Flutterby™! : Protest Votes 2000-10-25 00:53:26+00

Protest Votes

2000-10-25 00:53:26+00 by TC 12 comments

Welp it's that time again. Send in the clowns and let's pick the "least" dangerous of the lot. I must say I am going to be a little pissed if Nader draws enough votes to elect Bush to office. I understand them wanting to get their 5% but not at the expense of 4 years! I have been planning to cast my vote for Browne but will switch to Gore if it's too close to call. I would urge the rest of you to please be practical on election day. Vote often and vote responsibly.

Todd, I'm still of the opinion that it just doesn't matter. Either side gets in they are going to attack our privacy. Don't even pretend to believe that one side will be any kinder to you than the other. The only reason I might be tempted to help Gore over Bush is just to keep the congress and administrative branches of government in the hands of opposing parties. As it stands I'm voting for a third party just to get the numbers up on actual voters that are rejecting what the democans have to offer.

I need to research my district. If votes are usually close, I'll vote against the greater evil. Otherwise, I will vote for a third party.

Bah. If you side with the lesser evil, you're still siding with evil. You aren't throwing away your vote; both major candidates are headed in the same direction. One's going a little slower, is all.

Interesting points. I disagree with you Larry, I think each administration will attempt to further it's own agenda. I will cast my lot based on who will do the least damage. If you don't think the Administration branch will be run any different then consider the appointments that will be made to the judicial branch... Way to go Eric! violent agreement even if we vote for different 3rd parties Well Shadow, evil isn't always bad in power. Why do you think the CIA hasn't snuffed Sadam? He's a known predictable element(yes trying to get flutterby back on the Echellon list <giggle>) and yes they both preach to the centrist crowd (candidates do that)but they look at issues in radically different ways and this WILL effect the course of future history.

I think you misunderstand me, Todd. I don't think a Gore administration would do exactly what a Bush adminstration would do or vice versa. Yes, each has its own agenda that it will attempt to push through. What I'm saying is that whether you kick me on the left shin or kick me on the right shin you are still attempting to cripple me. The damage to me will be different depending on who gets into office but I see the amount of damage as being the same. I don't see a benefit coming to me from either party. Even looking at possible appointments to the judiciary I see a balanced scale. Each side will be looking there to further their differing but equally stiffling agendas. Both will appoint judges that will be willing to limit my freedoms, though the limits will be on different freedoms. I've looked at this from every angle and I see a wash no matter which way I look at it. Even looking at it from the standpoint of putting a democrat in the White House to counter the republicans on the hill could backfire because it is possible that the democrats will come back into control there. The evils are equal.

Hmm well I understand that the leading candidates suck. I happen to think they both suck also. I can't stand some of Gore's big spending "typical democrat" programs but I will at least make a choice. What I don't understand is if you are advocating "apathy" or lack of voting?? If so then you are empowering the people that do vote further. Not really flame baiting you here but I am curious since I do not care for either candidate myself....

Trying to see the difference in the Evils...sorry folks but this isn't low hanging fruit. This is fruit that picks it's self for you. Good Ol Fun Salon's version of G.W.

Todd, by voting I'm proving to the mainstream parties that I am a voting citizen. I'm currency. By voting for Nader or Browne or whoever other than a democan I'm giving the mainstream parties a direction they need to move to get my vote. Politicians are greedy and I'm counting on that greed to move them my direction to get my vote in the next election. I don't know of any better hammer I have to get their attention.

See, I'm not sure about this. As it happens, I live in a state where Gore is pretty much certain to win, but I'm starting to come around to the point of view that it might be a good thing if Nader ruins things for Gore, and Bush gets in. Bush is definitely the greater of the two evils, as regards the candidates, but the Democratic Party's drift to the right may be an even greater evil. Perhaps they need to learn that they need to return to the left wing of the party, that they can't take our votes for granted. Saying that "we don't like what you're doing, but we'll support you in the swing states anyway" may send exactly the wrong message. (I am, incidentally, unsure of whom I'm going to vote for. I'd like to register a protest vote, but don't think Nader's an especially good vehicle for that, as my crusade is civil rights, not consumerism...)

My vote against Bush isn't so much because I think Gore is better, it's because I really don't think I could stomach four years of hearing about Bush and his escapades. I don't really mind Gore's escapades - at least he's been hanging with the Buddhists. I'm also no real fan of Nader but if my vote isn't going to have any real appreciable effect in my district I'll vote for him because the Greens are a little closer to my ideology that the Libertarians. I really wish the world were capable of supporting a Libertarian society but I see too many kids' futures going down the drain because their parents don't give a shit. Of course I'd prefer to see some kind of licensing system for child bearing but I better not even go there...

I watched Ralph Nader on GMA this morning while I was getting ready for work. Charlie Gibson was pretty rough on him about being a spoiler for Gore. Nader made one of the most compelling arguments for his campaign that I've heard. I may think so highly of it because it reflects my sentiments exactly. I'm not the one that should be changing my convictions for the candidate or the party. The candidate and the party I support should reflect my convictions. BTW, Ralph Nader's official website is http://www.votenader.org, not http://www.nader2000.org. There are some discreprencies between the two sites about Nader's position on some things, including the 100% tax rate on income over a certain amount and the forced breakup of Fortune 500 companies. Nader is not supporting either proposal.