Have to wonder why some people are so adamant that we should vote for a known socialist?
You got it 1/2 right. The "not this again" should have been directed at the OP's post. This mental light-weight stuff is getting really old and annoying.
Have to wonder why some people are so adamant that we should vote for a known socialist?
The better voting system would be to have two votes.
First time around, all candidates are welcome and everyone votes for whichever candidate they like best.
Second time, only the top two candidates from the first vote (regardless of party) are on the ballot.
This lets everyone vote his conscience and not risk "wasting a vote" in the final election. Of course, our primary two parties wouldn't like this one bit.
Isn't that what we do in the primaries --> general election? I see no fundamental difference.
ATM, et al... My point was not to persuade anyone that they were or were not "wasting their vote". It was an honest consideration of the point at which a given candidate becomes viable enough to be worthy of voting for. ...
I get your points and give weight to viability in my processing of candidates.
A large point where I differ is that I'm not looking at viability in the exclusive (or even primary) context of winning the current election, but the viability of my support and my vote to impact other candidates, other voters and future elections.
Rather than discuss that, I took some easy cracks in this thread. My bad. Maybe later I'll come back and be more serious.
My vote isn't wasted if it enables others to come off the fence and waste theirs with me next time.
After the next time, the numbers may be high enough to coax others into wasting theirs.
Eventually, all those wasted votes together total a win.
I wish there was some other way, but it seems most people have adopted some sort of "strategy" that does little more than keep the 2 current parties running the game.
If only there were multiple candidates that weren't Obama...
Oh wait, every other candidate except Obama is not Obama.
But I assume you meant that you just vote for whomever the Republican party selects. That seems wasteful to me.
Truth is - as any field of candidates gets winnowed down to 2 or 3 or whatever, the likelihood of having one that I agree with goes down exponentially. The question is - how best to proceed... and that's what I'm considering.
I held my nose and voted for McCain last time. I'll do that again for Romney. Only this time I will volunteer for his campaign too. Bozo the clown would be better than what we have now....
If your choice is between Obama and Romney vote Obama at least the Rs will watch Obama.
Once you're POTUS, no one watches over you but the voters, and you don't pay for the damage you do until four years later.
If your choice is between Obama and Romney vote Obama at least the Rs will watch Obama.
i understand the principle aspect of it for you and God bless you vote how you want.
but do YOU personally think that romney/obama or anyone in the future will get the message your sending?
i ask this in a sincere way and in no way trying to be smart or snarky. just curious as to your thoughts
jake
When do you expect this strategy of yours to start working?
I'd rather exert some minimal control over the political process than vote for a candidate who has zero (make that 5%) chance of winning - or not vote at all.