U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-16-2015, 06:59 PM
 
5,556 posts, read 5,025,984 times
Reputation: 3943

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricius Maximus View Post
The most common reason for partisans staying at home is that they don't like what's on the ballot representing their party that year, and it's quite logical to not vote for what you don't like.



Don't dignify someone or some party you don't like with your vote; if there is someone or some party you like, vote for them no matter what their "chances to win" are. The winning condition is to obtain the most votes, and you help the candidate get closer to that by your vote; someone should set a positive example, and if one votes a certain way others may follow in the future that may not otherwise have. Elections are supposed to represent the people, and not representing yourself honestly perverts the signal government receives. "The lesser of two evils" is still just that: evil, and if you vote for evil all you do is aid evil. It is a meaningless fear tactic used by oligarchs to perpetuate the status quo; it's the only conclusion that makes sense, since no one wants what they believe is evil government.
Now THAT is a truly awesome post!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-16-2015, 07:29 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
27,137 posts, read 15,677,613 times
Reputation: 9811
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarc View Post
Yeh, ha, LBJ over Goldwater. Look how THAT ended up.
It wasn't going to end up good either way. It was the radical we knew vs. the radical we didn't which is why LBJ won. Being a year out from the Kennedy assassination didn't hurt either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wartrace View Post
Not everyone is a useful idiot with a "party" affiliation. 42% of the people identify themselves as independent voters. Why would these independent voters go to the polls if they dislike both major political crime families?
I went independent because in Arizona there is only really Republican primaries with only a handful of Democratic races that are contested in primaries. This allows me to vote in either primary to try to see if there is a candidate that fits me more than picking the lesser of two evils or picking a third party candidate that really wouldn't effect the vote all too much.
That and I am not strict republican or democrat as I am a moderate who can vote on either side provided they aren't too much to the extremes or vote or the less extreme.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogead View Post
Write-in and third party votes can likely be justified if one's only concern is the dislike of/lack of enthuasm for the specific Democratic and Republican candidates seeking election. On the other hand, if the concern is the inherent corruption of the electoral system itself, choosing not to participate is the only rational way to react to the fetid system.
I can see the corruption aspect but if you don't vote, is that really not
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarc View Post
I know, right? What's the logic behind this "you better vote for one party or the other"?
Because as I mentioned the only real 3rd parties to make a difference in the vote was Wallace with the Dixiecrats in 1968 (removing five states from the board,) Ross Perot taking the votes from Clinton and Bush in 92 and Teddy Roosevelt landing in second despite being on the Progressive/Bull Moose Party rather than the Republican Party he previously ran for or even Nader taking some votes from Gore in 2000 to allow for Dubya to win in a few states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2015, 07:31 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
27,137 posts, read 15,677,613 times
Reputation: 9811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricius Maximus View Post
The most common reason for partisans staying at home is that they don't like what's on the ballot representing their party that year, and it's quite logical to not vote for what you don't like.



Don't dignify someone or some party you don't like with your vote; if there is someone or some party you like, vote for them no matter what their "chances to win" are. The winning condition is to obtain the most votes, and you help the candidate get closer to that by your vote; someone should set a positive example, and if one votes a certain way others may follow in the future that may not otherwise have. Elections are supposed to represent the people, and not representing yourself honestly perverts the signal government receives. "The lesser of two evils" is still just that: evil, and if you vote for evil all you do is aid evil. It is a meaningless fear tactic used by oligarchs to perpetuate the status quo; it's the only conclusion that makes sense, since no one wants what they believe is evil government.
I can somewhat see that but if you don't vote, don't you also not care? I'm interested what you think about it because this was my view except when you are say too young to vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2015, 08:10 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
34,593 posts, read 33,579,817 times
Reputation: 51685
The message is being sent to your own party but apparently, the lunkheads (Party Machine and Big Donors) just don't get it. They can buy their choice of candidate the longevity for a run but they can't buy me ("me" meaning everyone who deliberately stays home) to make me vote for them.

I mean, seriously, Romney a third time? He's the same guy that lost the other two times. Is his ego banking on people disliking Hillary more than they dislike him? Is that a good reason to vote for someone -- who do you dislike less?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2015, 08:40 AM
 
11,058 posts, read 3,725,868 times
Reputation: 5184
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
I mean, seriously, Romney a third time? He's the same guy that lost the other two times. Is his ego banking on people disliking Hillary more than they dislike him? Is that a good reason to vote for someone -- who do you dislike less?



I don't see a problem in Romney running again, the more people run the better. The same with Jeb and his family baggage. Let the voters in the primary decide, that's why its call a process.



and by the way, all of them have EGO, that's why they run and nobody has a bigger ego than the Clintons, that's why they love the spotlight and can't let it go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2015, 08:51 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
34,593 posts, read 33,579,817 times
Reputation: 51685
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
I don't see a problem in Romney running again, the more people run the better. The same with Jeb and his family baggage. Let the voters in the primary decide, that's why its call a process.



and by the way, all of them have EGO, that's why they run and nobody has a bigger ego than the Clintons, that's why they love the spotlight and can't let it go.
I'm just telling you why I would consider staying home. I'm telling the party machine they can buy their way through the primaries and general election but they aren't going to buy me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2015, 09:07 AM
 
11,058 posts, read 3,725,868 times
Reputation: 5184
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
I'm just telling you why I would consider staying home. I'm telling the party machine they can buy their way through the primaries and general election but they aren't going to buy me.


the process will play out....the process always eliminates the weak candidates. Both parties will do that.........the more people that run the better, let the voters in each party decide who they want in the general election.


I want to hear from all of them for solutions to the problems of our country, that's why we have primaries. Let Romney, Jeb, Walker, Rubio, Cruz and Paul run for the GOP and whoever wants to run for the democrats.


How many times Ron Paul ran for president had lost? but many people wanted to see him run because of his ideas and wanted him to be heard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2015, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
27,137 posts, read 15,677,613 times
Reputation: 9811
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
The message is being sent to your own party but apparently, the lunkheads (Party Machine and Big Donors) just don't get it. They can buy their choice of candidate the longevity for a run but they can't buy me ("me" meaning everyone who deliberately stays home) to make me vote for them.
The message isn't always heard though. In 2009/10, the TEA Party took over the Republican Party similar to the 1960 with Goldwater conservatism. This worked on the districts, even states (though some already had it) but on the 2012 campaign trail we saw many of the TEA Party fail to connect to the nation on a whole (rather a subset)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
I mean, seriously, Romney a third time? He's the same guy that lost the other two times. Is his ego banking on people disliking Hillary more than they dislike him? Is that a good reason to vote for someone -- who do you dislike less?
To be fair, once (2008) but he fell off in early on in February compared to September Republican National Convention with only 2 votes from delegates, McCain got most of the vote with Ron Paul getting 21 votes and 14 obstains. In 2012 Romney was in a similar spot but you still had several 1 votes, 9 votes to Santorum and 190 votes to Paul.
We have also seen several failed nominations return and on both parties. Adlai Stevenson lost back to back after gaining the Democratic nominations in 1952, again in 1956 and even tried again in 1960 but failed. Richard Nixon famously lost in 1960 before winning when he ran eight years later. It maybe meh, but some people really want that candidate to be the candidate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
I don't see a problem in Romney running again, the more people run the better. The same with Jeb and his family baggage. Let the voters in the primary decide, that's why its call a process.
I agree. I'd love to find out who are running so we can start hearing the creation of their platforms and what new solutions are being brought forward as well as debates so we can figure out which candidates should continue their run while others should just stop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
and by the way, all of them have EGO, that's why they run and nobody has a bigger ego than the Clintons, that's why they love the spotlight and can't let it go.
I have to agree with that. Even if Hillary isn't running, she loves the attention from possibly running.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
I'm just telling you why I would consider staying home. I'm telling the party machine they can buy their way through the primaries and general election but they aren't going to buy me.
It don't matter about how you can buy votes. You can still voice your votes during the primaries. If you don't like Romney, vote for another with a platform you want to see. Staying at home, it don't send the message unless enough people do it. One person is not enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
the process will play out....the process always eliminates the weak candidates. Both parties will do that.........the more people that run the better, let the voters in each party decide who they want in the general election.
Exactly, look at how many TEA Party candidates were in the debates but by the time Super Tuesday came about, they were irrelevant. Not bagging on the TEA Party but many of the nominees who made comments that hurt them similar to the Dean Scream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
I want to hear from all of them for solutions to the problems of our country, that's why we have primaries. Let Romney, Jeb, Walker, Rubio, Cruz and Paul run for the GOP and whoever wants to run for the democrats.
As do I. America is at a crossroads that we can either rise or fall back from. I want to hear all the options available and I hope more plan on becoming nominations soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
How many times Ron Paul ran for president had lost? but many people wanted to see him run because of his ideas and wanted him to be heard.
This goes to a point I made previously about some people liking candidates. I may not like Romney himself running but I want someone like Romney getting the nomination. If he is the nominee, I'd vote for him but I rather a fresh but similar view.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2015, 09:31 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
34,593 posts, read 33,579,817 times
Reputation: 51685
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
the process will play out....the process always eliminates the weak candidates. Both parties will do that.........the more people that run the better, let the voters in each party decide who they want in the general election.


I want to hear from all of them for solutions to the problems of our country, that's why we have primaries. Let Romney, Jeb, Walker, Rubio, Cruz and Paul run for the GOP and whoever wants to run for the democrats.


How many times Ron Paul ran for president had lost? but many people wanted to see him run because of his ideas and wanted him to be heard.
I don't vote for people based on what they say. I vote for people based on what they've done.

Lower taxes coming from candidates with a history of raising them or voting to raise them are liars.

Another example: For decades politicians have been talking about simplifying the tax code. It will never happen because lawyers make too much money off of complicated taxes and regulations and they're a big donor group. Anyone who says they will simplify the tax code and/or regulations once in office is lying.

Border security? From who? People with a record of sucking up to Mexico? People with a record of pandering to companies looking for cheap labor? Better monitoring for visa overstays? Show me the legislation you've introduced. Show me your record of doing something about it in your own state.

Smaller government? How big was the state government in your state when you first became governor compared to how big the state government was when you left or now if you are still governor. How many bills did you vote "Yes" on that added federal government employees, offices, programs?

National Debt. Do you have a balanced budget? What's the debt of your state compared to when you took office? How many times did you vote to raise the National debt ceiling? Name the spending bills you voted against in Congress or vetoed as governor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2015, 10:06 AM
 
11,058 posts, read 3,725,868 times
Reputation: 5184
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
I don't vote for people based on what they say. I vote for people based on what they've done.

Lower taxes coming from candidates with a history of raising them or voting to raise them are liars.

Another example: For decades politicians have been talking about simplifying the tax code. It will never happen because lawyers make too much money off of complicated taxes and regulations and they're a big donor group. Anyone who says they will simplify the tax code and/or regulations once in office is lying.

Border security? From who? People with a record of sucking up to Mexico? People with a record of pandering to companies looking for cheap labor? Better monitoring for visa overstays? Show me the legislation you've introduced. Show me your record of doing something about it in your own state.

Smaller government? How big was the state government in your state when you first became governor compared to how big the state government was when you left or now if you are still governor. How many bills did you vote "Yes" on that added federal government employees, offices, programs?

National Debt. Do you have a balanced budget? What's the debt of your state compared to when you took office? How many times did you vote to raise the National debt ceiling? Name the spending bills you voted against in Congress or vetoed as governor.



the reason Romney is good for the conversation debate because he is the only mainstream candidate that is correct on immigration and doesn't pander to cheap labor corporations that are driving wages down and unemployment up on the lower class and middle class for votes like some in both party do, especially in the democrat party......some say he is stupid and that's why he lost in 2012 but I look at it differently, he stood up to a PRINCIPLE regardless if it cost him votes or an election.


We can't deport by force 12 million (close to 20 million) illegals we dont have the manpower for that but what we can do it make things harder on them by not giving them jobs or government handouts and they will return to their country or if they stay in our country force them to obey our laws and follow the process which its the law.....and secure the border, how can you have any reform without securing the border. That's like remodeling your broken store on the surface and keeping the same security system.


Jeb Bush isn't for that, he is for amnesty and open borders just like most in the Democrat party.......the upper elites don't care because the illegals are not competing for their jobs or driving their wages down, That affects only the lower and middle class.



I like to see a mainstream candidate like Hillary take a stand on principle regardless if its going to hurt her in the polls. She won't. She was for the war when it was popular and against the war when it became unpopular....she was against gay marriage and for the DOMA act when her husband signed it into law when it was popular then change when the nation changed..............has Hillary taken any stance on principle regardless if it might cost her votes or an election?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top