Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by DavidH, Aug 12, 2008.
No, because it is inevitable that the winner will be one of the two major party candidates. In fact, we've had a Democrat or a Republican president since 1853. That's 155 years of no third parties or independents in the White House. Sure, the two parties have undergone several huge ideological changes... but the majority of the voters feel too comfortable with the labels they're familiar with to ever stray from them.
Because of this, voting third-party or independent is ultimately just helping one of the major candidates win. So even if you hate both of them... you've got to figure out which one you hate the least.
I'm sorry you feel that way.
I notice you said you're sorry he "feels" that way. I think he thinks that way. Conveniently, for this election at least, I both think and feel that way.
When you vote independant you
1. Take away a vote from a major party candidate
2. Help major party candidates take the agenda of your independant party candidate more seriously and might comform to some of the issues you are interested in.
Absolutely, you're worth a statistic to a politician unless he/she has a real heart, and your vote counts as everything to you if you are a patriotic citizen. I always support voting for the candidate you agree with the most. Four years, ladies and gentlemen. Four years of policy, at least.
Ah, see once again we agree. While voting for the candidate that you feel is the most qualified is the right thing to do, in reality its a wasted vote when it pertains to a third party candidate at this point in the game. If a third party candidate has any hope of being a true contender for the job he has to excel in the primaries, because if not, its virtually impossible for a third party candidacy to gain any traction or even acknowledged by the media.
If you vote for a third party candidate in the general election you are throwing your vote away and might as well just stay home. The powers that be have given you 2 choices, one of which will be the next president regardless of who you vote for. You might as well pick the lesser of the two evils.
This is both very concise and correct.
Did you just pull a 180 in this thread or did I misunderstand your first post?
"If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you are still voting for evil."- Jerry Garcia
The point of voting for a third party is not to vote for a "winner." It's that type of mentality that has given us this unstoppable machine. You vote for a third party to tell the elites that you see through their charade and don't care for the way they govern. Like, bkadoctaj alluded to, you send the elites a message that you want and know what real change is... and the more people that send that message, the more likely they are to change.
If we continue to buy into whatever they give us, they've got no reason to change. Change isn't voting for the prettiest puppet on the stage. Obama-madness is a testament to how thoroughly under control the American masses are... Iran, you're fucked.
Friends don't let friend vote Democrat.
Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about
it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us.
Man1: He's right, this is a two-party system.
Man2: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away.
[Kang and Kodos laugh out loud]
[Ross Perot smashes his "Perot 96" hat]
Its sad but true none the less, I mean you could vote for Barr or write in Ron Paul because that's who you believe is the best candidate thus ensuring an Obama victory, or you could vote for Nader or some other big liberal thus ensuring a McCain win.
If you truly want a viable third party you need to start at the Congressional level, and elect some third party candidates to congress and senate. This way you build the party gaining some political clout. Even if we did elect a 3rd party candidate to be the next president, without party support in the house, he would be hard pressed to get anything accomplished because dem's and repub's alike would resent him and not want this new party to succeed.
Maybe I haven't illustrated my point clearly enough. I can understand why someone would want to vote independent or third party... but really, they are still voting for one of the major party candidates.
For example, Ross Perot got 18.8% of the popular vote in 1992.... the most of any independent candidate in recent history. Bill Clinton ended up winning with a pretty significant margin. But had Perot's voters voted for Bush, he may have won. Instead, those who voted for Perot were helping Clinton win.
In 2000, Ralph Nader got about 2.7% of the popular vote, and George W. Bush won by a very narrow electoral victory. As many of you know, Al Gore actually had a slightly higher popular vote.... just not enough to win. With Nader's extra 2.7%, Gore may have been able to beat Bush. So again, all those who voted independent were helping Bush win.
So again in this election, if you vote third party/independent, all you're doing is taking away votes from one of the major party candidates and helping the other win. It won't be clear which one you helped until the results come in.
And furthermore... I've noticed a lot of people say they're going to "write-in" Ron Paul's name. They don't realize that even if the majority of the country wrote in Ron Paul's name, he still would not win. Why? Because he's not a registered candidate. He isn't running in the general election, so writing his name in is just as good as writing Bugs Bunny. Might as well not even vote.
Ran in the progressive party and lost a narrow defeat to the democrats, even when he ran as a republican, he was progressive for them. It's only nowadays that the third parties don't get a chance, and it's because nobody will vote for them.
man i want to try and get this straight..
if i truely despise both candidates because i beleive they both have the same agenda. According to you i should either vote for one of them anyway, or not exercise my right to vote for who i truely beleive will make a good president, whether it be via 3rd party or write-in?
If i don't like either candidate, why would i care whether or not i take a vote away from them?
Still... he didn't win the presidency when he ran as a Progressive. In fact, Wilson won in a landslide.... 435 electoral votes compared to Roosevelt's 88. The Republican party was split between conservatives and progressives. All Roosevelt did by running third party was divide the Republican vote in half and ensure a Democrat would win. That's my point... independents/third parties inevitably always help one of the major parties win.
Normally i would agree, but in this situation i feel it would be economically foolish to let Obama get elected. So i will hold my nose and vote McCain and hope that in 4 years we will have better choices.
I'm not trying to tell you not to vote third party... do what you want. I'm just hoping people realize that voting third party is the same as voting for one of the major parties. Voting Bob Barr will take away votes from McCain and help Obama win. Voting Ralph Nader will take away votes from Obama and help McCain win.
As for writing in a candidate, as I said above... that doesn't count for anything at all if they aren't registered with the Federal Election Commission.
I'm not saying it's fair or anything, but it's reality.
You wouldn't. But at least you would be conscience in your decision of which major party candidate you were ultimately voting for. Even if you hate them both, you have to admit that their presidencies wouldn't be absolutely identical.
i can see your point for sure man. I'll probably vote against obama as well (sounds a lot better than "voting for Mccain" lol).
Paying inflated prices for energy and inventory is tough enough for business right now. the increased corporate taxes, FUTA & state controlled health care will mean death for way too many small businesses. I guess these things will count as "change" so he is kind of telling the truth...
you say these things because you are for one of the two big parties, I voted for Ron Paul even though I view that he was not a republican, or atleast a republican that I knew. This country does not need a neo-conservative in office or in contrast an neo-liberal, but that is what you are telling me what I am supposed to vote for, Fuck that.