Comments | idiosyncrazy: (без темы)

idiosyncrazy

(Untitled)

Oct 01, 2004 17:24

Well, people... i am really tired of people saying that the two candidates are the same, that they can't vote for anyone, or they can't vote for either of the major candidates. I thought that argument was completely debunked after the 2000 election. I thought no one seriously thought that anymore ( Read more... )

Comments 10

malathion October 3 2004, 01:11:40 UTC

I'm still not seeing how "I can't vote for either of the major candidates" has been refuted as a tenable position.

idiosyncrazy October 3 2004, 22:09:24 UTC

Reason number one: President Bush is the worst president this country has ever had, and it's our obligation to vote for someone else ( ... )

malathion October 3 2004, 23:55:14 UTC

I agree that George W. Bush is one of the worst Presidents this country has had.

The election system is not formatted to exclude third parties. The behavior of voters is what excludes third parties.

Also, I don't want John Kerry to be President. I would prefer someone else. Therefore I will not vote for him. If you want him to be President, you should vote for him. Where I take exception is when people say that voting for a third party is "throwing away your vote." I can't comprehend that. Voting for someone you don't want to be President is throwing away your vote.

idiosyncrazy October 4 2004, 15:16:07 UTC

No. Voters [who might vote for third parties] behave in the way they do because they know a vote for a third party doesn't accomplish anything, even to "grow" their party, even as a protest vote, except for swinging the election in the other direction. No vote is "thrown away." Some votes don't accomplish what they should, because of our system.

I don't want George Bush to be president. Therefore I will vote for John Kerry. To vote for anyone else would make no sense for my first objective: firing the most delinquent, criminally negligent president in history.

If we had Instant Runoff Elections, then it really would be up to the individual voter, because they could express their first choice for office, then mark their second choice. "Swinging elections" in the wrong direction would no longer be a possibility. But, our election system isn't formatted that way.

Side note: the two parties do work to exclude third parties. Case in point: the democrats have hired a killer legal team to challenge Ralph Nader's petitions to ( ... )

Thread 10