It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No third party candidate is going to win, why throw away your vote on one one?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 05:43 AM
link   
In this time when a lot is at stake and there is no way a third party candidate is going to win why would anyone waste their vote on a thrid party candidate? This is probably going to be a close vote, every vote is going to be an important vote. Most people who would consider voting for a third party, if they were voting for the two party they would vote democrat, the republicans are hoping for a lot of third party voters. The thing is if you are unsatisfied with Bush and do not want to give him your vote why would you give it to a candidate who can't possibly win but by doing so your possibly helping Bush win. A lot of people who voted for Nader last time wanted him to win because of enviormental issues well since Bush has been in office things have only gotten worse on the enviorment and if Bush wins again they will once again continue to get worse. While I admit I understand one not being happy with the dems. or reps. with the shape the US is currently in I can't understand throwing away such an important vote when a third party candidate can't possibly win.




posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 06:28 AM
link   
Well, one reason would be for developing the future possibilities for diversity in the political party system. Even if a third-party candidate cannot realistically win, it only takes 5% of the vote to qualify the party for future PECF (Presidential Election Campaign Fund) matching funds.

There's more info here:
www.fec.gov...



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 06:38 AM
link   
I am still voting Libertarian (Badnarik). I fell I am nor throwing my vote away. If more people would vote for the "party of freedom', then we wouldn't have to contend with the likes of a Bush or Kerry type. I have voted libertarian in every election that they are on the ballot, and they are making progress.

But it all comes down to grassroots. Lib's are being elected more often into local and city politics, which is good. We need a strong support base, and that is exactly what is happening. People need to get over the idea that America is just Democrat or Republican. Both parties have achieved much, but their main agenda is to stay in power. Dem's have beewn fighting poverty for decades, and it still flourishes. Why? Keeping people in poverty, and filling their hopes with promises of a better life, all the while blasting the Republicans for doing nothing, saying the Rep's are going to end welfare, is a sure vote for them.
On the other side, Rep's say they want to end abortion and gay rights, and provide stiffer penalties for criminals. Abortion, gay rights, and criminals are still around. Why? Because without them, they would have absolutely no agenda, besides the War on Terror.

Libertarians, on the other hand(though I don't agree with 100% of their agenda) have these ideas:
1. Ending welfare, byt doing away with it all together. Charity would be the sustenance for the impoverished.
2. Abolishing the FBI and CIA.
3. Ending the farce of the War on Drugs. More criminals are in jail on drug related crimes than amy other crime. Prohibition doesn't work. Make all drugs legal so people won't have to steal to pay the mob's high drug prices.
4. End the Federal and State Income Tax. Put more money ointo the hands of working class Americans to stimulate the economy.
5. Protect our 4th amendment right to bear arms.
6. Privatize schools. It costs over $6000 a year per student at public school, and just under $2000 a year for private school.
7. Have a more lenient immigration policy( Which I don't wholeheartedly agree with). America was built by immigrants. It is the strength of our diverse culture which has made it the most advanced the world has ever known.
8. Reduce our military to a free standing army, for defense against direct invasion only. Pull back our troops from all foriegn countries.

These are some of items on their agenda. and that is why my vote is not being wasted. After years and years of the same qolves in sheep's clothing, it's time for a change.

The Soviets had a one party system. We, in America, have a one party system, disguised as a two party system.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 06:50 AM
link   
That's a good point, but again, realistically, the majority are going to vote Republican or Democrat now, in this election.

So many serious issues are stake in this election.

Endorsing a third party for "future Presidential Election Campaign Funds" isn't rectifying the situation of this country's quagmire right now or helping bring our guys home safely from Iraq.

Once these immediate issues (and others) are satisfactorily addressed and dealt with, then we can have the luxury of making future plans for diversity in the political arena.

Now's just not the time.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:11 AM
link   
Mako,

Vampirella is the bomb!



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by nathraq
I am still voting Libertarian (Badnarik). I fell I am nor throwing my vote away. If more people would vote for the "party of freedom', then we wouldn't have to contend with the likes of a Bush or Kerry type. I have voted libertarian in every election that they are on the ballot, and they are making progress.

But it all comes down to grassroots. Lib's are being elected more often into local and city politics, which is good. We need a strong support base, and that is exactly what is happening. People need to get over the idea that America is just Democrat or Republican. Both parties have achieved much, but their main agenda is to stay in power. Dem's have beewn fighting poverty for decades, and it still flourishes. Why? Keeping people in poverty, and filling their hopes with promises of a better life, all the while blasting the Republicans for doing nothing, saying the Rep's are going to end welfare, is a sure vote for them.
On the other side, Rep's say they want to end abortion and gay rights, and provide stiffer penalties for criminals. Abortion, gay rights, and criminals are still around. Why? Because without them, they would have absolutely no agenda, besides the War on Terror.

Libertarians, on the other hand(though I don't agree with 100% of their agenda) have these ideas:
1. Ending welfare, byt doing away with it all together. Charity would be the sustenance for the impoverished.
2. Abolishing the FBI and CIA.
3. Ending the farce of the War on Drugs. More criminals are in jail on drug related crimes than amy other crime. Prohibition doesn't work. Make all drugs legal so people won't have to steal to pay the mob's high drug prices.
4. End the Federal and State Income Tax. Put more money ointo the hands of working class Americans to stimulate the economy.
5. Protect our 4th amendment right to bear arms.
6. Privatize schools. It costs over $6000 a year per student at public school, and just under $2000 a year for private school.
7. Have a more lenient immigration policy( Which I don't wholeheartedly agree with). America was built by immigrants. It is the strength of our diverse culture which has made it the most advanced the world has ever known.
8. Reduce our military to a free standing army, for defense against direct invasion only. Pull back our troops from all foriegn countries.

These are some of items on their agenda. and that is why my vote is not being wasted. After years and years of the same qolves in sheep's clothing, it's time for a change.

The Soviets had a one party system. We, in America, have a one party system, disguised as a two party system.


The poor depend on charity to survive, so I assume that this party has never been where there was no work, I have I lived through a recession and certainly would not like to depend on anyone's charity. I did manage to find work and walked 3.5 miles after work everyday no matter what the weather but depend on someones charity for survival, heck I could not even get a ride home no matter what the weather. I nearly froze to death once when the weather was 13 degrees below 0 counting the wind chill factor and being poor I did not have adequate outer clothing to wear but no one offered me a ride and no one gave a diddly. Depend on others charitable nature LOL that does not make sense. My grandson is in a preschool private school it cost nearly 5,000 a year for halfday. Where is that private school for 2,000. Get rid of the FBI and CIA, what are we going to do for security?



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:22 AM
link   


... why throw it away by voting for either one of the top two DRONES?



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:32 AM
link   
Why throw away your vote by picking a Republican or Democrat? You only throw away your vote if you give it to one of those two. You throw it away when you give it to someone that doesn't deserve it. While Ross Perot was not a good candidate for president he did show that a 3rd party candidate could get significant votes. Had he not screwed around and pulled out of the race and then jumped back in he may very well have won. If not it certainly would have been a tight race.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by goose


The poor depend on charity to survive, so I assume that this party has never been where there was no work, I have I lived through a recession and certainly would not like to depend on anyone's charity. I did manage to find work and walked 3.5 miles after work everyday no matter what the weather but depend on someones charity for survival, heck I could not even get a ride home no matter what the weather. I nearly froze to death once when the weather was 13 degrees below 0 counting the wind chill factor and being poor I did not have adequate outer clothing to wear but no one offered me a ride and no one gave a diddly. Depend on others charitable nature LOL that does not make sense. My grandson is in a preschool private school it cost nearly 5,000 a year for halfday. Where is that private school for 2,000. Get rid of the FBI and CIA, what are we going to do for security?


1.There are National Charitable Foundations. Their money is pooled, and dispensed to where it is needed.
2. If a person nearly freezes to death walking 3.5 miles uphill in the snow both ways to work, then they either need to a) move, or b) sit in their house and feel sorry for themselves.
3. The State and Local Police Forces are for our security. How many times has an FBI agent saved your life? The FBI's main task(besides the war on terror) is drug enforcement. Eliminate the prohibition of drugs, and the FBI will be facing a major budget reduction.

It's all about personal freedoms and choice. Not about the government trying to take care of you.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by goose
In this time when a lot is at stake and there is no way a third party candidate is going to win why would anyone waste their vote on a thrid party candidate? This is probably going to be a close vote, every vote is going to be an important vote. Most people who would consider voting for a third party, if they were voting for the two party they would vote democrat, the republicans are hoping for a lot of third party voters. The thing is if you are unsatisfied with Bush and do not want to give him your vote why would you give it to a candidate who can't possibly win but by doing so your possibly helping Bush win. A lot of people who voted for Nader last time wanted him to win because of enviormental issues well since Bush has been in office things have only gotten worse on the enviorment and if Bush wins again they will once again continue to get worse. While I admit I understand one not being happy with the dems. or reps. with the shape the US is currently in I can't understand throwing away such an important vote when a third party candidate can't possibly win.


Man you picked the wrong crowd to try out this crap on. Didn't you read the sign on the door when you came in? DENY IGNORANCE! The only vote you throw away is the one you don't use. Other than that, only the ignorrant ones will vote for "the lesser of two evils" scenerio. If you are a free thinking person who is not controlled by the BS that is spewed to you every day in the media, then you will vote for who you beleive is the best person, not for who Ben Afflek or Barbara Streisand tells you to, or for who is most likely to win. Trust me, in this election, the one most likely to win is NOT the right person for the job!!!

[edit on 27-8-2004 by mpeake]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:44 AM
link   
It depends on how you look at the current situation. On one hand you have people saying you are throwing away your vote because one of the big two will win, and on the other hand people saying the two party system simply is not good enough (ie. vote for Evil 1 or Evil 2).

Throw away my vote? Are you kidding me?

I am going to vote third party because its my Constitutional right. I do not agree with many, if not most, of what the major two parties are offering. That brings me to another point...don't vote for someone because of what they "offer"!!!! Research each candidate, their voting records, their contributors, etc. and then make an educated opinion on who has done their best in your views. If you do not take the time to do this then your vote is the one that is going to be wasted. Candidate contributors can tell a lot about how a persons morals and what policies and actions they will take as President. One example of this would be if a candidate got contributions from, say, an oil company that wants to drill in Yellowstone (purely hypothetical). The money that company gives that candidate, should he/she become President, is money that company wants repaid by the President pushing legislation in their favor. Now, if one is opposed to drilling for oil in Yellowstone, you wouldn't want to vote for someone that is trying to do just that.

If people would just use some intellect when voting, we may just see that the two party system vanish. Until voter apathy and other such issues are taken seriously by the American public we will continue down the same road.

So, my vote will not be wasted at all. In fact, I consider it more patriotic and American to vote according to one's conscious rather than voting for "someone else" just because you dont like "the other" candidate. Each time you give in to this mentality then you are forever within the two party systems grasp. The Democrats and Republicans will forever say "dont vote for so and so because its a vote for/against me/he" and will use the unknowing American public. Its a constant tug-o-war with these two, and if you don't break the chain then each election we will hear the same dribble about why you shouldn't vote Third Party!

[edit on 27-8-2004 by Jazzerman]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 07:48 AM
link   
For the most part nathraq, I agree with you.

I think rather than completely abolishing the FBI and CIA- we need to possibly rearrange exactly what it is they do. We do need intelligence organizations though.

I agree that we should be getting rid of welfare. While this is not universally the case, welfare encourages people not to work because they will be taken care of anyways. Why go to work or change your life to improve it when you can sit on the couch collecting free stuff like welfare and unemployment? Sometimes, people just do need to move. IE- in Lansing, MI nobody can get jobs right now, so while everyone I know is complaining about a lack of work my boyfriend moved 45 minutes away and had countless job offers! but everyone else just sits back and says "I can't do that!" He had to sacrifice for what he wanted, just like everyone who works has to sacrifice their time to not watch cable and eat chips all day.

As a prime example- if I took a $5/hour paycut right now- the state would start paying for my childcare, I would qualify for all kinds of WIC and federal programs, and I would effectively be getting about a $10/hour raise and my taxes would go down!
The only reason I don't do it is because I am one of (the only I've ever met) the extremely rare people who don't believe it is society's job to take care of me. That is my responsibility, even when it makes things harder for me.

Goose, I am going to suggest that your family picked an expensive private school, regardless of which most private schools run on significantly less than the public schools, yet tend to rate better and teach better discipline.
The private schools considered expensive often are still less than what the public schools run on.



Originally posted by nathraq

Originally posted by goose


The poor depend on charity to survive, so I assume that this party has never been where there was no work, I have I lived through a recession and certainly would not like to depend on anyone's charity. I did manage to find work and walked 3.5 miles after work everyday no matter what the weather but depend on someones charity for survival, heck I could not even get a ride home no matter what the weather. I nearly froze to death once when the weather was 13 degrees below 0 counting the wind chill factor and being poor I did not have adequate outer clothing to wear but no one offered me a ride and no one gave a diddly. Depend on others charitable nature LOL that does not make sense. My grandson is in a preschool private school it cost nearly 5,000 a year for halfday. Where is that private school for 2,000. Get rid of the FBI and CIA, what are we going to do for security?


1.There are National Charitable Foundations. Their money is pooled, and dispensed to where it is needed.
2. If a person nearly freezes to death walking 3.5 miles uphill in the snow both ways to work, then they either need to a) move, or b) sit in their house and feel sorry for themselves.
3. The State and Local Police Forces are for our security. How many times has an FBI agent saved your life? The FBI's main task(besides the war on terror) is drug enforcement. Eliminate the prohibition of drugs, and the FBI will be facing a major budget reduction.

It's all about personal freedoms and choice. Not about the government trying to take care of you.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Well let's see,

For the last forty years I have always voted in every election. And I have always been reduced to casting my vote for the lessor of two evils as opposed to a candidate I believed in or had faith in.
Ironically the only President that even came close to my expectations of leadership was one that suffered from Alzheimer's for most of his terms. Yet he possessed a knack for delegating authority rather than imposing it unwisely.
This time which may very well be my last time there is in my mind no lessor of two evils. Both are controlled and manipulated by the the same invisible hierarchy. One is the right hand and the other the left and neither knows what the other is doing! This is an excellent means of manipulation and control of Power. Read 'The Prince'.

"Throughout the cold war, the United States government operated at an unprecedented level of secrecy and manipulation, with numerous leaders pushing the limits of their power to new levels. With presidents such as Richard Nixon, who had a "by any means necessary" approach to politics, there is a clear parallel between the cutthroat politics of this era and the "Realpolitik" that was invented by Niccolo Machiavelli centuries earlier. With emphasis on facets of the presidency such as public appearances, military strength, and tight networks of confidantes, the Cold War was extremely Machiavellian in its leaders' willingness to strengthen the country through "any means Throughout the cold war, the United States government operated at an unprecedented level of secrecy and manipulation, with numerous leaders pushing the limits of their power to new levels. With presidents such as Richard Nixon, who had a "by any means necessary" approach to politics, there is a clear parallel between the cutthroat politics of this era and the "Realpolitik" that was invented by Niccolo Machiavelli centuries earlier. With emphasis on facets of the presidency such as public appearances, military strength, and tight networks of confidantes, the Cold War was extremely Machiavellian in its leaders' willingness to strengthen the country through "any means necessary"

people.bu.edu...

We do not live in a Democracy, we live in a State that is ruled by unseen powers. Enjoy your dream.

TUT


[edit on 27-8-2004 by tututkamen]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 09:23 AM
link   
This is what we've come to, everyone believing that if you didn't vote for the winner you threw away your vote. I'm glad that there are going to be at least a couple million of us who vote with our conscience and don't settle on someone our parents, co-workers, or Fox News tells us we have to vote for. It's kind of a breath of fresh air in this politically smoggy election.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Why throw away your vote on the lesser of 2 evils?

Any vote that is not cast for the candidate that you feel best represents you is a wasted vote.

Who ever invented the popularity contest needs to be drawn and quartered. This is what our elections have become, and it is not what it was intended to be when this country was founded.

I vote for third party candidates at all levels of government, and I vote in every election. Never wasted a single vote.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by goose
In this time when a lot is at stake and there is no way a third party candidate is going to win why would anyone waste their vote on a thrid party candidate?


If you think about it tho, if either party lost because of a third part candidate, especially now, then the main party is going to beunder pressure to co-opt some of the third parties platform, to bring in those third party voters next time. Its the very fact that the election is so close that will make this more important. There are a lot of 'democratic' voters who have been complaining that the part has moved to far to the centre. Just think what a loss because of the green party or some such would do. Ie imagine an 'anti-war' party or even a bunch of non affiliated anti war parties, and the dems loosing because of lost voters to them. In 2008, they'd be suicidal to not take a strongly antiwar platform and put up an anti war candidate. Or imagine the republicans loosing because of numerous voters going over to a bunch of parties that are wildly protectionist in terms of trade. The republicans would have ot adopt that into their platform.

Of course, neither party would have to do anything, and they could stick to their guns and go the way of the Whigs.

[edit on 27-8-2004 by Nygdan]



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 10:56 AM
link   
We're pretty much screwed either way (Kerry or Bush) at this point, hehe... I've done my votes as a protest before, but it just seems to take votes away from the lesser of two evils. I understand, and agree with the idealogy of voting away from the big two, but we have to get Bush out of there before we're knee-deep in it (already up to our ankles)...

"Amiga_de_los_Gatos" Friend of the cats?



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 11:03 AM
link   
It sure seems too many people are looking at the presidential race like its a horse race and trying to pick the winner. Kind of a shame as it seems to undermine the way things work here. The way I see if if you don't vote your conscience, then why vote at all? I can't help but think that by going the 'lesser of two evils' path now that it will be a permenant scar on the 3rd parties who could one day make a difference here in america.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 11:15 AM
link   
It frustrates me that the "The current system sucks, vote 3rd party" voice only ever gets very loud during a presidential election.

If the only time you vote Libertarian/Green/Natural Law/Very Silly Party is during the presidential election, you'll get nowhere. Sure, you may get some more fed money to the party of your choice for the next time, but your party will remain a small player as long as you think the presidential election is the most important one.

If you want to get a better candidate in, if you want to break the two party deadlock on Washington, you need to start at home. Pay attention to your local elections: They don't always come on the 1st Tuesday in November, so you may have to do a bit of work to find them. Support the party of your choice in your municipal/county elections. Work to get a Libertarian Sherrif, if that's your bent, or a Green mayor. Establish a base of power, the move up from there: elect someone to state offices. You probably won't be able to get legislators right away, but Attourney General, Secretary, etc. Now that you have a base of power, expand it.

Don't expect this great change to come right away, it will take years. In the US we're fed on stories of overnight revolutions, but that's not the way it works in the real world. Even the American Revolution was led up to by a great deal of planning and thought.

It's not as glorious as being a media pundit screaming about unfair election laws only every 4 years, but it's a hell of a lot more effective.



posted on Aug, 27 2004 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whiskey Jack

If you want to get a better candidate in, if you want to break the two party deadlock on Washington, you need to start at home. Pay attention to your local elections: They don't always come on the 1st Tuesday in November, so you may have to do a bit of work to find them. Support the party of your choice in your municipal/county elections. Work to get a Libertarian Sherrif, if that's your bent, or a Green mayor. Establish a base of power, the move up from there: elect someone to state offices. You probably won't be able to get legislators right away, but Attourney General, Secretary, etc. Now that you have a base of power, expand it.



This is such an important aspect of establishing these third parties, yet so overlooked. Recently, in our local elections, I think they said we had like 30,000 registered voters. Only 7,000 showed up to the polls. The people were given the option of voting the week prior the actual election date, as well as the scheduled election day voting option and, absentee voting ballots.

Three options were granted for people to cast their vote, and yet, people still didn't make it to the polls. These same people will sit around and complain how bad government is or wonder why things are the way they are.

People have accepted things the way they are and certainly need to be motivated to stand up for a change. But, as Whiskey Jack had stated, the time to do this is during local elections, where our political voice really counts.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join