2008 US Presidential Elections

[Timothy]

As of right now, I support two Libertarian candidates for President of the United States; Ron Paul and Wayne Allyn Root. I've been a Libertarian Party member for almost two years now, and what frustrates me is that I'm torn between the two candidates. As a free-marketeer, I wholly endorse WAR's literal "rags-to-riches" story and see that as the embodiment of the fabled American dream. That, and his stance on abortion is far more tolerant than that of Paul's.

On the other hand, all third party candidates suffer from being outside of the (IMO ridiculous) two-party system, and therefore, need some kind of unity in order to come even close to winning an election. Ron Paul's popularity has been soaring over the past year, but even so, I do not wish to vote for a candidate simply to jump on the proverbial "bandwagon." However, these are my feelings on the matter...

Which person and party would you/ will you vote for in 2008?

[Papa Smurf]

SPOILER: Click to show

I'm an Undecided voter. I just got my Absentee Voter pamphlet today because I like to avoid voting booths, and I was wondering about the whole process. I do vote because I like spitting in the ocean, But I don't really get much of a choice for primaries. It's basically Obama, Clinton, or a third party which will never win because of the "us or them" mindset of America. The republicans don't let undecided voters like me play with the primaries. I like both so i'll flip a coin and choose the face for the blue side.

not that my vote really matters:

I'm in a district selected for the choice even before the voting starts. The district will pick Clinton, but if I wanted to have a delusion I break the count with my 1 vote from 35,000. That vote goes for one of the many districts of California. The state will be one of fifty each declaring who they want.

Then it gets interesting:

say most of the votes goes to Clinton, right? but the party likes obama. The party can [this goes the same for all the other parties too] decide to support obama instead, so it throws all the votes away to choose obama. because it can.

A year later we get Two Sides:

Obama V.s. Romney (or whoever)

If I vote in CA, it doesn't matter because CA is always Democrat

If I vote in IN, it doesn't matter because IN is always Republican

but again I like to spit in the ocean so I vote anyway.

Millions more like Obama, but Romney gets more electoral votes.

Romney wins.

Sucks, doesn't it?

"I'm here to tell you about voting. Imagine you're locked in a huge underground nightclub filled with sinners, [women of negotiable affection], freaks, and unnameable things that rape pitbulls for fun. And you ain't allowed out until you all vote on what you're going to do tonight. You like to put your feet up and watch [TV]. They like to have sex with normal people using knives, guns, and brand new sexual organs you did not know existed. so you vote for television, and everyone else, as far as you can see, votes to [SMURF] you with switchblades.

"that's voting. you're welcome"

-Spider Jerusalem, Transmetropolitan: Year of the Bastard Pg. 51

I'm an officially undecided voter but given the polarized state of the nation, between Republicans and Democrats I'll go with democrats. I don't care whether Obama or Clinton wins. I like them both.

[Timothy]

smurf said:

I'm an officially undecided voter but given the polarized state of the nation, between Republicans and Democrats I'll go with democrats. I don't care whether Obama or Clinton wins. I like them both.

Great comics quote BTW!

Here's my run-down for the people I'm 100% sure of I won't vote for:

Republican Party
Romney: he constantly lies
Giulliani: every other word out of his mouth is "9/11"

Democratic Party
Obama: too cavalier about genocide

[Papa Smurf]

heh, well Romney is out and Giuliani has disappeared, now all you have to do is remove Obama and your little diabolical scheme is complete! but one question... How can you be too cavalier about genocide?

[Timothy]

smurf said:

heh, well Romney is out and Giuliani has disappeared, now all you have to do is remove Obama and your little diabolical scheme is complete! but one question... How can you be too cavalier about genocide?

He was on some political talk show ( I can't remember which one; they're pretty much all the same) and made some comment that what was going on in Rawanda was "just genocide" and kind of shrugged it off.

[Papa Smurf]

"just genocide"?

[Timothy]

Yeah, it was really odd... Prior to that moment, I had no real problems with the man. But he kind of shrugged it off like it was no big deal. I'm not advocating a "Team America" type of future USA, but you can't just say, "Oh, that's just the Holocaust... ho-hum..."

[Papa Smurf]

"Oh, that's just the Holocaust... ho-hum..."
I need to use that somewhere. I dont know where, but that just needs to be used.

Im surprised that "Just genocide" hasn't been used in TV adds. It seems that that would be the perfect shot to toss him out of the prez race.

-----
but straying from the topic, You are supporting third party people. Do you think there could ever be a situation that a third party would win? I wonder I third parties could actually be a disadvantage in and of themselves.
A third party sucks away votes votes from the other parties, but sucks more from the Main party that is more leaning toward the third. As such The libertarian party in particular hurts the more liberal Democrat party and in doing so helps the Republican party.
Would it be possible to actually cause havoc in the opponent party? For example, The republican party has a problem. Die hard conservatives dislike McCain. If there was a third party aimed at those people the Republican party would lose a lot of votes. Therefore it would be possiblly advantageous for democrats to create a Conservative Party and act like uber conservatives to foster dissent. Could the Libertarian party be such a ruse but only created to help republicans?
Just a theory, but it worries me

[Timothy]

smurf said:

but straying from the topic, You are supporting third party people. Do you think there could ever be a situation that a third party would win?

I'm an optimist, and I think that it's entirely possible. If enough people get tired of the same-old song and dance with either of the two major parties, then I can definitely see a third party like the LP making its presence felt.

I wonder I third parties could actually be a disadvantage in and of themselves.
A third party sucks away votes votes from the other parties, but sucks more from the Main party that is more leaning toward the third.

Makes sense, although I don't really consider the LP (Libertarian Party) to be more Republican than Democrat. However, this can change depending upon the individual Libertarian's philosophy; members of the LP can be more conservative on both social and fiscal issues, or they can be more liberal on both. Personally, I prefer being in the middle; I find it gives me an entirely different perspective when making difficult decisions.

For example, The republican party has a problem. Die hard conservatives dislike McCain. If there was a third party aimed at those people the Republican party would lose a lot of votes. Therefore it would be possiblly advantageous for democrats to create a Conservative Party and act like uber conservatives to foster dissent. Could the Libertarian party be such a ruse but only created to help republicans?

Hmm... I think that's definitely an interesting way to look at the situation. However, my belief is that the LP was created for people who want the best of both worlds; to be economically conservative but socially liberal. To that end, I've met both right-wing Libertarians and left-wing, along with discovering that I'm more left-wing than some of my contemporaries. For example, I still advocate donating money to the poor, but I don't think the government should do the job; private charities (which includes "regular" people like us) can still make a difference without government interference.

"Libertarians" like Ron Paul* are more right wing than I care for, which I think goes along with your original question. I think he brings more moderate Libertarians over to the Republican Party, which I will not join for ideological/philosophical reasons.

*Granted, he did run for President in 1988 as a Libertarian and (obviously) lost, but I would rather that he run as the LP's candidate rather than join the RP simply for better PR coverage.

[Papa Smurf]

^ Still you have to wonder if, as Spider says, we are just choosing the face of the man who will [Smurf] us next.

The really sad part is that people will refuse to choose a third party because they don't think it will happen. And what do you know? it doesn't happen. A self-fulfilling prophesy.

What do you think of the electoral system? I would say it's a useless tool that gets in the way. If people could actually see their vote, they can say "183,201,651 people voted for Bob and that last one was ME!" and see that it counted.

It would also serve to deter voter apathy in another way. Democrats in Republican controlled states, or vice-versa, don't vote now because they know their vote will be thrown away. with a Full Populational count they don't have to fear this.