Another Pointless Poll - Who would you vote for U.S. president?

[Whateverist]

Just a couple more months before we find out if the U.S. will throw out its first black president in order to install its first Mormon one. So ... if the election were held today, who would get your vote? Since we essentially have a two party system I will of course give you a choice for tweedle dumb and tweedle smart. I'm also going to give you two choices for "other" so you can express your rationale, but you'll have to tell us which one you like in your post because this is my fucking poll.

Choice A: Running in the blue trunks and representing all that is good, we have Obama, the current champion. Obama successfully ran on a platform of "yes we can" in the last election but some of those who voted for him last time are now saying "oh no, you didn't". A pragmatist with a willingness to compromise, some describe him as the candidate of incremental change. I'm voting for Obama.

Choice B: Running in the red trunks and representing rapacious capitalism and the empowerment of the individual through the elimination of any social safety net, we have Romney. The original author of Massachussets' version of Obamacare when he was their governor, Mitty has turned the etch-a-sketch on that position. Running in the primary Romney positioned himself to the right of reason, but is expected to say what ever it takes to win this race in the general election. I'm voting for Romney.

Choice C: I'm voting for "other" because I resent a system that allows only two choices. I refuse to be limited to the lesser of two evils. I want what I want and I can live with who ever actually gets elected. After all, what really is the difference between a candidate who delivers so little of what was promised and one who would veto any attempt to deliver those same things?

Choice D: I'm voting for "other" because I really believe __________ is above and beyond superior to either Choice A or B, and, I believe in my heart of hearts that (s)he really will win this election. When elected my candidate will work tirelessly and successfully for full employment, free everything and, of course, world peace.

[Tiberius]

How about:

Choice E: I'm voting for "other" because it's not a two-party system, and __________ better represents my political views.

My main objections to Choices C and D are:

1) It's not a system that only allows two choices, therefore you aren't limited to the lesser of two evils.
2) Whether you think ________ will win the election is not why you should vote for them.
3) "free everything / world peace" are ridiculous goals for the leader of a single country.

[Whateverist]

How about:

Choice E: I'm voting for "other" because it's not a two-party system, and __________ better represents my political views.

Maybe but I'm picking up strong overtones of Choice C.

[Cinjin]

Where I come from, you'd have better luck trying to get a person to talk about the time they saw their parents having sex, than getting them to admit who they're going to vote for. Maybe people from Michigan are just weird that way.

[Tiberius]

Maybe but I'm picking up strong overtones of Choice C.

Actually, the first section of Choice D would suit me fine. I don't vote for people because I believe they will win the election; I vote for them because they represent the best candidate (in my view), and I hope other people feel the same way.

I disagree with the statement "When elected my candidate will work tirelessly and successfully for full employment, free everything and, of course, world peace." because full employment should be the responsibility of employers, not the government; nothing is ever truly "free"; and world peace will not come as the result of one person or even one country, but as the result of everyone.

[Gambit]

D: I'm voting for Ron Paul because he seems honest, doesn't talk shit, and defends his positions no matter how much criticism comes his way. I also believe that he's most likely to make the changes needed to turn 'merica around. I'm not from the U.S., but still, that would be my vote.

[jackman]

if the election were held today, i'd be voting for obama (if you say "of course", then fuck you. /kidding). but i will not say with certainty that that can't change if he goes anymore off course. right now i'm still holding onto my views of him and i think he's still the same guy that campaigned in 08 but that he's taken too much of the "i dont wanna be the aggressive black guy that people think about", so he's gone too far in the wrong direction to try to at least get something done in the right direction (if that makes any sense). getting something done is at least showing he has earned his pay and i wish congress over the last 2 yrs were able to say that.

[Darth]

I'm not American, but if I were, I'd vote for Gary Johnson and I'd use Tiberius's E option =P

[Minimalist]

1) It's not a system that only allows two choices, therefore you aren't limited to the lesser of two evils.

How little you understand what is going on over here, Divo Tiberio.

[Anomalocaris]

How about:

Choice E: I'm voting for "other" because it's not a two-party system, and __________ better represents my political views.

My main objections to Choices C and D are:

1) It's not a system that only allows two choices, therefore you aren't limited to the lesser of two evils.
2) Whether you think ________ will win the election is not why you should vote for them.
3) "free everything / world peace" are ridiculous goals for the leader of a single country.

It's a system that allows multiple choices, but only two who could possibly win. Voting for any of the others would never create the slightest chance of any of those others winning, but it does take a vote away from whichever of the two who could win, that you would however slightly prefer to the other. So there are multiple choices. However all but one of the choices collapse to the equivalent of a vote for that of the two plausible winners whom you hate more.