|
|
Post by RS Davis on Apr 11, 2004 1:55:28 GMT -5
It has been suggested to me in private conversation that, as much as I dislike Bush, a vote for a libertarian is a vote for him, and therefore is somehow a betrayal of the values that I share with that person.
Let me begin by saying I detest both Bush and Kerry.
Here is the question: Is an honest and conscientious vote for a person you truly believe would be good for the country ever a wasted vote?
I would submit that abandoning your ideals and voting for someone you don't like, just to try and make someone else you don't like lose, is truly the wasted vote.
Comments?
- Rick
|
|
|
|
Post by whatever on Apr 11, 2004 20:52:40 GMT -5
I've been trying to form a halfway decent response to this. It isn't happening, so I'll have to make a mess of it. My hubby has the tv on the lovely docu-drama-bs-propaganda 911 on NBC. It's messing with my head. I look up and see these slick scenes and great looking actors and stuff...yuck. I don't even want to see a fancy production about 911. He thinks it's keeping informed with what's being said, "know thy enemy as thy friend" sort of thing. I tell him he's being subverted. Big bucks go into tv productions. It could happen.
Okay, sorry, I answered this question on STL CA the other day, and I said AAB, meaning ABB Anybody But Bush. I almost feel bad about saying it, but Bush scares the heebeegeebees out of meeeeeee. I can only hope Kerry isn't anywhere close to that agenda. Whatever in the hell it is, and it might as well be called "Kill the Golden Goose"
I would not say a third party vote is a waste. No. It's not the tactic I'm going with this year, but that's okay. It has been up to now, with my little old different colored Lib ticket. I agree I have little arguement to "abandoning your ideals and voting for someone you don't like, just to try and make someone else you don't like lose," as being much more a waste.
What I think, however, is that the ideals I'm abandoning... are already gone. They may already be useless, in terms of an election. Bush hasn't been much of a Republican in any case, either party scarcely matters. And did he even win last time? Have to seriously worry when they screw with your right to vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by penguin on Apr 12, 2004 19:46:18 GMT -5
Here is the question: Is an honest and conscientious vote for a person you truly believe would be good for the country ever a wasted vote? I would submit that abandoning your ideals and voting for someone you don't like, just to try and make someone else you don't like lose, is truly the wasted vote. Comments? - Rick I agree with you. I couldn't look myself in the mirror knowing I've voted for someone I would not feel is qualified to be presdident. I cannot, in good conscience, vote for either Bush or Kerry. If everone adopts the lazy "lesser of two evils" approach, we'll be forever stuck with evil. I don't vote for evil, I vote against it. |
|
|
|
Post by whatever on Apr 13, 2004 6:48:20 GMT -5
I agree with you. I couldn't look myself in the mirror knowing I've voted for someone I would not feel is qualified to be presdident. I cannot, in good conscience, vote for either Bush or Kerry. If everone adopts the lazy "lesser of two evils" approach, we'll be forever stuck with evil. I don't vote for evil, I vote against it. Come on guys, don't sugar coat it, tell me how you really feel! Aaaaaah, just don't kick me off for it, okay  I'm not terribly worried about Kerry. Is he the best? No, he isn't even Libertarian, so it's not possible. Is he viable? Yes, and he's likely not any worse than any other smuck that makes it. He is the only chance I see of removing Bush. Either we disrupt this whole police-state world-power puritanical serf mentality, or we might lose the right to vote along with other rights. Way I see it, it's all we have left. I'm very scared of my nation right now. We've discounted the most basic ideals of the consititution, and are flying blindly, with people that would rather edit out what they don't think will "work" rather than understand why we should allow it to work. People too ignorant to disagree with searches, seizers, registrations and facial recognition on the streets. "Show me your papers." My rage wars with my fear for most upsetting. Bush, after careful consideration, is a no-good bastard. He must go, at all costs. Other presidents were bad, but bad within their limits. This one is has claimed no limits and is effectively a traitor to our nation. Ashcroft can go straight to hell, do not pass go, keep your (filthy blood money) $200 and go to hell. |
|
|
|
Post by dr snootch on Apr 15, 2004 7:42:20 GMT -5
I agree with you. I couldn't look myself in the mirror knowing I've voted for someone I would not feel is qualified to be presdident. I cannot, in good conscience, vote for either Bush or Kerry. If everone adopts the lazy "lesser of two evils" approach, we'll be forever stuck with evil. I don't vote for evil, I vote against it. I couldn't agree more. As Rick is fond of saying, a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil. I also could not vote for either Bush or Kerry. So, assuming he votes for himself, Gary Nolan could have a solid 4 votes in this election. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by whatever on Apr 15, 2004 8:09:51 GMT -5
Well, at least no one called me a traitor  Or deleted me! Man, CA is such a joke sometimes. But the rudeness seems to start with the website, not the posters. I'm still looking for a response to my view, past just saying it's wrong to vote for the lesser of two evils. I appreciate that, but I have actually heard it before. More than once; it's not a new concept. However, it ignores what I'm saying. In my mind, we've got the standard/substandard type of government that we're used to, verses the "Homeland" that Bush is creating. We can keep what we have, improve it as we go; hopefully what our system allows us to do without bloody revolutions OR we can vote libertarian and wish others would do the same, knowing we help the Lib numbers but effectively having no impact on the election. I am voting for Kerry, because I do see him as the only safe candidate. I am fully aware I could be wrong, but no more wrong than with any candidate; you never know until they're in office. He seems like he might not be a traitor to our nation, and that's a good start. I want to be able to vote in the next election, as well as this one. Our systems of law and government are being systematically eroded. I am unreasonably afraid of Bush; with him in office, I'm not sure there will be an election next time. Think I'm kidding? Why? Because it's never happened, or because its never happened here? |
|
|
|
Post by RS Davis on Apr 15, 2004 11:49:55 GMT -5
I couldn't agree more. As Rick is fond of saying, a vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil. I also could not vote for either Bush or Kerry. So, assuming he votes for himself, Gary Nolan could have a solid 4 votes in this election. ;D Hahaha...make that 5 - HotJan is voting for Nolan, too. - Rick |
|
|
|
Post by RS Davis on Apr 15, 2004 12:09:08 GMT -5
Well, at least no one called me a traitor Or deleted me! Man, CA is such a joke sometimes. But the rudeness seems to start with the website, not the posters. I'm still looking for a response to my view, past just saying it's wrong to vote for the lesser of two evils. I appreciate that, but I have actually heard it before. More than once; it's not a new concept. However, it ignores what I'm saying. In my mind, we've got the standard/substandard type of government that we're used to, verses the "Homeland" that Bush is creating. We can keep what we have, improve it as we go; hopefully what our system allows us to do without bloody revolutions OR we can vote libertarian and wish others would do the same, knowing we help the Lib numbers but effectively having no impact on the election. I am voting for Kerry, because I do see him as the only safe candidate. I am fully aware I could be wrong, but no more wrong than with any candidate; you never know until they're in office. He seems like he might not be a traitor to our nation, and that's a good start. I want to be able to vote in the next election, as well as this one. Our systems of law and government are being systematically eroded. I am unreasonably afraid of Bush; with him in office, I'm not sure there will be an election next time. Think I'm kidding? Why? Because it's never happened, or because its never happened here? No offense or anything, but I think your fear of Bush is unreasonable. He's a horrible president, yes. But I think the fever against him has reached a pitch I've never quite seen before. Hell, I think I may have lost some frineds over my choice of candidates.  What's going on? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!This isn't really a response to you, Sweetie, but more me venting from some personal things I've been dealing with recently. Let me say, though, that I think many people have lost all perspective on this issue. The world will keep turning no matter who wins - the freedom that hangs in the balance of this election is the same as the freedoms that hung in the balance of every election for the last 100 years. For the last 100 years, no matter who was president, we've lost our freedom. It comes from the left, it comes from the right, from the top and bottom. Liberals have been taking away our economic and associative freedoms, and conservatives have ben taking away our personal and religious freedoms, while both claim to be actually fighting for our freedom. The net result is a just that we vote for which freedoms we want to lose for the next four years. To me, the only way to stem this tide is to vote for freedom. Still, that is just my opinion. If voting your conscience is a vote for Kerry, I would never begrudge you that. You must do what you think is right, not what someone else tells you to do. Kudos on remaining firm, despite all the libertarians around you.  - Rick |
|
|
|
Post by whatever on Apr 15, 2004 16:54:01 GMT -5
No offense or anything, but I think your fear of Bush is unreasonable. He's a horrible president, yes. But I think the fever against him has reached a pitch I've never quite seen before. Hell, I think I may have lost some frineds over my choice of candidates. What's going on? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!This isn't really a response to you, Sweetie, but more me venting from some personal things I've been dealing with recently. Let me say, though, that I think many people have lost all perspective on this issue. The world will keep turning no matter who wins - the freedom that hangs in the balance of this election is the same as the freedoms that hung in the balance of every election for the last 100 years. For the last 100 years, no matter who was president, we've lost our freedom. It comes from the left, it comes from the right, from the top and bottom. Liberals have been taking away our economic and associative freedoms, and conservatives have ben taking away our personal and religious freedoms, while both claim to be actually fighting for our freedom. The net result is a just that we vote for which freedoms we want to lose for the next four years. To me, the only way to stem this tide is to vote for freedom. Still, that is just my opinion. If voting your conscience is a vote for Kerry, I would never begrudge you that. You must do what you think is right, not what someone else tells you to do. Kudos on remaining firm, despite all the libertarians around you. - Rick Thank you, I appreciate all that very much. I see what you mean about the mass hysteria. I'll try to keep it in mind, truly I will And I'll be the first to say I'll be overjoyed if I'm completely wrong. That would be just fine. Just like with Y2K |
|
|
|
Post by RS Davis on Apr 15, 2004 17:55:38 GMT -5
Thank you, I appreciate all that very much. I see what you mean about the mass hysteria. I'll try to keep it in mind, truly I will And I'll be the first to say I'll be overjoyed if I'm completely wrong. That would be just fine. Just like with Y2K Yeah, I remember the Y2K stuff. I remember telling everybody the biggest thing they had to fear was freaks and weirdos who wanted to create a disaster, and as for the computer stuff, the biggest thing was all those unemployed Y2K programmers. - Rick |
|
|
|
Post by whatever on Apr 15, 2004 23:04:56 GMT -5
Yeah, I remember the Y2K stuff. I remember telling everybody the biggest thing they had to fear was freaks and weirdos who wanted to create a disaster, and as for the computer stuff, the biggest thing was all those unemployed Y2K programmers. - Rick Oddly enough, we had a different take on that too. But, I'm a programmer. Dude I used to code with 99999s all the time! I used to joke that, when everything went to hell and stuff that it was the programmers who would be blamed. We'd be saying "NO, I wasn't a programmer, no....uh no" And Rick, I am the only person I know of who coded for y2k before y2k was y2k. Ha. It was for a report of the weather info we routed at, well nevermind. It was, ah, 1992 I think. I put that little outer loop on my date test. I had to test if the day changed, then if the week changed, month changed...year changed...decade changed...century? What the heck. They laughed that the software wouldn't still be used by then. But some of the software was already 20 years old. And, they lost the source code. Is that so funny or what? Compiled fortran with no source code. I imagine it's all been scrapped now, but I know they tried to reverse engineer it once, and failed. |
|
|
|
Post by RS Davis on Apr 16, 2004 1:03:57 GMT -5
Oddly enough, we had a different take on that too. But, I'm a programmer. Dude I used to code with 99999s all the time! I used to joke that, when everything went to hell and stuff that it was the programmers who would be blamed. We'd be saying "NO, I wasn't a programmer, no....uh no" And Rick, I am the only person I know of who coded for y2k before y2k was y2k. Ha. It was for a report of the weather info we routed at, well nevermind. It was, ah, 1992 I think. I put that little outer loop on my date test. I had to test if the day changed, then if the week changed, month changed...year changed...decade changed...century? What the heck. They laughed that the software wouldn't still be used by then. But some of the software was already 20 years old. And, they lost the source code. Is that so funny or what? Compiled fortran with no source code. I imagine it's all been scrapped now, but I know they tried to reverse engineer it once, and failed. I almost followed that. ;D I'm a completely different kind of nerd... - Rick |
|
|
|
Post by whatever on Apr 16, 2004 15:16:53 GMT -5
I almost followed that. ;D I'm a completely different kind of nerd... - Rick What kind woudl that be? |
|
|
|
Post by RS Davis on Apr 16, 2004 19:44:32 GMT -5
What kind woudl that be? Political, of course. - Rick |
|
|
|
Post by whatever on Apr 16, 2004 19:53:20 GMT -5
Political, of course. - Rick Whoa. Never thought of that |
|
