PDA

View Full Version : Third Parties



Hachiko
06-09-04, 18:45
Suppose you were going to vote for a party other than the Dems and GOPs. Who would you vote for, and why? :?

The list... (http://www.politics1.com/p2004.htm)

bossel
07-09-04, 00:57
Having no vote at all, I voted "Personal Choice". If I read their "constitution" it sounds just like the party I would like (didn't read everything, though):

"Thus, the interpretation of the principle of Personal Choice, as it applies to specific issues, shall be each individual's Personal Choice. The Party shall make no group decisions on specific issues. No person shall be authorized to speak for the Personal Choice Party on any specific issue. Each Person is free to develop and express their own personal opinions."

Sounds as if the press would have a hard time to find a certain party line on particular issues, pretty chaotic. :-)

I wonder why there are 2 prohibition party candidates. CONCERNS OF PEOPLE (PROHIBITION) PARTY & PROHIBITION PARTY, if you look at the provided links you'll find the same party website. Can any party have as many presidential candidates as they want, as long as they run under slightly different party names? Or is candidacy completely unrelated to party membership anyway?

Lina Inverse
07-09-04, 03:14
Well, going from what is said about the candidates on this site...
...
Ok, read up on the candidates and think that the Libertarian party looks nice, they have some good points going for them. Did some further research using the links provided on above main page and found some more.
- against Iraq war
- against government intrusion into private homes
- pro-choice, legalize abortion
- allow same-sex marriage
- no money waste for so-called "war on drugs"
- less government regulation in the private sector
- eliminate Epa permits for pollution (including Federal and State governments)
- eliminate immunity for government polluters
- allow peaceful immigration, no restriction on work permits
- no meddling with the affairs of other nations
- reverse the erosion of civil liberties
- no taxing or regulating the internet

Ok, now you might say, "But he's pro-guns!". I regard this as a non-issue.
First, the guns aren't the problem, the lethal ammo is - it should be replaced by non-lethal stun ammo.
Second, even with guns banned, the criminals and terrorist groups which are making the most use of them would still have no problems in getting them. Thus, preventing the average joe on the streets from getting guns wouldn't change anything, because he's not the problem.

Brooker
07-09-04, 05:48
Ok, this is a big issue with me. Given the importance of this next presidenctal election, I think voting for a third party candidate is a little irresponsible. It seems a lot of people who vote for third parties do it as some form of protest. But be reasonable, the winner will be Bush or Kerry and no matter what your beliefs, I'm sure you have a preference, so make your vote count and choose which one you prefer! Even if you truly believe in that third party candidate (do you?) you're still throwing your vote away because it's only going to benefit the candidate you like the least .

You saw what happened in the last election. Gore might have won if not for Nader. I don't blame Nader for that, he just did the best he could, I blame the people who voted for him, because all they did was deliver Bush to the White House.

Please don't let it happen again!! There are other ways to make your protest.

senseiman
07-09-04, 07:08
I gotta second that. Voting for a third party candidate in this election is counterproductive and they are just being used by the big parties as weapons against each other anyway. Some of Ralph Nader's biggest financial backers are Republicans who completely oppose everything he stands for but want him to take votes away from the Democrats.

Miss_apollo7
07-09-04, 08:00
OOOPS!! Was too quick to press yes, for "Green", until I saw "yes, I'll vote Democratic anyway." :( :( I can't change it!!

If I had to vote in the presidential election, I'd vote Democratic party, as voting for a third party is counter productive, as suggested in earlier posts with Nader etc...however, if I really HAD TO vote for a third party, that would be Green I think, as I am for environment etc....but ONLY if I could not vote Democratic...which is ironic really, I know!!! :-)

PLEEEEEASE, if anyone can change the poll - please change mine from Green to Democratic!! (I was toooo quick) :(

Duo
07-09-04, 13:00
It's sad that the US, the biggest democracy in the world, has only 2 major parties. I don't feel that in no way possible, 280 million can be represented by just one choice on either side of the political spectrum. Anyways, this is all I have to say. Hopefully in the future some third party will get big, but i doubt it, especially with that outdated electoral system.

Brooker
08-09-04, 02:52
It should be a four party system - two on each side. But that hasn't happened yet, so let's not worry about that right now.

For the liberal minded here... You don't see too many conservatives trying to figure out which third party they want, it's just the Liberals. If the Liberals are broken into several different groups and the conservatives are all one group, even if there are fewer conservatives, they'll win everytime. United we stand, divided we fall.

Using the airplane food analogy from my signature: voting for a third party is like asking the stewardess for lobster, knowing full-well you're not going to get it. You just asked for lobster to protest the choices you were given. Now, you've completely given up your control over the choice because she's just going to give you whatever the hell she wants. So what was the point of asking for lobster? Just to piss the stewardess off?

That's life folks. We're only cookin up two meals on this flight, and the head sets ain't free. :D