Questions about voting

[dkgojackets]

Re: Questions about voting

Agreed. The whole "if you don't vote, you can't complain" argument is bull.

I will vote this year, because of Ron Paul. If he isn't on the ballot, I will either write him in or not vote at all. Every other candidate is a complete and utter tool, so they will not be getting my vote.

Yeah I want Paul too even though I'm sure he won't be on the ballot. At least I can give him a vote in primaries.

[Chaos81]

Re: Questions about voting

When you vote even if you do what I said above because you don't like the choices it gives you the right to complain because you were part of the process.

Being part of the process, even if it's completely pointless, gives you the right to have an opinion? I guess I'm dense, because that makes no sense to me. To me voting for Mickey Mouse, or wrecking your ballot, is just as "bad", as not voting.

there's always the option of starting a grass roots campaign for someone you truly feel for.

What if there isn't anyone you "feel for"?


Almost forgot.

1) Well I've only been able to vote for 2 elections, and this will make three, so no.

2) Wouldn't matter.

3) Nothing.

[Double Eights]

Re: Questions about voting

1. This will be my first Presidential Election in which I will be able to contribute. I will be voting for Ron Paul in the NY Primary. If Ron Paul is on the final Republican ballot, he's got my vote. If he is not on the ballot, I will either write him in or not vote at all.

2-4. I don't care if my vote counts as .5 of a vote, or counts as 100 votes. I don't care if I get paid $0, or if I am paid $1,000 if I vote. As long as there is a candidate I like on the ballot, I will vote. If there is no candidate that I like, I will either write him in (if possible) or not vote. Simple as that.

I will not vote if I do not have candidate I agree with.

[SPTO]

Re: Questions about voting

Well Chaos we'll agree to disagree on our philosophies

[pk500]

Re: Questions about voting

So you'd rather someone vote for a person they don't like, someone they wouldn't want running their country, and someone whom they don't agree with any of their policies?

Would it make you feel better if those people voted for Scooby Doo?

There are more than just Democrats and Republicans on the ballot ...

I find it very hard to imagine there's no one on the ballot that either matches or comes close to your positions on many issues, unless you're a complete anarchist. Usually there are at least five or six third-party candidates on the ballot.

For example, I've voted Libertarian in each of the last three presidential elections.

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

Re: Questions about voting

I vote but I don't agree with the "if you don't vote you have no right to complain" what if each canidate is an idiot to you, vote on the lesser of two evils and who you agree with the most? If there is no one you think is worthy, why vote ? And of course you can still complain if both are not worthy in your eyes.

As I said in the prior post, there are more than two candidates in every presidential election. If you're too lazy to look past the Democratic and Republican candidate, then you're too lazy.

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

Re: Questions about voting

1. This will be my first Presidential Election in which I will be able to contribute. I will be voting for Ron Paul in the NY Primary. If Ron Paul is on the final Republican ballot, he's got my vote. If he is not on the ballot, I will either write him in or not vote at all.

I suggest that you explore the Libertarian Party and its candidate in the general election in November. Paul was a card-carrying Libertarian for a long time before he moved to the Republican Party to enhance his electability to the Congress.

Paul may be labeled a Republican, but he's really a Libertarian.

https://www.lp.org

Take care,
PK

[Karlos05]

Re: Questions about voting

I'll vote Colbert/Doritos or no one at all.

[Chaos81]

Re: Questions about voting

Well Chaos we'll agree to disagree on our philosophies

There are more than just Democrats and Republicans on the ballot

Really?

I find it very hard to imagine there's no one on the ballot that either matches or comes close to your positions on many issues, unless you're a complete anarchist. Usually there are at least five or six third-party candidates on the ballot.

I voted in the 2000 election. In 2004 there were some that came close, but the positions I didn't agree with, I disagreed with tremendously, so I didn't vote. I fail to see how that matters with regards to me voicing an opinion, but we'll have to agree to disagree.


dk, my apologizes for jacking your thread.

[Double Eights]

Re: Questions about voting

I suggest that you explore the Libertarian Party and its candidate in the general election in November. Paul was a card-carrying Libertarian for a long time before he moved to the Republican Party to enhance his electability to the Congress.

Paul may be labeled a Republican, but he's really a Libertarian.

https://www.lp.org

Take care,
PK

Yeah, I am essentially a Libertarian but registered as a Republican so I could actually vote in a Primary around here. Ron Paul is literally the only candidate that is actually running on standard Republican viewpoints. Small government, anti-war, etc.. And yet he gets mocked and criticized for these ideas by people in his own "party," when he is the only one to actually go by the Republican standards. It's nuts.

[mudtiger]

Re: Questions about voting

Yeah, I am essentially a Libertarian but registered as a Republican so I could actually vote in a Primary around here. Ron Paul is literally the only candidate that is actually running on standard Republican viewpoints. Small government, anti-war, etc.. And yet he gets mocked and criticized for these ideas by people in his own "party," when he is the only one to actually go by the Republican standards. It's nuts.

Lol, I suggest you read his old newsletters, he's got quite a bigoted past and should be laughed off the stage. I wouldn't call The New Republic part of his "own" party either.

http://tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca

[Chief Illinimac]

Re: Questions about voting

There are more than just Democrats and Republicans on the ballot ...

I find it very hard to imagine there's no one on the ballot that either matches or comes close to your positions on many issues, unless you're a complete anarchist. Usually there are at least five or six third-party candidates on the ballot.

For example, I've voted Libertarian in each of the last three presidential elections.

Take care,
PK

No offense as I see your point, but you only prove that a vote is worthless unless you like either of the two major parties' candidates. You can argue with your philosophy or the theory of the voting system, but the fact of the matter is, you wasted your time voting in the last three presidential elections.

Our system is a great idea. It just doesn't work the way it was meant to. As a result, I have never voted because ultimately my vote does not have any impact on the outcome. I look at it like this: if I went back in time and voted in past elections, would it matter? The answer is no.

And as for not being allowed to complain about government if you don't vote... well that's just an ignorant blanket statement. I'll complain all I want if someone I didn't want in office is there messing things up. I have yet to see a strong candidate that deserves my backing (another reason I don't vote). I still have every right to complain about X even if I didn't vote for Y or Z, because I don't like X Y or Z, and I don't have a choice in the matter. Apparently some people believe that my opinion is only valid if it's shared by someone else on a ballot. Sounds like backward thinking to me.

In case it isn't clear, I am only speaking of national elections, i.e. the presidential election.

[Double Eights]

Re: Questions about voting

Lol, I suggest you read his old newsletters, he's got quite a bigoted past and should be laughed off the stage. I wouldn't call The New Republic part of his "own" party either.

http://tnr.com/politics/story.html?i...5-4532a7da84ca

1. Those have yet to be proven as things he has said.

2. He advocates civil liberties. One of the civil liberties a person has is freedom of speech. So even if those are true, it means nothing.

[mudtiger]

Re: Questions about voting

1. Those have yet to be proven as things he has said.

2. He advocates civil liberties. One of the civil liberties a person has is freedom of speech. So even if those are true, it means nothing.

ha.

He didn't seem to have a problem with them in '96

http://reason.com/blog/show/124339.html

Which is specially funny because the other night on cnn he said he's never even read them.

from the reason article

May 22, 1996 Dallas Morning News:
Dr. Paul denied suggestions that he was a racist and said he was not evoking stereotypes when he wrote the columns. He said they should be read and quoted in their entirety to avoid misrepresentation. [...]

Sure, that's freedom of speech, but bigoted nonetheless. Straight up racism is not exactly a libertarian value.

Even fellow libertarians are jumping ship

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/01/11/ron-pauls-ugly-newsletters/

[dkgojackets]

Re: Questions about voting

ha.

He didn't seem to have a problem with them in '96

http://reason.com/blog/show/124339.html

Which is specially funny because the other night on cnn he said he's never even read them.

from the reason article


Sure, that's freedom of speech, but bigoted nonetheless. Straight up racism is not exactly a libertarian value.

Even fellow libertarians are jumping ship
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/...y-newsletters/

how the hell are you drawing those conclusions from those links