Absentee Ballot

[stjames1759]

My absentee ballot is here! I'm getting all the Marines worked up in my shop by saying I'm going to write in Ralph Nader. :D

[Rob]

They shouldn't be upset! A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush!

[stjames1759]

They shouldn't be upset! A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush!
I know, but they're Marines and don't understand that.

[schmenencke]

I know, but they're Marines and don't understand that.
Or they're intelligent enough to realize that a vote for Nader isn't a vote for Bush. It's amazing how if people say something enough, everybody starts to believe it's true.

[tdowe99]

I voted absentee in 2000. I was in FL, but voted for IL. When I was done punching the card, I noticed these little hanging pieces of paper. That was before we knew what "chads" were. I just brushed them off and mailed it away. If only Floridians had done the same.

[Rob]

No, actually, my comment has been thought through several times. Bush is supposedly in the lead. Wasting a vote on a third party (and it is a waste- voting on a principle isn't going to change a thing, no matter how noble one's intentions) only hurts Kerry, therefore helping Bush.

[Third Floor]

absentee voting is wasting your vote anyways. since the dont count them til after the regular election, at which time who wins is already decided. things you learn from 2000 election

[mojo1210]

Or they're intelligent enough to realize that a vote for Nader isn't a vote for Bush. It's amazing how if people say something enough, everybody starts to believe it's true.

:thumbsup

thank you, im sick of that rhetoric. maybe if people stop believing this our government will become more then a two party(slowly becoming the same thing) system.

[stjames1759]

:thumbsup

thank you, im sick of that rhetoric. maybe if people stop believing this our government will become more then a two party(slowly becoming the same thing) system.
I have to agree with Rob on this one. With the country this divided on this important of an election, voting for Nader is just hurting Kerry.

[mojo1210]

but thats my point. i dont give a shit if its hurting kerry, because i'm not voting for him. i'm not simply picking the lesser of two evils like everyone seems to feel they should.

who said i was voting for nader to begin with?

[SMN43]

absentee voting is wasting your vote anyways. since the dont count them til after the regular election, at which time who wins is already decided. things you learn from 2000 election
can you post a link to something proving this correct? i'm curious, since i'm voting absentee, but i think you have the facts wrong. who knows...

[mojo1210]

can you post a link to something proving this correct? i'm curious, since i'm voting absentee, but i think you have the facts wrong. who knows...


correct me if im wrong. but in 2000 i believe that there were numerous absentee ballots from florida that we not counted at all.

[Rob]

Florida shouldn't be a model for any type of voting discussion.

[stjames1759]

correct me if im wrong. but in 2000 i believe that there were numerous absentee ballots from florida that we not counted at all.
they weren't, but im still going to vote. never said you were voting for kerry or nader. i thought we were debating whether a vote ( any vote ) for nader would hurt kerry and help bush.

[mojo1210]

they weren't, but im still going to vote. never said you were voting for kerry or nader. i thought we were debating whether a vote ( any vote ) for nader would hurt kerry and help bush.


i guess i should have been more specific...i was debating more along the lines of will any third party vote hurt kerry and help bush.

[stjames1759]

i guess i should have been more specific...i was debating more along the lines of will any third party vote hurt kerry and help bush.
me too...i say any third party vote will

[mojo1210]

me too...i say any third party vote will


see, then the discussionwill never end. :)

ill just say this, like i said before, i don't think the people voting for a thrid party canidate really look at it as hurting kerry, because if they wanted kerry they would vote for him. if they wanted bush, they'd vote bush. yeah the canidate i vote for most likely will not win, but i vote for the person i vote for because they are the ones that i am in the most aggrement with. the anyone but bush mentality pisses me off, because it seems most of those people saying that will give kerry their vote. kerry isn't the only choice, and after that nader isn't either.

[Rob]

While it's true Bush and Kerry aren't the people for whom you can cast votes, they are the only candidates that have any chance of winning. By voting for a third-party candidate, you aren't casting a vote for change, you are standing up for an idea, which is honorable, but futile. If you want change, you must vote Kerry. It's that simple.

[stjames1759]

While it's true Bush and Kerry aren't the people for whom you can cast votes, they are the only candidates that have any chance of winning. By voting for a third-party candidate, you aren't casting a vote for change, you are standing up for an idea, which is honorable, but futile. If you want change, you must vote Kerry. It's that simple.
i agree. it sucks this is an "anyone-but-bush" election, but it seems like voting for a third party candidate is going to get the exact opposite results that you want.

[mojo1210]

While it's true Bush and Kerry aren't the people for whom you can cast votes, they are the only candidates that have any chance of winning. By voting for a third-party candidate, you aren't casting a vote for change, you are standing up for an idea, which is honorable, but futile. If you want change, you must vote Kerry. It's that simple.

to me kerry isn't change.

[Rob]

That's a valid opinion, and one that I can't agree with, but that's the point of a democracy.

[mojo1210]

That's a valid opinion, and one that I can't agree with, but that's the point of a democracy.

right on...to each his own.

not necessarily directed at you, but...if there is such strong oposition against bush, then why is kerry the one choice. if you think hes the one great, but to me i find myself saying, thats the best there is? if there is such an anyone-but-bush movement, you think this would have drawn a top notch canidate, from the dems, from anyone. furthermore, will the country ever be more then just two parties in congress, in the senate, in the courts, in the oval office. to me the most effective way of change is choice and different ideas/perspective. like i said, i think the two main parties are becoming so similar its not even funny. i think something NEW needs to be introduced to break down this complacency, and homogeny.

[Rob]

Our system doesn't work- plain and simple. It's a popularity and bank account contest. No good change can happen with the system as it is. To that end, we have to work within the system. Kerry might not be a huge change, but he is a change. Bush is a dangerous man. Is Kerry worse? Who knows. I'd rather give him a chance and be bitten in the ass then give Bush four more years to destroy us along his current path.

[stjames1759]

i think the two main parties are becoming so similar its not even funny. i think something NEW needs to be introduced to break down this complacency, and homogeny.
can't argue with that. but i think it needs to start with a change in this administration.

[mwjorgens]

things you learn from 2000 election
democracy doesnt work. and yes a vote for nader is a vote for bush

[mojo1210]

can't argue with that. but i think it needs to start with a change in this administration.

fair enough......

at least the few in this thread are going to vote, and haven't been chastized for the way i view politics. :thumbsup

[mojo1210]

Our system doesn't work- plain and simple. It's a popularity and bank account contest. No good change can happen with the system as it is. To that end, we have to work within the system.

how much longer will the system last if it doesn't work? to be honest, how much longer can the nation be divided, and 'represented' by the rich, popular, and now famous (arnold, in california is a great example of this, and i think a great example of the best and worst parts of our system). will it lead to civil war again, revolution, or will the government continue on the path its on? will you or i live to see such outcomes?

[Rob]

Our system will last until we are literally taken over by a foreign nation. Every era has had its dominant power. The US is on the decline, China is on the rise. Will this be the switch? I'm not so sure, but who knows.

Armed revolt is such an archaic idea, and an impossible one due to the nation's armed forces. How else do you introduce change?

The Switzerland model is one to seriously look at- do some research on how they are able to bring about change, and you will be astounded.

[mojo1210]

Our system will last until we are literally taken over by a foreign nation. Every era has had its dominant power. The US is on the decline, China is on the rise. Will this be the switch? I'm not so sure, but who knows.

Armed revolt is such an archaic idea, and an impossible one due to the nation's armed forces. How else do you introduce change?

The Switzerland model is one to seriously look at- do some research on how they are able to bring about change, and you will be astounded.

yeah i agree that armed revolt is an archaic idea. i really do not invision a group marching their way to dc and trying to take over. i don't think its out of the rhelm of possibility for a state or region of the country to want out. will that happen anytime soon, i doubt it.

and what specifically about switzerland should i look into, recent history?

[schmenencke]

democracy doesnt work. and yes a vote for nader is a vote for bush
As far as the election goes, a vote for a third party candidate is just like not voting.
Why don't we hear people say that refusing to vote is a vote for Bush? Because it points out the idiocy of the argument.

This discussion also ignores the individual who would prefer Bush to Kerry, but votes Badnarik instead.

[Rob]

Read into Switzerland's government, and specifically how they handle constitution amendments. It's not exclusively in the hands of the government- the people can push it through.