Create a free poll! | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0%
0%
13%
8%
13%
67% Comments Left About This PollShowing comments 1-5 of 5. From Ken Harper on October 20, 2008 at 6:37 am. In a perfect world you could "vote your conscience" because your without consequence. Unfortunately, there are consequences and we possibly might have avoided the past 8 years of "Dubya" if more people had accepted that. While it is perfectly acceptable for anyone - yes, even you, Jeff - to promote and vote for any candidate they choose, it is simply foolish to pretend that voting for Ralph Nader or whomever under our current system might not end with John McCain as President. That's the reality of "voting your conscience". And let us not forget that, regardless of what any candidate may promise or propose, there is this little thing called "Congress". If folks want certain things then send e-mails, make phone calls, get their attention. The loony far right figured that out a long time ago.  From Jeff in reply to Ken Harper on October 20, 2008 at 6:22 pm. "While it is perfectly acceptable for anyone - yes, even you, Jeff - to promote and vote for any candidate they choose, it is simply foolish to pretend that voting for Ralph Nader or whomever under our current system might not end with John McCain as President." Ken, that's an apologist's statement, made all too often by those who do not believe we live in a valid and vibrant Democracy. In fact, that kind of thinking has destroyed our system and turned it into the nightmare we have now. We have only two parties? Bullshit. We have a wide range of political parties and interests and had the Democrats and Republicans not worked so hard to create a de facto one party state, we'd be a lot better off... but I don't have to participate in the fantasy. You are free to maintain the make-believe thought that a vote for a candidate of conscience is a vote for your enemy. Fine. Whatever. But that's nothing more than political bigotry. So, rather than defend the status quo, join us in tearing it apart and building something new and better. Conversely, if you think my vote for Mr. Nader or Ms McKinney or someone else's vote for Perot or Barr or Baldwin is "throwing the vote away" then it's incumbent upon you to get your candidate (and their party) to deal with our issues. If he won't, he's not getting my vote, nor should he. From Jeff Green on October 16, 2008 at 10:17 pm. Michelle, Being "Real" means voting your conscience. Everything else is commentary. Moreover, Obama is NOT talking about better access to health care any more than John McCain is. Neither candidate will move this nation one inch closer to that... and you know that. You're just hoping Obama will somehow rise above his corporate sponsors and do the right thing. He won't. You can bet on it. From Andrew Campbell on October 16, 2008 at 1:32 pm. In the best of circumstances, our subconscious 'mind' is waaaay 'bigger' than the conscious one. From Michelle on October 16, 2008 at 12:04 pm. I would vote for the green party, I'm even registered under the green party. But let's be real here. If Obama talking about getting us better health coverage while still letting insurance companies "have a seat at the table" still seems socialist to some Americans, then we have a loooong way to go before electing a "radical" green party candidate unfortunately. (I personally do not consider the green party to be radical at all). And anyway, whats so scary about socialism? so yeah i guess i'm voting for Obama.
|
Add a Comment