Voting Nader In the Upcoming Election Is Immoral and Naive

Quote:

When is the last time a third party candidate broke 10%?

A guess would be Ross Perot in 1996.

0 Replies

Cephus wrote:

Sofia wrote:
If a third party candidate breaks 10%, by the next election cycle, there may be a stronger, viable third party, a challenge to the status quo. The change won't take place quickly enough to satisfy some, but it could be the impetus for the real change so many seek.

When is the last time a third party candidate broke 10%? Heck, they're all fighting tooth and nail to get 5% so they can get federal matching funds.

Hasn't happened yet, certainly isn't going to happen this year.

I definitely wasn't predicting 10% for the third party candidate this go round. I was saying if all the people who are being guilted away from Nader, and all the voters who stay home because they don't think the third party is viable actually voted their conscience, and IT DID happen to break 10%, the third party may actually gain enough strength to be a contender in the NEXT election cycle.

Think about it. How many Anybody But Bushies are voting for Kerry, but actually prefer Nader? You are hard pressed to find ANYONE voting for Kerry because they are excited about his candidacy...hell, most are holding their noses.

0 Replies

The enthusiasm that Bush fans have for the notion of lefties voting for Nader is a great indication of what that vote's effect will be.

Edgar said it best. "Let's you and him fight."

0 Replies

Hard as it may be to believe, I am't always playing partisan.

I'm talking about the Big Picture-- American Politics. Not just this November. If the Dem Party doesn't go through some changes, we'll all be stuck in the center together, with no real options.

Kerry's "plans" are practically the same as Bush's.
Bush Light.

0 Replies

if all the republicans voted conservative
if all the democrats voted liberal
Kucinich would be running against McCain.

0 Replies

So, Sofia, for this "bigger picture" will you be voting for a third party or will you be voting for Bush?

Lot's of people want others to use their vote on the bigger picture, but will you be spending your vote on a third party?

0 Replies

LOL!

If my party had completely drifted away from what drew me to it in the first place, I would. I'm not thrilled with The Guy at the top of my party of choice, but I am solidly behind most of the principles in the GOP.

I'm actually an indy, but...where's the party? The GOP is closer to me than the Dems. (Although, the Dems are closer to the GOP than it should be.)

Your answer: If McCain was running, I wouldn't only be VOTING for him, I'd be WORKING for him. No matter what the polls said.

0 Replies

Makes sense, if it's still true to what you want. But I still think that most people who laud voting for a third party candidate mean that they think it's a great idea for those in the opposite party to do with their vote.

Personally, I think all Republicans should get behind a third-party candidate and really shake up this stagnating 2-party system.

I think it would be good for America in the long term.

[size=7]But most of all in the short term.[/size]

0 Replies

Who do we vote for?
(Who espouses traditional Conservative issues?)

0 Replies

I'm not sure who to endorse just yet. I am, however, convinced that you should vote for a third party for the good of the country.

0 Replies

You are looking for someone who is not Democratic nor Republican who espouses traditional conservative values?

It sounds like you, rather than I, should be voting for Kerry.

0 Replies

If people think they are throwing their votes away if they vote for Nader and cannot stand to think of re-electing Bush or electing an almost neutered Kerry, then, the solution would be not to vote at all.

0 Replies

Jarlaxle wrote:

Quote:
When is the last time a third party candidate broke 10%?

A guess would be Ross Perot in 1996.

Who was running as an independent (ie. not a memeber of a third party).

0 Replies

Sofia wrote:

I definitely wasn't predicting 10% for the third party candidate this go round. I was saying if all the people who are being guilted away from Nader, and all the voters who stay home because they don't think the third party is viable actually voted their conscience, and IT DID happen to break 10%, the third party may actually gain enough strength to be a contender in the NEXT election cycle.

This has nothing to do with guilt and everything to do with having an effective government in this country, as opposed to the Nazi-esque stormtrooperism of the Bush Administration. We simply cannot afford to keep that moron in office one day longer than absolutely necessary. Idealism has it's place, but not in this election.

Quote:

Think about it. How many Anybody But Bushies are voting for Kerry, but actually prefer Nader? You are hard pressed to find ANYONE voting for Kerry because they are excited about his candidacy...hell, most are holding their noses.

I can't stand Nader and wouldn't vote for him if he was the only one running. Same goes for Nolan. Heck, if I could only vote for someone I supported, I wouldn't vote. I just know that we need to get evil incarnate out of office before he completely destroys this country.

0 Replies

mporter wrote:

If people think they are throwing their votes away if they vote for Nader and cannot stand to think of re-electing Bush or electing an almost neutered Kerry, then, the solution would be not to vote at all.

The problem is that you still have to live under the regime that's elected (or appointed, as was the case this time) whether you vote or not. You're just as screwed as the rest of us if you don't vote and Bush gets in again.

0 Replies

Cephus wrote:

Jarlaxle wrote:
Quote:
When is the last time a third party candidate broke 10%?

A guess would be Ross Perot in 1996.

Who was running as an independent (ie. not a memeber of a third party).

Reform Party.

0 Replies

?

I know.

Anything other than the major two is a third party...

0 Replies

He's back. Consumer activist Ralph Nader is running for President again -- giving Democrats fits and angering even some of of his own former Nader Raiders. Progressives can't forgive him for costing Al Gore at least two states in 2000 election, most notably Florida, and the Presidency. Yet, while he attracted nearly 3% of the popular vote in the 2000 election nationally, polls are showing him doing even better this time, with 5% to 7% backing. He could cost Presidential candidate John Kerry at least seven states where the election is close, according to polls.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

He's back. Consumer activist Ralph Nader is running for President again -- giving Democrats fits and angering even some of of his own former Nader Raiders. Progressives can't forgive him for costing Al Gore at least two states in 2000 election, most notably Florida, and the Presidency. Yet, while he attracted nearly 3% of the popular vote in the 2000 election nationally, polls are showing him doing even better this time, with 5% to 7% backing. He could cost Presidential candidate John Kerry at least seven states where the election is close, according to polls.

I doubt that Nader will even come close to the 2.7% he pulled off in 2000. Even if he does, the ultimate result will be that, a) Ralph Nader will not be president, b) your ideological antithesis, George Bush, will be president. Period. Your wishful thinking does you no favors, Edgar.

In any case, your inability or unwillingness to support or explain away the inconsistancies and sloppy reasoning in your argument doesn't reflect well on you. Further, the mountains of hyperbole you've raised on the topographical map of your post history only makes your entire argument look as illogical as it is:

Prompt: Ralph Nader will not be the next president, and voting for him will only result in the re-election of George Bush, who is the candidate you oppose most.

You: I hate all politicians! War bad. Democrat is a synonym for republican! Radical and completely impractical reworking of American society needed. NOW!

Prompt: There are fundamental differences between the candidates on several issues.

You: I hate all politicians! War bad. Democrat is a synonym for republican! Radical and completely impractical reworking of American society needed. NOW!

Prompt: How do you respond to these statistics?

You: I hate all politicians! War is bad. Democrat is a synonym for republican! Radical and completely impractical reworking of American society needed. NOW!

Prompt: Yesterday my dog was killed in a freak accident involving urine and an electirc fence.

You: I hate all politicians! War is bad. Democrat is a synonym for republican! Radical and completely impractical reworking of American society needed. NOW!

You're arguing that both parties are essentially the same, and ignoring the laundry list of fundamental differences that have already been pointed out. What's next on your itinerary of windmills to tilt at - the cold tyranny of winter and the unconscionable burden of having to scrape ice off your windows, rendering all talk of cars infuriating?

0 Replies

I took that last post from Google News. I went back for the link and the story was gone. Anyway, I did not write it.

0 Replies

Voting Nader In the Upcoming Election Is Immoral and Naive

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know