for health and safety.  So the only way businesses will create jobs is to make things as dangerous as possible.