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.

 

The Obama, Paul, Romney Mexican Stand-off Pledge

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   
I just had a little brain storm. I was thinking of how many Dr. Paul supporters are now voting for either Obama or Romney. The reason they aren't voting for Paul is because they are afraid their most despised politician will win. Obama fans think "A vote for Paul is a vote for Romney" and Romney fans think "A vote for Paul is a vote for Obama".

This is the way they want it. They made sure they are both so polarized that you will have literal fear of the other actually winning.

But... what if you had assurance that your vote for Paul didn't mean a vote for the "other" guy? What if every Paul supporter that is planning on voting for Romney, found one that is planning to vote for Obama... then both agree to vote for Paul? That way there is no risk involved.

I'm up for grabs. If somebody who has obviously sided with Romney (when they were cheering for Dr. Paul early on) wants to pledge with me, I won't vote for Obama and will vote Paul instead if they do the same. Why isn't this already a movement!? It's like a risk-free way of voting your conscience.
edit on 17-8-2012 by Cuervo because: grammar




posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 08:24 PM
link   
Well why not stick to your guns and vote for Paul in the first place then, instead of being disingenuous? If you were a supporter in the first place either of the other two messages would turn your stomach either way..... I say if you planned on voting for Paul and didn't think he had a chance and voted just to get the other guy out, then you missed the point of voting entirely.......



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jheated5
Well why not stick to your guns and vote for Paul in the first place then, instead of being disingenuous? If you were a supporter in the first place either of the other two messages would turn your stomach either way..... I say if you planned on voting for Paul and didn't think he had a chance and voted just to get the other guy out, then you missed the point of voting entirely.......


Not really. Because you have Paul, who is your first choice and then they make sure that one of the two others is completely opposed to your ethics which makes you afraid to vote for Paul.

Like it or not, a vote for Paul is a vote for the guy you are afraid of since you could vote for the one with a possibility of defeating said "bad guy".

This plan would ensure that your missing vote from the lesser-of-evils will also go missing on the other side, as well. So your vote for Paul will not increase the chances of your despised candidate winning.



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
The only ethics I would be completely opposed to if I voted for the lesser of two evils would be my own... This election cycle is so bad you can't tell if they're actually running against each other because they both have the exact same ideas and that's what scares me! I know I am in the minority here but I just can't vote against myself in a time like this.....



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


I think that's a REALLY great idea! Instead of your votes cancelling each other out in the Romney/Obama battle, they would both go for the guy you really want. Very clever and effective!

The only downfall is that people can't always be trusted. For example, if you don't know the person, an Obama supporter could agree to vote for Paul and then vote for Obama instead. I'm just not sure it would work on a large scale.

Good luck with the idea!



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join