I Have Finally Decided.

I have on multiple occasions posted that I am neither a Democrat or Republican and that in fact is true. I am registered as "Undeclared" here to keep my options open.

I have never truly cared for the two Party System we have and the way it is rigged to stop any hope of a 3rd Party or true Independent from being able to effectively campaign.

Many here have treated Mr. Paul as if he was a 3rd Party Candidate, but the truth is that even if elected he would still be beholding too the Party because he would be unable to win without them.

I had decided earlier on that I would likely vote for the Libertarian Candidate for two reasons:
I tend to lean their direction on more issues than the traditional Parties stances.
As a form of protest against the flawed system as it is.

Then along comes Barr, a Republican that is best known for leading the charge to Impeach Clinton over his commission of Purgery. He is by no stretch of the imagination a Libertarian that I can see. To me that indicated that the Libertarian Party sold out its own principals to get a high profile name on the ballots. I had to ask myself why and the answer comes back money. There is no chance of the Libertarians winning, so money is the only possible explanation for selling out.

Being neither opposed in general to Democrats or Republicans and due to the fact that I base my opinion more on the individual than the Party, I had to come to a decision other than to not vote which is unacceptable to me. With Barr being ruled out that leaves me with Obama, McCain or choices even less palatable to me.

Then Obama does something that catches my eye and has great meaning to me because it seems to define his character or lack of it. He decided against Public Funding! Now politicians changing their mind has little impact on me and in fact raises my opinion of someone if they are able to lay their own beliefs aside and embrace the wishes of the voters. The old "flip-flop" argument is nonsense as any honest person is going to change over time as they learn and grow. That is a desirable trait in fact, but this is different. This is a character only issue.

Obama is the FIRST candidate since 1971 to refuse public funding for the general election.

USA Today Article

By Emily Cadei, CQPolitics.com
Today's announcement by presumed Democratic nominee Barack Obama that he won't be taking part in the public financing system for the general election has important implications for the presidential race...

...Obama is likely to have a huge advantage over his Republican rival by the time the conventions roll around. Taking public funding would neutralize that...

...Campaign finance reform groups are also disappointed. "We had hoped and expected that Sen. Obama would stick with the public pledge he made to accept public financing and spending limits for the presidential general election," said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21.

WashingtonPost.com

AS RECENTLY as November, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was unequivocal about whether he would agree to take public financing for the general election if his Republican opponent pledged to do the same. "If you are nominated for president in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?" the Midwest Democracy Network asked in a questionnaire. Mr. Obama's answer was clear. "Yes," he wrote. "If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election."....

Source

..."Senator Obama has long been a proponent of public financing of campaigns, and we are asking the FEC to take a step that could preserve the public financing option for the parties’ nominees," said Obama spokesperson Bill Burton.

The Raw Story Commentary

...Barack Obama's decision this week to opt out of public campaign funding, breaking his earlier pledge to accept it if his opponent did, is generating fierce debate.

For example, the Associated Press's Liz Sidoti has charged that "Barack Obama chose winning over his word ... and with that, the first-term Illinois senator tarnished his carefully honed image as a different kind of politician."

Now that brings me to McCain and what I have come to believe about him.

He is far from perfect, but far closer to an acceptable candidate for my tastes. His so called "flip-flops" are all related to either his changing stances on opinions over time or the fact he realizes he must sometimes act based on the wishes of the voters. None of his changes seem to be of the sort that screams to me he is a liar as was the case with Obama's "flip-flops".

He appears to be an honest person even though I don't always agree with his stances. He has shown that if a majority of the voters oppose his views he has flexibility. He has experience the best and worst life has to offer and came out a winner. He is not a elitists Ivy Leaguer like Obama or pretending to be something he is not like Barr.

I've both read and listened to his infamous "100 year" comment to get it into context. I had no problem understanding what he truly meant and can only assume those who did not are actually lying due to partisanship. He was just being a realist in stead of telling us what we want to hear; another good trait in my mind.

There you have it. I'm going to vote based on character, which leaves only McCain. There is no candidate that reflects my views, so I'm left with this, my only logical choice.

I'll also admit right up front that Obama's associations with shady characters and fanatics does play a part in my decision. To avoid the ridiculous "Racists" accusations, I'll remind everyone that my Daughter (Ivy League School on a full scholarship and my pride and joy) is the same race as Obama; half Black and half White. I am White so that should indicate my stance on Race. I am color blind and always have been.

Rather than another veiled flame thread, I would rather hear others reasoning as to who they are or are not voting for, in the form of statements without arguments. I know that will never happen, but it would be interesting to read all the same.

Very well said, eloquent even. I share your final choice, even though I cannot vote. I'm a U.S. citizen, patriot, warrior, and love my country. I've been out of the U.S. long enough such that the terms of the voting requirements in the state I left disallow my participation. No problem; it's even understandable.

As to your criteria and choice: I was not a fan of Senator Obama's from the beginning. Then I started tuning out the purple rays of hyperbole and listening to his words. Then, I began to believe him. Then, I listen more. I found it useful to frequent websites that had whole speaches as a complete offering. The same went for my interest in Senators Clinton and McCain. I find that it's foolish on my part to extropolate my interpretation on any of their words. I cannot in clear conscience nor sensibility do any more than look and and analyze their words within context of the speech, and apply it to their views on the issues that MATTER.

It's come down to, for me, who will do the least damage to what I perceive is an already flailing economy. I believe that will be Senator McCain. I really liked a lot of what Ron Paul said. I couldn't shake the mental image of purple Koolaide, though, for some inexplicable quirky reason.

Good thread, well thought out.

Cheers

That is certainly a well thought out decision and I can certainly relate to your dilemma. I think a lot of people are torn in this case, because quite honestly, both candidates are poor choices in their own unique and individual ways.

I agree that Mccain is likely the more genuine of the two, I don't know, I just get the feeling that Obama has an agenda that is all his own and it definately sways me toward the other direction. His policies really aren't clear on anything and not much has been established thus far other than "change". I keep hearing him talk about change this and change that, but he never really gives any examples that make sense.

But on the other hand, a vote for Mccain really is just a vote for more of the crapulence that we have been experiencing for the past eight years. It is clear that, although he is a decorated war veteran and a distiguished American, he is also very old and poor in health and quite honestly out of touch with the average American voter and their struggles day to day. I think Mccain will keep us in Iraq until the cows come home, he already stated his intentions there.

Neither candidate seems to have any real goals or plans in regard to our feeble economy, and nobody seems to be offering any plan to fix it except for raising taxes on this group or that group. Socialized health care sounds good in principle but I fear will be a massive failure that will cost the tax payers a fortune to implement.

I am truly disgusted with the two party system, I think it is honestly a sham and an insult to American voters who shouldn't be forced to hold their noses and vote for the lesser of two evils. My candidate since day one has been Dr. Paul, and I have never made any bones about how I feel about the mistreatment that he has recieved throughout the primaries and to this day. I believe he is by far the most qualified for the job, but unfortunately we will never know that because the PTB have seen fit to freeze him out of any debate or provide him with any real platform from which to contend.

So here we are, back to which millionaire yes man to vote for. My answer is an emphatic "neither". I will be staying home on election day. Yes, it is a petty way to look at things on my part, but I am disgusted and disenfranchised from American politics and I refuse to participate in a game that has been rigged.

Vote for Mccain if it makes you feel better, but at the end of the day is it REALLY going to matter who wins?

LMFAO.... wait, before you read the following, i am getting so confused. i thought you said obama.

i am feeling dizzy btw these two candidates and all the hoop-la around it.






[edit on 1-7-2008 by justamomma]

When this all started I was leaning as much toward Obama as anyone else in fact. I even considered the basic Roulette Wheel idea of at least he is new. My mind could not live with that. I've had more of a struggle on this one than any in the past.

Last time I made the mistake of voting for Bush, but I admit I was wrong. Not that I entirely disagree with all things on the Right but in that Bush just seems to be incompetent and too directed toward those he owes and cares to little about our needs and wishes. I should have gone third Party last time out.

McCain's history as a renegade played a part in my reasoning. He clearly is not afraid to buck the system where the Republicans are concerned.

I'm still fishing for others stories and reasoning in their decisions?????

Originally posted by BlackOps719


My answer is an emphatic "neither". I will be staying home on election day. Yes, it is a petty way to look at things on my part, but I am disgusted and disenfranchised from American politics and I refuse to participate in a game that has been rigged.

Vote for Mccain if it makes you feel better, but at the end of the day is it REALLY going to matter who wins?

you sir, have summed up my sentiments right here.

reply to post by justamomma


I think we are all being put through a roller-coaster ride on this one. I understand fully.

Originally posted by BlackOps719

But on the other hand, a vote for Mccain really is just a vote for more of the crapulence that we have been experiencing for the past eight years. It is clear that, although he is a decorated war veteran and a distiguished American, he is also very old and poor in health and quite honestly out of touch with the average American voter and their struggles day to day. I think Mccain will keep us in Iraq until the cows come home, he already stated his intentions there.

I took his remark as more of an allusion to reality. I got the impression he meant in the same way that our presence in South Korea was and is necessary for stability.

I'm also gambling on the fact he is a true renegade in the Republican Party and I have to admit I admire that.

Originally posted by BlackOps719

I am truly disgusted with the two party system, I think it is honestly a sham and an insult to American voters who shouldn't be forced to hold their noses and vote for the lesser of two evils. My candidate since day one has been Dr. Paul, and I have never made any bones about how I feel about the mistreatment that he has recieved throughout the primaries and to this day.

I can't say that I disagree with what you say. I was not a Paul follower and I liked him except I think his qualifications were to narrow. He is no doubt one of the great minds in economics, but his talents seem to end there.

For me, I have to vote as I see it as one of the most important things in our system and failing to participate will only facilitate its failure. Where I think many fail is not realizing that voting for a Third Party when you can, or even for someone who is not on a ballot or has any chance, is as, if not more, important than a vote for the winner.

If you live where you can, you should vote your heart for Mr. Paul.

Character counts a lot. I don't feel that Obama is being allowed to show his true character. I feel he is being controlled by the Senior democrats and this worries me. Because no matter how good his plans are the senior democrats will make Obama accept the parties plans.

McCain is more likely to tell everyone, his own party included, where to stick it. In other words McCain is more likely to blow off his party than Obama would if he felt that a certain issue wasn't right for America.

I am still undecided, leaning McCain. Obama still has a chance but his people need to quit acting that every question asked to Obama is offensive. His people should just lay back and let us see who the real Obama is. If he is who he says he is, it will show. Race has always been an issue in politics. That is the reason candidates cater to each race. Why should this one be any different? I am not calling for racist slurs. but there are legit race questions that are a part of politics.

I have never in my life voted "for" anyone. I've always voted against someone. It won't be any different this election.

If Ive got something interesting to do like make a sandwich; I may not even go to the community center where I vote. Just stay home, eat my sandwich and post on BTS. with my friends.

And even if I don't vote, I'm gonna bitch reguardless of who's elected.

In a way, not voting, is a protest vote.

reply to post by jam321


yes, just as bush told his party AND us, the citizens to stick it. might as well throw that piece of paper away after writing down your decision for all the good it's going to do.

reply to post by jam321


Thank you for your thoughts. They are very close to my own.

reply to post by Blaine91555




I understand what you are saying Blaine, but to be honest it would be like driving down to the track to bet your savings on a horse with three broken legs.

If you know the candidate has 0 chance of winning, who am I really humoring there? Yes yes I know it is not very American of me to not vote at all seeing as people have died to afford me the right. And nobody respects that more than I do.

I just feel it insulting to be forced to cast a vote in vain for a candidate that has no chance, and Im certainly not going to compromise my principles to vote for either of the other two.

Call it a silent one man protest if you must, but I just don't see it happening.


What's the point in rolling the dice if you know full well the damn things are loaded? I wish I could have a better outlook on this than I do, but it is what it is.

BUT I completely respect your reasoning and I fully support anyone elses right to vote as they see fit.

[edit on 7/1/08 by BlackOps719]

Originally posted by whaaa

And even if I don't vote, I'm gonna bitch reguardless of who's elected.

You have my vote for honesty! I'll probably end up doing the same.

reply to post by BlackOps719


I see it more as vote toward the future when I vote for someone without a chance. For instance a vote for Paul, if enough people did so, could be difference between him running next time or not. If enough started voting their real feeling and Parties be damned, we might start to see more Perot's in the future who actually have a chance. Just my thoughts. Individual drops of rain mean little but can become part of a torrential rain eventually.

One of the reasons McCain is winning with me is his refusal to tow the Party line while on the other hand, I could not tell the difference between Clinton and Obama.

i don't know if it is or when considering the stress this brings on ppl who are honest, caring, and trying to be a good citizen only to realize it doesn't really even matter. i only say funny, bc i too have come to this realization after doing the ACTUAL homework and sometimes you just have to laugh at the situation you find yourself in to keep from sinking into gloom and despair.

i tend to take my frustrative laughs on those who are so for a candidate that they do more homework on the opposition for discrediting purposes yet know nothing about their own candidate and how useless he is too. just an admission of my sense of humor.

i am very proud of all my fellow citizens including myself who have done the work despite this sad realization that there really is no REAL choice being given here. wish i could hug ya all just for trying

[edit on 1-7-2008 by justamomma]

About Obama not accepting public funds, 2 things.

1) Ron Paul did it first in the primaries. Obama saw the positive press it got Paul, so that's why he's doing it.

2) When a candidate accepts public funding, there's a legal limit/cap to how much money he can raise from donations. When the candidate forgos public funding, there's no limit to how much he can raise through donations. If Obama accepted public funding, the government would have given him about $80million dollars. That's for the GENERAL ELECTION. Obama raised more than $150million (IIRC) alone in the PRIMARIES from donations. He will probably get double that, $300mil in the general election, so there's Obama's choice, 80 million from public funding or 300 million from donations. The choice is clear for him.

So really his decision is not based on morals, he's just going to get a duck load more money if he DOESN'T accept public funding.

IIRC, politicians who reject public funding can also spend remaining money however they want after the race is over (that's why Ron Paul is using his remaining $5million to make books) so even if Barack loses the election, he's going to leave this race a lot richer than he was before.

[edit on 1-7-2008 by OrangeAlarmClock]

I'm leaning toward McCain. His choice of a running mate will tell me whether or not I'm voting for him or writing in Duncan Hunter, however.

The reason I say McCain is because I see Obama as the ultimate puppet controlled by Congress, his wife and religious leaders. In addition, his beliefs clearly shows he's a socialist and a Marxist.

Originally posted by OrangeAlarmClock
the government would have given him about $80million dollars. That's for the GENERAL ELECTION.

It is actually 85 million. The purpose of all candidates accepting public funding is to even the playing field so no candidate has an unfair advantage. The last estimate I saw was that Obama will end up with close to 250 million to McCain's 85 million. He broke his pledge which is undeniable and he did it to try and buy the election. Nobody is naive enough to think otherwise. I'm sure I'm not the only one who discarded him based on this.