We need a little chaos...

[Malice]

I think its time the American Election process needs a little chaos.

With the convention for the Dems not to long away, we still dont know who will be picked. This could lead to some serious chaos.

I think this would be good for the system, not for the Republicans, just for the entire system in general.

Chaos usually spikes interest, and interest usually starts debates and questioning. I say bring on the chaos.

[rdh007]

I kind of agree. I'd like to witness an election where the convention is more than a pageant for the guy who's already had the nomination locked up for months.

[Malice]

I kind of agree. I'd like to witness an election where the convention is more than a pageant for the guy who's already had the nomination locked up for months.

Absolutely...three days of everyone in politics on every level going up there and hyping the candidate.
Its pointless. The Convention has not meant a damn thing since probably 1947 or so. The person picked has always been known before the convention.

Bring it on!

[Arkady Rossovich]

There is enough chaos already. If not now,then things will get bad when the convention comes.

[Nivek]

I agree.

[Malice]

There is enough chaos already. If not now,then things will get bad when the convention comes.

You havent seen anything yet.
This is nothing compared to the chaos that I forsee if someone doesnt just drop out on the dems side.

[Gilpesh]

If chaos means a revolution that changes the government from s**ty inefficient beast for its own existence to some actually for the people, then chaos might be good.

[The Senator]

The Democratic Party needs chaos. Two years ago, we campaigned on a platform which would help the middle class, end corruption in Congress, and bring an end to the war in Iraq. Two years later, we haven't helped the middle class (unless you count handing out free money which magically comes from a deficit as help), we haven't really ended corruption in Congress (Rep. Jefferson is still in office, for example), and the war in Iraq-- last time I checked-- is still in full-swing. The Democrats have spent a little over a year positioning themselves to avoid vicious showdowns with the White House, so they can roll into 2008 with the upper hand. The party has taken a blind eye to just about everything. They thought the Republicans would be battling it to the death into their convention. Meanwhile, this party which I hold dear to my heart is right in the middle of a bloody fight to the death between two rather inexperienced, insignificant Presidential candidates who don't seem to care about the middle class, who don't really care all that much about corruption, who sit on top of mountains filled with excess baggage... this has turned into the election year from hell, to put it frankly.

When this convention is done, the party will be bruised. We have an uphill battle against John McCain to look forward to, not to mention a sagging economy, an endless war, and endless problems within our political system which need to be fought head-on. We can't afford to position ourselves any longer. We can't afford to bicker over nonsense. If we screw ourselves over in August, then go on to lose in November, the Democratic Party will uproot itself and be forced to take a look at what it has done to itself in the past eight years. And that, I feel, is something we have to do if we plan on regaining the Presidency and the trust of the American voter.

[BlackLantern]

The Democratic Party needs chaos. Two years ago, we campaigned on a platform which would help the middle class, end corruption in Congress, and bring an end to the war in Iraq. Two years later, we haven't helped the middle class (unless you count handing out free money which magically comes from a deficit as help), we haven't really ended corruption in Congress (Rep. Jefferson is still in office, for example), and the war in Iraq-- last time I checked-- is still in full-swing. The Democrats have spent a little over a year positioning themselves to avoid vicious showdowns with the White House, so they can roll into 2008 with the upper hand. The party has taken a blind eye to just about everything. They thought the Republicans would be battling it to the death into their convention. Meanwhile, this party which I hold dear to my heart is right in the middle of a bloody fight to the death between two rather inexperienced, insignificant Presidential candidates who don't seem to care about the middle class, who don't really care all that much about corruption, who sit on top of mountains filled with excess baggage... this has turned into the election year from hell, to put it frankly.

When this convention is done, the party will be bruised. We have an uphill battle against John McCain to look forward to, not to mention a sagging economy, an endless war, and endless problems within our political system which need to be fought head-on. We can't afford to position ourselves any longer. We can't afford to bicker over nonsense. If we screw ourselves over in August, then go on to lose in November, the Democratic Party will uproot itself and be forced to take a look at what it has done to itself in the past eight years. And that, I feel, is something we have to do if we plan on regaining the Presidency and the trust of the American voter.

The Democrats royally screwed themselves by taking the hottest issue (the war) saying they were going to end it or at least get some type of timetable or change and utterly failed to deliver. Whats' worse is that they rolled over for the surveillance bill when the President refused to let them out of session for their summer vacation. The Republicans might be lying war mongering d-bags but at least they are up front about it. The Dems have been on this whole "we're just like regular people" crap and it sickens me. I am still on the fence about this whole election, but McCain is looking like the lesser of 3 evils at this point.

[Lightning Strykez!]

Well, someone could always be assassinated ya know...that would bring chaos. :dry:

[BlackLantern]

Well, someone could always be assassinated ya know...that would bring chaos. :dry:

No one takes the time to plan an assassination anymore...it's all IED's and protests nowadays...

[Gilpesh]

No one takes the time to plan an assassination anymore...it's all IED's and protests nowadays...

Also if anything... assassinations bring about the complete opposite of what the reason for assassination was.

[EdRyder]

You havent seen anything yet.
This is nothing compared to the chaos that I forsee if someone doesnt just drop out on the dems side.

Well, I cant imagine anyone would be all that surprised when after the Democratic nominee is made whoever is left behind isnt going away quitely.However, they'll be out of the loop.We can finally get to some 1 on 1 debates between McCain and the Democratic nominee.Just ignore the softball with the megaphone.Most of the bull**** is on us,..We finally went out of our way to "BrittanySpearify" an entire presidential race.

[Lightning Strykez!]

My gut instincts tell me that the nominee will be Obama.

However, if the superdelegates pull a fast one and "give the nomination away" to Clinton, Malice will definitely get his "chaos". Because you can bet your butt there will be a revolt--especially among African American voters.

And then we'll all be introduced to President McCain. :cool:

[Doctor Strange]

I think its time the American Election process needs a little chaos.

With the convention for the Dems not to long away, we still dont know who will be picked. This could lead to some serious chaos.

I think this would be good for the system, not for the Republicans, just for the entire system in general.

Chaos usually spikes interest, and interest usually starts debates and questioning. I say bring on the chaos.What the process needs is to be wrenched from the control of the two parties who have done everything they can to marginalize other candidates, especially debate access and getting on the ballot.

[SuBe]

What we need is a transfer of power back to the people, no more of these vote buying, pandering to certain group ********. We need new blood in our government.

[Tron5000]

The Democrats royally screwed themselves by taking the hottest issue (the war) saying they were going to end it or at least get some type of timetable or change and utterly failed to deliver. Whats' worse is that they rolled over for the surveillance bill when the President refused to let them out of session for their summer vacation. The Republicans might be lying war mongering d-bags but at least they are up front about it. The Dems have been on this whole "we're just like regular people" crap and it sickens me. I am still on the fence about this whole election, but McCain is looking like the lesser of 3 evils at this point.

Wow. Generalize much?

Do you just mean the ones in Washington, or all Republicans? Like, is my dad, because he votes Republican, in your opinion a "lying war mongering d-bag"? 'Cause he's actually a really nice dude that I respect a lot. It would greatly disappoint me if the man who I view with much admiration and respect were, in fact, a "lying war mongering d-bag." That would, like, totally shatter my world, and stuff.

[Tron5000]

My gut instincts tell me that the nominee will be Obama.

However, if the superdelegates pull a fast one and "give the nomination away" to Clinton, Malice will definitely get his "chaos". Because you can bet your butt there will be a revolt--especially among African American voters.

And then we'll all be introduced to President McCain. :cool:

Not just AA voters, but the entire electorate who chose one nominee only to have elite Democrats give the nom to the other candidate. If that happens, then what the hell is the point of primaries anyway?

[Malice]

My gut instincts tell me that the nominee will be Obama.

However, if the superdelegates pull a fast one and "give the nomination away" to Clinton, Malice will definitely get his "chaos". Because you can bet your butt there will be a revolt--especially among African American voters.

And then we'll all be introduced to President McCain. :cool:

Rock!

[Doctor Strange]

The Democrats royally screwed themselves by taking the hottest issue (the war) saying they were going to end it or at least get some type of timetable or change and utterly failed to deliver. Whats' worse is that they rolled over for the surveillance bill when the President refused to let them out of session for their summer vacation. The Republicans might be lying war mongering d-bags but at least they are up front about it. The Dems have been on this whole "we're just like regular people" crap and it sickens me. I am still on the fence about this whole election, but McCain is looking like the lesser of 3 evils at this point.
Two things: one, the Iraq war is not "the hottest issue" as you believe it is. Sure, to the superbatty left-wingers it is, but they're a marginalized group who are so out of touch with the rest of the country; and, two, Congress is not Commander in Chief. There was nothing they could do to "end it" or to set a timetable. Perhaps if they actually supported their country things would be a lot further along. Still, everyone seems to forget Bush's speech on Sept 19, 2001. Iraq is just a foothold, and not the final battlefield in this war.

[StorminNorman]

I think its time the American Election process needs a little chaos.

With the convention for the Dems not to long away, we still dont know who will be picked. This could lead to some serious chaos.

I think this would be good for the system, not for the Republicans, just for the entire system in general.

Chaos usually spikes interest, and interest usually starts debates and questioning. I say bring on the chaos.

You want Chaos, but you think nothing of the consequences of that chaos.

You calling for Chaos is like a small child calling for no rules. The idea sounds great, but it ends with your place trashed and being sick from too much candy.

The only way for "Chaos" to be brought about by the Democratic Convention is for Obama to NOT get the nomination he has.

All that will do is give a perfect example to the black community about how their voices don't mean as much as the white community. All that will do is show the youth that their votes really DON'T count. All that will do is tear this country apart by race and by generation.

You want chaos? The assassination of MLK caused chaos. It brought riots in the street. Innocent people were hurt and harmed and the country was further ripped apart by race. Yes, it did lead to a positive change (civil rights legislation), but that benefit could and would of been obtained. A brilliant, peaceful man did not have to die for those laws to be passed. The pain and trouble and chaosit caused did not need to happen.

All those goals you want to happen can happen without chaos. Chaos, in fact, is the LAST thing we need.

If the public is caught up in the chaos of politics, it will prevent them from looking at our political process.

[Alex The Great]

Alll hell'll break looose of Obama isn't nominated. Racism arguments will sky rocket. go Obama!

[BlackLantern]

You want Chaos, but you think nothing of the consequences of that chaos.

You calling for Chaos is like a small child calling for no rules. The idea sounds great, but it ends with your place trashed and being sick from too much candy.

The only way for "Chaos" to be brought about by the Democratic Convention is for Obama to NOT get the nomination he has.

All that will do is give a perfect example to the black community about how their voices don't mean as much as the white community. All that will do is show the youth that their votes really DON'T count. All that will do is tear this country apart by race and by generation.

You want chaos? The assassination of MLK caused chaos. It brought riots in the street. Innocent people were hurt and harmed and the country was further ripped apart by race. Yes, it did lead to a positive change (civil rights legislation), but that benefit could and would of been obtained. A brilliant, peaceful man did not have to die for those laws to be passed. The pain and trouble and chaosit caused did not need to happen.

All those goals you want to happen can happen without chaos. Chaos, in fact, is the LAST thing we need.

If the public is caught up in the chaos of politics, it will prevent them from looking at our political process.

yea...what he said:yay:

[MaskedManJRK]

You know what I REALLY want to see?

Instead of a usual Dem Convention, I want them to take Hilary and Obama, put them in a big dirt arena with a ring of rocks, give the two huge broadswords and have them go at it on a PPV, preferably with the music from Star Trek that plays whenever Kirk is fighting someone.

Would it happen? No. Would it be a disgrace to national politics? Hell yes. But, goddamnit, it would be so bloody entertaining--not to mention satisfying.

[Malice]

You want Chaos, but you think nothing of the consequences of that chaos.

You calling for Chaos is like a small child calling for no rules. The idea sounds great, but it ends with your place trashed and being sick from too much candy.

The only way for "Chaos" to be brought about by the Democratic Convention is for Obama to NOT get the nomination he has.

All that will do is give a perfect example to the black community about how their voices don't mean as much as the white community. All that will do is show the youth that their votes really DON'T count. All that will do is tear this country apart by race and by generation.

You want chaos? The assassination of MLK caused chaos. It brought riots in the street. Innocent people were hurt and harmed and the country was further ripped apart by race. Yes, it did lead to a positive change (civil rights legislation), but that benefit could and would of been obtained. A brilliant, peaceful man did not have to die for those laws to be passed. The pain and trouble and chaosit caused did not need to happen.

All those goals you want to happen can happen without chaos. Chaos, in fact, is the LAST thing we need.

If the public is caught up in the chaos of politics, it will prevent them from looking at our political process.

I think you are misconstruing my comments.
When I mean Chaos, I am not talking armed conflict and people dieing, I am talking chaos creating some change in the political system (the Dems getting rid of Super Delegates) and the people seeing what is happening.

I think that is the chaos I am looking for.

[Tron5000]

You know what I REALLY want to see?

Instead of a usual Dem Convention, I want them to take Hilary and Obama, put them in a big dirt arena with a ring of rocks, give the two huge broadswords and have them go at it on a PPV, preferably with the music from Star Trek that plays whenever Kirk is fighting someone.

Would it happen? No. Would it be a disgrace to national politics? Hell yes. But, goddamnit, it would be so bloody entertaining--not to mention satisfying.

Stone circle death match with Klondor.

fl9CrpLs3MM

[The Senator]

Two things: one, the Iraq war is not "the hottest issue" as you believe it is. Sure, to the superbatty left-wingers it is, but they're a marginalized group who are so out of touch with the rest of the country; and, two, Congress is not Commander in Chief. There was nothing they could do to "end it" or to set a timetable. Perhaps if they actually supported their country things would be a lot further along. Still, everyone seems to forget Bush's speech on Sept 19, 2001. Iraq is just a foothold, and not the final battlefield in this war.

And let me guess... the issues voters are really concerned about are bringing Jesus into government, giving tax breaks to multibillion dollar corporations, and cutting those bad, bad earmarks, right?

Not the whole "the economy is falling apart under our feet" thing. Or the rising price of oil, which is packing a considerable punch on the middle class's wallet.

Nope, not at all.

And you certainly can't alleviate some of these economic constraints by ending an entirely unnecessary and completely mismanaged war which has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars thus far. Not at all...

[Matt]

The Democratic Party needs chaos. Two years ago, we campaigned on a platform which would help the middle class, end corruption in Congress, and bring an end to the war in Iraq. Two years later, we haven't helped the middle class (unless you count handing out free money which magically comes from a deficit as help), we haven't really ended corruption in Congress (Rep. Jefferson is still in office, for example), and the war in Iraq-- last time I checked-- is still in full-swing. The Democrats have spent a little over a year positioning themselves to avoid vicious showdowns with the White House, so they can roll into 2008 with the upper hand. The party has taken a blind eye to just about everything. They thought the Republicans would be battling it to the death into their convention. Meanwhile, this party which I hold dear to my heart is right in the middle of a bloody fight to the death between two rather inexperienced, insignificant Presidential candidates who don't seem to care about the middle class, who don't really care all that much about corruption, who sit on top of mountains filled with excess baggage... this has turned into the election year from hell, to put it frankly.

When this convention is done, the party will be bruised. We have an uphill battle against John McCain to look forward to, not to mention a sagging economy, an endless war, and endless problems within our political system which need to be fought head-on. We can't afford to position ourselves any longer. We can't afford to bicker over nonsense. If we screw ourselves over in August, then go on to lose in November, the Democratic Party will uproot itself and be forced to take a look at what it has done to itself in the past eight years. And that, I feel, is something we have to do if we plan on regaining the Presidency and the trust of the American voter.

Amen my brother. After being a life-long Democrat, I really had my eyes opened as to how corrupt the party is following the 2006 election. For the first time in years, they actually had power to bring about change...and what do they do? They try to create deadlocks? They went out of their way to pass bills they knew would get vetoes simply so they could ***** about it in 2008. The only thing that could be said they did to "help the middle class" was pass a minimum wage bill...and a lot of good that did, being as, y'know..basically every state was already passing their own! The Democrats are no better than the Republicans.

I agree with Malice entirely and chaos would suit me just fine.

[Matt]

Alll hell'll break looose of Obama isn't nominated. Racism arguments will sky rocket. go Obama!

So you're saying the party should be essentially blackmailed into nominating this man, because otherwise the African American community will be upset and spoiled kids who are voting because it is trendy now will not vote again? I call bull **** on that one. Should this logic carry over to the general election? Should we all just vote Obama to avoid upsetting people?

[bell110]

You want Chaos, but you think nothing of the consequences of that chaos.

You calling for Chaos is like a small child calling for no rules. The idea sounds great, but it ends with your place trashed and being sick from too much candy.

That's called a learning process. Sometimes kids have to learn things the hard way.

The only way for "Chaos" to be brought about by the Democratic Convention is for Obama to NOT get the nomination he has.

All that will do is give a perfect example to the black community about how their voices don't mean as much as the white community. All that will do is show the youth that their votes really DON'T count. All that will do is tear this country apart by race and by generation.

Personally, I hope Obama does get the popular vote. It would be a good test to see where the democrates stand. I think deep down, the democratic leaders WANT Hillary to win. It would be interesting to see if they go with what the public wants or what they want.

You want chaos? The assassination of MLK caused chaos. It brought riots in the street. Innocent people were hurt and harmed and the country was further ripped apart by race. Yes, it did lead to a positive change (civil rights legislation), but that benefit could and would of been obtained. A brilliant, peaceful man did not have to die for those laws to be passed. The pain and trouble and chaosit caused did not need to happen.

All those goals you want to happen can happen without chaos. Chaos, in fact, is the LAST thing we need.

If the public is caught up in the chaos of politics, it will prevent them from looking at our political process.

There is no gaurantee that change can or will happen without chaos. But I'll tell you one thing, the public already doesn't look too deeply into politics. I'm not advocating violence, but we need something to get people to stop watching American Idol and the ****ing final four and start paying attention to the world around them.

[Matt]

Two things: one, the Iraq war is not "the hottest issue" as you believe it is. Sure, to the superbatty left-wingers it is, but they're a marginalized group who are so out of touch with the rest of the country; and, two, Congress is not Commander in Chief. There was nothing they could do to "end it" or to set a timetable. Perhaps if they actually supported their country things would be a lot further along. Still, everyone seems to forget Bush's speech on Sept 19, 2001. Iraq is just a foothold, and not the final battlefield in this war.

Oh yeah, Congress "supporting their country" would make things go faster. Yep, that would certainly end the insurgency. American flag lapel pins and "I support the troops" bumper stickers would show those Iraqis that their rebellion against our illegal occupation is in vain.

Oh, and Congress could cut off funding for the war. Of course, they don't have the balls to...but see, the brilliant thing about our Framers were, they created this notion you may have heard of called "Checks and balances." The President has the power of the sword...but the Congress has the power of the purse...so yeah, they could do a lot with that power to force Bush into a time table or even pull out if they actually had a set.

[hippie_hunter]

I know that I should be above such things, but the Republican in me can't help but smile with glee watching the Democrats crumble over the Obama/Hillary squabble especially since I can't stand either of their candidates that they're offering.

[Matt]

I know that I should be above such things, but the Republican in me can't help but smile with glee watching the Democrats crumble over the Obama/Hillary squabble especially since I can't stand either of their candidates that they're offering.

Hell, the Democrat in me is loving it. :cwink:

[BlackLantern]

Hell, the Democrat in me is loving it. :cwink:

the Democrat in you should be worried about losing this election...

[Matt]

Having either of these candidates in the White House will be far more disastrous to the party in the long run. Jimmy Carter led to 25 years of Republican control. These candidates could easily do the same.

A loss, however, may actually shake things up and bring about real change.

[StorminNorman]

I think you are misconstruing my comments.
When I mean Chaos, I am not talking armed conflict and people dieing, I am talking chaos creating some change in the political system (the Dems getting rid of Super Delegates) and the people seeing what is happening.

I think that is the chaos I am looking for.

While I agree that a shaking of the political system is needed - I think that the sort of change you want, an admirable change of reducing the isolation of Washington, is not going to come about from a controversial Democratic Convention.

Obama NEEDS to get the nomination if he has the popular vote and delegate count. For anyone but him to get it would create armed conflict and people dieing. Riots will come.

What we truly need is a political movement - not political destruction. A movement towards a government of a reduced size. A movement towards the wishes of the founding fathers. That sort of movement will not come from the Democratic Party - so Democrat Party chaos is not where we should look.

The REPUBLICAN PARTY is where this sort of change can and should resonate. Ron Paul has the right idea - but he is an extremist. If we can mix Ron Paul's intentions with the moderation of a Romney and the excitement of an Obama the Republican Party can create massive political change.

If not, I hope to see a third party, a rational realistic libertarian party emerge. Of course the likelyhood of this happening is very slim. The chances of it succeeding? Even worse.

[StorminNorman]

the Democrat in you should be worried about losing this election...

I would hope the American in him would rather see whats best for his country occur, than whats best for his party.

[MaskedManJRK]

I would hope the American in him would rather see whats best for his country occur, than whats best for his party.

I think that's the biggest and most damaging problem with modern American politics: almost all the poltictions don't give a flying f**k about the country of the people living in it anymore. All they care about is the advancement of their political party.

[Malice]

I vote Malice!

[Matt]

I think that's the biggest and most damaging problem with modern American politics: almost all the poltictions don't give a flying f**k about the country of the people living in it anymore. All they care about is the advancement of their political party.

Nail on the head.