Subject:
|
Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 28 Feb 2004 21:33:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
477 times
|
| |
|
|
"Tom Stangl, VFAQman" <talonts@vfaq.com> wrote in message
news:40405999.BF54E76A@vfaq.com...
>
> None of those got millions of votes last election. That level of votes • truly
> *is* a vote for Bush.
How many Electoral votes did Nader get? Those are the ones that really
matter.
I don't think he got "millions of votes". He only got 92,000 or something
in Florida which was one of his better states. I'm not sure your math is
right.
> Or to anyone that doesn't want Bush in power again, regardless of their • party or
>
> non-party affiliation.
We got into this mess because after Clinton, many Americans voted for
"Anybody but a Democrat" - the results will be no better by voting for
"Anybodody but a Republican".
Like my Dad said of the upcoming election "It's like watching a football
game where you wish both teams could lose".
The Democrats haven't done anything to deserve to win. They were gutless
cowards when they were the only thing standing between us and a two-theater
war. Every time I turn around some Dem is crying about how he was duped.
People that stupid don't deserve to be in office - and their party doesn't
deserve to hold office until they fix some things.
The candidates are different this time around, but the parties are the
same - and as a result, it will be a close election again.
It doesn't help anything to have lazy idiots running around promoting a vote
for "anyone but Bush". That doesn't fix anything. It's a simpletons
solution and it will put us right back in this election rut in 2008.
> He should have been easy to beat last time. Oh wait, he was, it was bro's • and
> daddy's judges that handed him the title, not the people.
And who elected the Florida public officials? The reliable conservative
Florida voters. It's amazing how things can turn out your way when you
actually show up to vote for "minor elections". It also gives you practice
so you know where your polling place is and how to poke a pin through a
ballot the right way.
The lazy "major issue voters" of Florida only had themselves to blame, so
don't go crying about how it's unfair when stupid lazy people screw
themselves.
> I'm not blaming ALL of it on him. But he is the only independent that • *probably
>
> will* take millions of votes from whatever Dem candidate runs, which is • the same
>
> or worse than handing those votes to Bush.
I think the audience is receptive to a "McCain style Republican" who could
draw some of the moderates away from Bush.
I still place all of the the blame where it belongs - on a Democratic party
that refuses to take a meaningful stand on anything.
On the issues where Bush is just plain wrong, they take a passive stance.
Just look at Kerry. He needs to say that discrimination against anyone
based on something that they can't change about themselves is just plain
wrong and should no more be legislated against than the color of one's skin.
But he won't do that. He's a cop-out with his "I'd rather leave it to the
states" nonsense.
> I'm a conservative liberal or a liberal conservative, using standard
terms,
So you're a moderate.
> depending on the issue. I'm probably more Libertarian than anything else, • but
> Dem is much more palatable than Rep, though I don't like either very much • in
> practice.
Well, if you are more libertarian, then you're less of anything that the D's
or R's have to offer.
> By that page, I'm:
> Your Personal Self-Government Score is 90%.
> Your Economic Self-Government Score is 60%.
About what I guessed. Your arguments sound like those of a lot of people I
know near the left/libertarian border.
> Not a very useful page, though, as it is *very* lacking in depth/breadth • of
> questions.
What do you expect for 10 questions?
It's useful in that it gets people a ballpark view of where their politics
tend to be.
There are many more detailed questionaires (and I think that site might have
links to a few). But those can take hours to fill out, and most NG readers
aren't going to bother with that.
It's interesting to see where political candidates plot on that chart (based
on their platform from their web sites).
To really find out where you stand, I reccomend reading the commentary from
the "Hit & Run" blog at http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/ every once in a
while and seeing if you agree with what those people are saying. A lot of
ideas from both sides there - and much as in the Lego community, people seem
to be fairly rational and well-behaved.
> > Ok, so who do you suggest I vote for if I want to vote against them • both?
>
> Voting against both doesn't help in this coming election. Choose the • lesser of
> 2 evils.
I don't vote for evil - even if one is "lesser".
> If you don't, you have absolutely ZERO right to complain about who won, • since
> you threw away your vote. You might as well not vote at all.
A vote for choice is never a wasted vote.
> I seriously doubt any of them would continue on his path of insanity.
Of course not, they have thier own path of insanity. I don't want either.
> I doubt any of them will continue to drag the country further and further • into
> debt, dragging us into more and more conflicts that we can afford less and
less,
I guess if you just tax the living daylights out of people (without cutting
back on pork-barrel spending and subsidies for your rich buddies) then you
consider that "getting out of debt".
It looks nice on paper, but it's still money out of my pocket that I can
spend more intelligently than the government. It's not their money, it's
mine - from my hard work.
> Sure, they'll porkbarrel, like any other politician. But if you think • they'll
> do at at the level of GWB, you're insane.
Both parties do it the same amount. Might as well read
http://www.factcheck.org while you're at it.
> > 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.
>
> Vote for Bush, and the country goes broke. Vote Dem, and it MAY go broke, • but
> it's much less likely. And you'll be free to complain, leave, or protest • about
> it, unlike the way Bush is pushing us (Patriot Act 3, anyone? It's only a
> matter of time...).
Like I've said before, it's a vote between the party that gave me the
Digital Millennium Copyright act and 1994 Assault Weapons Ban - or the
people who brought me the Patriot Act (and incidentally also support the
1994 Assault Weapons Ban).
I vote against both.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
12 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
