America Votes, how?

Folks vote because of some issue, they like or dislike about a
candidate. I finally realize why I'm voting for JFKerry. and it's
because he's not a republican, not becasue he's a democrat. Aint that
odd?
I dont think we need a rep congress and a rep. prez. now that's as
good of a reason as any..........we'll all have fun tomorrow, 11-03-04
disCussin' who should have been elected, it'l be fun for a few dayz.....

<>haveAgoodDay-Bjay<>

 

Yep. Most poeple vote *for* someone and based on what it is that the
voter expects the candidate to do when in office. Some old dogs (like
my 98 year old grandad) have voted Democrat their whole lives for no
other reason than it was the Democrates to established his farm
subsidies. How long ago was that and what good/bad has any one
candidate or party done since then?

I asked that very question of him once. That was the last time I
talked politics with him. It was clear that he bases his voting on
emotionalism.

 

Looks like we'll have fun for a WHILE! It looks like Ohio is the state
this year. Of course, it was predicted that Ohio would be the "state
of choice" for 2004 months ago. Mostly because there were too many
things in place which found it awfully convenient. Something about the
voting machines, the person in charge, that person being on a
administration seat with the White House, that person also promising
Bush the state months ago...and so on.

Anyway, I was watching the news and they did a survey of "white moms".
It seems the biggest factor of this voting was "morals". Then the next
question asked was about church. Only about 30 percent attend church.
Then they voted for Bush...

I was talking with one person on this election. They said they voted
for Bush. Then while the news was playing out, the news was talking
about the issues. Abortion, this person said they were for a woman's
right to choose. Gay marriage, the person said they were for gay
marriage. Stem cell, the person said they were for stem cell research.
I finally asked who they voted for for Sheriff in Dallas County. They
didn't know. What's wrong with that picture?

Far too often, people vote and don't know what they're voting for or
who they're voting for. Sorta like a certain somebody here telling
people to vote for Badnarik. And how many votes did Badnarik get in
the percentage? He didn't even show up on the radar to even report.
Nadar hardly showed up. Now, you ask this certain somebody about his
guns and he'll tell you real quick that his guns are a hot issue with
him. People like this certain somebody (who I won't mention any names
or call out the person's name because I wouldn't want to embarrass
Mark Johnson or anyone like him...so I'll just keep saying "certain
somebody") shouldn't have a registration to vote!

 

Just as Kerry supporters can not be lumped into a single group
which then generalizes about their feelings/emotions/life choices,
etc., neither can Bush supporters be cast in a similar way.

I guess I better fit the Libertarian mold, than any. I don't care about
abortion(but, do get damn tired of hearing about it), don't care about
gay/gay marriage(tired of that too), and a myriad of other issues
that some folks seem to make a part of heir daily lives.

My philosophy's pretty simple - "If it's any of my business, I'll fight
for/against it, if not, I'm history". I would think a few other folks
around this country would do well to adopt a similar strategy?

Thanks - Gary

 

The Family quoted:
So trying to guess the "winner" and voting for who that might be is
what it's all about. I beg to differ.

I knew exactly who I was voting for, the party platform, party and
candidate ideology and sensabilities. That's why I chose who I did to
vote for. The lesser of two evils is still evil.

As Badnarik says, "The only wasted vote is when you choose a candidate
you don't respect. If you're in prison and there's a 50% chance of
lethal injection, a 45% chance of electrocution, and a 5% chance of
escape, would you choose lethal injection because it's the most likely
option? When do you vote *for* liberty instead of the lesser of 2 evils?"

Holding your nose and voting against someone is not a solution since
you [1] end up with a person you're still not happy with and you
ignored your internal, moral compass while doing so.

BTW: Badnarik consistently showed double the % of Nader in the polls,
was on more ballots than Nader and got more votes than Nader. The
media studiously ignores Badnarik because, if more people were to hear
him speak and present his ideas (more effectively than either of the
Republicrats) there would be a ground swell of support. Both the
Republicrat mascots refuse to allow him to participate in the debates
specifically because of those concerns.
http://badnarik.org/interview_9news.php

Did I "pick a winner"? In a manner of speaking? Yes. In the process I
can sleep better at night knowing I did the right thing instead of a
"less wrong" thing.

[1] "You" in the general sense; not a specific person.

 

: So trying to guess the "winner" and voting for who that might be is
: what it's all about. I beg to differ.

I really don't understand why people vote for the frontrunner, just
because he's the frontrunner. Hell, I haven't voted for the winning
candidate for president since 1980.

: I knew exactly who I was voting for, the party platform, party and
: candidate ideology and sensabilities. That's why I chose who I did to
: vote for. The lesser of two evils is still evil.

: As Badnarik says, "The only wasted vote is when you choose a candidate
: you don't respect. If you're in prison and there's a 50% chance of
: lethal injection, a 45% chance of electrocution, and a 5% chance of
: escape, would you choose lethal injection because it's the most likely
: option? When do you vote *for* liberty instead of the lesser of 2 evils?"

: Holding your nose and voting against someone is not a solution since
: you [1] end up with a person you're still not happy with and you
: ignored your internal, moral compass while doing so.

Well said.

: BTW: Badnarik consistently showed double the % of Nader in the polls,
: was on more ballots than Nader and got more votes than Nader. The
: media studiously ignores Badnarik because, if more people were to hear
: him speak and present his ideas (more effectively than either of the
: Republicrats) there would be a ground swell of support. Both the
: Republicrat mascots refuse to allow him to participate in the debates
: specifically because of those concerns.
: http://badnarik.org/interview_9news.php

: Did I "pick a winner"? In a manner of speaking? Yes. In the process I
: can sleep better at night knowing I did the right thing instead of a
: "less wrong" thing.

One thing about Badnarik, when he said something, you knew it was because
he believed it, not because polls and focus groups told him it would win
him votes.

 

You can "beg" all you want, it won't change. In everything we do, we
choose down from a field of many to a final one. Everything.

If someone like Badnarik wants to truly win an election for President
of the United States, he can start a little earlier...he can start
earlier, and stay past the election. He doesn't do anything for
anyone. He comes out of no where, jumps on a couple ballots
representing a screwball platform and doesn't work for any goals. Then
when he doesn't get enough votes to even be a blip on the radar during
the primaries, he whines and runs anyway giving people another
choice...that really doesn't turn out to be a choice at all.

What you suggest is like having an NFL season, playing all the games
out and on Super Bowl day getting one of the most losing teams out
there and putting them on the field with the better of the field...and
having three teams playing all at once.

But Badnarik doesn't do anything. He didn't do anything for the people
before the election and he's certainly not doing anything now, after
the election. Where is he?

You didn't choose someone to vote for, you simply didn't want to go
into the history books as voting for Bush...who promises you guns and
didn't push to renew the AWB. That's your only issue.

Oh, Badnarik said that? See, I wouldn't know since he doesn't do
anything but give ridiculous sayings about killing people and
comparing his life to criminal penalties. I believe the first time I
ever heard him say anything was when he started off talking about how
the founding fathers were a bunch of criminals escaping prosecution.
Only thing I wanted to hear him say was what he planned to do to solve
the issues we're facing and what he's done with respect to them up to
that point. As you can imagine, he never touched on the latter.

I'm very happy with who I voted for. Who I voted for wouldn't have
been my first choice, but he certainly has done more for the people
than Badnarik has...and is still doing. Here we are two days after the
election, what has Badnarik done and where is he?

The reason Kerry wouldn't have been my first choice was simply because
of who he had working his campaign. When I found out Kerry was using
the ass-wipe hacks from Gore's campaign, I was afraid it would turn
out the way it did. Kerry was going in against stacked deck. He chose
to go in there with a pair of two's and worst case, draw four aces. He
waited to do his best showing the last couple weeks in the campaign
and that cost him the election. Perhaps the Democrats can reach down
deep and toss those hacks out on their asses and get some people who
will stop whining to the people in campaigns for 2006.

Where is he? Where's he been over the past 4 years? Where's he been
the past 20 years?

And where's that "swell" you keep boasting about? Badnarik is doing
what he's going to do, disappear for 4 more years and then re-appear
for 2008 and get on the ballot to get some screwball party (which
reminds me of a AA meeting more than a "party") some votes so they can
get funding from the government.

I somehow doubt you "sleep" any different at night.

Voting for Badnarik would be the same as voting for Jim Bob "the
drunk" down on the corner...as little as Badnarik does to help others.

 

Never a stutter or verbal delay while he tried to figure out how to
word an answer for the audience of the day. You just know he'd answer
the same question similarly every time.