Yeah, nominees used to be chosen solely by party officials. The whole concept of voting for a nominee is relatively recent.HalfPastNoon said:Don't believe so. Not since the Republican convention of 1948 and the Democratic convention of 1952 have the conventions determined who would be the party nominee. It's all been party primaries since then...
In 1956, the democratic presidential candidate left the choice of VP to the delegates.
Dude, you've been on your knees salivating since before primaries-- who are you kidding? There's no restraint in Drensch-land.
Hitokage said:Just turned on the TV. It's replaying on the east coast as well. I think Bill Clinton speaks... an hour and half after Carter(who is speaking as I post this).. not sure though.
Kang: It's true! We are aliens! But what are you going to do about it? It's a two party system! You have to vote for one of us!
Man in Crowd: Well, I'm just going to vote for a third party!
Kang: Go ahead! Throw your vote away!! HA HA HA HA!!!
fart said:well, that's basically true, but seriously, what are you going to do? a slick politician is as menacing to some people as a developmentally retarded one. in the immortal words of krang:
Drensch said:Huh? Clinton was rarely referenced at all during the primaries.
It may have had the same type of message and content, but Clinton's rhetoric was far superior. The themes were eloquently laid out. The order was flawless. The transitions were seemless. It was an exceptionally intelligent speech, despite the fact that you've probably heard it all before.fart said:the sad truth is that it's much of the same rhetoric, only the delivery is different.
I know, I was just poking fun at your demmish leanings.
http://www.kucinich.us/issues/departmentpeace.phpGruco said:Did Kucinich actually ever say what his DoP would do, beyond the current State department, btw?
The Department of Defense now requires in excess of $400 billion for its activities. A Department of Peace can be an effective counterbalance, redirecting our national energies towards nonviolent intervention, mediation, and conflict resolution on all matters of human security.
A Department of Peace can look at the domestic issues that our society faces and often ignores as we focus on matters internationally. We have a problem with violence in our own society, and we need to look at it and address it in a structured way. Domestically, the Department of Peace would address violence in the home, spousal abuse, child abuse, gangs, police-community relations conflicts and work with individuals and groups to achieve changes in attitudes that examine the mythologies of cherished world views, such as "violence is inevitable" or "war is inevitable." Thus, it will help with the discovery of new selves and new paths toward peaceful consensus.
The Department of Peace will also address human development and the unique concerns of women and children. It will envision and seek to implement plans for peace education, not simply as a course of study, but as a template for all pursuits of knowledge within formal educational settings.
Lucky Forward said:I thought the animatronic Jimmy Carter performed great. When do they need to have him back at Disneyworld?
Having not seen the speech, I'll take a stab at it. An economy, no matter how you slice it, is a system to distribute resources... and environmental policy involves resource management, or in other words, making sure we still have resources around to distribute.Meier said:She just said good environmental policy is good economics. Someone explain that to me.
Pollution is the quintessinal example of negative economic externality.Meier said:She just said good environmental policy is good economics. Someone explain that to me.
:lol Good one sp0rsk. Obama was awesome, I actually had tears in my eyes.sp0rsk said:omg obama is gonna be the second black president!
How about African with a white mother American. Who cares? If there is any black in you in this country, you're considered black.Drensch said:I don't like how Obama is constantly referred to as African American(not in the sense that he is part african obviously). He does have a white mother. They should be calling him biracial or something. It's kind of denying his whole heritage just to "Lousiana" his race.
and maybe Canada just doesn't flow very well.Socreges said:OBAMA 2012!!
That was an amazing speech. I didn't even mind all the glorification of America because I could tell he so strongly believed in it. Politics, in every country, needs more people like him. It's not just youth and charisma. It's passion. THAT'S the type of person that can get the 18-32 demographic out and voting.
But this was a little much-
Barak Obama: "And that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible."
That immediately reminded me of The Simpsons joke from that speech contest: "Only in America.. and possibly Canada..."
Drensch said:I don't like how Obama is constantly referred to as African American(not in the sense that he is part african obviously). He does have a white mother. They should be calling him biracial or something. It's kind of denying his whole heritage just to "Lousiana" his race.
Well, obviously. That's what made The Simpsons line even funnier.and maybe Canada just doesn't flow very well.
That's the case with pretty much all distinct minorities. Like you said, "who cares?" Though maybe white people feel cheated because they're not getting due credit for his greatness.How about African with a white mother American. Who cares? If there is any black in you in this country, you're considered black.
If there is any black in you in this country, you're considered black.