I was just reading through Badnarik's website, and I pretty much agree with most of his points. Still have to vote for Kerry though.

Originally posted by Nate the Grate
I was just reading through Badnarik's website, and I pretty much agree with most of his points. Still have to vote for Kerry though.
I don't understand why people don't vote their conscience, and then complain about the status quo.

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

I don't understand why people don't vote their conscience, and then complain about the status quo.

I don't know who to vote for now. I don't want it to be either of the 2 major party candidates *sigh*

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
I don't understand why people don't vote their conscience, and then complain about the status quo.

Some people don't have a candidate to vote for that matches their ideals. I should follow that up by saying that we're really fucking lucky to have Badnarik on the ballot.

But I think it's important for people to do what they feel they need to, even if that happens to be voting for Kerry to get Bush out of office when they could vote for someone more ideal. The important thing is that people make the decision between idealism and practicality for themselves, because that's part of the act and responsibility of voting.

What <i>I</i> don't understand is people saying, "I <i>have</i> to vote for Kerry." No, you don't. At least acknowledge that it's your decision.

I believe this was already stated by someone here in another thread, but I'll re-iterate for the sake of this one. This election is a little different from typical elections. The winner will be Bush or Kerry. I didn't see any 3rd party candidate debating in Florida tonight ... but maybe in 2008 things will change..

<font color=#007AAA face="courier new">I think it's upsetting that Badnarik and Cobb are not allowed to debate with the numbskulls.</font>

I am a little disgusted that not one of my 150 or so cable channels had any coverage of the third party debates.

It is a difficult system though. I'd say 60% of Americans think Bush should go. But what happens when 5% vote third party and another 10% think Kerry is even worse than Bush and vote for Bush anyway?

This is confirmed by polls; just over 40% of Americans approve of the job Bush is doing but around 50% profess that they plan to vote for him in November.

I'd prefer a system where voters rank five or so candidates w/ relative points being assigned to each candidate. The top two have a run-off. Who wouldn't want to see a guy like Wesley Clark or Tom Coburn go head to head against Bush and Kerry rather than offer their blind support during the general election although they disagree w/ 90% of what their candidate has to say.

I read a great article on voting systems and the relative pros and cons of each system a few months ago. The basic premise of the article is that every system has its inherent flaws.

And does anyone else find it amusing that although 2/3 of Americans think that the U.S. made a mistake by invading Iraq, BOTH candidates voted for the war and openly admit that they would have invaded Iraq even knowing what they know today?

Are you fucking kidding me? Every dipshit in the Bush administration and every douchebag in Congress that voted for that abortion of a foreign policy maneuver should be fired Trump-style.

to expand on my earlier (and hastier) comments:

I feel that this election will probably be the most important of my entire life (also the first), and that we are at a pivotal time in our nation. We hired President Bush to do a job, and in my opinion, he has not done that job, so it is time for him to go. I live in a swing state and I feel my vote really is important, and I know the only way to get rid of Bush is to vote Kerry. I think the point I'm trying to make is that getting rid of Bush, to me, is more important that electing Kerry. I'm not really voting for Kerry, I'm voting against Bush.

(although after last night's debate though, I feel really really good about Kerry, and I am actually more leaning towards voting FOR Kerry, not against Bush)

We hired President Bush to do a job, and in my opinion, he has not done that job, so it is time for him to go.

I agree w/ this statement 100%. Likewise, I think we hired U.S. Senator John Kerry to do a job, he has not done that job, and it is time for him to go as well. In my opinion, I do not think John Kerry deserves to be a U.S. Senator (that of course is not my decision, but the decision of those in the state of Massachusetts) and see absolutely no reason to reward him with the presidency.

My point is that we limit our future choices by voting for the "lesser of two evils" (or "against" somone).

Originally posted by Nate the Grate


One thing I would let you know is this:

Voting for Badnarik is voting against Bush and is like a .5 vote for Kerry. It is similar to voting for Nader and it being a vote against Kerry and a .5 vote for Bush.

That is why I am voting Badnarik. It hurts Bush AND it endorses my concience,

Originally posted by jczeroman

That is why I am voting Badnarik. It hurts Bush AND it endorses my concience, IN your case, I don't think this is true. They base that ".5" on the fact that you're essentially taking your vote away from Bush and giving it to someone other than Kerry.

You were never going to vote for Bush.

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son
IN your case, I don't think this is true. They base that ".5" on the fact that you're essentially taking your vote away from Bush and giving it to someone other than Kerry.

You were never going to vote for Bush.

Just as an iside... I am going to take a new look at my vote and look at each candidate during the debates and give them another chance.

Originally posted by jczeroman


Just as an iside... I am going to take a new look at my vote and look at each candidate during the debates and give them another chance.

I can assure you the neither candidate will mention anything about decentralizing the locus of decisionmaking on any issue -- reason enough to vote LP.

But what frustrates me the most those still considering their choice in candidates is this: when has a politician ever followed through on their campaign promises. For Christ sake, GWB claimed he was a fiscal conservative the didn't believe in nation building in 2000. And Kerry has a long history of supporting big government.

I don't care who you vote for, but please consider what they will actually do in office rather than the bullshit the spew on the eve of the election.

yeah, nate, you dont live in a swing state

Originally posted by Nate the Grate
to expand on my earlier (and hastier) comments:

I feel that this election will probably be the most important of my entire life (also the first), and that we are at a pivotal time in our nation. We hired President Bush to do a job, and in my opinion, he has not done that job, so it is time for him to go. I live in a swing state and I feel my vote really is important, and I know the only way to get rid of Bush is to vote Kerry. I think the point I'm trying to make is that getting rid of Bush, to me, is more important that electing Kerry. I'm not really voting for Kerry, I'm voting against Bush.

(although after last night's debate though, I feel really really good about Kerry, and I am actually more leaning towards voting FOR Kerry, not against Bush)

That's fine, but realize that you've made a choice. You haven't been left in a dead-end situation with no other recourse but to vote for Kerry. You have decided to vote for Kerry because you think it's the best thing.

Originally posted by jczeroman
Just as an iside... I am going to take a new look at my vote and look at each candidate during the debates and give them another chance.

I've pretty much promised myself that I am not going to make up my mind until election day or at least the day before because I feel that the more time I give myself to consider with an open mind, the better.

I want to believe your theory about a vote for Badnarik being a .5 vote for Kerry, because I want to vote for Badnarik but I also want Kerry to win. Unfortunately, though, what Nimrod said makes sense. If you weren't going to vote for Bush anyway, there's no way voting for Badnarik is going to hurt him.

Originally posted by Nate the Grate
We hired President Bush to do a job, and in my opinion, he has not done that job, so it is time for him to go.

what exactly did you hire him to do?

No matter what political affiliation, everyone has to remember that our country is a LOT different than it was 4 years ago. No matter whom was elected, their original agendas/policies would have been forced to take a backseat to the whole 9/11 thing.

Originally posted by carter
GWB claimed he [...] didn't believe in nation building in 2000.

<font color=#007AAA face="courier new">I'm glad I'm not the only one who remembers that. From what I've read, it seems he was already bent on overthowing Iraq at that time.</font>

Originally posted by Nimrod's Son

I don't understand why people don't vote their conscience, and then complain about the status quo.

in any election, normally it's not a big deal to vote for an "alternative party" even if they're not going to win or it's giving a vote to an "evil" party. i always, always vote for who i feel and discourage "strategic" voting.

but people have to realize, in this one instance in 2004, there's WAY too much at stake. if i was in america i'd vote for kerry even though i hate him more than bush for being such a shitty alternative.

Originally posted by Mayfuck
yeah, nate, you dont live in a swing state

nuh uh do too!

oh nevermind just read a thing on cbs.com, Maine looks solidly Kerry now. but it USED to be a swing state, so I'm still half right.

Originally posted by Lie
I want to believe your theory about a vote for Badnarik being a .5 vote for Kerry, because I want to vote for Badnarik but I also want Kerry to win. Unfortunately, though, what Nimrod said makes sense. If you weren't going to vote for Bush anyway, there's no way voting for Badnarik is going to hurt him.

Yes, I think Mike has a pretty good point. I don't know if it would stop me voting Badnarik.