RE: The Myth of the Third Party Solution
November 11, 2012 at 7:34 pm
(This post was last modified: November 11, 2012 at 7:48 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Right, so rather the devil you know. If you've decided to vote -against- the candidate you don't want rather than voting -for- the candidate that you do I can hardly see the point in complaining about the system. You're the one gaming it.......and you're getting out of the system exactly what you put in, less of what you don't like..but not really more of what you do. How else is it going to play out if those are the metrics you vote by? So maybe you're afraid that others wouldn't vote similarly? Boohoo. If you vote for your guy and they lose..boohooo. Other people would complain if their guy lost (they don't already?) boohoo. There are always winners and losers.
Suppose that our system was set up so that a minimum of 8 people had to run for president, and of those 8, 6 had platforms that revolved around something you abhorred. How do you propose to vote against the candidate you don't want (in truth you're voting against the issue on the platform, right?), and how do you avoid the problem you mentioned (won the election despite low overall support) by voting for the candidate that you do want?
Now, I get that there's less risk involved in voting against what you don't want compared to voting for what you do, but I can't really see how that's a problem with the system. What should we be doing, minimizing risk in political campaigns to a baseline? I believe that was one of the things that got us this stale two party shit to begin with...less chance for your boy to lose if there's only one other guy running.
Suppose that our system was set up so that a minimum of 8 people had to run for president, and of those 8, 6 had platforms that revolved around something you abhorred. How do you propose to vote against the candidate you don't want (in truth you're voting against the issue on the platform, right?), and how do you avoid the problem you mentioned (won the election despite low overall support) by voting for the candidate that you do want?
Now, I get that there's less risk involved in voting against what you don't want compared to voting for what you do, but I can't really see how that's a problem with the system. What should we be doing, minimizing risk in political campaigns to a baseline? I believe that was one of the things that got us this stale two party shit to begin with...less chance for your boy to lose if there's only one other guy running.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
