I really don't like to talk politics on this board but I'm having a tough time deciding until last night when it came to me as who to cast my ballot for.
I'm voting for Pedro. OFC
I'm voting for Pedro. OFC
OT: Who I'm voting for in this years presidential election.
- Thread starter skysdad
- Start date
OFC stands for Old Farts Club. Pedro is from Napoleon Dynamite. I see you are fairly new to the board. Hope you can add in a positive way to this Duke Illustrated basketball discussion board. OFC
I'm writing my own name in.. the US needs me
Screw an election. I shall stage a coup and name myself Supreme Benevolent Overlord and cure all that ails everyone. 
I grew up in Robeson County. For me, Pedro is the offensively stereotyped Mexican who embellished I-95 billboards in the 1960s and 1970s, advertising South of the Border, a business establishment just south of the NC-SC state line that seemed to exist primarily to sell fireworks to North Carolinians.
Or Pedro Martinez. As a Yankees fan, I didn't much care for him either.
Or Pedro Martinez. As a Yankees fan, I didn't much care for him either.
Last edited:
What do you call two Mexican firefighters?
Jose and hose B.
Now that is offensively stereotyping.
Jose and hose B.
Now that is offensively stereotyping.
I was going to vote for Austin Petersen for the Libertarian nod, but that went to Gary Johnson. Im not sure what Im going to do.. but this sounds the best
The Pedro I speak of is from the movie Napoleon Dynamite. If you haven't seen the movie it makes no sense. If you have seen the movie you will get the humor. Pedro in the movie is not a stereotyped character. He is a very important part of the movie. I'm a Yankee fan also and I dislike Martinez as much as anyone. He looked real tough pushing down an elderly Zimmer. If Zimmer had been 30 years younger Martinez's skinny rear end would have been running from him. I remember South of the Border very well. Always passes through going to Myrtle Beach but never remember stopping. OFC
The only problem with all of this is Pedro didn't go after Zimmer. What was Pedro suppose to do? Let Zimmer just tackle him and beat him up? Zimmer needed to know his place and that was not charging opposing players. Dumb move on his part and he looked like a fool doing it.
You are right Den but Zim would have still whipped his butt 30 years earlier. Funny thing that Zim at one time was the Red Sox Manager. OFC
Anyone other than that crooked beotch Billary Clinton.
OFC
OFC
This ones obvious. I'm voting for Gary-7. I think he has what it takes. Dsouthr could be his running mate!
I would prefer to see the Pedro Sky referenced as the President over Hillary or Donald.
No reason to try to turn this into a fight. I have no respect for your stance and don't expect any in return. I don't care to discuss it and I doubt you care about anything I have to say.
I was gonna vote for Pedro until he planned to build a massive tunnel under the border. Voting for The Rapture myself...
Better call than an email.
I'm going to struggle voting for Trump in November, but, IMO, it's my best option.
I know. But sometimes a little salt and vinegar is needed.
And I'll just preface that by saying we're all different people. I have a ton of respect for many, many Duke fans on this board who don't think the same as me politically. I don't think they're bad people....hopefully they're able to think the same in me. If not, then oh well.
I can stomach that, phrased that way. I'm bewildered and will not be un-bewildered, but I can stomach that.
I agree he would have taken Pedro to beat down town 30 years ago. Zimmer was a tough dude. I think Zimmer was with just about every major league team in his life. He was a baseball lifer and great for the game.
Not voting. The system doesn't serve us. It's a power game that too many people play into. I hope that one day another system gains favor.
I don't think refusing to participate contributes to fixing it at all. Not voting is essentially a vote for whomever you like least. If they're truly indecipherable in your mind, fine.
Not thrilled about either candidate. I kind of wished all elections were non-partisan (why do we even need political parties?). Maybe the top 3-4 candidates from the primaries could run in the general election. I'm throwing my vote away if I don't vote for one of the two main candidates. Haven't looked into the third-parties much, but if they had a reasonable chance at winning, I would strongly consider voting for them. But they don't have a chance, unfortunately. So I don't know at this point.
I don't think more than 2 parties are sustainable. Maybe elsewhere, but I just don't see it being anywhere on the horizon here. It'll always be to someone's advantage to team up with others until there are only two left. That's why we see, for example, evangelicals, the Tea Party, and the so-called "RINOs" all in one party, with all kinds of in-fighting, rather than for each group to go it alone. And it's why both parties ultimately play toward the middle more than their base would like.
I used to think the whole idea of voting for the person, not the party, was a really admirable thing. Now it just strikes me as weird, b/c regardless of the person, they represent a party and are at least somewhat beholden to their party's platform. For all the similarities, there are still some pretty huge differences between the two major parties platform-wise. Voting for a party is kind of like the way fans approach college basketball: I don't really care how nice a guy a UNC player is; I don't root for him on the court.
I used to think the whole idea of voting for the person, not the party, was a really admirable thing. Now it just strikes me as weird, b/c regardless of the person, they represent a party and are at least somewhat beholden to their party's platform. For all the similarities, there are still some pretty huge differences between the two major parties platform-wise. Voting for a party is kind of like the way fans approach college basketball: I don't really care how nice a guy a UNC player is; I don't root for him on the court.
Voting us an utter and complete waste of time.
I voted Romney, lost. I voted Rubio, lost. My vote didn't matter and yours doesn't either. Electoral college will decide for us as always.
Gosh I hate politics and everything about them. We need another Roosevelt.
I voted Romney, lost. I voted Rubio, lost. My vote didn't matter and yours doesn't either. Electoral college will decide for us as always.
Gosh I hate politics and everything about them. We need another Roosevelt.
My contention, Dattier, is not to have more political parties - but just to get rid of them completely. I understand the purpose of parties is to unite groups of individuals with similar beliefs. It just seems like politicians could be more agreeable to dissenting views if they weren't bound by the groupthink ideals of a party. I'm most likely going to vote for someone in November that I don't really care for all the much - because the only alternative is voting for someone who has 0% chance of winning. It's alarming to me when you see voting for a particular piece of legislation and every single member of one party votes in favor of (or against) the bill.
The purpose of parties may be to unite people. But I think it's pretty clear that they are dividing people instead. I will never believe that a politician has our best interests in mind. Whether they are on the left or the right.
I find it odd that some people believe one politician is more crooked than the other. The majority of them have special interest. I also laugh when you have rich people acting like they are representing the masses (both parties). These VP nods better be great!