General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
möbiustrip
 
möbiustrip's Avatar
 
..and if you don't, please consider voting third party. If you're one of many, many people who live in a bedrock state, and have a Bush/Kerry preference but aren't wholly satisfied with either guy, there's an underdog candidate for you.

Pay attention to numbers like these as we come into November. My state's 9% red, so my vote won't count either way--I plan to make it count by supporting a guy with new ideas I actually like.

__________________
I personally believe that there has to be a law that limits the power of the supreme court. -- R@$T@M@N
Old 07-09-2004, 03:46 PM möbiustrip is offline  
Reply With Quote
#1  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

/-\lex
 
You should vote for who you want regradless of if you live in a swing state.
Old 07-09-2004, 03:51 PM /-\lex is offline  
Reply With Quote
#2  

Doppelganger
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by /-\lex
You should vote for who you want regradless of if you live in a swing state.

Unless you can't stand the other guy, in which case you are voting defensively.
Old 07-09-2004, 03:53 PM Doppelganger is offline  
Reply With Quote
#3  

mike27
crt expert
 
Is it just me, or does this appear to be Kerry's election to lose at this point?

(291 vs 247)
__________________
Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become great.
- Mark Twain
Old 07-09-2004, 03:55 PM mike27 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#4  

möbiustrip
 
möbiustrip's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by /-\lex
You should vote for who you want regradless of if you live in a swing state.
People are pretty heated over which of Bush or Kerry is the lesser of two evils. Note, both options are still "evils." I'm asking people to play ball with the electoral college before the election, instead of bitching about it after.

A third party needs 5% of the popular vote to get federal matching funds. That's a hundredth of a percent of the nationwide popular vote in every state. Kerry can afford to win CA, and Bush can afford to win TX, by a slightly smaller landslide if it means we get better choices in 2008.
__________________
I personally believe that there has to be a law that limits the power of the supreme court. -- R@$T@M@N
Old 07-09-2004, 04:02 PM möbiustrip is offline  
Reply With Quote
#5  

/-\lex
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by möbiustrip
People are pretty heated over which of Bush or Kerry is the lesser of two evils. Note, both options are still "evils." I'm asking people to play ball with the electoral college before the election, instead of bitching about it after.

A third party needs 5% of the popular vote to get federal matching funds. That's a hundredth of a percent of the nationwide popular vote in every state. Kerry can afford to win CA, and Bush can afford to win TX, by a slightly smaller landslide if it means we get better choices in 2008.

Your point being?

You seemed to indicate that you wanted people to vote for either bush or kerry in a state that may swing. Im saying that is foolish for the reason that you point out (which leaves me confused) the lesser evil is still an evil. You then in essence are helping an evil take power in this country. If you don’t want bush to run the country don’t vote for him, if you don’t want kerry running the country don’t vote for him.
Old 07-09-2004, 04:09 PM /-\lex is offline  
Reply With Quote
#6  

möbiustrip
 
möbiustrip's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike27
Is it just me, or does this appear to be Kerry's election to lose at this point?

(291 vs 247)
Says these particular numbers. They'll change. I don't want to turn this into a Kerry-Bush debate, because the election will be close regardless.

However the election is not at all "close" for most voters because of the way our voting system works.

If you live in a swing state, your vote for Bush or Kerry matters. If you don't, it doesn't.
__________________
I personally believe that there has to be a law that limits the power of the supreme court. -- R@$T@M@N
Old 07-09-2004, 04:09 PM möbiustrip is offline  
Reply With Quote
#7  

isp
 
I live in ohio, an impact state for this election. Will be voting for the first time this year.
Old 07-09-2004, 04:09 PM isp is offline  
Reply With Quote
#8  

/-\lex
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by isp
I live in ohio, an impact state for this election. Will be voting for the first time this year.

Vote for Michael Badnarik
Old 07-09-2004, 04:13 PM /-\lex is offline  
Reply With Quote
#9  

Geotpf
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike27
Is it just me, or does this appear to be Kerry's election to lose at this point?

(291 vs 247)

Yes.

By the way, I know the site where he got that from. It's run by a Republican, who has been very fair and intelligent in his projections.

http://www.electionprojection.com/elections2004.html
__________________
Sigh.
Old 07-09-2004, 04:14 PM Geotpf is offline  
Reply With Quote
#10  

/-\lex
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppelganger
Unless you can't stand the other guy, in which case you are voting defensively.

The conundrum isn’t that we are going in the wrong direction at 5 mph as opposed to 10 mph, the conundrum is that we are going in the wrong direction.
Old 07-09-2004, 04:16 PM /-\lex is offline  
Reply With Quote
#11  

möbiustrip
 
möbiustrip's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by /-\lex
Your point being?

You seemed to indicate that you wanted people to vote for either bush or kerry in a state that may swing.
A lot of posters are holding their nose and voting for one guy because the other guy sucks worse. If you want to vote third party in a swing state, great. If you love Bush or Kerry and live in a bedrock state, great.

However if you don't love either guy, but still have a preference, there's a good chance you should reprioritize. Most states have already chosen their winner.
__________________
I personally believe that there has to be a law that limits the power of the supreme court. -- R@$T@M@N
Old 07-09-2004, 04:18 PM möbiustrip is offline  
Reply With Quote
#12  

Geotpf
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by /-\lex
Vote for Michael Badnarik

In that case, he WON'T have an impact in this election.

Look, if you want to vote third party, and live in a non-swing state (I would say 10%+ on this chart, not 5%+), I have no problem with that. I voted Harry Browne in 2000-because I hated Bush and Cheney, and hated Lieberman and slightly disliked Gore. (People who say a choice of Vice-President doesn't effect who votes for whom are full of shit-Gore choosing Lieberman was the sole reason I did NOT vote for Gore.) But I live in California.

In any case, voting third party does NOT affect what happens in future elections, or what the winner will do after winning. If Bush wins, he knows that if the Greens or Nader stay strong, they can move further to the right, because they push the center further to the right (that is, you can move further to the right and still win votes). If Kerry wins, he knows he probably doesn't need the support of Nader or the Greens, because he won without thier help. The House and Senate will safely ignore Nader or the Greens, and so will local officials.
__________________
Sigh.
Old 07-09-2004, 04:27 PM Geotpf is offline  
Reply With Quote
#13  

/-\lex
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by möbiustrip
A lot of posters are holding their nose and voting for one guy because the other guy sucks worse. If you want to vote third party in a swing state, great. If you love Bush or Kerry and live in a bedrock state, great.

However if you don't love either guy, but still have a preference, there's a good chance you should reprioritize. Most states have already chosen their winner.


Quote:
Originally Posted by /-\lex
The conundrum isn’t that we are going in the wrong direction at 5 mph as opposed to 10 mph, the conundrum is that we are going in the wrong direction.
Old 07-09-2004, 04:31 PM /-\lex is offline  
Reply With Quote
#14  

/-\lex
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geotpf
In that case, he WON'T have an impact in this election.

Look, if you want to vote third party, and live in a non-swing state (I would say 10%+ on this chart, not 5%+), I have no problem with that. I voted Harry Browne in 2000-because I hated Bush and Cheney, and hated Lieberman and slightly disliked Gore. (People who say a choice of Vice-President doesn't effect who votes for whom are full of shit-Gore choosing Lieberman was the sole reason I did NOT vote for Gore.) But I live in California.

In any case, voting third party does NOT affect what happens in future elections, or what the winner will do after winning. If Bush wins, he knows that if the Greens or Nader stay strong, they can move further to the right, because they push the center further to the right (that is, you can move further to the right and still win votes). If Kerry wins, he knows he probably doesn't need the support of Nader or the Greens, because he won without thier help. The House and Senate will safely ignore Nader or the Greens, and so will local officials.

By that logic everyone who didn’t vote for the winning party in their state would have no affect. Should everyone vote for the candidate that is predicted to win in their state?

If 500 people in palm beach county decided to vote for a 3rd party candidate instead of bush would that have not had an affect?
Old 07-09-2004, 04:37 PM /-\lex is offline  
Reply With Quote
#15  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:32 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.