BF2S Forums voting for a 3rd party candidate

Jesse Ventura's idea of ''none of the above'' sounded good to me.  I can't really descide tbh, I keep thinking if McCain gets in we wont live to see the 2012 election :\

dooms day tbh.  Meh, Carlin had it right, I'll sit at home, and blame you fuckers for electing these pricks

Last edited by Bell (2008-09-18 07:32:57)

I-=C-A-V-E-M-A-N=-I wrote:

How can you consider it throwing away your vote when your vote means nothing to begin with? The Electoral College picks the president not the population.

Because the EC doesn't base its voting on the popular vote for each state or anything...

wiki wrote:

Faithless electors have not changed the outcome of a presidential election in any election to date.

oug wrote:

are there any smaller parties more "radical right" shall we say that steal votes from the Republicans?

Or is it just the Dems that suffer losses from the greens etc?

Yes and no.

Libertarians. They're not necessarily further right, but they do leech votes from the Republican candidate.

Last edited by FEOS (2008-09-18 16:58:20)

I'm sure I posted a fucking awesome post in this thread. Maybe Lowing can debate it, then someone, lets call him "Timortal" can karma him with snide remarks and not post something of value himself.

oug wrote:

As for the Libertarians, don't they get Dem votes as well?

Yes, they do. (If you believe citizens' votes were the property of the Dems...yeah, splitting hairs...)

The traditional left v right, liberal v conservative model does not accurately describe all people.  Go look at the politicalcompass website for a slightly better model.

oug wrote:

RAIMIUS wrote:

oug wrote:

As for the Libertarians, don't they get Dem votes as well?

Yes, they do. (If you believe citizens' votes were the property of the Dems...yeah, splitting hairs...)

The traditional left v right, liberal v conservative model does not accurately describe all people.  Go look at the politicalcompass website for a slightly better model.

Oh I'm well aware of that! Just wanted to know if there is a purely right-wing party out there "stealing" votes only from the Reps. The Libertarians don't seem to fit the bill, because apparently they get votes from both the big two.

Your flawed assumption is that Republicans are purely right-wing. An equally flawed assumption is that Dems are purely left-wing.

FEOS wrote:

Your flawed assumption is that Republicans are purely right-wing. An equally flawed assumption is that Dems are purely left-wing.

I wouldn't call the Democrats left-wing at all. At least not by European standards. But what about the Reps? If they're not all right-wing, then what else are they?

I-=C-A-V-E-M-A-N=-I wrote:

Until you can actually verify that the numbers that are given to the media are 100% accurate, I'm sticking to my view. Until that is accomplished you can't even guarantee that the election isn't fixed to begin with. But, who would want to count a couple million votes?

The EC is not required to use their votes in accordance with popular vote of the population.

That's not quite how it works. See, when you make a claim like that, it's up to YOU to prove that your claim is correct. So it's YOU that has to verify that the numbers provided by not just the media, but the Federal Election Commission and all other sources are incorrect.

Look up the term "faithless elector". That's the part of my previous post you somehow failed to include in your response. While the EC voters can technically vote for whomever they choose, they have rarely voted against the popular vote. When they have, it has been in small numbers (single votes, normally) and they have never affected the outcome of an election.

oug wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Your flawed assumption is that Republicans are purely right-wing. An equally flawed assumption is that Dems are purely left-wing.

I wouldn't call the Democrats left-wing at all. At least not by European standards. But what about the Reps? If they're not all right-wing, then what else are they?

We're not talking about European standards...we're talking about American standards, as we're talking about American political parties. The Democrat Party platform is left of center. The Republican Party platform is right of center. But there are issues that both parties take centrist positions on.

I wasn't telling anyone in particular to prove it. But that until it is proved, I just can't believe that everyone's vote counts. Not to mention that there are far to many people that don't pay attention, vote for someone because they belong to a particular party, etc. Does anyone seriously believe that the votes from such people should count the same as someone that actually pays attention to what is happening in the world? Do you think that the people that actually run this country believe so? Or, do they actually control the outcome while creating the illusion of democracy?

FEOS wrote:

We're not talking about European standards...we're talking about American standards, as we're talking about American political parties. The Democrat Party platform is left of center. The Republican Party platform is right of center. But there are issues that both parties take centrist positions on.

Ok so now that we're past the basics that we both knew, is there any political party - the opposite of say, the Greens - that capitalizes mostly on Republican votes? Because like I said earlier, the Libertarians don't fit the bill as they take votes both from Dems and Reps.

I-=C-A-V-E-M-A-N=-I wrote:

I wasn't telling anyone in particular to prove it. But that until it is proved, I just can't believe that everyone's vote counts. Not to mention that there are far to many people that don't pay attention, vote for someone because they belong to a particular party, etc. Does anyone seriously believe that the votes from such people should count the same as someone that actually pays attention to what is happening in the world? Do you think that the people that actually run this country believe so? Or, do they actually control the outcome while creating the illusion of democracy?

You could try researching how the system actually works for yourself.

And don't worry about what other people think or why they vote the way they do. It's YOUR vote, not theirs.

If people took the attitude you do (and apparently many do, based on voter turnout numbers), no one would cast their vote.

"I'm just one of 200+ million eligible voters...my vote doesn't count in the grand scheme of things."

There is no illusion: This is a democracy. Where your vote counts as much as mine and as much as the Presidential candidates themselves. That's the great thing about participating in the democratic process. The process stops being democratic when people stop living up to their responsibilities as citizens and stop giving their inputs via their vote.

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Voter Turnout %

Have a look at the voter turnout percentages on the right.

If the US had anything near what Australia did in terms of voters bothering to register and vote, than 3rd party options would not be a waste.

At the moment though the only press goes towards the two main parties, along with the votes. The campaign money other parties can afford to spend is utterly insignificant on a nation wide scale.

Australia also has compulsory voting laws, does it not?

TheAussieReaper wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Australia also has compulsory voting laws, does it not?

Only if you first register. After that point if you do not vote you will be fined. But registration (eligible once you turn 18) is entirely optional.

That was a wrinkle I was unaware of. I must admit, that system has its merits...keeps the riffraff out of the voting booths, at least.

DesertFox- wrote:

The Simpsons episode (4F02)Treehouse of Horror VII wrote:

Man2: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away.

As true as it was in 1996.

Perot then abrubtly smashes his hat.

haha so true.