NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm sick of your "who are you voting for LOLZ? bush r kerry???" threads. Its sad when other countries think we only have two parties.

LIBERTARIANS
GREENS
REFORM PARTY
GRASSROOTS

Google it. here, you lazy bums. i did the work for you.
http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm

there are so many goddamn parties most of you REFUSE to acknolwedge.
/me explodes

except of course for those who would never vote for one of the 2 major parties anyway, a vote for one of those 3rd parties could mean that the guy you REALLY hate gets elected.

would you really vote for ralph nader this time, for example? the votes that nader got in florida last time might well have gone to gore if he hadnt been running giving him a definitive majority.

Pfff. If you vote for the Democrats when you couldn't agree more with Green policies, then you're not being truely represented. As for me, my polictical orientation lies with the Democratic Socialists of America.

Yes, by voting for Kerry, America shall be saved from all the evils that Bush has brought down upon us.

except of course for those who would never vote for one of the 2 major parties anyway, a vote for one of those 3rd parties could mean that the guy you REALLY hate gets elected.

would you really vote for ralph nader this time, for example? the votes that nader got in florida last time might well have gone to gore if he hadnt been running giving him a definitive majority.
If Catherine Harris hadn't ordered thousands of legitimate votes to be thrown out, gore would've had a definitive majority (ok well maybe that is some speculation)

But no, I won't be voting Green, and I wouldn't have the first time. I am a staunch anti-Bush Libertarian (In fact, I can't see how any libertarian could vote for Bush because they are afraid a democrat might get in- Bush has done nothing but TAKE AWAY our liberties...so in other words, if you know anyone voting for Bush, convince them to vote LP- you won't ever get them to vote Kerry, but you might get them to vote away from Bush) but I am also very much anti-Kerry. I cannot respect anyone who uses a serious senate vote as a political toy. Also, I cannot vote for anyone who supports "mandatory national service"

I'm sick of your "who are you voting for LOLZ? bush r kerry???" threads. Its sad when other countries think we only have two parties.

LIBERTARIANS
GREENS
REFORM PARTY
GRASSROOTS

Google it. here, you lazy bums. i did the work for you.
http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm

there are so many goddamn parties most of you REFUSE to acknolwedge.
/me explodes

Not to mention the Constitution Party (my party), and, as someone pointed out below, the Democratic Socialists of America.

oh, and I think it's petty sweet how the libs are #1 on your poll. But I guess I already knew where your affiliation lies...

Yes, by voting for Kerry, America shall be saved from all the evils that Bush has brought down upon us.

Probably not. Kerry will have all the evils of Bush and then some. You're permitted to disagree, of course, (without flaming) but i personally believe Kerry is a very, very bad man.

I'm a Liberterian, and if I were 1 year older I would be voting for my Bu..ddy Kerry. Seeing as Badnarik stands no chance, nor will any of the Libertarian party's candidates for awhile...

this is obviously the best (read: dumbest illogical piece of crap) party out there: http://www.nazi.org/

why vote for someone you dont agree with?

every vote counts. peoples attitude that it doesnt is why other parties are rarely elected. every vote for a different party decreases the percent of votes the major parties get.

this is obviously the best (read: dumbest illogical piece of crap) party out there: http://www.nazi.org/

That's quite possibly the most illogical combination of political beliefs I've ever seen. Political correct environmentally friendly Nazis. Whaaa?

this is obviously the best (read: dumbest illogical piece of crap) party out there: http://www.nazi.org/
even their website is top notch!!

..eugh. sorry. i know a lot of web designers.

why vote for someone you dont agree with?

every vote counts. peoples attitude that it doesnt is why other parties are rarely elected. every vote for a different party decreases the percent of votes the major parties get.

I wasn't even aware of Badnarik until last month, and then that was beacuse I visited the Libertarian site on to see what was going on. There isn't the funding to put him through, there isn't the support etc. *shrug* That's why people go Dem/Rep - the support network is already established.

why vote for someone you dont agree with?

every vote counts. peoples attitude that it doesnt is why other parties are rarely elected. every vote for a different party decreases the percent of votes the major parties get.

That's for sure!

That's quite possibly the most illogical combination of political beliefs I've ever seen. Political correct environmentally friendly Nazis. Whaaa?

Please, please, tell me you're joking.

see if y'all would never vote for a republican or a democrat, then of course you should vote for your own candidate. its only those who are dallying with a 3rd party who should think long and hard before "wasting" their votes.

Even though I am a Libertarian, I'm voting for Bush just to keep Kerry and the other collectivist scum as far as possible from the nation's highest seat.

I'm a Liberterian, and if I were 1 year older I would be voting for my Buddy Kerry. Seeing as Badnarik stands no chance, nor will any of the Libertarian party's candidates for awhile...
Voting for one of the two major parties makes them think they are doing something right
which obviously isn't true
voting third party does two things- that I can think of currently (and neither is get that person elected- yet)
1. It gets more attention for your party of choice and maybe even gets them the 5% necessary for our country to even recognize them (what bullshit)
2. It forces the two main parties to realize how messed up they are, and perhaps even change for the better

I wasn't even aware of Badnarik until last month, and then that was beacuse I visited the Libertarian site on to see what was going on. There isn't the funding to put him through, there isn't the support etc. *shrug* That's why people go Dem/Rep - the support network is already established.
that's because they get taxpayer money
further keeping the other parties down
which as I have established, is bullshit

We know he's not going to be elected, that's not what we're trying to do
we're fighting for ballot-access and for what we believe in

Even though I am a Libertarian, I'm voting for Bush just to keep Kerry and the other collectivist scum as far as possible from the nation's highest seat.
well why, since as I said previously, Bush has continuously decreased our liberties and increased government- giving the republican party quite a bad name, since the only thing they had going for them was the claim that they were into small, localized government
HE WANTS AN AMENDMENT IN THE US NATIONAL CONSTITUTION TO "PROTECT THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE"
that's damn near as far as you can get from libertarian
he wants to ban liberties and at the national level

"except of course for those who would never vote for one of the 2 major parties anyway, a vote for one of those 3rd parties could mean that the guy you REALLY hate gets elected."

Are you aware that Governmentally allocated funding of presidential parties is based on percentage of popular vote achieved? Not electoral college.

So let's say you vote 3rd party, let's say Libertarian.

The libertarians get 4% of the popular vote (minimum required for governmental grants), they get an increase in funding.

The following year, they have more money to campaign with, they manage to pull 6%. Hey, they get even MORE money. . .

Eventually they'll get closer and closer into the running, and the two-party system splits to three-party, and one of the parties starts to fade away, leaving two new parties.

Read the history books. Look what happened to the Whigs, for instance. Note that parties come and go. That's how.

Me.

They're all either socialist, communist, or just plain weird. The Green party did have a chance, though not as big as their counterparts in Europe. They could've made it this year, but they refused Nader, and I think he'll get a decent amount of votes this year.
In any case, since I'm conservative, I sort of want a Green party for conservatives, so to speak. I want it so that the nut jobs in our party, like Sen. Jim Ihofe, can go there instead of tarnishing the image of the Republican party. Then again, if they start their own party, they won't have the resources the Republican party has. It'd take someone as rich as Perot to do that. Does anyone know of a far right billionaire?

dude, most people are quite aware of the fact that there are other candidates running, we just don't care. i'm not a Republican or a Democrat, but i am politically savy enough to know that one or the other of these parties WILL WIN come November...thus i pick the one i dislike less, and i support them to increase the chances i will be able to at least partially stomach the next administration. we work with the tools we have.

dude, most people are quite aware of the fact that there are other candidates running, we just don't care. i'm not a Republican or a Democrat, but i am politically savy enough to know that one or the other of these parties WILL WIN come November...thus i pick the one i dislike less, and i support them to increase the chances i will be able to at least partially stomach the next administration. we work with the tools we have.
I wouldn't say that. The Republican partie was an itty-bitty grassroots party in the 1850s. Look at us now. A few parties make an appreciable dent in the two party system. But every so often, a party goes mainstream. It happened a few times in the past, and I bet it'll happen again. Right now, however, the condition isn't right. Especially this election year, where everyone is in one camp or the other, but never in between.

well why, since as I said previously, Bush has continuously decreased our liberties and increased government- giving the republican party quite a bad name, since the only thing they had going for them was the claim that they were into small, localized government
HE WANTS AN AMENDMENT IN THE US NATIONAL CONSTITUTION TO "PROTECT THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE"
that's damn near as far as you can get from libertarian
he wants to ban liberties and at the national level

True enough, but I tend to value economic freedom over social freedoms. Either way, I would prefer we have a well-intentioned, if rather lacking president over a total socialist fucktard like Kerry.

True enough, but I tend to value economic freedom over social freedoms. Either way, I would prefer we have a well-intentioned, if rather lacking president over a total socialist fucktard like Kerry.
I think that amendment was mostly a political stunt, anyhow. Disturbing, yes, but nevertheless, a political stunt. It was to galvinize the evangelical vote, and for maximum effect, it needed to be defeated. Sad, but true. In any case, I doubt Bush would actually wish it passed, as he'd be hounded left and right.

I'm a Liberterian, and if I were 1 year older I would be voting for my Bu..ddy Kerry. Seeing as Badnarik stands no chance, nor will any of the Libertarian party's candidates for awhile...

Excellent one there, good job white-ing out 'my' and 'ddy Kerry'. The problem is that Libertarians, Reformists, Greens, and Socialists have absolutely no chance of becoming President. As long as Democrats and Republicans enjoy a griphold monopoly, this isn't going to change...what if they tried? The bill that would destabilize the Democratic/Republican hold on the government would be voted down, 532-535 or something similar.

Although the libertarian party is necisarry in America to keep the government from becoming all-too powerful, I am afraid if one gets elected for president, the death toll in this country will sky-rocket.

so?

well why, since as I said previously, Bush has continuously decreased our liberties and increased government- giving the republican party quite a bad name, since the only thing they had going for them was the claim that they were into small, localized government
HE WANTS AN AMENDMENT IN THE US NATIONAL CONSTITUTION TO "PROTECT THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE"
that's damn near as far as you can get from libertarian
he wants to ban liberties and at the national level

And several libertarians, including far end extreme ones like Jay Severin, agree. Because marriage is and has been since the beginning between a man and a woman. I'm not religous. Libertarians believe that homosexual couples should have every right as heterosexual couples, but you can't call it marriage, because it isn't. It's a union between to people that should provide benefits identical to marriage, but it isn't a marriage.

Looking at the poll, you'd think everyone's a libertarian. Hmm...


Although the libertarian party is necisarry in America to keep the government from becoming all-too powerful, I am afraid if one gets elected for president, the death toll in this country will sky-rocket.


Not the gov't, the two parties, you mean...which are already too powerful. I don't agree with the Libertarian party's gun control policies, but there's no proof that it will skyrocket, and a valid argument against it. Besides, there's a good chance that no senate would pass it.

so?
How can the public live with that? The platform of the Libertarian party is little more than a slightly controlled anarchy. I've described myself as libertarian in the past, but I never knew that there were people that liberatarian. It's almost repulsive.