third party

[huskertim]

It seems that we're all disatisfied with our elected leaders. The theme of the last election was change, and yet virtually all of us voted for one of the two parties that have run this country for more than a century and a half.

 

I have to admit, I voted Republican. I really dislike McCain but they smote me with Palin (consevative, individualist, hated by the media<big plus IMO>, and not too hard on the eyes).

 

I feel I abandoned principles because I didn't vote Libertarian.

 

Question is, will I do it again?

[HuskerExpat]

I'm not dissatisfied with Obama at all. I'm one of the 69% of Americans who approve of him so far.

[carlfense]

It seems that we're all disatisfied with our elected leaders. The theme of the last election was change, and yet virtually all of us voted for one of the two parties that have run this country for more than a century and a half.

 

I have to admit, I voted Republican. I really dislike McCain but they smote me with Palin (consevative, individualist, hated by the media<big plus IMO>, and not too hard on the eyes).

 

I feel I abandoned principles because I didn't vote Libertarian.

 

Question is, will I do it again?

 

Palin smote you? PALIN?! I never figured you part of the Vote Bimbo crowd. I can find you several thousand sorority girls to vote for if you are into that type.

[huskertim]

Easy to bite on medias hatred, but when I see an independent woman I immediately think that her intellegence will be insulted. See Hillary Clinton et al... Her performance as gov of Alaska is evidence of an individualistic and forward-looking administrator. A lack of experience equals a lack of corruption, imo. And I'm not afraid to give an intellegent, hard-working (if inexperienced) person a chance if he or she has shown aptitude, as surely those who voted for Obama would echo.

 

P.S. Do you think no one voted for Barry because he was pretty?

[carlfense]

Easy to bite on medias hatred, but when I see an independent woman I immediately think that her intellegence will be insulted. See Hillary Clinton et al... Her performance as gov of Alaska is evidence of an individualistic and forward-looking administrator. A lack of experience equals a lack of corruption, imo. And I'm not afraid to give an intellegent, hard-working (if inexperienced) person a chance if he or she has shown aptitude, as surely those who voted for Obama would echo.

 

P.S. Do you think no one voted for Barry because he was pretty?

 

I agree that she is an independent woman. I agree that she was largely crucified by the media. I even agree with her stance on some issues (mostly on gun control issues). That said, she's never given me the slightest impression of intelligence. I know she was hampered by McCain's campaign plan, but her interviews were painful to watch. When a candidate claims to read several newspapers a day but can't name them I get a bit concerned.

 

And certainly, I agree that many people probably voted Obama based on his looks. I'm not sure how that is applicable. I'm not an Obama backer.

[huskertim]

Easy to bite on medias hatred, but when I see an independent woman I immediately think that her intellegence will be insulted. See Hillary Clinton et al... Her performance as gov of Alaska is evidence of an individualistic and forward-looking administrator. A lack of experience equals a lack of corruption, imo. And I'm not afraid to give an intellegent, hard-working (if inexperienced) person a chance if he or she has shown aptitude, as surely those who voted for Obama would echo.

 

P.S. Do you think no one voted for Barry because he was pretty?

 

I agree that she is an independent woman. I agree that she was largely crucified by the media. I even agree with her stance on some issues (mostly on gun control issues). That said, she's never given me the slightest impression of intelligence. I know she was hampered by McCain's campaign plan, but her interviews were painful to watch. When a candidate claims to read several newspapers a day but can't name them I get a bit concerned.

 

And certainly, I agree that many people probably voted Obama based on his looks. I'm not sure how that is applicable. I'm not an Obama backer.

 

 

I'm not pointing fingers here, I was just pointing out that I was lulled into my old voting pattern (lesser of two evils) because the party seemed to be making an effort to reach out to conservatives.

I had intended to vote for Bob Barr and hoped many fellow conservatives would do the same. My thinking was that McCain V Obama offered no actual difference. That is to say, IMHO, both represent an ever exanding federal government and further entrenchment of the two partys' strangle hold on power.

If we could have shown strong numbers this might have set up future success for a third party (not nesesarily the Libertarian party) or at least caused a serious reconsideration of current positions by both the Dems and Repubs.

[huskertim]

I'm not dissatisfied with Obama at all. I'm one of the 69% of Americans who approve of him so far.

 

 

This thread wasn't intended to attack Obama, Obviously I'm not a fan, but rather an endictment of the system that so many seem to feel is corrupt. I'm just guessing that there are a number of you who did vote for Barak, as well you should have if he was the one you thought best, but are not fans of the government as it is now. I for one can freely say I voted for GW and I really didn't like the guy (more specifically his policies) all that much but I saw the altrnatives as more undesirable.

[huskertim]

So again, the question for all of us (HuskerExpat aside) who like to bitch about the parties, did any of us vote for a third party? I already confessed that I whimped out.

[strigori]

Except in a few rare cases, like Ventura in Minnesota, voting for a 3rd party candidate is about pointless. And is more or less throwing your vote away as little more than a protest vote. Elections are mostly about money anymore, and without connections to the two major parties, the other guy just doesnt have money to compete. So unless the nation at some point decides that there should be a cap on spending for political campaigns, and the courts decided that money doesnt equal speech, the playing field is skewed and third parties have little or no hope of gaining larger footholds.

[huskertim]

Except in a few rare cases, like Ventura in Minnesota, voting for a 3rd party candidate is about pointless. And is more or less throwing your vote away as little more than a protest vote. Elections are mostly about money anymore, and without connections to the two major parties, the other guy just doesnt have money to compete. So unless the nation at some point decides that there should be a cap on spending for political campaigns, and the courts decided that money doesnt equal speech, the playing field is skewed and third parties have little or no hope of gaining larger footholds.

 

 

So does that mean that we, as the electorate are powerless, that once again instead of changing the landscape through democratic elections we must confer yet more power on unelected men in black robes so we don't have to get our hands dirty? I don't know about you, but I feel as though we're being pretty cowardly as a nation when we have to go to daddy to fight our battles for us.

[strigori]

Except in a few rare cases, like Ventura in Minnesota, voting for a 3rd party candidate is about pointless. And is more or less throwing your vote away as little more than a protest vote. Elections are mostly about money anymore, and without connections to the two major parties, the other guy just doesnt have money to compete. So unless the nation at some point decides that there should be a cap on spending for political campaigns, and the courts decided that money doesnt equal speech, the playing field is skewed and third parties have little or no hope of gaining larger footholds.

 

 

So does that mean that we, as the electorate are powerless, that once again instead of changing the landscape through democratic elections we must confer yet more power on unelected men in black robes so we don't have to get our hands dirty? I don't know about you, but I feel as though we're being pretty cowardly as a nation when we have to go to daddy to fight our battles for us.

My point is that most people are sheep. And he who has the most money can get their name and face and opinions in front of the most people. And if one guy has a massive money advantage, he can paint his opponent into whatever place he wants. Sad but true.

[rawhide]

I agree. Sad and true.

 

The old sayin' that money is the root of all evil ain't just for hearing yourself talk.

 

Money and intelligence/common sense don't always go hand in hand. GW and others are prime examples. Then again Warren Buffett is a counterpoint.

 

I think campaign spending limits are the only way anyone not of the BIG 2 can have any chance of getting into the White House. .02 jimho

 

 

GBR

[HUSKER 37]

Not much of a partier..

Although I have been known to take a 500mL Erlenmeyer flask to keggers.

 

 

I resent being pressured to declare whether I'm Liberal or Conservative..It depends entirely on the subject..and almost always somewhere in the middle.

 

I could never figure out how so many can only see one side of the issues.

 

Is a third (or fifth?) party any better?

[HuskerJen]

I'm not dissatisfied with Obama at all. I'm one of the 69% of Americans who approve of him so far.

 

Just curious, you're satisfied with Obama? Really? Do you have any ability to think critically?

 

Let's see, during "The Chosen One's" campaign he said:

 

* He'll end the Iraq war.

* He'll end NAFTA and other trade agreements which are detrimental to American workers.

* He won't hire lobbyists and that his administration wouldn't be for sale.

* He said he would allow five days of public comment before signing bills into law.

 

And these are merely the instances I can think of right off the top of my head.

 

For a much more complete rundown of "the chosen one's" lies, look here:

 

PolitiFact

 

PolitiFact is a project of the St. Petersburg Times to help you find the truth in American politics. Reporters and editors from the Times fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups and rate them on our Truth-O-Meter. We’re also tracking more than 500 of Barack Obama’s campaign promises and are rating their progress on our new Obameter.

 

 

 

But you're "satisfied" with Obama.

 

[hosker]

So again, the question for all of us (HuskerExpat aside) who like to bitch about the parties, did any of us vote for a third party? I already confessed that I whimped out.

 

i voted for Ron Paul.... who ran as a republican, but wasn't the republican nominee... its worth noting that he ran for president in the 88 election as the Libertarian Party's nominee.