PDA

View Full Version : Why do we only vote Democartic or Republican?



PUGS1688
08-19-2008, 12:45 AM
There are so many more parties out there with so much more potential for a better president. I hate Barrack Obama, and I hate John McCain and I feel like we're screwed. Why are American's looking at the 2 poster boys and no one else? Do we really believe that these two clowns are the best choices to lead us? Ew.

SmthBluCitrus
08-19-2008, 08:48 AM
Did you seriously just put "ew" at the end of your post? Are you a middle school girl? I'm female, and I don't say "ew."

We have a two party system because of money. A lot of people have a lot of money invested in this. Sure, it would be better to have a more legitimate multiple party system, but it is also a bit inherent that we have people who are on the left and people on the right. Two real choices are a lot easier than three ... or four ... etc ...

We look at issues in black and white, yes and no, right and wrong. Most people don't pay attention and they just want easy answers.

But, to be fair, you do have multiple candidates to choose from. The primary process produces a lot of valid (and some invalid) candidates. You really only end up with the two party system for a matter of months. You can look at it that way, it's not entirely false. :D

yaowowrocket11
08-19-2008, 11:53 AM
Some people believe that Obama can lead this nation and be successful.
Some people believe that McCain can lead this nation and be successful.
Some people don't like either of them, and will look at other candidates.
Some people don't like either of them, and will not vote for President.

Do and vote how you want to, not by who America is favoring.

dbroncos78087
08-19-2008, 03:41 PM
Did you seriously just put "ew" at the end of your post? Are you a middle school girl? I'm female, and I don't say "ew."

We have a two party system because of money. A lot of people have a lot of money invested in this. Sure, it would be better to have a more legitimate multiple party system, but it is also a bit inherent that we have people who are on the left and people on the right. Two real choices are a lot easier than three ... or four ... etc ...

We look at issues in black and white, yes and no, right and wrong. Most people don't pay attention and they just want easy answers.

But, to be fair, you do have multiple candidates to choose from. The primary process produces a lot of valid (and some invalid) candidates. You really only end up with the two party system for a matter of months. You can look at it that way, it's not entirely false. :D

I think the bolded segment sums it up nicely. There are many better candidates im sure but this is the system we have. I would like to have many 3-4 candidates every year (that have a legitimate shot to win) but it is tough to make it a majority candidate if you do that. I suppose that is why two is used. We have trouble getting 50% of the country with two candidates.

b1e9a8r5s
08-19-2008, 04:09 PM
People want to feel that there vote matters and as it stands, with the exception of some specific smaller scale (state level) positions, there are no viable (read: have a chance of winning) 3rd party candidates for president. I think the country would be better off with more parties but it would take quite the movement to get a 3rd party to be at an even playing field on a national level.

Raidaz4Life
08-19-2008, 04:24 PM
basically what everyone else is saying... The two main parties have all the money, people are more secure voting for a party that has a chance, and it is very difficult to have a legitimate third party because of the minimum number of electorate votes a candidate must have to be president.

Zaunnie
08-19-2008, 04:34 PM
haha in Canada we have multiple parties. The Liberals, Conservatives, New Democratic Party, Bloc Quebecois, and many others. Except no one votes for the Bloc because they're French Canadian, and no one gives a crap about the NDP

NotVeryOriginal
08-19-2008, 07:01 PM
Did you seriously just put "ew" at the end of your post? Are you a middle school girl? I'm female, and I don't say "ew."



I think it was onomatopoeic, as in 'uh' or 'heh'. Hes using it to pose the question.


haha in Canada we have multiple parties. The Liberals, Conservatives, New Democratic Party, Bloc Quebecois, and many others. Except no one votes for the Bloc because they're French Canadian, and no one gives a crap about the NDP

Same here. We have the Lib Dems, the Conseratives, and the centre party Labour. It seems to work fine, altho the Libdems, whilst having roughly a 3rd of the national voter, are evenly spread throughout, so they usually get the short end of the stick in the 1st-past-the-post voting system.

SmthBluCitrus
08-19-2008, 07:09 PM
I think it was onomatopoeic, as in 'uh' or 'heh'. Hes using it to pose the question.


Yea, I figured. T'was only a joke. That's why I continued my post, and smiled at the end. :D

Randy West
08-19-2008, 07:10 PM
When the two parties that have a stranglehold on our political system why should they let a third forth or fifth party get involved??

Right now we have two parties with all the money and the CONTROL.......they have made it impossible for any other parties to even come close to competing.

Welcome to American politics............Coke or Pepsi or go home

Prior22
08-19-2008, 07:31 PM
There are so many more parties out there with so much more potential for a better president. I hate Barrack Obama, and I hate John McCain and I feel like we're screwed. Why are American's looking at the 2 poster boys and no one else? Do we really believe that these two clowns are the best choices to lead us? Ew.

This is the exact attitude all those Ralph Nader supporters had in 2000 and 2004. All voting for a third party back then did was take away votes from Gore and Kerry. So if you want to vote for a third party candidate, feel free. Just know that its basically the equivalent of throwing your vote away.

NotVeryOriginal
08-19-2008, 07:55 PM
This is the exact attitude all those Ralph Nader supporters had in 2000 and 2004. All voting for a third party back then did was take away votes from Gore and Kerry. So if you want to vote for a third party candidate, feel free. Just know that its basically the equivalent of throwing your vote away.

This is the exact attitude that promotes, "Go extreme or gtfo our team"

Im sure people who vote thrid party are actually using their vote to vote for what they believe in, the vast majority of them are educated enough on politcs to search out parties that agree with their ideas, and theydeserve that vote more than the drones who vote out of fear mongering both anti-Obama and anit-McCain voters fall into this.

b1e9a8r5s
08-19-2008, 08:39 PM
Because of how close the last few races have been, it really makes it hard for people to "justify" voting for a 3rd party that they know can't win. In these close races a vote for the 3rd party is almost like a vote for the other guy.

NotVeryOriginal
08-19-2008, 09:26 PM
Because of how close the last few races have been, it really makes it hard for people to "justify" voting for a 3rd party that they know can't win. In these close races a vote for the 3rd party is almost like a vote for the other guy.

Voting against someone is fear voting, and is exactly the reason why the right to vote is idiotic at best.

PUGS1688
08-20-2008, 02:18 AM
This is the exact attitude all those Ralph Nader supporters had in 2000 and 2004. All voting for a third party back then did was take away votes from Gore and Kerry. So if you want to vote for a third party candidate, feel free. Just know that its basically the equivalent of throwing your vote away.

What a dumb ****ing post. Throwing my vote away is giving into the Media and being like every other mindless idiot in the US and picking between the 2 most corrupted ****s in the race. I'm not saying I would DEFINITELY vote for a 3rd party candidate, because I would have to learn about plans for the future before I commit to anyone.

All I'm saying is, neither two of these Candidates really make me think this country has a bright future.

Prior22
08-20-2008, 10:27 AM
What a dumb ****ing post. Throwing my vote away is giving into the Media and being like every other mindless idiot in the US and picking between the 2 most corrupted ****s in the race. I'm not saying I would DEFINITELY vote for a 3rd party candidate, because I would have to learn about plans for the future before I commit to anyone.

All I'm saying is, neither two of these Candidates really make me think this country has a bright future.

My post wasn't dumb at all. It was dead on accurate. All the Ralph Nader supporters would have been better served voting for Gore and Kerry. Instead they voted Nader and allowed eight years of Bush and all his policies that went against their values.

Way to go Independents. You make your voice heard voting for a candidate with no chance of winning. Kudos to you.

CubsGirl
08-20-2008, 11:16 AM
I think what irritates me the post is that if you mark independant on your political party registration thing, the parties have to approve giving you the ability to vote for them. For example, on one of the last ballots I saw before I got all disgruntled and registered Democrat, I only had the Democratic party and American party on my ballot - I didn't want to risk not being able to vote for the Democratic party who I'm most likely to vote for.

[/rant]

Randy West
08-20-2008, 11:16 AM
I could just as easily say it was the people that voted Kerry/Gore that screwed the election for Nader

b1e9a8r5s
08-20-2008, 12:08 PM
I encourage people to vote for a 3rd party. I wouldn't call it throwing your vote away nessecarily, but you go in knowing that your candidate isn't going to win, at this point anyway. A lot of people's "votes don't matter". I'm a republican living in Illinois. My vote for McCain won't make one lick of difference.

If a third party wants a real chance of getting the white house, I think they need to start small. Weather you like it or not, America isn't going to elect a green party or libertarian or any other 3rd party to president when there are very few of them in any elected official. If I were running those parties, I would work very hard on trying to field candidates in winable districts or senate races and slowly build momentum and gain notoriety. Just like no politician is going to get elected to president without expierence (although I Obama win would get us close to that), no political party is going to win the office without first demonstrating it can win senate or house seats and establishing a track record. I know, judging from your tone, you would say what have the two parties done for us, but thats just how it is.

CubsGirl
08-20-2008, 12:14 PM
I encourage people to vote for a 3rd party. I wouldn't call it throwing your vote away nessecarily, but you go in knowing that your candidate isn't going to win, at this point anyway. A lot of people's "votes don't matter". I'm a republican living in Illinois. My vote for McCain won't make one lick of difference.

If a third party wants a real chance of getting the white house, I think they need to start small. Weather you like it or not, America isn't going to elect a green party or libertarian or any other 3rd party to president when there are very few of them in any elected official. If I were running those parties, I would work very hard on trying to field candidates in winable districts or senate races and slowly build momentum and gain notoriety. Just like no politician is going to get elected to president without expierence (although I Obama win would get us close to that), no political party is going to win the office without first demonstrating it can win senate or house seats and establishing a track record. I know, judging from your tone, you would say what have the two parties done for us, but thats just how it is.
Exactly. Third party candidates aren't just going to go from one or two seats in the Senate to the president. You're 100% right when you say they need to start at the bottom and work their way up.

RogerRomo
08-20-2008, 12:32 PM
I encourage people to vote for a 3rd party. I wouldn't call it throwing your vote away nessecarily, but you go in knowing that your candidate isn't going to win, at this point anyway. A lot of people's "votes don't matter". I'm a republican living in Illinois. My vote for McCain won't make one lick of difference.

If a third party wants a real chance of getting the white house, I think they need to start small. Weather you like it or not, America isn't going to elect a green party or libertarian or any other 3rd party to president when there are very few of them in any elected official. If I were running those parties, I would work very hard on trying to field candidates in winable districts or senate races and slowly build momentum and gain notoriety. Just like no politician is going to get elected to president without expierence (although I Obama win would get us close to that), no political party is going to win the office without first demonstrating it can win senate or house seats and establishing a track record. I know, judging from your tone, you would say what have the two parties done for us, but thats just how it is.

Good news. Looks like latest "polls" (BS things, I ahve never been polled anyone else?), show that McCain is ahead by as much as 5 pts in the general election. Your vote is goign to make a difference. Vote!

Padres Son
08-20-2008, 12:33 PM
I'm voting for a third party candidate this year. I know my candidate has zero chance of winning, but I'm not wasting my vote. The point of voting for a third party candidate is to attempt to influence the policies of one of the "major" candidates. Here's what I mean:

Let's say hypothetically that Bob Barr wins 8% of the votes nationally in this election. That's a significant enough chunk of voters to grab the attention of the other two parties (especially the republican party which Barr would be "stealing" most of his votes from). In 2012, the major parties will be targeting that 8% of voters and trying to sway them over to their party by adopting some of the values of the third party candidate. Bob Barr's main platform is reducing the size of the government and government spending. So, in 2012, whoever ends up being the republican candidate would probably incorporate the smaller govt, smaller spending ideals into his campaign in order to gain some of that 8% back into his corner.

By voting for a third party candidate with values that align with yours, you can influence the major parties. So, voting for someone who has no chance of winning is not a waste of a vote.

b1e9a8r5s
08-20-2008, 12:52 PM
Good news. Looks like latest "polls" (BS things, I ahve never been polled anyone else?), show that McCain is ahead by as much as 5 pts in the general election. Your vote is goign to make a difference. Vote!

Don't worry, I'm voting, but there is no way in hell that Illinois isn't going to go for Obama, so in that sense, my vote doesn't matter.

b1e9a8r5s
08-20-2008, 12:55 PM
I'm voting for a third party candidate this year. I know my candidate has zero chance of winning, but I'm not wasting my vote. The point of voting for a third party candidate is to attempt to influence the policies of one of the "major" candidates. Here's what I mean:

Let's say hypothetically that Bob Barr wins 8% of the votes nationally in this election. That's a significant enough chunk of voters to grab the attention of the other two parties (especially the republican party which Barr would be "stealing" most of his votes from). In 2012, the major parties will be targeting that 8% of voters and trying to sway them over to their party by adopting some of the values of the third party candidate. Bob Barr's main platform is reducing the size of the government and government spending. So, in 2012, whoever ends up being the republican candidate would probably incorporate the smaller govt, smaller spending ideals into his campaign in order to gain some of that 8% back into his corner.

By voting for a third party candidate with values that align with yours, you can influence the major parties. So, voting for someone who has no chance of winning is not a waste of a vote.

That was well said and I think that is a good argument for voting for a 3rd party. If the 3rd party gets enough votes then either the party itself gains notoriety and momentum or the big party that closely resembles the 3rd parties’ views has to do more to get those voting for the 3rd party to vote for them.

arkanian215
08-20-2008, 01:36 PM
this whole voting system is pretty poor. forget republicans and democrats. forget voting.

RogerRomo
08-20-2008, 05:26 PM
this whole voting system is pretty poor. forget republicans and democrats. forget voting.

Thank you for not voting. :clap:

Raider_Vet
08-20-2008, 05:36 PM
Did you seriously just put "ew" at the end of your post? Are you a middle school girl? I'm female, and I don't say "ew."

We have a two party system because of money. A lot of people have a lot of money invested in this. Sure, it would be better to have a more legitimate multiple party system, but it is also a bit inherent that we have people who are on the left and people on the right. Two real choices are a lot easier than three ... or four ... etc ...

We look at issues in black and white, yes and no, right and wrong. Most people don't pay attention and they just want easy answers.

But, to be fair, you do have multiple candidates to choose from. The primary process produces a lot of valid (and some invalid) candidates. You really only end up with the two party system for a matter of months. You can look at it that way, it's not entirely false. :DGreat post SmthBluCitrus, I can always depend on you for a good read and logical answers. My take on this is that I know every election it's going to be a democrat or republican that wins the election. Yes I know if more people voted how they truely felt things would be different but it's not going to happen anytime soon. Call me shallow but it's the way I feel.

Raider_Vet
08-20-2008, 05:41 PM
Great post SmthBluCitrus, I can always depend on you for a good read and logical answers. My take on this is that I know every election it's going to be a democrat or republican that wins the election. Yes I know if more people voted how they truely felt things would be different but it's not going to happen anytime soon. Call me shallow but it's the way I feel.
I'm voting for a third party candidate this year. I know my candidate has zero chance of winning, but I'm not wasting my vote. . How can you say this when you know a 3rd party has no chance of winning? Sorry but IMO you are wasting you're vote. We are faced with choices often that requires us to choose the lesser of 2 evils and Presidential Politics is nothing new to this. Remember Gore vs Bush 2? This was never more clear in recent memory.

Padres Son
08-20-2008, 05:44 PM
How can you say this when you know a 3rd party has no chance of winning? Sorry but IMO you are wasting you're vote. We are faced with choices often that requires us to choose the lesser of 2 evils and Presidential Politics is nothing new to this. Remember Gore vs Bush 2? This was never more clear in recent memory.Did you bother reading the rest of my post, or do you want me to type it again? I explained why voting for a candidate that can't win isn't necessarily a waste of a vote.

papipapsmanny
08-21-2008, 01:24 AM
party system is getting ridiculous i believe it should be rid of, they arent working together, and disagree with each other just because the other side came up with an idea they made up

then when someone tries to be mature and compromise he is ridiculed by everyone,,, its completely ********


analogy its like haveing redsox and yankees fans running the goverment, you have seen us in arguments they are dumb, poorly orgainized arguements and at the end of th day nothing gets done, and everyone is left feeling dumber

b1e9a8r5s
08-21-2008, 01:53 AM
How can you say this when you know a 3rd party has no chance of winning? Sorry but IMO you are wasting you're vote. We are faced with choices often that requires us to choose the lesser of 2 evils and Presidential Politics is nothing new to this. Remember Gore vs Bush 2? This was never more clear in recent memory.

The answer to your question would be another question. What is the intent of your vote? Not to speak for this poster, but it seems that they are unhappy with both parties and have found a third party that speaks more closely to the issues they hold dear. The intent of their vote is to bring about....wait for it..."change" by bringing the 3rd party notoriety that can be built on for the future or to influence either of the big 2 parties to shift to be more inclusive of the third parties views. Weather enough people get behind the 3rd party to make an impact is a legitimate issue, but I don't think you should knock it.

ari1013
08-24-2008, 09:46 AM
I think it was onomatopoeic, as in 'uh' or 'heh'. Hes using it to pose the question.



Same here. We have the Lib Dems, the Conseratives, and the centre party Labour. It seems to work fine, altho the Libdems, whilst having roughly a 3rd of the national voter, are evenly spread throughout, so they usually get the short end of the stick in the 1st-past-the-post voting system.
The US isn't a Parliamentary Democracy. It's a Democratic Republic. There's a HUGE difference between the two systems.

In both systems you wind up with a majority government and a minority opposition. But in the US system, the majority is purely elected, whereas in the European system it's formed via coalition.

The strength of the US system is stability. The weakness of the US system is choice.

ari1013
08-24-2008, 09:47 AM
The answer to your question would be another question. What is the intent of your vote? Not to speak for this poster, but it seems that they are unhappy with both parties and have found a third party that speaks more closely to the issues they hold dear. The intent of their vote is to bring about....wait for it..."change" by bringing the 3rd party notoriety that can be built on for the future or to influence either of the big 2 parties to shift to be more inclusive of the third parties views. Weather enough people get behind the 3rd party to make an impact is a legitimate issue, but I don't think you should knock it.
It just can't work unless the Constitution is amended and the EV system is dismantled.