Jump to content

The Democratic National Convention


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 218
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest fragged one

vote 3rd party.. vote Libertarian. :)

best post of the thread :tup:

 

 

i'll end with a plea to those with intentions to vote 3rd party, or not vote at all, do not waste your vote. pick the lesser of your 2 evils, if that is your perception

that is the same asinine near-sighted thinking that has, and continues, to only give us two evils to vote on. if people, like you, would vote for the best choice, rather than vote for merely the better of two choices, then we wouldn't be in this situation.

 

and to that, i'll echo the previous comment:

 

VOTE LIBERTARIAN

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fragged one

Just how many more evils would you like to choose from :erm:

 

:lol:

no.  they are both screwing the citizens and the country equally albiet different ways.

 

that's like asking me to choose whether i'd like to eat a shitburger or have the ratfries.

 

instead, i'll continue to request the filet mignon until it's sufficiently on the menu.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fragged one

the speech was meh...I have heard it from him before and I am still waiting for some substance.

then you need to look elsewhere besides the dems and reps.
Link to post
Share on other sites

best post of the thread :tup:

 

 

i'll end with a plea to those with intentions to vote 3rd party, or not vote at all, do not waste your vote. pick the lesser of your 2 evils, if that is your perception

that is the same asinine near-sighted thinking that has, and continues, to only give us two evils to vote on. if people, like you, would vote for the best choice, rather than vote for merely the better of two choices, then we wouldn't be in this situation.

 

and to that, i'll echo the previous comment:

 

VOTE LIBERTARIAN

As much as I'd like to vote for a 3rd party candidate, no 3rd party candidate stands a chance in h*ll of winning against the likes of Kerry and Bush.

 

Consider: Most people vote based on what they see and hear on the news, whether it be on television, newspapers, magazines, or the internet. If the media won't so much as recognize the existence of a 3rd party candidate, then how will these television/newspaper/magazine/internet-oriented people know there is an alternative? I'd be willing to bet that 75% of the American people don't even know there is a 3rd party candidate to choose from (unless it's from the little snippets about Nader and the other wannabe's).

 

The media controls the minds of the sheep, and with that thought in mind, it will be a no-holds-barred battle between Kerry and Bush. Period. As much as I'd like to change that, reality stands in my way. -kd5-

Edited by kd5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that Nader didn't run for exactly this reason - he didnt' want to split the vote. Unfortunately, unless we had two people that EVERYONE hated as the Dem and Rep nominees, the smaller parties have absolutely no chance of winning. Right now its just important to me that we get Bush out of office. Anybody but Bush in 2004! During the next election (as long as Bush doesnt run again), THEN I'll consider voting for another party.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fragged one

I believe that Nader didn't run for exactly this reason - he didnt' want to split the vote. Unfortunately, unless we had two people that EVERYONE hated as the Dem and Rep nominees, the smaller parties have absolutely no chance of winning. Right now its just important to me that we get Bush out of office. Anybody but Bush in 2004! During the next election (as long as Bush doesnt run again), THEN I'll consider voting for another party.

that was a mistake i made.

 

last election i was 'anyone but al gore', and voted for bush...look what happened. i'm not going to make another mistake and vote against people like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fragged one

Its my firm belief that the outcome of that election would have been different if it were not for the fiasco in Florida. :mrsgreen:

all the recounts and several independent audits of the ballots still showed bush as the weiner.
Link to post
Share on other sites

actually, bush would of still one, as 5 independent organizations found out after looking into it.

I'm still somewhat skeptical... :erm:

 

all the recounts and several independent audits of the ballots still showed bush as the weiner.

I don't need a recount to tell me Bush is a weiner. :lol:

 

Our entire voting system needs to be revised anyway... the current system is a little "off" in the way it works. Count the damn votes regular and see who got more... thats the way it should be done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

that is how its done

You must not know how the voting system in this country works then. :blink:

 

http://people.howstuffworks.com/electoral-college.htm

 

After the 2000 U.S. presidential election, just about everybody in the United States was talking about the Electoral College. In the end, of course, Gore won the popular vote (more Americans voted for him), but Bush actually won the presidency, because he was awarded the majority of the votes in the Electoral College.

Edited by neo x1
Link to post
Share on other sites

actually I know how its done and it has been discussed on this bb many times. Each state counts their votes to see who wins and the president who wins wins the state, the state then votes with a pre determined number of delegates...the votes are then counted again (see a pattern). The person with the most votes wins..

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it is who wins the most states, not the most votes :P

no its who wins the most state votes wins the election. Its a way of securing some voice for the smaller states in a presidential election. States rights are still a very big deal in the US. The funny thing that I have noticed on this bb is that the same people who advocate states rights seem to be against the Electoral College which is one of the best gurantees that a state has a voice in a national election. A few facts about the electoral college are that in many states the delegates arent required to give the "winner" all of the electoral votes. It is legal to give the candidate a % breakdown though it is never done anymore. In my opinion this is how it should be done every time in every state but nothing is perfect.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...