To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 23424
23423  |  23425
Subject: 
Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:37:39 GMT
Viewed: 
295 times
  
"Tom Stangl, VFAQman" <talonts@vfaq.com> wrote in message
news:403FA430.A8B67CF0@vfaq.com...
Neb Okla wrote:

I don't want Bush in office.  I don't want Kerry in office.  I don't • really
want Nader in office, but of those three he's the only candidate I • haven't
ruled out.  A vote for Nader (or any fringe candidate) is a vote against • a
two party system.

Get real.  You're deluding yourself.  A vote for Nader at this point is *a • vote
for Bush*.

Yeah, and...

...a vote for the Libertarian candidate is a vote for Bush...
...a vote for the Socialist Worker Party candidate is a vote for Bush...
...a vote for the Communist Party candidate is a vote for Bush...
...a vote for nobody is a vote for Bush.

Everything but a vote for a Democrat is a vote for Bush to a Democrat.

Bush should be easy to beat - everyone I know thinks he's an idiot and hates
him.  Only the Democrats - or the Chicago Cubs - could manage to lose to
Bush again.

If you think blaming it all on Nader will help, go ahead Mr. "You're
deluding yourself".


I don't like the 2-party system either.  I'm independent, I don't consider
myself a member of *any* party out there.

What kind of "independent" are you?

    http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html

When most people say "I'm independent" it really means "I can't be bothered
to give careful consideration to what I am".  Nobody agrees with
*everything* any party says, so we're all Independent.


But I also am not going to bury my
head in the sand and say a vote for a candidate that will *NEVER* make it • into
office is a vote against both parties.  It's not, it's a vote against the • Dem
candidate, and FOR GWB.

Ok, so who do you suggest I vote for if I want to vote against them both?


Unless the Dem candidate is as bad as GWB (I can't imagine them finding • someone
*that* bad), I will make a *realistic* vote for changing the leadership of • this
country, and vote Dem.

So far the only candidates left are as bad as GWB IMHO.


Independents don't have the pull yet.  Maybe in the future.  But I'm more
interested in getting GWB out of office than throwing away the country's
near/far future on making a statement.

If I vote for Bush, I get a more fascist government (TSA) - if I vote for
the Dem candidate, I get a more socialist government.  Kind of sucks if
you're not into authoritarian regimes.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy?
 
(...) None of those got millions of votes last election. That level of votes truly *is* a vote for Bush. (...) Or to anyone that doesn't want Bush in power again, regardless of their party or non-party affiliation. (...) He should have been easy to (...) (20 years ago, 28-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy?
 
(...) Get real. You're deluding yourself. A vote for Nader at this point is *a vote for Bush*. Keep voting indirectly for Bush. But don't whine if GWB gets reelected and continues hauling the US into a decline that may take decades to reverse. I (...) (20 years ago, 27-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

12 Messages in This Thread:


Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR