Another piece of info for you Bush bashers..

[darien87]

Darien, I do understand how you feel.
Though I'd have to agree with annunaki.
One good example is when Ross Perot ran:

The Democrats and Republicans were running scared after that showing.
They don't want to share their piece of the pie, with a third party.

I actually liked Perot when he ran.

 

[darien87]

No federal candidate I've ever voted for has won an election.
No provincial candidate I've ever voted for has won an election.
One municipal candidate I voted for has one an election.

Yet not one of my votes was wasted. I have always voted for the candidate that most closely reflects my values and ideas for governing. I wish my neighbors would share my reasoning and elect the person that I vote for, but simply because my neighbors don't does not mean my vote has been in vain.

I will not cast a vote for a person whom I do not want to represent me. Those who vote for a candidate they don't like simply because they are a Republican or Democrat instead of a third party with a candidate they really like have truly wasted their vote (even if that candidate wins).

I understand that you get an amount of personal satisfaction in knowing that you voted for whom you truly liked. But seeing other people get elected, that didn't follow your political ideals didn't make you feel like you wasted your vote at all??? Sure you voted for who you wanted to win, but they didn't, and the candidates who's political views you didn't like are still governing, in spite of you voting against them.

If a third party candidate had a chance in hell of winning the Presidency, I would surely vote for one. But they don't, and until the day comes that they do, I will continue to give my support to the person that most closely mirrors myself. Unfortunately, that is what leaves us in the 2-party mess that we're in. I'm sure that there are millions of Americans that are playing the same waiting game that I am.

 

[annunaki]

OK, so I go ahead and cast my vote for Mr. Libertarian, or Mr. Green Party, or Mr. Let's Have a Tea Party; do you REALLY think that the Democrats and Republicans are going to see this and think, "Wow, Darien voted for someone else in this election. Maybe we should re-think what we're doing in Washington"??????????

Gimme a break. It's not going to make one bit of difference. Not unless you convince about 100 million other people to do the exact same thing. And pre tell, how do you propose to do that? I'm not saying it's right. It's just the way it is.

Until you come up with a solid game plan, your words are just rhetoric.



P.S. And how do you think there's nothing more at stake in this election than any other?!?!? We're losing billions of dollars a day, fighting a pointless war, and the economy is in the worst shape it's been in my lifetime. Sure as hell seems like high stakes to me.

You have already bought their line and swallowed it based upon your response. It is not rhetoric but the truth. Every vote counts and if you don't vote for the candidate you feel best suited to your ideals then you wasted your vote.

If you want change you have to begin brining it about yourself. You explain things to your fellow man, your neighbor, etc. Have an open civil discussion on your ideals. Start a local political group to educate others. ALWAYS keep the converstation civil and if they insist on arguing without answering questions and dodging, you simply say you wish to save the friendship/relationship and end the "conversation". Tell them if they like the way things are currently headed to keep doing the same things over again and hope it changes. Meanwhile, you are doing something to actually bring it about.

We are also losing billions of dollars a day at home and no one is doing a thing to fix that either. The war has become a scapegoat for overspending. We have many areas that need to be addressed with loads of wasteful spending, the war is just one of many and a way to point fingers to the other side of the aisle. Those in government need to realize throwing more money at a problem does not fix it. That goes for many failing programs here at home.

Nothing gets done because if 1 million people agree on something and one person is against it, the whole thing collapses. Those in power are too afraid to step on some toes once in awhile to get things done for the good of the country, among many other things.

 

[annunaki]

I understand that you get an amount of personal satisfaction in knowing that you voted for whom you truly liked. But seeing other people get elected, that didn't follow your political ideals didn't make you feel like you wasted your vote at all??? Sure you voted for who you wanted to win, but they didn't, and the candidates who's political views you didn't like are still governing, in spite of you voting against them.

If a third party candidate had a chance in hell of winning the Presidency, I would surely vote for one. But they don't, and until the day comes that they do, I will continue to give my support to the person that most closely mirrors myself. Unfortunately, that is what leaves us in the 2-party mess that we're in. I'm sure that there are millions of Americans that are playing the same waiting game that I am.

Voting is not something where you get your way all the time. Continue to stick to one's ideals and engage others and maybe they will come to fruition.


P.S. If one didn't vote, they don't have the right to complain about anything.

 

[bandphan]

The point of the the OP was to get people thinking, thinking about who we vote for and why. Ive voted in every local election since I was able to, and will continue to do so. Understanding our system will help make changes, just look at the way the media manipulates perception. We all can disagree, but its understanding what we are disagreeing about that counts.

 

[darien87]

P.S. If one didn't vote, they don't have the right to complain about anything.

It was George Carlin that said exactly the opposite. "I didn't vote for the guy, you did. Since I didn't vote for him, that means I get to complain."

 

[rnatalli]

It was George Carlin that said exactly the opposite. "I didn't vote for the guy, you did. Since I didn't vote for him, that means I get to complain."

Gotta love George!

 

[mtrycrafts]

It was George Carlin that said exactly the opposite. "I didn't vote for the guy, you did. Since I didn't vote for him, that means I get to complain."

I am not sure if that is the exact opposite of this though

If one didn't vote, they don't have the right to complain about anything.

 

[Tomorrow]

I understand that you get an amount of personal satisfaction in knowing that you voted for whom you truly liked. But seeing other people get elected, that didn't follow your political ideals didn't make you feel like you wasted your vote at all??? Sure you voted for who you wanted to win, but they didn't, and the candidates who's political views you didn't like are still governing, in spite of you voting against them.

So by your logic you and our friend Joe Schmoe "wasted" your votes by voting for Gore or Kerry last two elections.

 

[Davemcc]

I understand that you get an amount of personal satisfaction in knowing that you voted for whom you truly liked. But seeing other people get elected, that didn't follow your political ideals didn't make you feel like you wasted your vote at all??? Sure you voted for who you wanted to win, but they didn't, and the candidates who's political views you didn't like are still governing, in spite of you voting against them.

So the person I don't like won. Should I have voted for them anyway, just to say that I was on the "winning side". Are you saying that that is a way not to waste my vote? How is it better to abandon the most qualified candidate just to say that you voted for the "winner"?

No. I didn't waste my vote. I supported the best candidate. My neighbors disagreed with my judgment and I shall suffer along with them for their poor decisions. That's the nature of democracy. I get one vote to express my preference. If I don't do that, my vote is wasted.

If a third party candidate had a chance in hell of winning the Presidency, I would surely vote for one. But they don't, and until the day comes that they do, I will continue to give my support to the person that most closely mirrors myself. Unfortunately, that is what leaves us in the 2-party mess that we're in. I'm sure that there are millions of Americans that are playing the same waiting game that I am.

Well you're giving any third party a Catch 22, aren't you. "I'll vote for you if you can win" but they can't win if you won't vote for them. Which comes first? I'll tell you. Integrity. Vote for the best candidate, not one of the two "likely winners". If that behavior takes root, the two major parties will either have to shape up and nominate the best candidates, or lose the election. As it stands, losers are winning elections based on your logic while the best candidates stay home.

 

[darien87]

So the person I don't like won. Should I have voted for them anyway, just to say that I was on the "winning side". Are you saying that that is a way not to waste my vote? How is it better to abandon the most qualified candidate just to say that you voted for the "winner"?

No. I didn't waste my vote. I supported the best candidate. My neighbors disagreed with my judgment and I shall suffer along with them for their poor decisions. That's the nature of democracy. I get one vote to express my preference. If I don't do that, my vote is wasted.



Well you're giving any third party a Catch 22, aren't you. "I'll vote for you if you can win" but they can't win if you won't vote for them. Which comes first? I'll tell you. Integrity. Vote for the best candidate, not one of the two "likely winners". If that behavior takes root, the two major parties will either have to shape up and nominate the best candidates, or lose the election. As it stands, losers are winning elections based on your logic while the best candidates stay home.

That's an awfully big if you're throwing out there Dave.

Sorry, but it just seems like a wasted vote to me, to vote for someone that has NO chance in hell of winning an election. Whether you voted or not, the candidate you didn't want still won. Seems like you might as well have not voted at all.

What is important to me right now is to make sure that the candidate whose ideals I disagree with the most doesn't win. Unfortunately, in this political climate, that is the best that I can do.

 

[darien87]

So by your logic you and our friend Joe Schmoe "wasted" your votes by voting for Gore or Kerry last two elections.

No I didn............................... Aaaaawwww man.

 

[bandphan]

What is important to me right now is to make sure that the candidate whose ideals I disagree with the most doesn't win. Unfortunately, in this political climate, that is the best that I can do.

ok, but you can do better

 

[Rickster71]

Two quick points:

Voting isn't like betting; you waste your bet if you lose.
You don't waste your vote, if you lose.

The only difference between Democrats and Republicans, are the groups they pander to.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

So by your logic you and our friend Joe Schmoe "wasted" your votes by voting for Gore or Kerry last two elections.

A vote can only be seen as "wasted" after the fact, that is after the enemy (Bush, eg) has won. At the time that it is cast, a vote it never wasted because it increases the likelihood of one's preferred candidate winning.

 

[Mort Corey]

Well, there was another famous Joe that said something to the effect that it doesn't matter who votes for anything....it's who counts the votes that matters.

Mort

 

[annunaki]

Well you're giving any third party a Catch 22, aren't you. "I'll vote for you if you can win" but they can't win if you won't vote for them. Which comes first? I'll tell you. Integrity. Vote for the best candidate, not one of the two "likely winners". If that behavior takes root, the two major parties will either have to shape up and nominate the best candidates, or lose the election. As it stands, losers are winning elections based on your logic while the best candidates stay home.

Very, very well put Dave!!!

 

[Davemcc]

That's an awfully big if you're throwing out there Dave.

One must consider all available possibilities. If people continue to use your logic, it is a certainty that two parties will trade power back and forth and nothing will change. Not only that, it is a certainty that these two parties will govern with a sense of entitlement and contempt for the average voter.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Well, there was another famous Joe that said something to the effect that it doesn't matter who votes for anything....it's who counts the votes that matters.

Mort

You mean Stalin?

 

[bandphan]

that is after the enemy (Bush, eg) has won.

The enemy, or the other persons in the race. If "Enemy" is how you veiw other candidates thats your choice, but that conjers visions of fanaticism and it just adds to your preceived persona