Pages: 1 2 3 4

 

Poll

Are you throwing away your vote voting for a 3rd party candidate?

Yes53%53% - 37
No37%37% - 26
Not Sure8%8% - 6
Total: 69
2008-10-07 02:25:17
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6829|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

They most certainly were represented.
Except not in any form of government representation.
They weren't voting for Congressional representatives...they were voting for President. Again...it's not a Parliamentary system.

Dilbert_X wrote:

That is a function of their message not resonating with the donating public. Nothing more, nothing less.
Its also a function of not achieving critical mass. Would Exxon donate $50m to the Libertarians? No they're too small, they will never be elected hence no donation and so it goes on.
If their message was in line with Exxon/Mobil's interests, then yes. I would expect Exxon/Mobil to donate $50M to the Libertarians. But it's not, so I don't.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Your comment makes no sense.
Its not bothered me so far.
Another thing we agree on.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-10-07 02:36:17
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6524|eXtreme to the maX
They weren't voting for Congressional representatives...they were voting for President. Again...it's not a Parliamentary system.
Sucks though it does, I prefer the parliamentary system, at least there is a chance your vote will count.
If their message was in line with Exxon/Mobil's interests, then yes. I would expect Exxon/Mobil to donate $50M to the Libertarians. But it's not, so I don't.
Replace 'If their message was in line with Exxon/Mobil's interests' with 'If they were likely to be elected and therefore able to return the favour 100-fold' and we're done.
Fuck Israel
2008-10-07 02:41:37
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6829|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

They weren't voting for Congressional representatives...they were voting for President. Again...it's not a Parliamentary system.
Sucks though it does, I prefer the parliamentary system, at least there is a chance your vote will count.
Your perspective.

The electoral college system has just as many benefits as drawbacks, so it's a wash.

Dilbert_X wrote:

If their message was in line with Exxon/Mobil's interests, then yes. I would expect Exxon/Mobil to donate $50M to the Libertarians. But it's not, so I don't.
Replace 'If their message was in line with Exxon/Mobil's interests' with 'If they were likely to be elected and therefore able to return the favour 100-fold' and we're done.
Nope. Won't do it. People support what they agree with and that usually means what's in line with their perceived best interests. Some view the contribution game as a quid pro quo, but far more view it as furthering a group that has their best interests in mind.

I guess it just depends on your level of cynicism whether you view it as supporting a group that you agree with (and will therefore run the government and its policies in a way that benefits you) or paying for politicians to vote your way.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-10-07 05:15:41
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6524|eXtreme to the maX
People support what they agree with and that usually means what's in line with their perceived best interests.
People may do, for companies its different.
For companies the only merit is the bottom line, and executives can theoretically be held to account over it.
They must, by enforceable law, only carry out activities and spend money which can be expected to help their bottom line.
supporting a group that you agree with (and will therefore run the government and its policies in a way that benefits you) or paying for politicians to vote your way
I don't see the difference, at least not at the corporate level.
If I hand out 'Vote Fuckwit' flags I wouldn't expect a return, other than marginally more chance of my preferred candidate getting in.
If I handed Presidential candidate Fuckwit $50m of my companies money I'd damn well expect President Fuckwit to return the favour. If my shareholders didn't perceive they were getting value I'd expect to be out on my butt.
Fuck Israel
2008-10-07 17:27:39
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6829|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

People may do, for companies its different.
For companies the only merit is the bottom line, and executives can theoretically be held to account over it.
They must, by enforceable law, only carry out activities and spend money which can be expected to help their bottom line.
Companies consist of people. Those people's interests are tied to the success of the company so long as they work for it.

Dilbert_X wrote:

I don't see the difference, at least not at the corporate level.
If I hand out 'Vote Fuckwit' flags I wouldn't expect a return, other than marginally more chance of my preferred candidate getting in.
If I handed Presidential candidate Fuckwit $50m of my companies money I'd damn well expect President Fuckwit to return the favour. If my shareholders didn't perceive they were getting value I'd expect to be out on my butt.
Handing out flags and donating your hard-earned money to a candidate are two different things.

I'm not saying companies don't expect a quid pro quo, but I am saying they shouldn't. Nor should a candidate feel beholden to anything but the ideals they profess that garnered them the contribution(s).
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-10-08 00:15:49
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6524|eXtreme to the maX
Companies consist of people. Those people's interests are tied to the success of the company so long as they work for it.
Nope, companies consist of shareholders, the people who work for it are irrelevant except insofar as they have a legal obligation to maximise the financial benefit to the shareholders.
I'm not saying companies don't expect a quid pro quo, but I am saying they shouldn't. Nor should a candidate feel beholden to anything but the ideals they profess that garnered them the contribution(s).
Sadly thats not how it works.
I guess they didn't cover 'Politics 101' at the Curtis LeMay School of Aerial Bombardment

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2008-10-08 00:40:22)

Fuck Israel
2008-10-08 03:11:05
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6829|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

Companies consist of people. Those people's interests are tied to the success of the company so long as they work for it.
Nope, companies consist of shareholders, the people who work for it are irrelevant except insofar as they have a legal obligation to maximise the financial benefit to the shareholders.
May want to tell the employees of those companies that they're not part of it. And if the people working for the company aren't taken care of, then the company isn't going to make money for the shareholders...for whom there is no legal obligation to maximize finanicial benefit.

Oh...almost forgot. Shareholders are also people.

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm not saying companies don't expect a quid pro quo, but I am saying they shouldn't. Nor should a candidate feel beholden to anything but the ideals they profess that garnered them the contribution(s).
Sadly thats not how it works.
I guess they didn't cover 'Politics 101' at the Curtis LeMay School of Aerial Bombardment
I have no idea what the fuck you are on about here.

I fully realize that's not how it works...hence the words "shouldn't" and "should" above.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-10-08 03:43:50
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6524|eXtreme to the maX
for whom there is no legal obligation to maximize finanicial benefit
I think you'll find there is, I'll look it all up.
Strictly a companies only obligations to its employees are to pay what was agreed and not do them harm.
Employees are no more important than the machines and the lightbulbs.
I'm taking the strict legal corporate view here. Obviously if a company wants to do well it makes sense to look after the employees.
Employees, CEO included, have no right to give away shareholders money to whichever organisation makes them feel better however.

I fully realize that's not how it works...hence the words "shouldn't" and "should" above.
Gee whizz I was pulling your leg, take a break!
No company is going to give away money unless they think they are going to get a return, even if its only goodwill and a better corporate image.
Fuck Israel
2008-10-08 07:30:45
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|7133|US

Dilbert_X wrote:

I guess they didn't cover 'Politics 101' at the Curtis LeMay School of Aerial Bombardment
Woah there, we have a very nice polisci department!...and we like Hap Arnold better

Last edited by RAIMIUS (2008-10-08 07:31:18)

2008-10-08 10:15:45
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7019|132 and Bush

ATG wrote:

I will be voting anything but republican in all categories no matter what the contest as a protest.

I will write in Ron Paul for president.
I will vote against any bonds, taxes, fee increases and spending bills I have a chance.
Ron Paul is a member of the Republican party, no?
Ron Paul officially quit, no?
Ron Paul has not picked a VP, no?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2008-10-08 10:52:02
mikkel
Member
+383|7019
Voting for a third party is a vote for more "change" than either of the two big parties could ever deliver.
2008-10-08 14:09:40
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|7133|US

mikkel wrote:

Voting for a third party is a vote for more "change" than either of the two big parties could ever deliver.
You got that one right!
2008-10-15 08:39:39
destruktion_6143
Was ist Loos?
+154|7045|Canada
every american in these forums should vote ron paul.

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard