What we need is a voting populace of people who aren't too scared to put a checkmark next to a third-party candidate
I've heard the "voting for the lesser of two evils" rationale a million times before and it never makes sense.... no matter how much you hold your nose, your vote counts the same as everyone else's, and all those votes are what keeps the two-party fraud in place....
"We need a runoff system to stop this practice."
bull .
We need the Repugs to govern in good faith.
We need to get money out of politics.
We need to get vote-districting out of politicians. control.
The entire system is 100% corrupt. 2+ parties and your bull runoffs would be just as corrupt.
Nice meltdown, but I'm a registered Libertarian and far from a shill for the neocon GOP.... I can't stand the Republicans' warmongering and surveillance state, and feel they are just as bad as Democrats when it comes to shoving wedge issues down our throats, wasting taxpayer money, and reducing our freedoms.... I also do not watch any cable news at all....
The reality is that you are the one in the narrow partisan bubble, and you can't comprehend that there is a growing number of people like me who are fed up with the two-party bull and see it for what it is....
"Libertarian"
and hugely fraudulent (bowel) movement
I'm a lib
Lib? Christ no
I'm a centre-left socialist, the Libs in this country are a joke
4-0 on banner night
some more
It was 3-0 last April.
Hey man I can't disagree with that oneIt was 3-0 last April.
I agree, but having runoff elections will insure things like Clinton winning with under 50% in 1992 won't happen. Any idea how many people think Bush would have won if Perot didn't take so many votes? Many are scared less to vote 3rd party because of things like that.What we need is a voting populace of people who aren't too scared to put a checkmark next to a third-party candidate
I've heard the "voting for the lesser of two evils" rationale a million times before and it never makes sense.... no matter how much you hold your nose, your vote counts the same as everyone else's, and all those votes are what keeps the two-party fraud in place....
"Bush would have won if Perot didn't take so many votes"
Gore would have won FL and Presidency w/o Nader. All the Repug nightmares, from 2001 and well into the future, would have been avoided.
You start with a lie by changing the context of my quote. Why must you do such de able things? I did not say bush would have won you idiot. I said "Any idea how many people think Bush would have won if Perot didn't take so many votes.
As for the 2000 election, maybe Gore would have won if not for Nadar.
My point is you have people who want to vote third party, but are afraid their vote will put their last choice in office instead of their second choice.
We need runoff elections. Bush should have never won Florida with less than 50%+1 of the vote.
3rd parties MUST be the same corrupt s as the 1st and 2nd parties, or they won't have enough $Bs to run elections.
so your 3rd-party-as-pure-white-knight fantasy delivering your Repug/Libertarian dystopia is hilarious, ridiculous, but that's you.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 10-10-2014 at 07:06 PM.
First of all, " " is a racist slur. It's pretty ironic that you would condemn a group of people for racism even as you engage in that practice yourself.You s are the most racist people on earth, you don't like treating other races equally. You gooks are everywhere but you only allow a very small fraction of immigrants to your countries. I'm 100% sure that when you become the majority in Canada and Australia the immigration laws will be way more strict than they are today.
Second, just because I said I was Asian doesn't mean I'm automatically of Chinese / Japanese / Korean descent. Asia is far too big a continent to be compartementalized like that.
It depends on the candidate for me.What we need is a voting populace of people who aren't too scared to put a checkmark next to a third-party candidate
I've heard the "voting for the lesser of two evils" rationale a million times before and it never makes sense.... no matter how much you hold your nose, your vote counts the same as everyone else's, and all those votes are what keeps the two-party fraud in place....
No what we need is a system that allows for viable candidates that don't rely on parties to function or at the very least allow for more than a handful of parties. Pluralism is dead.What we need is a voting populace of people who aren't too scared to put a checkmark next to a third-party candidate
I've heard the "voting for the lesser of two evils" rationale a million times before and it never makes sense.... no matter how much you hold your nose, your vote counts the same as everyone else's, and all those votes are what keeps the two-party fraud in place....
. (Wrong thread)
yeah, this is why i'm pretty apathetic when it comes to elections nowadays. no matter who the candidates are, you are simply voting for the party platforms, and i'm not a fan of either of the 2 parties
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote