Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, July 09, 2019

Billionaire philanthropist and Independent presidential candidate Ross Perot is dead at 89, CNBC has confirmed. Perot, who ran for president twice in 1992 and 1996, died after a five-month battle with leukemia, a representative for the Perot family said.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

R.I.P.

One American I admired.

#1 | Posted by J_Tremain at 2019-07-09 10:36 AM | Reply

Damn. I was hoping he would run again.

#2 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-09 10:56 AM | Reply

He had the only political campaign I ever volunteered to help.

#3 | Posted by kudzu at 2019-07-09 11:37 AM | Reply

I thought Leprechauns where immortal, like all the fay.

It's some kind of vanishing act. We need to check the coffin like we did for Walt Disney. They only froze his brain though - you could tell by the circular head scar.

#4 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-07-09 11:52 AM | Reply

I voted for Perot in 1992. It will likely remain the dumbest presidential vote I ever cast. Clinton was a good president for eight years who helped the economy. Voting third party for president is a wasted vote that accomplishes absolutely nothing for Americans or for third parties.

Growing up in Dallas, I thought Perot was the tiny god-king of business. My wife is still bitter about when Perot's people lied to her while she was reporting a story on a new business development they were starting in Denton County. Their companies were sneaky sumbitches from top to bottom.

#5 | Posted by rcade at 2019-07-09 12:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

Seriously, though, I thought H. was much older than that. I remember reading that he was getting close to 100.

Someone must be messing with the timeline again.

#6 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-09 12:05 PM | Reply

I agreed with his home-spun "crazy old aunt in the basement" analogy about the deficit then, and still do.
That monster is eventually going to destroy our economy.

#7 | Posted by e1g1 at 2019-07-09 12:07 PM | Reply

I met him when I did some training at Perot Systems in 06. Nice bloke with a VERY mischievous sense of humor.

#8 | Posted by RevDarko at 2019-07-09 12:14 PM | Reply

"Voting third party for president is a wasted vote that accomplishes absolutely nothing for Americans or for third parties."

How exactly did you "waste" your vote in 1992? It reflected how you actually felt and what you wanted at the time. It didn't hurt any other candidate's chances of getting elected. Just like in any other election.

#9 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-09 12:14 PM | Reply

Perot was the first and last time I voted third party.

#10 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-09 12:17 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Somewhere in Texas, there's a huge sucking sound. RIP wing nut with a crew cut.

#11 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-07-09 12:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Nice bloke with a VERY mischievous sense of humor."

Speaking of mischief, a friend of mine just sent me some mimosa hostilis bark and it made me think of you. Hope all is well.

#12 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-07-09 12:17 PM | Reply

"What we have Larry is a giant sucking sound"

Ross Perot on NAFTA

Larry king live

#13 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-07-09 12:18 PM | Reply

"How exactly did you "waste" your vote in 1992? It reflected how you actually felt and what you wanted at the time."

You're making an emotional argument.
Already, you should be worried that it's not a sound argument.

#14 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-09 12:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

That monster is eventually going to destroy our economy.

#7 | POSTED BY E1G1 AT 2019-07-09 12:07 PM | REPLY |

The balloon will only stretch so much.

#15 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-07-09 12:21 PM | Reply

Bless his pea-pickin' little heart.

I never voted for him but I've never forgotten one of his creeds ~ "Measure twice ~~ cut once."

I've used that one a lot.

#16 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-07-09 12:25 PM | Reply

I voted for Perot in 1992 mostly in the hope that he would garner enough electoral votes so as to scare the living s##t out of the people in Washington so that they would seriously consider dumping the Electoral College. Now I have to admit that I did read his book, 'United We Stand, How We Can Take Back Our Country', just before the election and I found it very interesting, if not somewhat compelling. In fact, after reading it on a cross-country flight (it was only 134 pages long) I gave it to the guy sitting next to me on the plane and told him to read it as well.

Disclaimer: At the time I was working for EDS, the company that Perot had founded, and while he was no longer associated with the company when I first joined EDS (fall of 1991), his views and the culture that he had instilled in the company was still very evident and to the older EDS people, he was still looked-up to and was very much admired.

OCU

#17 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-07-09 12:28 PM | Reply

We must return immigration to a logical, orderly process where people fill out their applications and wait for approval. We must make sure illegal immigrants stop storming our borders. We must establish the correct criteria, such as our need for certain job skills or education, for granting the right to immigrate into the United States. ~ Perot

#18 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-07-09 12:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

- Growing up in Dallas

We sent a guy over to Ross's EDS company to pick up a check in payment for a referral fee on a COBOL programmer they hired from us... and they sent him back without the check because he wasn't wearing a tie, lmao.

He was local royalty, alright, like the Hunt family.

#19 | Posted by Corky at 2019-07-09 12:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Third party vote means the third choice was better than the other two.

Sorry Rcade, but I would believe such a vote is for a better future. I voted Perot, too. Funny how many voted for him here on DR.

Guess we all saw the better of the two evils.

#20 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-07-09 12:41 PM | Reply

After Perot, what I learned is change comes from the inside.
Obama was a sea change for the Democrats in 2008; Trump was a sea change for the Republicans in 2016.
Both were outsiders and not expected or wanted to do well, especially by the heads of their respective parties.
Of course, change can absolutely come from the outside, but it's much more likely to happen by subverting the existing establishment.

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-09 12:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#5 | Posted by rcade

Here's a thought. If Perot had become President back then, we wouldn't have a DOTARD in the driving seat today.

#22 | Posted by J_Tremain at 2019-07-09 12:52 PM | Reply

How exactly did you "waste" your vote in 1992? It reflected how you actually felt and what you wanted at the time.

Elections are about achieving things, not about feelings.

My vote was wasted because Perot had no chance to win and it didn't help members of his party get elected to Congress or any other office -- in 1992 or in any election after that.

Voting third party just helps one major party or the other. It doesn't help third parties achieve anything real.

Modern history has shown third parties never grow after a third party candidate gets a decent amount of presidential votes. They either fade away or remain a meaningless sideshow like the Libertarian Party. Anyone who watched the Libertarian Party national convention in 2016 knows that they're not a credible movement.

#23 | Posted by rcade at 2019-07-09 01:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Sorry Rcade, but I would believe such a vote is for a better future.

There is no better future in America that can be achieved outside of the two major parties.

Trump in 2016 shows that those parties can be taken over from the outside. The route to change is by doing that, not by frittering away a vote on no-hopers like Jill Stein or Gary Johnson.

#24 | Posted by rcade at 2019-07-09 01:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Yes, when I started to work for EDS the old Perot 'dress code' was still in effect. Men had to wear dark (Navy blue was preferred) suits (sport coats didn't cut it), long-sleeved white shirts with button-down collars, conservative ties and shoes with laces (no loafers). Women had to wear dresses or skirt and blouse (no slacks). Also men had to be clean shaven and have a conservative hair cut (note that since I became an EDS employee as the result of an acquisition, while the dress code was still mandated, my facial hair was permitted, but if I shaved it off, I would not have been allowed to grow it back). Eventually they relaxed the dress code, particularly for people whose job didn't put them in the public eye or who didn't interface with customers, which for us meant that most of our people was off the hook since we were a software development organization and most of our people never saw the outside of the mushroom farm. However, I was a spokesman for the company working in the product marketing group so I was stuck with adhering to the dress code at all time. However, like I said, slowly the dress code was 'modernized' to the point where sports coats were OK and even loafers were permitted and women could wear slacks (still no shorts). However, the facial hair ban remained and you were still expected to wear a dress shirt (white was still preferred but pastels were OK as long as they still looked conservative) and tie. Note that I worked for EDS for 11 years and by the time I left (our division was sold to a group of venture capitalists and then eventually to Siemens) the dress code was pretty much gone. Granted, those of us who had public facing jobs were expected to comport ourselves in a manner so as to always represent the company in its best possible light.

OCU

#25 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-07-09 01:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Heard in the sky, a huge sucking sound
rip ross..here's to heaven bound

#26 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-07-09 01:15 PM | Reply

"It will likely remain the dumbest presidential vote I ever cast."

We live and learn. Sometimes.

Looks like you did!

And....That giant sucking sound you hear is his soul being whisked away into the cosmos.

#27 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-09 01:16 PM | Reply

- That giant sucking sound

was Bill Clinton

#28 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-09 01:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Voting third party just helps one major party or the other. It doesn't help third parties achieve anything real.
Modern history has shown third parties never grow after a third party candidate gets a decent amount of presidential votes. They either fade away or remain a meaningless sideshow like the Libertarian Party. Anyone who watched the Libertarian Party national convention in 2016 knows that they're not a credible movement.

#23 | POSTED BY RCADE

It's for this reason that up until '16 I've always voted for the lesser of 2 evils when not presented with a candidate I felt I could support.

For me, '16 was different. I found both Trump and Clinton to be so detestable that I couldn't bring myself to vote for either one of them.

That's why I voted Johnson. If the '20 election was held tomorrow and Biden was the nominee, I'd vote for him.

#29 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-09 01:37 PM | Reply

'Now, lookey here!'

#30 | Posted by kudzu at 2019-07-09 01:41 PM | Reply

"There is no better future in America that can be achieved outside of the two major parties.
Trump in 2016 shows that those parties can be taken over from the outside. The route to change is by doing that, not by frittering away a vote on no-hopers like Jill Stein or Gary Johnson."

#24 | POSTED BY RCADE

There are people who voted for Trump because they genuinely believed he could offer a better future in America. There are people who voted for Clinton because they geniunely believed she could offer a better future in America. I have no contempt for either of those groups of people. People who voted third party believed that neither Trump nor Clinton were offering a better future, and were making a vocal statement that the two leading parties need to do better. Their decisions of how to exercise their right to vote deserves as much respect as anyone else's.

#31 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-09 01:46 PM | Reply

What we need is a truly viable 3rd party..and the fact that the democrats and republicans do everything in their power to prevent it is proof positive of the necessity.
the dems and repubs argument is the same as the wealthy leeches make when they argue against unions

#32 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-07-09 01:52 PM | Reply

#23 | Posted by rcade

I agree. I did vote for Perot the first time and last time I voted non-main party. H.W. just seemed weak and that was the ecomomy after 12 years of Reagonomics too WEAK. I couldn't stand Clinton either - he was just so slimy and besides that I still had my eyes closed to reality.

The thing is as the boomers die off and Millennials and Gen Z get to voting I actually see a chance for a 3rd party. It's just a slim chance though. It would be someone that creates a grass roots movement via Social Media that shames both parties. It won't happen right away with the decisiveness of the moment. I think the economy needs to be in the tank, student debt is left unaddressed as well as healthcare and with both sides to blame - THEN the moment may be right.

#33 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-07-09 01:59 PM | Reply

That giant sucking sound is

------------------ servicing his child raping hero.

#34 | Posted by Reinheitsgebot at 2019-07-09 02:08 PM | Reply

and an absolutely PERFECT example of the electorate crying out for a legitimate 3rd party candidate...look at the small donor contributions to liz warren and last time to bernie. that's a cash opinion/decision to circumvent the establishment

#35 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-07-09 02:09 PM | Reply

#31 | Posted by sentinel

A protest vote that has zero chance and doesn't actually lead to selection of your view of the lesser of two evils OR impact how a major party moves forward (in particulate the winner) is just a wasted vote. Especially when you consider the candidates that were 3rd party this last presidential election - I mean yikes! To me it is kind of hard to respect people who throw away their votes and outside some local elections 3rd party is wasted - it is probably better not to vote.

#36 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-07-09 02:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A 3rd party is something my opinion has changed on and it's because of this place.

If there is to be any real meaningful impact from a 3rd party, it can't be done by running someone for POTUS....it has to grow at the state level first.

IOW, we need to start seeing 3rd party politicians occupying significant portions of state legislatures and even some governors first then move on to Congress in DC, etc.....

#37 | Posted by eberly at 2019-07-09 02:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

- it is probably better not to vote.

The emotional third party "ego vote" is a meager substitute for civic responsibility to others; voting in such a way that might actually help most Americans rather than thumbing one's nose at them in a futile attempt to "make a statement".

So, you're right, it can be worse than not voting at all if you are feeding the delusion that a third party will make a difference.... often even helping the worse party.

#38 | Posted by Corky at 2019-07-09 02:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#37 | POSTED BY EBERLY

And that's why it'll have to be some charismatic who get's elected under the presumptive auspices of the dems/reps and then in the midst of their term, heeds a grassroots call to run for a 2nd term under a 3rd party banner.
the two parties are entrenched starting with the school board..IMO

#39 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-07-09 02:31 PM | Reply

Eberly.

I completely agree with your post #37.

It also make me wonder why third party candidates don't run for local offices, in local elections.

#40 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-07-09 02:34 PM | Reply

A protest vote that has zero chance and doesn't actually lead to selection of your view of the lesser of two evils OR impact how a major party moves forward (in particulate the winner) is just a wasted vote. Especially when you consider the candidates that were 3rd party this last presidential election - I mean yikes! To me it is kind of hard to respect people who throw away their votes and outside some local elections 3rd party is wasted - it is probably better not to vote.

#36 | POSTED BY GALAXIEPETE

Some historians have made the argument that the rising popularity of the Socialist and Communist parties in the US are what drove FDR to enact so many of his policies to blunt rising enthusiasm for Communism/Socialism.

3rd Party votes can push the parties in certain directions if enough people vote for them.

#41 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-09 02:39 PM | Reply

-It also make me wonder why third party candidates don't run for local offices, in local elections.

IMO, it's because there is a fundamental difference between truly embracing the platform of a political party and just simply being being disgusted with the other 2 established parties.

Setting aside all of the drama, theatrics, hypocrisy, etc wrapped around politics....there are significant philosophical and specific platform differences between the GOP and the democratic party.

People need to embrace the platform of a 3rd party before claiming to be a member of that party and supporting that party....not just support a Gary Johnson for president because he's not a R or a D.

#42 | Posted by eberly at 2019-07-09 03:00 PM | Reply

"Nice bloke with a VERY mischievous sense of humor."
Speaking of mischief, a friend of mine just sent me some mimosa hostilis bark and it made me think of you. Hope all is well.
#12 | POSTED BY HAGBARD_CELINE AT 2019-07-09 12:17 PM

Wow, you guys get exotic. Hey, I have been taking ashwaganda mushroom powder in the morning. It really does relax gently, lowering blood pressure - I enjoy coffee after and it still does it's job. Enjoy your spirit molecules.

#43 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2019-07-09 03:01 PM | Reply

The emotional third party "ego vote" is a meager substitute for civic responsibility to others; [...] feeding the delusion that a third party will make a difference.... often even helping the worse party.
#38 | POSTED BY CORKY

Oh go fk yourself, shill. You and your ilk are the main problem with the DEM party.

Now I'm definitely voting third party, if for no other reason than -------- like you.

#44 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-09 03:09 PM | Reply

I voted for Perot in 1992 and I've never regretted it for a second. I was 20 years old at the time. I'm glad I didn't vote for Clinton and I wasn't willing to vote for Bush. Bill Clinton did some good things as president and some that were terrible. He was also a ------- in many ways in his personal life. Democrats were then, and some still are, too willing to overlook the issues in Clinton's personal life. I think that is one of the reasons we now have our Dotard in Chief.

#45 | Posted by anton at 2019-07-09 03:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"it is probably better not to vote."

This is officially the dumbest comment ever posted on the Retort. How can you even rationalize a statement like that?

#46 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-09 03:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#42 | POSTED BY EBERLY

The platform of a party doesn't mean squat if you don't believe the candidates are either willing or able to deliver on it. Or if they're more focused on the aspects that you either care less about or disagree with in those platforms. Unless someone is a one-party voter, they usually choose whomever they lean closest to, not necessarily someone who's party they embrace completely.

#47 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-09 03:26 PM | Reply

Yeahhhhhh... the big bad Perot who quit the campaign because he didn't want his running to spoil his daughters wedding... ya see.... there were people making lesbian accusations against her..... pfffffffftttt

mmmmhhhhhmmmmmm a real game changer that one.

#48 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2019-07-09 03:40 PM | Reply

It also make me wonder why third party candidates don't run for local offices, in local elections.

#40 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2019-07-09 02:34 PM

A lot of it has to do with money, if you are the "chosen" candidate of the local party, they can help you get the vote out, plant lawn signs, even get you donations. As you get higher up the rungs, that support becomes even more valuable.

If you are running as an independent, you are on your own and need to do a lot of things that your local party handles for you.

#49 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-09 03:43 PM | Reply

Who? Wasn't he Sweet Pea in the Popeye movie?

#50 | Posted by wisgod at 2019-07-09 04:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

People who voted third party believed that neither Trump nor Clinton were offering a better future, and were making a vocal statement that the two leading parties need to do better.

That vocal statement wasn't heard by anybody. It meant nothing. It accomplished nothing.

Their decisions of how to exercise their right to vote deserves as much respect as anyone else's.

Voting isn't T-ball. It isn't about making everyone feel good because they participated.

Voting has consequences. Every vote doesn't deserve equal respect. Some votes are pointless, stupid or harmful and should be treated accordingly.

Would you honestly say that a vote for Marianne Williamson "deserves as much respect as anyone else's"? I hope for your sake the answer is "no."

#51 | Posted by rcade at 2019-07-09 04:42 PM | Reply

Now I'm definitely voting third party, if for no other reason than -------- like you.

You've just outed yourself as someone who votes for exceptionally dumb reasons that have nothing to do with what voting is supposed to accomplish -- putting somebody in office who makes a positive impact on issues you care about.

It's kind of the perfect self-own -- "I do things to make people on a message board angry!" Ladies and gentlemen we got ourselves an Internet badass up in here!

#52 | Posted by rcade at 2019-07-09 04:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Would you honestly say that a vote for Marianne Williamson "deserves as much respect as anyone else's"? I hope for your sake the answer is "no."

#51 | POSTED BY RCADE

Then then we're just witnessing a charade? And just waiting for the powers that be tell us who we can select from? Because Marianne Williamson is running for president...or is she? If what you're saying is true, then why does your party let her even speak?

#53 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-09 04:48 PM | Reply

"People who voted third party believed that neither Trump nor Clinton were offering a better future, and were making a vocal statement that the two leading parties need to do better."

"That vocal statement wasn't heard by anybody. It meant nothing. It accomplished nothing."

^
This.

It's like all these third-party voters, who never win anything, all agree that it's us, not them and their pie in the sky parties, who are the problem.

They're perpetual victims. But their victims of their own unrealistic expectations about what politics can deliver.

I absolutely voted for Perot because I felt like I was a victim of a broken system.

But I also figured out that voting for Perot didn't fix the system one iota.

Some didn't make that crucial last step.

#54 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-09 04:52 PM | Reply

-You've just outed yourself as someone who votes for exceptionally dumb reasons that have nothing to do with what voting is supposed to accomplish -- putting somebody in office who makes a positive impact on issues you care about.

Corky is pretty impactful if he can get folks to do things like that.

#55 | Posted by eberly at 2019-07-09 04:56 PM | Reply

If what you're saying is true, then why does your party let her even speak?

This is a weird question that has nothing to do with what you quoted.

She was allowed in the debate because she met the rules that were set beforehand.

#56 | Posted by rcade at 2019-07-09 05:04 PM | Reply

- Now I'm definitely voting third party, if for no other reason than -------- like you.
#44 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM

Did I mention the irrational, selfish, emotional ego-centered vote?

I think I did.

- Ladies and gentlemen we got ourselves an Internet badass up in here!

rofl!!

#57 | Posted by Corky at 2019-07-09 05:30 PM | Reply

"Voting isn't T-ball. It isn't about making everyone feel good because they participated."

Never said it was. And I never said that all votes deserve equal respect. I'm saying people who vote their conscience deserve to have their decisions respected as anyone else who votes their conscience, regardless of the candidate.

"Some votes are pointless, stupid or harmful and should be treated accordingly."

Votes are only pointless, stupid or harmful if the intent by each voter behind those votes is pointless, stupid or harmful. You cannot in any way show that the votes for third party party candidates had any effect the outcome of the last election or any election, other than diminishing the popular vote percentage of the winners (but not affecting who won).

#58 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-09 05:34 PM | Reply

www.thepublicprofessor.com

#59 | Posted by Corky at 2019-07-09 05:35 PM | Reply

- vote their conscience

If their conscience tells them to vote in an irrational, selfish, emotional ego-centered way with no regard to their civic duty to vote in a way that is most beneficial to most of their fellow citizens.... then perhaps they should have their conscience tuned up.

#60 | Posted by Corky at 2019-07-09 05:38 PM | Reply

Derp. Derp. Maybe we can get independent voters to come back to voting for our party by ridiculing them for their choices in previous elections.

#61 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-09 05:43 PM | Reply

'It's kind of the perfect self-own -- "I do things to make people on a message board angry!" Ladies and gentlemen we got ourselves an Internet badass up in here!'

I completely agree that voting to spite some idiots on a message board is stupid. It's also stupid to ignore the fact that people do vote against candidates for emotional and sometimes irrational reasons, and if you're knowingly doing things that push people away from a candidate that you believe is in your best interests, what does that make you?

#62 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-09 05:51 PM | Reply

One reason I vote 3rd party is that if they manage to get over 5% of the popular vote they are eligible for federal election funding. A 3rd party will never be viable without that. Not in the billion dollar races of today. Even that won't help much but it would help.

It would also guarantee ballot access the following election which is huge as 3rd parties have to spend a lot of their limited funds securing ballot access.

As far as 3rd party candidates starting smaller there are 188 elected libertarians in the country including a couple of mayors, a bunch of school boards and the bulk of them in some sort of city council position. I can tell you in my district the libertarians have a candidate in almost every contest and a couple of them have done quite well. As ROC pointed out a lot of it has to do with money and organizational structure. An established structure will get the yard signs out maybe a couple of TV spots a radio add or two, assistance with web pages etc. When it comes time to vote in local elections my guess is 1/2 the people don't have a clue for most of the races and pull the lever for either their parties candidate or a name they recognize making yard signs probably 5 times as important in local races as national ones.

That said the libertarian party almost by definition will never amount to anything. Find 3 random libertarians and probably the only thing they will agree on is legal weed and that at least one of them isn't a "real" libertarian. It is too big of a tent and the members are WAY to in love with their own opinions (yeah myself included)

Unfortunately in 92 I couldn't vote and by 96 it was clear Perot didn't have a real shot so I never voted for him, but had I been able to vote in 92 I would have.

#63 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2019-07-09 06:24 PM | Reply

I never voted for Ross Perot. He came across too me as gimicky. My presidential votes in the 1990s went to the WWII heroes.

You chuckleheads voting 3rd party need to stop the crybaby schtick and keep it between Republicans and Democrats.

And since none of you here are billionaires, just effing vote for the Democrat.

#64 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-07-10 12:12 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

The problem with voting for an Independant candidate is that they don't stay independant very long. There's way to much money (lobbyist) controlling the direction of the country.

I appreciate the candidate who claims they don't take corporate money but sooner or later it seeps into all three branches of government. Money is corruptible, influence peddling is corruptible, and it's the rare executive who can look away from those almighty dollar signs.

I miss Obama. He's as close as this country as ever come to an honest broker in the White House.

#65 | Posted by Twinpac at 2019-07-10 08:04 AM | Reply

IOW, we need to start seeing 3rd party politicians occupying significant portions of state legislatures and even some governors first then move on to Congress in DC, etc.....

#37 | POSTED BY EBERLY

You mean...Like Senator Bernie Sanders!!

Is someone starting to feel the Bern again?

Let go of the hateful MAGA and Feel the Bern!

#66 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-10 10:30 AM | Reply

- Derp. Derp.

Your most insightful post yet. Keep up the good werk.

But yeah, we wouldn't want to criticize self-defeating behavior. Some light might accidentally come on.

#67 | Posted by Corky at 2019-07-10 12:13 PM | Reply

"But yeah, we wouldn't want to criticize self-defeating behavior. Some light might accidentally come on."

It's obviously not coming on for you.

#68 | Posted by sentinel at 2019-07-10 12:20 PM | Reply

It's also stupid to ignore the fact that people do vote against candidates for emotional and sometimes irrational reasons, and if you're knowingly doing things that push people away from a candidate that you believe is in your best interests, what does that make you?

Someone who doesn't have an exaggerated sense of my own importance in deciding an election.

Over 120 million people voted in 2016. I could spend every waking minute on message boards from now until November 2020 and have no measurable impact on the outcome beyond 1 / 120000000.

#69 | Posted by rcade at 2019-07-10 01:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

America is sick and tired of its politics. It wants change. No independent has performed better than straight talking Perot. His uncanny resemblance to Alfred E. Newman only helped his campaign.

#70 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-07-10 06:47 PM | Reply

I voted for Ross in 1992. I had been voting since 1975 and was fed up with politicians by then. I didn't feel it was a wasted vote, even though I knew he couldn't win. I thought he had an outside chance of taking the majority of the popular vote and losing miserably in the EC.
Amazing how many off us here voted for Ross.

#71 | Posted by willowby at 2019-07-10 09:32 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort