Republicans should reimburse taxpayers for convention costs

Nobody asked me
Click to expand...


Well of course not, fyrestarter! We knew you'd just make a stink about it, so we left you out of the discussion.


:D









(That's only mildly kidding. That's exactly what the 'movers and shakers' in NY did.)
 
Question: Why don't the Libertarians, Greens, and Constituionalists receive some of that money, too? We all know the answer.
 
Question: Why don't the Libertarians, Greens, and Constituionalists receive some of that money, too? We all know the answer
Click to expand...

It's a two party system, man. Besides, if taxpayers knew their money was going to support the candidates behind such benefits to society as tree-hugging and pot-smoking, they'd hit the roof. Republicans and Democrats, for all their ills, still represent the majority of American morals, not the whims of fringe-dwellers.
 
Fyrestarter:

1.Where, in the constitution, is a two party system mentioned?

2.Where, in the constitution, is FedGov authorised to give out such grants?

3. Why does this stuff not violate the Frst Amendment?
 
Well, civics class was a long time ago but, doesn't a party have to get a certain percentage of votes in one election to get gov't funding for the next one?
 
Robert F. Kennedy is dead today (killed by a Muslim terrorist) partly as a result of refusal at that time to provide Secret Service protection at taxpayer expense to Presidential candidates.

I'm all for giving the first family and opposing candidates all the security they need, at taxpayer expense.

Any amount of money needed to prevent AL-Queda or other terrorist groups from carrying out a sucessfull attack that disrupts the elections is money well spent.
 
So you agree, Moonstone, that the existant process perpretuates the 'two-party system'? Because I don't see government funding for campaigns in the constitution.
 
2-party system supports 2-party system, not exactly a news flash. Gov't funding supposedly gets the word out to the masses. Most of which happen to be one of two parties. As Florida in the last election proved, even the people who voted Nader didn't really want him President since they tried to change their votes when they didn't like the outcome. The constitution can't cover everything, like the needed security, which I do think the should gov't should pay for.
 
Well, civics class was a long time ago but, doesn't a party have to get a certain percentage of votes in one election to get gov't funding for the next one?
Click to expand...

IIRC, 5%.

How much did the dems get for their convention?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top