3 replies to this topic

[Blodo]

This guy kicks ass. Not a doubt about it. I suppose you all know he has been a presidential candidate in 1992 in the United States. If you don't, who the hell are you presuming to be?

He's just plain no-bullshit, when he got asked what he would do when he became president - he threw it right in their faces: electronic direct democracy. Instead of keeping with the illusion that the bunch of lunatics that is taking up decisions for the crowd all the time in a governmental system that has the audacity to call itself the "rule by the people" (democracy from greek), he just said it right there. Give the rule to the people, just like George Washington wanted.

Electronic direct democracy is all about providing referendums in all bigger decisions that need making. That's basically it. The people vote on things that institute some sort of noticable change such as - say - medical funds or something. The don't leave it to the crooks - i mean - senators to do it for them. Now if the mass media were organised by the government further to destroy what I named the "repetitive brainwash" we could actually have some real opinions flowing around from real people. The reason why it doesn't get done today is because it requires an honest government - something I doubt any country that openly endorses capitalism has (or any country of the world for that matter), especially these days.

My views on the world are socialist - the radical type. But I am no idiot, I know you can't just run around, and - say - abolish the currency right there, it just wouldn't work without creating the positive mindset for it, and making people be ready for it. And that takes years frankly. That's why I fully accept Henry Ross Perot's ideas. If he was in an election here, I would've voted for him.

Going back to the subject of his campaign though: The interesting fact is how people against him were desperate to find something that they could use against him in his dossier - yet they couldn't find anything. Maybe because he was an honest man, and earned his dollars by hard work? They accused him of being authoritarian, even if it was such a crock of lies given the fact how he was endorsing th government to be given to the hands of the people. Then they accused him of being insensitive by addressing to a group of people at one of his speeches "you people", which is such a retarded argument, I bet even the Devil got appaled.

But that was enough for all the perpetrator centrists (democrats and conservatives, they're all the same) in the country - you know - the guys who say they are doing something, when they are sitting down with their thumb up their ass just raking up money by using the U.S. law for operations that border on the illegal ( tax havens anyone? ).

So he pulled back for a while to allow his daughter to have a wedding, then - when it was revealed that he qualified for vote in all 50 states (yes assholes - the intelligent people voted for him, and not Clinton nor Bush who are both self serving slags) he pulled out $65.4 million from his own money and campaigned.

Now the only reason he didn't win that one, was because he pulled out once and then came back in. That was the only reason - according to sources I found on the internet -, seeing as he kicked ass in most states being on second place and only worse by fractions of percents than either Bush or Clinton.

He was against national deficit spending, he was against NAFTA (both of these are crap and shouldn't be tolerated, the difference is one screws over the people of America, the other screws Canada). In 1996 he dodn't get much votes though. Which is a damn pity, but I swear it was because the reps and libs were throwing around insane amounts of cash campaigning, and generally making a mush out of people's brains.

I swear, if Perot got really pissed off he would've won the elections and turned America upside down. For the better. Now tell me your opinions.

[Pyth]

I think I would vite for him. Definately.

[MSpencer]

3rd Party Politicians have the uncanny advantage that they can assemble their entire party for the primaries in a very small room, such as a high school auditorium or living room. They are not bound by conventions, so their ideas can be radically different and much better than the Republicans and Democrats, whose beliefs are so thoroughly engraved in the older members of the party that nobody except the supreme embodiement of their beliefs gets selected to run.
Is Ross Perot a good guy? Yes. Is he an excellent choice for public office? Of course. Will he ever get elected? Hell no.
Also, a couple years back I saw him speak in person, about 40m from where I'm sitting right now typing this. Interesting man, strong convictions and beliefs, and utterly unelectable due to these qualities.

[Hostile]

I voted for him 1992, his policy was to run the government like a business. In the black, efficient, and as little buearocracy as possible. I didn't dig Bush Sr at all in that reelection of his.