you know what- my main concern with this election is with all of these people, especially young people, who put all of there idealistic hopes into obama because whether or not obama or bush or mike is president , the only people who can do 98% of this "change" are the ordinary no names. people need to get out and do shit themselves and if they leave it up to the president than this country will be thoroughly disappointed.
I agree 100% for all people. This is exactly what is necessary. Inner/outer change, not the illusion of change.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
you know what- my main concern with this election is with all of these people, especially young people, who put all of there idealistic hopes into obama because whether or not obama or bush or mike is president , the only people who can do 98% of this "change" are the ordinary no names. people need to get out and do shit themselves and if they leave it up to the president than this country will be thoroughly disappointed.
I agree..in fact I think the ONLY way for any significant social change to occur is through mass popular protests. I don't expect the president to do much, in terms of everyday life for Americans.
worldwide though? the reason I voted for Obama was because of foreign policy concerns. again.....small policy shifts from the world's only superpower could have significant impact on millions of people around the world.
good job commy. I concur with your sentiments. I agree that obama is not perfect but for people to not vote for him because they think there isn't a big difference between he and mccain is simply idiotic. So things were pretty much the same Under Clinton as they were bush? Yeah okay end of argument.
Actually voting in general is a waste. Our votes (because they are singular) don't matter. Does that mean, I'm not voting? No. I feel like it's more of a duty than anything.
Voting for a third party candidate is fine. I'm not doing it, but have no problem with one who is.
To me voting 3rd party is not about winning. The way the system is set-up it is impossible for a 3rd party candidate to win, but that doesn't mean we can't send a message to Washington. If enough people go out and vote 3rd party we can send a clear message to the Republicans and Democrats that their position of power isn't so secure anymore. That they have two options, start governing for the people or eventually find themselves out of a job. Enough votes for a 3rd party candidate can bring much needed attention to their party helping them get local politicians elected to start changing this country from the ground up. It's a long process but we shouldn't simply give up because we don't see immediate results. A lot of Americans are fed up with the Republicans and Democrats so I think it is extremely important to send a message this year.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
I was thinking about this topic a bit more last night had a great revelation. I think it's safe or fair to say that a vast number of voters would vote for a 3rd party candidate if they thought they had a chance of winning. The way our system is setup is so that all votes do not count because of the electoral college system. So with that said, in non-battle ground states, why aren't people voting 3rd party? The significance of doing so would be tremendous. It would be the difference in 3rd parties receiving funds for getting the minimum percent vote which would keep them afloat and be able to grow with prominence. So with this stated, in non-battle ground states, wouldn't it be more beneficial if voters who felt as such, voted 3rd party candidates compared to voting for the 2 major parties where it is already decided? Most people who lean towards 3rd parties, yet vote for Dem or Rep because they think it's too important to do otherwise, this is the opportunity to make a difference and build a party for the future while not compromising what you believe to be an important election. It's what should occur (at a minimum), yet in practice, the opposite occurs. For example, I live in NY. Most of my friends are Dems, but lean towards 3rd party policies and beliefs - yet every election, they vote Dem even though it is already obvious that NY will go to the Dems (and it's not close). So why not use this opportunity to help and vote 3rd party and build a party for the future?
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I was thinking about this topic a bit more last night had a great revelation. I think it's safe or fair to say that a vast number of voters would vote for a 3rd party candidate if they thought they had a chance of winning. The way our system is setup is so that all votes do not count because of the electoral college system. So with that said, in non-battle ground states, why aren't people voting 3rd party? The significance of doing so would be tremendous. It would be the difference in 3rd parties receiving funds for getting the minimum percent vote which would keep them afloat and be able to grow with prominence. So with this stated, in non-battle ground states, wouldn't it be more beneficial if voters who felt as such, voted 3rd party candidates compared to voting for the 2 major parties where it is already decided? Most people who lean towards 3rd parties, yet vote for Dem or Rep because they think it's too important to do otherwise, this is the opportunity to make a difference and build a party for the future while not compromising what you believe to be an important election. It's what should occur (at a minimum), yet in practice, the opposite occurs. For example, I live in NY. Most of my friends are Dems, but lean towards 3rd party policies and beliefs - yet every election, they vote Dem even though it is already obvious that NY will go to the Dems (and it's not close). So why not use this opportunity to help and vote 3rd party and build a party for the future?
It's because people want immediate results. People have to realize that a 3rd party candidate is not going to win the election. They get frustrated and loose hope every four years when their candidate doesn't win. What they don't realize is if that candidate had a strong enough showing in the presidential election it could create momentum for the party. It could help the party get local or state level candidates elected.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Well sure selecting the winner of something is great, but as we see in practice, the results of such things don't bold well.
To me, it really shows the hypocrisy of some voters though. Many who lean towards 3rd parties and vote otherwise are the first to tell people to vote 3rd party in non-battle states, yet don't do so themselves. If people did this, you'd see a Green party or another party have significant turnout - like 10+%. With all the money and backing from that occurence, they could seriously gain a strong local foundation, and within a 2nd election (8th yr), you'd have a significant role in society in debate and appearance with potentially some smaller locals candidates on the ballot and potentially even getting voted into congress. Once that mark would be accomplished, people would take a 3rd party seriously and it would only grow stronger and larger over time.
It's because people want immediate results. People have to realize that a 3rd party candidate is not going to win the election. They get frustrated and loose hope every four years when their candidate doesn't win. What they don't realize is if that candidate had a strong enough showing in the presidential election it could create momentum for the party. It could help the party get local or state level candidates elected.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Well sure selecting the winner of something is great, but as we see in practice, the results of such things don't bold well.
To me, it really shows the hypocrisy of some voters though. Many who lean towards 3rd parties and vote otherwise are the first to tell people to vote 3rd party in non-battle states, yet don't do so themselves. If people did this, you'd see a Green party or another party have significant turnout - like 10+%. With all the money and backing from that occurence, they could seriously gain a strong local foundation, and within a 2nd election (8th yr), you'd have a significant role in society in debate and appearance with potentially some smaller locals candidates on the ballot and potentially even getting voted into congress. Once that mark would be accomplished, people would take a 3rd party seriously and it would only grow stronger and larger over time.
I completely agree.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
If you study political history concerning the emergence of third parties typically what transpires to enable a successful third party is a split of the base of either the the 2 major parties.
Usually grass roots third parties simply can't raise enough money to compete.
How different would this election have been should Hillary have decided to run independent? Or what if Hillary had received the DNC nomination and Barack Obama had decided to run independent? Would the same people that champion the third parties have backed an independent Obama or Clinton?
Last month, a local radio station ran a phone-in political discussion and one of the topics expressed by numerous listeners was that there wasn't a good candidate from either party. At the time of this program, T Boone Pickens was running his adds regularly and making the talk circuit shows. An amazing amount of listeners (if I remember about 40%) would have voted for him if he was a candidate.
I know this was just a talk radio show but I was amazed at how many people would actually phoned in singing the praises of a man they knew little about outside of a few national commercials and talk shows.
I tend to agree but would add this point. People in our society have been looking for alternative parties. In recent history we've had 2 elections (96 and 00) in which two very different candidates made impact upon society by their running and bringing attention to alternatives to the 2 major parties. In my opinion, at some point in time what will occur is that a 3rd party will emerge and have some staying power by the example I mentioned above. The Dems will probably be hurt the most by this occurence and what will follow will be the Democratic party will shift a good number of its politics towards 3rd party voters once the 3rd party is too significant to ignore. A new platform which encompasses 3rd party voters, but probably not overly radical enough to lose too much of their normal base will come into being. Through political parties and elections, this is the storyline of how we will see practical change in our government officials and policies. The rest will outside the voting booth (if people ever decide to do so).
Ps.. If not this scenario, I see global warming, world war and nuclear fallout leading to the end of humanity. Either way, evolution or devolution works.
If you study political history concerning the emergence of third parties typically what transpires to enable a successful third party is a split of the base of either the the 2 major parties.
Usually grass roots third parties simply can't raise enough money to compete.
How different would this election have been should Hillary have decided to run independent? Or what if Hillary had received the DNC nomination and Barack Obama had decided to run independent? Would the same people that champion the third parties have backed an independent Obama or Clinton?
Last month, a local radio station ran a phone-in political discussion and one of the topics expressed by numerous listeners was that there wasn't a good candidate from either party. At the time of this program, T Boone Pickens was running his adds regularly and making the talk circuit shows. An amazing amount of listeners (if I remember about 40%) would have voted for him if he was a candidate.
I know this was just a talk radio show but I was amazed at how many people would actually phoned in singing the praises of a man they knew little about outside of a few national commercials and talk shows.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
voting is never a waste.
voting for who you truly believe in is never a waste.
voting for what you'd like to see change is never a waste.
even if your candidate doesn't get elected, YOU know you voted your own beliefs. only 2x in my voting history has the candidate i voted for actually won the presidential election. and so it goes. only once did i ever vote for the 'lesser of 2 evils'....and it didn't make a shit of difference in any case. granted that year, there were NO appealing choices imo, and i always feel it's my civic duty to vote, but either way....i far rather vote my beliefs, always. also why i will be voting obama. i am glad after such a looonnnnggg time, i actually have a presidential canadidate i truly want as president.
voting is never a waste.
voting for who you truly believe in is never a waste.
voting for what you'd like to see change is never a waste.
even if your candidate doesn't get elected, YOU know you voted your own beliefs. only 2x in my voting history has the candidate i voted for actually won the presidential election. and so it goes. only once did i ever vote for the 'lesser of 2 evils'....and it didn't make a shit of difference in any case. granted that year, there were NO appealing choices imo, and i always feel it's my civic duty to vote, but either way....i far rather vote my beliefs, always. also why i will be voting obama. i am glad after such a looonnnnggg time, i actually have a presidential canadidate i truly want as president.
Very nice! I applaud this!
..even when I also believe that conscientiously-not-voting is a very impactful and integrity based option, too!
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Comments
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
worldwide though? the reason I voted for Obama was because of foreign policy concerns. again.....small policy shifts from the world's only superpower could have significant impact on millions of people around the world.
Trust me, I'd have said it, if I'd have been conscious of it's existence as an innocuous expletive.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Voting for a third party candidate is fine. I'm not doing it, but have no problem with one who is.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
It's because people want immediate results. People have to realize that a 3rd party candidate is not going to win the election. They get frustrated and loose hope every four years when their candidate doesn't win. What they don't realize is if that candidate had a strong enough showing in the presidential election it could create momentum for the party. It could help the party get local or state level candidates elected.
To me, it really shows the hypocrisy of some voters though. Many who lean towards 3rd parties and vote otherwise are the first to tell people to vote 3rd party in non-battle states, yet don't do so themselves. If people did this, you'd see a Green party or another party have significant turnout - like 10+%. With all the money and backing from that occurence, they could seriously gain a strong local foundation, and within a 2nd election (8th yr), you'd have a significant role in society in debate and appearance with potentially some smaller locals candidates on the ballot and potentially even getting voted into congress. Once that mark would be accomplished, people would take a 3rd party seriously and it would only grow stronger and larger over time.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I completely agree.
Usually grass roots third parties simply can't raise enough money to compete.
How different would this election have been should Hillary have decided to run independent? Or what if Hillary had received the DNC nomination and Barack Obama had decided to run independent? Would the same people that champion the third parties have backed an independent Obama or Clinton?
Last month, a local radio station ran a phone-in political discussion and one of the topics expressed by numerous listeners was that there wasn't a good candidate from either party. At the time of this program, T Boone Pickens was running his adds regularly and making the talk circuit shows. An amazing amount of listeners (if I remember about 40%) would have voted for him if he was a candidate.
I know this was just a talk radio show but I was amazed at how many people would actually phoned in singing the praises of a man they knew little about outside of a few national commercials and talk shows.
Ps.. If not this scenario, I see global warming, world war and nuclear fallout leading to the end of humanity. Either way, evolution or devolution works.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
voting for who you truly believe in is never a waste.
voting for what you'd like to see change is never a waste.
even if your candidate doesn't get elected, YOU know you voted your own beliefs. only 2x in my voting history has the candidate i voted for actually won the presidential election. and so it goes. only once did i ever vote for the 'lesser of 2 evils'....and it didn't make a shit of difference in any case. granted that year, there were NO appealing choices imo, and i always feel it's my civic duty to vote, but either way....i far rather vote my beliefs, always. also why i will be voting obama. i am glad after such a looonnnnggg time, i actually have a presidential canadidate i truly want as president.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
..even when I also believe that conscientiously-not-voting is a very impactful and integrity based option, too!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!