Oh my god read all my posts I don't need explanations from a polisci student. We're a democratic republic.
Wrong guess. I voted for Bush's second term. Now...tell me about these accelerated shitty policies and how you calculate the "less freedom" thing. You've got me interested. So far I'm just seeing rhetoric, but I really like people like you. Help me out here.
If you think its bad in Ohio check out what went down in Florida. Strong Suggestions of Voter Fraud speaks to need of reform! , page 1 And this recent article from WND, Did voter fraud swing the election?
Nice slogan. Do you say that to all the girls? Jesus man the idea is to effect the election as much as you can. Obama is closer to what I want. I don't get to pick the candidates and I'm not wasting my vote to make a political statement.
I must ask, did you vote for Obama in 2008 also? And if so, what changed you from voting for Bush in 04, to voting against McCain in 08? Of course, it's always good to have revelations, and realizing a political party is crap... if this is the case, what was the breaking point for you
This is true. They all claim to be Christians but I guess it means different things to different people. However the government itself is supposed to be secular but they do keep Christmas and conduct no official business on Sundays.
Your vote didn't have any noticeable effect on the election. We could've literally removed your vote and the outcome would've been exactly the same.
Not letting some deranged idealistic loyalty prevent me from acting pragmatically is just something I've always kind of done. Also, McCain is a warmonger, and yeah yeah Bush went to war too, but the people wanted it when we were provoked. I believe McCain's international policy would be devastating to us at a time when we needed to build alliances more than ever. So I don't have a breaking point. I just make informed decisions about pretty much everything I do.
You're one of 3 people who ever -rep'd me. You did it because I was asking you to justify some political argument. Now you post this. I'm fully satisfied. Are you a student of utility theory by chance? You've gotta understand the different ways one might calculate, "having an effect" and come at me with a positive argument. Going around making deductions is child's play. It's where ignorance thrives. It's what's happening when people advocate one candidate on the basis that he's not the other. I don't expect all of this to get through. Point is, build a constructive argument to support a claim and don't ignore your own fallacies all the time. It's bad reading.
[quote name='"mrgoodsmoke"'] Not letting some deranged idealistic loyalty prevent me from acting pragmatically is just something I've always kind of done. Also, McCain is a warmonger, and yeah yeah Bush went to war too, but the people wanted it when we were provoked. I believe McCain's international policy would be devastating to us at a time when we needed to build alliances more than ever. So I don't have a breaking point. I just make informed decisions about pretty much everything I do.[/quote] That's good. It's never useful to just perpetually vote for a single party which is what most people I know irl do
Thanks for sharing. Speculation. You can't have known my intentions. Frankly, I don't even remember -repping you, but I'm glad that you do. I used the phrase "noticeable effect". I'd love to hear how you think your vote had a noticeable effect on the the election. So insightful. You literally misrepresented my argument. You then characterized "making deductions" as "child's play" and "where ignorance thrives". If you would like to point out an actual fallacy, please go ahead. If candidate X wins a state by 1 vote or 1,000,000 votes, the same amount of delegates go to that candidate. If we subtract one vote out of the candidates you voted for (in the state you voted for them), the outcome of the presidential election will be the same.
Why was this put into pandoras box? Are they trying to say Obama is to perfect to cheat and this can only be a conspiracy theory?
His vote for Obama made Obama's vote count go up by +1. Obama got 58,905,252 votes. If mgs didn't vote, then that number would be 58,905,251. That's a "noticeable effect" on the election because 58,905,252 =/= 58,905,251. And had he voted for Romney...well, I don't need to do the math do I? Bottom line: did it change the outcome? No. Is it "noticeable"? Yes, because the popular vote count is now different. It's all how you measure "noticeable". It's a petty argument with no real purpose.