I'm really tired of...

[EagerBeaver]

...the argument that not voting or voting for a third-party candidate only enables Obama to become president.

Are we all that scared of an Obama presidency? Granted I don't like him any more than the next guy...but who are we to tell people who they should and should not vote for?

If McCain wants to beat Obama, maybe he should come out a little stronger on policies such as healthcare, tax cuts, etc. and stop pandering to the middle class as much. Then there wouldn't be a reason to vote third-party.

I'm voting third party as well. Just as much as I cannot vote Democrat because of their stances on several issues, I cannot vote Republican because of their pandering to the rich, neglect for the common man, and as Poimen stated in a thread of his own, not really doing anything when they were in control of the White House and Congress.

I will be voting with my CONVICTIONS this upcoming election, which means third-party.

If McCain is going to win, then his platform had better be strong enough to give more people a reason to vote for him.

I always pitied the day when Election Day became more about stopping the more evil of two candidates, rather than voting for what is right and honest according to one's morals.

[RamboPreacher]

...

I always pitied the day when Election Day became more about stopping the more evil of two candidates, rather than voting for what is right and honest according to one's morals.

the day? this isn't the first time this has happened; it has unfortunately, become the norm.

[Pastor Gary]

This is a simple fact, friend: American politics is based upon a two-party system...

black/white
on/off
up/down

those are all forced choices and so is the Presidential election. If you get in an elevator and want to go sideways, the button choices are still UP or DOWN.

Whether you like it or not, in pragmatic reality, any vote cast for a third-party alternative AMOUNTS to a vote for Obama. You may FEEL better and more principled, but the result has been shown time after time.

And, I will add, I served in Vietnam to defend your right to toss that vote into Obama's lap.

[DaJudge]

...the argument that not voting or voting for a third-party candidate only enables Obama to become president.

Beav, I sometimes wish we had more than 2 choices too. Fact is though, we live in country with a 2 party system, and throughout the history of this country, a 3rd party candidate has NEVER won. So, the sad fact is, if you don't vote for one of the 2 major party candidates, you are wasting your vote.

Are we all that scared of an Obama presidency?

Yes. Make no mistake, Beav. This man is the most dangerous person ever to have won a major party nomination. Not only are his economic ideas a disaster waiting to happen, but his national defense and foreign policy positions will harm us to an extent that we might not be able to recover from them.


Granted I don't like him any more than the next guy...but who are we to tell people who they should and should not vote for?

I'm voting third party as well. Just as much as I cannot vote Democrat because of their stances on several issues, I cannot vote Republican because of their pandering to the rich, neglect for the common man, and as Poimen stated in a thread of his own, not really doing anything when they were in control of the White House and Congress.

You are quoting Democratic talking points here that have no basis in reality. If you want to waste your vote on someone who has no possibility of winning, go ahead, but do it in the knowledge that you will be helping Obama win.

I always pitied the day when Election Day became more about stopping the more evil of two candidates, rather than voting for what is right and honest according to one's morals.

That's life in the real world, my friend.

[Dr. Ron]

Bev.....love you man......

Having said that ..........don't be stupid. You are (seemingly) a very intelligent, well spoken, professional, and deep thinking young man....but you are buying into the liberal bias hook, line and sinker....and the latter is the problem. Zero will sink this nation into a dismal socialistic stagnant pool of taxation without representation.

Mc isn't "pandering " to the rich.... If you don't like rich people, who do you think pays your salary? A rich person or company. Wealth and the accumulation of same, has always driven the progress of our nation. It is the "hope" that we can achieve wealth and prosperity, that causes us to create.......to opt for nothing less that progress in every strata of our existance as a people.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you......and remember (if the bible is allowed here) "in the multitude of counselors, there is safety." Possibly you might want to heed the words of those older, wiser, and far more educated in the process of politics (dolfan, PG, dajudge, ect.) They have been around a while...............a long while.....

Love you dude....just don't let all this junk from the liberal left become a blinder to you...,btw, Zero ain't out trying to give his money away....

[paul]

[EagerBeaver]

If McCain wants to beat Obama, maybe he should come out a little stronger on policies such as healthcare, tax cuts, etc. and stop pandering to the middle class as much. Then there wouldn't be a reason to vote third-party.

I cannot vote Republican because of their pandering to the rich, neglect for the common man,

Which is it....?

I generally refrain from interjecting to much when it comes to politics.

But some of the arguments I hear are so off base. the idea that we have an effective vote and some would choose not to exercise it, or use it in a non meaningful way simply is beyond my understanding.

I just think of Burma, Mozambique, North Korea, Cuba, and so many other places, where they would love to be able to choose between two parties ligetimately. To really have some kind of voice.

To me Palin is a perfect example of what is right about our system even though flawed. I wonder if the fix was in when she won her run for mayor ? or Gov. ? No she was choosen by the people, it was they that put her in office and now she has risen to become a canidate for VP.

[EagerBeaver]

[EagerBeaver]

If McCain wants to beat Obama, maybe he should come out a little stronger on policies such as healthcare, tax cuts, etc. and stop pandering to the middle class as much. Then there wouldn't be a reason to vote third-party.

I cannot vote Republican because of their pandering to the rich, neglect for the common man,

Which is it....?

I generally refrain from interjecting to much when it comes to politics.

But some of the arguments I hear are so off base. the idea that we have an effective vote and some would choose not to exercise it, or use it in a non meaningful way simply is beyond my understanding.

I just think of Burma, Mozambique, North Korea, Cuba, and so many other places, where they would love to be able to choose between two parties ligetimately. To really have some kind of voice.

To me Palin is a perfect example of what is right about our system even though flawed. I wonder if the fix was in when she won her run for mayor ? or Gov. ? No she was choosen by the people, it was they that put her in office and now she has risen to become a canidate for VP.

Whoops...by middle class I meant middle of the field politically.

The fact so many people jump on and tell someone that their vote gets Obama elected if it's not strictly for McCain (and I've heard it other places than here on J2) tells me the McCain camp is scared and somewhat insecure in what he has to offer.

Believe me I don't like Obama any more than I like green eggs and ham. But I don't like McCain either.

[forestwalker]

...the argument that not voting or voting for a third-party candidate only enables Obama to become president.

In most cases, it's just a really bad argument. The overall vote counts are irrelevant, only the votes in your state matter. And except for the Floridians, most everyone on this board lives in a state that is already in the bag for one candidate or the other. Here in CA, for example, assuming there's no drastic change between now and November, a vote for John McCain and a vote for Donald Duck will have equal weight in deciding the election: both will essentially disappear when all of our electoral college delegates are awarded to Obama.

So I'm free to cast a "pox on both your houses" vote (which is how I tend to think of it) and you're free to vote your convictions Chris.

[forestwalker]

I always pitied the day when Election Day became more about stopping the more evil of two candidates, rather than voting for what is right and honest according to one's morals.

Some reading you might enjoy Chris:

Divided and Conquered

New Categories

[DaJudge]

.

The fact so many people jump on and tell someone that their vote gets Obama elected if it's not strictly for McCain (and I've heard it other places than here on J2) tells me the McCain camp is scared and somewhat insecure in what he has to offer.

No, the reason for that is that many of us are old enough to remember this happening in previous campaigns

Ross Perot and his minions handed 2 presidential elections to Clinton. Perot, being a bit right of center, drained votes from Bush and Dole. Just enough to put Clinton over the hump twice.

Nader siphoned enough of the hard left vote to prevent Gore from winning the narrow 2000 election.

In this case, Barr and the Constitution party guy are right of center. They won't be taking Obama votes. They'll only take McCain votes. Experience is the reason we are against these 3rd party guys.

[pastorables]

Mc isn't "pandering " to the rich.... If you don't like rich people, who do you think pays your salary? A rich person or company. Wealth and the accumulation of same, has always driven the progress of our nation.

Exactly. Obama will tax many people out of jobs. My business is not large enough to sustain tax increases. My employees would be at risk if Obama is elected and raises taxes, etc. Btw, I'm not rich, but I do support the Republican party.

pa

[dolfan]

I want him to pander to the rich. Rich people create jobs. Poor people don't. Cut their taxes, cut federal spending.

Right now, Republicans pander to the non-working or low-earning classes. Earned-Income Tax Credits that "refund" more tax dollars to people than they paid in. Stimulus checks that put money in the pockets of the elderly when they don't even file a return, let alone pay taxes. All of that is a Republican president and with support of Congressional Republicans.

Create opportunties to generate wealth and you'll create prosperity for most. Not all, but most. Prosperity for all is a myth. Obama doesn't even promise it, that's how much of a myth it is.

Obama wants to tax oil companies and use the revenue to pay out a stimulus check wave again that will, guess what, create greater demand for oil. So, you're sticking them up twice: 1. Taxes that they pass along in the form of increased prices; 2. Draining supplies sufficiently to drive up prices. It is an insane plan. No one's talking about it.

Obama says the economy is a problem and the solution is higher taxes. Recipe for disaster. Raising taxes on a bear economy, which he has called it .... or one in a recession, which he has called it ..... is the absolute worst thing to do to that economy. McCain can say he's weak on economic issues. Obama doesn't have to; all he has to do is propose economic policies and we know he's weak on it.

Pander to the rich, pander to the producing classes and you'll win every time.

[DaJudge]

I want him to pander to the rich. Rich people create jobs. Poor people don't. Cut their taxes, cut federal spending.

Right. Perfect example: When the government recently mandated an increase in the minimum wage, several ladies I know who work in fairly menial jobs at an industrial plant lost their jobs, because the boss couldn't afford to pay them anymore. There are unintended consequences to all these liberal ideas.

[AllenNope]

Okay,
Then what about all the hogwash of voting your beliefs or your principles? That is why so many “Christians” vote for republicans. They are the pro “life party”? Anti-Gay party?

I am a strong believer in voting. I don’t care who you vote for just vote. If I vote third party or even write in the name of the person I think is the best person for the job, it does not mean that I am throwing my vote away or giving it to Obama. It simply means I am voting my convictions. I am voting for a person not against a person. If more people voted their true convictions rather than selling out for one main issue or another, we probably would have more than a 2 party system.

If I truly believe that my vote counts and I only vote against someone, I am throwing my vote away and the system has no chance of ever changing. If I vote my true conviction and encourage other people to do the same then my vote counts and maybe the system will be for the better.

Optimistic thinking

[Dr. Ron]

Allen, you speak as one who has many idealistic fantasies. Bless you brother, but no country can support more than a two party system....it just isn't possible for more than that to survive.

You will not change the system but creation of another party....you will see the parties change. The republicans of today are the dems of yesterday. The liberals took over the dem party and the conservatives left and became what we have today.

MAT was a staunch republican .....but the majority of the ghq staff in the 40s -50s were dems......go figure.

Don't let your idealism cloud reality.