How Do You Vote?

[hrgrisso]

I hear a lot of talk from Gunnies, Libertarians, Cons, CrunchCons etc. about how if it comes down to "McCain, Romney, Guiliani vs. Obama or the Hildabeast, I'm going to vote for whatever 3rd party candidate I like best."

To me this strikes as counter productive, doesn't it?

Before people go and start railing against me about morals, standards, and principles, please note, I am a crunchy con with libertarian tendecies. While I don't care for any candidate in the "FRONTRUNNER" catagory, aren't outside chances what what the primaries are for?

Should'nt we as gun owners go out and campaign the heck out of whomever we view as best for our rights for the primaries when we have a chance of getting them to the general? Rather than waiting till the general and then being grumpy (i.e. :banghead: ) about who the major parties select? Then voting for someone with no realistic shot, principles be what they may, at winning, in essence casting a vote for those favored by the loudes, again, the media.

Just so you know, this last election cycle I campainged for, volunteered for, attended rallies, handed out bumper stickers, talked to friends and strangers about the candidates that I truly cared about. Sadly two of the three that I campainged for lost. One was an incumbent friend of gun owners.

So seriously and honestly, can somone PLEASE explain to me, especially in a country where even if we get a president we don't like, but is not as anti as his/(in this "her" is the opposition) opposition. Shouldn't we vote for those, and then at the sametime campaign for congressmen/women and senators who will balance the presidents craziness? Sorry but I don't know what I'll do if because we vote for third party lost causes in the generals and Hilda gets in the White House what I'll do.

 

[Derby FALs]

Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Exploratory Committee

 

[MattC]

Humans think myopically. It is impossible to know the future, and predictions grow increasingly less likely the farther out a person forecasts. We are biologically wired to focus on the short-term. It takes a good deal of effort and training to think otherwise, such as having a strong retirement account and savings funds for a child's college education.

But the world outside of an individual is long-term. Voting for a third-party candidate, like a Libertarian, in the next presidential is not a wasted vote, despite the low probability of the Libertarian winning the presidency. However, the disgust and disappointment in the two major parties will be more evident with each third-party vote that is cast. And, more importantly, it helps the third-party gain momentum. A high percentage vote for a third-party candidate will bring credibility to the party and increased awareness. The vote makes it more likely for local candidates of that party to be elected the next year. The party could gain more seats in the next mid-terms. Maybe not in a 4 year period, but your consistency in voting will help, in the long-term, bring you winning candidates that you enjoy voting for, and let you feel proud again as you leave the booth on Election Day.

 

[flynnguy]

So what do you do when you don't believe in the Democrats or Republicans? Side with one or the other because they support more of your views than the other guy?

The Republicans want to turn us into a police state and the Democrats are desperately trying to create a Utopia.

No thanks, I'll stick to the party that favors smaller government, the Libertarian party. However, I will vote for a Libertarian in disguise. (AKA Ron Paul)

 

[cbsbyte]

I have given up on the Republican party. There is no hope for that party to ever reform into a small L libertarian party. It against the interests of the big Corporations, religious zelots, and other rightwing nuts who run the party to change. The Democrats might be ruled by unions, and liberals but least they are honest about it. Personally, I am backing Bill Richardson. He is pro-gun, and IMHO correct on the "war on terror", and social issues. We need change in this country and the Republicans are not going to be the party that will ever change the course of the ship.

 

[Outlaw Man]

Normally I don't care what letter is beside their name. There aren't a lot of people running as Jeffersonian Democrats.

I can normally go for a Republican candidate, though in the last election I voted for some Green Party candidates as well as a Democrat (on the state level - he really impressed me in his last term). I'll be voting in the primaries for the first time next year. IMO, this could be the most important election since the mid 1800s, and I want to do everything I can to help it go the right direction.

 

[K3]

Ron Paul gets my vote whether he's on the ballot or I have to write him in.

 

[lamazza]

Another for Ron Paul here

 

[NukemJim]

How do I vote?

Early and often.

I live in Chicagoland

NukemJim

 

[dasmi]

I won't do the lesser of two evils thing anymore. The republicans are just as evil as the Democrats.

 

[xd9fan]

I won't do the lesser of two evils thing anymore. The republicans are just as evil as the Democrats.

Yep.

Ron Paul is the ONLY RINO I will vote for. A libertarian with a strong libertarian mindset/voting record......The best kind of RINO there is....that party does not deserve him.

 

[wooderson]

I vote third-party*. I don't particularly care which third-party - Libertarians, Greens, Socialist Party of the USA, Monster Raving Loony, pretty much anything short of advocating Maoist insurrection or white pride and I'm your huckleberry.

No party accurately reflects my views on the whole, so I'm content to just voice support for people outside of the mainstream. I have the luxury of doing so without making any tough choices as I've never voted in a competitive race.

*sometimes a local Democrat if he or she is running against someone I truly despise, ala Joe Barton.

 

[Patriot-Brewer]

Electronically...

 

[Deanimator]

If it comes down to Giuliani vs. anybody but Richardson, I just stay home.

Giuliani and Clinton are EQUALLY virulent anti-gunners.

I will NEVER vote for Giuliani, no matter WHO he runs against. I remember the names Louima, Diallo and Dorismond. If I wanted to live in a police state, I'd vote for Hugo Chavez.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

I'm curious.

Those who who are voting for Ron Paul, or any other third party candidate in the general election...

what exactly are you accomplishing? And I mean REALLY accomplishing. You feeling good about yourself, or "honorable", or "sending a message" are not actual accomplishments. They don't really do anything.

So what actual tangible accomplishment do you think is coming from voting 3rd party in the general election?

 

[tinygnat219]

Ron Paul? Please

 

[xd9fan]

I'm curious.

Those who who are voting for Ron Paul, or any other third party candidate in the general election...

what exactly are you accomplishing? And I mean REALLY accomplishing. You feeling good about yourself, or "honorable", or "sending a message" are not actual accomplishments. They don't really do anything.

So what actual tangible accomplishment do you think is coming from voting 3rd party in the general election?

I'm curious too.

What exactly are you accomplishing by acting like an abused spouse and still voting for/sticking up for crap politicains that continuely bleed your wallet and your "rights" and liberties. Is this sheep=like behavior of voting for either of the two pro-Govt parties...."honorable".....IMHO it is not american....not in the traditional american sense. (ei 1770's american behavoir)

Many on this board, some after years of working within the 2-party system no longer believe or see the tangible accomplishments of re-arranging the chairs on the two-party-Titanic has a solution.

Voting 3rd party means for some (me included) that my voting behavoir(its much more than just voting every 4 years) will no longer continue to be a part of the problem.

Look at it from a free market point of view, If the americans suck at making cars (sad but true....big 3 are broke) and the Japs are making great stuff........will continuing to buy a ford make the Ford company change its failed ways???

(that behavior is socialist/communist in nature..what I mean by that is in the a socialist system where parties do not have to be accountable to the people.....the party does not have to change because you have no other choices.....and they know it)
Its amazing how many americans act like this(your comments included)

It all comes down to Brand loyality.....will you go down with the ship because you trade quality for loyality? Or will you put quality first regardless of brand?

IMHO 3rd party people believe in quality and then they look at the 2 party brands they see crap.


I'm done being loyal to a GOP that no longer believes in Limited Govt.
Prove me wrong.

(love your listed location by the way....cool)

 

[Cesiumsponge]

Ron "Dr. No" Paul

Sounds like by some commentary here, people are willing to call you an idiot because they don't like who you want to vote for. Why should people settle for less? I guess we should all change our votes to reflect what other people want, rather than what we believe is the best candidate. Democrats claim voting 3rd party gives Republicans the edge. Republicans claim voting 3rd party gives Democrats the edge. Yadda yadda yadda. Maybe to counter every one of our "wasted votes", you can go get 3 new people to register as voters; we need more voters anyhow.

I'm tired of playing the party line, especially when most every politician has taken so many inconsistent stances that they're about as straight as a circle. Psychologists call it an abusive relationship when you get smacked in the face repeatedly and you continue to stick around taking it. "I can change him/her/them". Some people get slapped a few times and wake up. Some never wake up.

 

[45Frank]

I vote for the candidate who is going to effect my way of life the day after the election, wheather it's guns, homeland security or the economy.
On most issues there's not one bit of difference but life as usual.

I would love to vote for a third party but the last politician who mounted a series third party campaign in the 90's gave us the Klintons. And he duped every sucker who fell for his new goverment and accountability BS.
PeRot did exactly what he intended and became richer then ever after the election. He was actually a better politician then Bush Sr. or Klinton.

How do you not know that the next 3rd part won't do the same then we get stuck with more Klintons?

 

[Derby FALs]

The real shame was Perot didn't get enough votes. Bush cut his own throat.

 

[45Frank]

The real shame was Perot didn't get enough votes. Bush cut his own throat.

How do you figure this one?

Perot didn't want to be President, he wanted nafta no matter what he say's, check his business profits after the election. When he seen he may win which he could have he came out with the Bush tried to kidnap or kill his daughter and went insane for a week or two. He was in love with the Klintons and despised Bush. No perot and Bush Sr. was a second termer. Perot was as evel as the Klintons and proved it.

 

[Derby FALs]

How do you figure this one?

Perot didn't want to be President, he wanted nafta no matter what he say's, check his business profits after the election. When he seen he may win which he could have he came out with the Bush tried to kidnap or kill his daughter and went insane for a week or two. He was in love with the Klintons and despised Bush. No perot and Bush Sr. was a second termer. Perot was as evel as the Klintons and proved it.

Bush screwed the pooch. Re-regulation of the U.S. economy, raising taxes after saying he wouldn't, managed to outspend JFK, support of the staus quo in Iraq, Yugoslavia and Soviet Union, calling that foreign policy the "New World Order", Sporting Purposes Import Ban, civil rights "quota" bill, federal subisdies to obscene art, Ruby Ridge...He plain ole pissed on his base.

We, the people, were ready for a change and Perot actually had a shot to break the two party stranglehold we still enjoy.

 

[hrgrisso]

Interesting thoughts

In spite of the fuming that a few people are doing now (my bad if I made your ticker burp a bit...) I'm glad I asked the question.

I do find our two party system reprehensible. It's something that the founders anticipated but couldn't figure out a lasting solution for.

While I do loathe the big brother/big government aspect of the Republican party nationally. I have to admit I feel very satisfied by my local GOP. (FYI I'm a registered independent and I believe it's not in name only) Let me correct the previous statement as well with, "EXCEPT FOR A CERTAIN SENATOR NAMED McCAIN."

I think our other Senator does a positive job and is open to ideas and feedback from his constituency. The Congressmen (and women) and state legislators etc. have all done what I consider to be a positive job. Tragedy with JD not getting re-elected.

I guess my thought is just this, are people so pissed at the national GOP and ignoring their "local" reps that they will either just sit out the next election or vote third party?

While I don't have a problem voting for a third party and have even done so for at least one candidate each election, I have a hard time justifying a vote on a 3rd party to myself for President. Especially with someone like Hillary/Obama/Guiliani/McCain running.

So that's my 2 cents. May the venom at our nations failed policies continue. Sorry couldn't resist.

 

[45Frank]

We, the people, were ready for a change and Perot actually had a shot to break the two party stranglehold we still enjoy.

You are right he was the last hope and he turned out to be a typical for me Politician and screw you. He could have won if he where a true third party candidate, he wasn't.

I wished and wanted him to win(for the third party)and I felt he did me in.
There's no way any third party could ever raise the needed money now to win or put up a good showing.

Still beleive if there's no Perot in the race Bush wins.