In response to:

A Third Party

Wumingren Wrote: Nov 10, 2012 10:17 AM
There was greater interest among conservatives for the candidacy of Romney than there had been with McCain. Why would Romney get fewer votes than McCain? Obama generated far, far less enthusiasm for his candidacy than the first time around. Why did Obama seem to be "absent" during the debates? Could the answer lie in vote shifting caused by rigged voting machines? Could it be that Obama should have had millions fewer votes and Romney millions more? And how many military absentee ballots were squelched? Something wicked happened and has yet to be revealed.
Neal from PA Wrote: Nov 10, 2012 10:25 AM

Please, think about this: As a young boy visiting my uncles near Chicago, I recall them talking about how many times each had voted in the Presidential Election of 1960. They both were members of the UAW and many of their friends were too. I ask them how they could vote multiple times; they said, “Easy, go when and where their Union Rep told them too”.

Voter fraud has and will continue to be a problem for all of us.
Wumingren Wrote: Nov 10, 2012 10:44 AM
Minnesota just defeated the Voter ID amendment. Perhaps it is time for the Right to orgainize and do massive voter fraud like the Left does. It seems that a fake ballot would be preferrable to a real bullet.

During the Q & A section of my speech to the Chamber group here last night, someone asked what I thought about the concept of a third party to counter the influence of the right wing of the Republican Party.

If there were a true independent third party in the U.S. House and Senate of, say, 10 percent of the membership that would mean 43 Members in the House and 10 Senators.

It is unlikely that either Republicans or Democrats would have enough votes to organize either Chamber without the buy-in of the independents.

Or, put another way,...