Mike Gravel

[Jaden]

I've been looking into the candidate Mike Gravel. He seems like a likely candidate to get my vote. He's been taken off a lot of debates, but at the debates he's been at he's been ruthless with the other candidates about their positions. Where he can't be in the debates he's recorded them and done seminars where he gives his own 2 cents about what the candidates are saying and his take on the issue discussed.

What does everyone else think about him?


http://www.gravel2008.us

[Faux Real]

It's pointless. His platform is nice, but voting for him is pointless currently, other than as a "protest vote". He has no chance of winning, the electoral college is always a barrier even if he won a few states, there's no way he'd be able to transform the highly bourgeois state to meet his agenda.

He does have a sweet promotional campaign video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rZdAB4V_j8), though.

[LSD]

What does everyone else think about him?

Looks like your typical left-Democrat, especially on social issues. He's a little bit fuzzy on economics, though, and his "anti-IRS" line is a tad disturbing.


Originally posted by gravel2008.us
Senator Gravel's Progressive Fair Tax proposal calls for eliminating the IRS and the income tax and replacing it with a national sales tax on new products and services.

Deriving all revenues from a universal transactional tax (presumably value-added?) is one of the hallmarks of the libertarian right. It's probably the most oppressive tax scheme imaginable and is called regressive taxation for a reason.

He may pay lip-service to notions of "protecting nescessities", but you implement a head tax like he proposes and the people who suffer will be the poor and the working class.

But I guess that doesn&#39;t matter so long as the good Senator gets to keep his &#036;165,200 a year... <_<

[lvleph]

If you are an Anarchist or a Communist and you decide you really want to vote, I am willing to bet Kucinich is a better candidate for you. However, their policies are very similar, Kucinich is just one more step to the left. However, he is still a liberal.

Oh and as far as taxes are concerned; there are ways to implement such a tax reform so that it is not a tax on the poor. Necessities should not be taxed or should have low tax rates, while luxury items should be at a lot higher rate.

[Dros]

Bourgoisie liberal candidate.

DON&#39;T VOTE&#33;&#33;&#33;

[Volderbeek]

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2007 08:36 am
If you are an Anarchist or a Communist and you decide you really want to vote, I am willing to bet Kucinich is a better candidate for you. However, their policies are very similar, Kucinich is just one more step to the left.
Not according to Political Compass:

[img]http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/8669/primarycandidatespceq2.png' border='0' alt='user posted image' class='attach' />

[manic expression]

Originally posted by Volderbeek+December 05, 2007 09:11 pm--> (Volderbeek &#064; December 05, 2007 09:11 pm)
[email protected] 05, 2007 08:36 am
If you are an Anarchist or a Communist and you decide you really want to vote, I am willing to bet Kucinich is a better candidate for you. However, their policies are very similar, Kucinich is just one more step to the left.
Not according to Political Compass:
[/b]
That&#39;s a statistical estimate, there&#39;s no real way to accurately "graph" one&#39;s political position. Kucinich is no closer to communism than Gravel.

[Cheung Mo]

Originally posted by manic expression+December 05, 2007 11:59 pm--> (manic expression &#064; December 05, 2007 11:59 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2007 09:11 pm

[email protected] 05, 2007 08:36 am
If you are an Anarchist or a Communist and you decide you really want to vote, I am willing to bet Kucinich is a better candidate for you. However, their policies are very similar, Kucinich is just one more step to the left.
Not according to Political Compass:

That&#39;s a statistical estimate, there&#39;s no real way to accurately "graph" one&#39;s political position. Kucinich is no closer to communism than Gravel. [/b]
Especially since the idea of a moderate GOP governor of ultra-liberal (in the derogatory sense of being a left-liberal with no understanding of class analysis) MA being more authoritarian than a ex-minister religious lunatic from Arkansas isn&#39;t all that plausible...It would be like drawing a political map that puts Jack Layton left of Hugo Chavez.

Although as devout Southern Baptists (a far-right hate cult founded for the sole purpose of defending human slavery) and devout Mormons (I pity these people it&#39;s so sad...), they both deserve to have their mental health held into question.

[Volderbeek]

Originally posted by manic expression+December 05, 2007 07:59 pm--> (manic expression @ December 05, 2007 07:59 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2007 09:11 pm

[email protected] 05, 2007 08:36 am
If you are an Anarchist or a Communist and you decide you really want to vote, I am willing to bet Kucinich is a better candidate for you. However, their policies are very similar, Kucinich is just one more step to the left.
Not according to Political Compass:

That&#39;s a statistical estimate, there&#39;s no real way to accurately "graph" one&#39;s political position. Kucinich is no closer to communism than Gravel. [/b]
A statistical estimate is still more accurate than a complete guess. And I certainly don&#39;t suggest that either are communists.

[manic expression]

Originally posted by [email protected] 06, 2007 12:41 am
A statistical estimate is still more accurate than a complete guess. And I certainly don&#39;t suggest that either are communists.
I understand where you were coming from, I&#39;m just skeptical of these "graphs" in general. It&#39;s not even statistical; how do you assign stats to political persuasions? No big disagreement here.

Anyway, here&#39;s a statistical estimate where Kucinich and Gravel match up perfectly: they are both going to lose.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

But I guess that doesn&#39;t matter so long as the good Senator gets to keep his &#036;165,200 a year... dry.gif

He&#39;s an ex-Senator.

Gravel&#39;s vision of the FairTax, from what I understand, is more on the lines of combining progressive and regressive elements. For example, something that costs &#036;10 would have a smaller tax than something worth &#036;1,000. However, everyone still gets back a calculated average.

I&#39;m not one of those people who doesn&#39;t believe in voting. I&#39;d probably pick either Kucinich or Gravel if forced between the two parties. Kucinich has a better chance. He&#39;s polling fourth and fifth in most polls.

[Dimentio]

The most dangerous candidate is Barack Obama. He could potentially make US imperialism very much stronger, as well as consolidating the authoritarian system of the Bush regime.

[lvleph]

Well, based on what I know about tGravel and Kucinich I would say that Kucinich is more supportive of workers rights. He is part of the Teamsters, not that they are anything but capitalist thugs.


Originally posted by Serpent
The most dangerous candidate is Barack Obama. He could potentially make US imperialism very much stronger, as well as consolidating the authoritarian system of the Bush regime.

How is that? He is talking about being less of a bully. I mean he could be lying just like any other politician, but he certainly does say he wants to be more positive in foreign policy.

[Dimentio]

Originally posted by lvleph+December 06, 2007 02:39 pm--> (lvleph &#064; December 06, 2007 02:39 pm) Well, based on what I know about tGravel and Kucinich I would say that Kucinich is more supportive of workers rights. He is part of the Teamsters, not that they are anything but capitalist thugs.


Serpent
The most dangerous candidate is Barack Obama. He could potentially make US imperialism very much stronger, as well as consolidating the authoritarian system of the Bush regime.

How is that? He is talking about being less of a bully. I mean he could be lying just like any other politician, but he certainly does say he wants to be more positive in foreign policy. [/b]
Exactly therefore. The world will love him.

Bush at leats destroyed the role of world leader which the USA have had.

[SouthernBelle82]

I really like him and am a supporter but my realistic choice is Bill Richardson.