Anyone else voting for a third party? Libertarians?

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I was very disappointing to learn that the D.C. ballot will NOT include Ron Paul nor Bob Barr.

What is a Libertarian to do?

Well, I do have a space to write-in a name at least.

At the moment I am reviewing the proposals of both Bob Barr and Ron Paul.

Question is, which one to write in on Tuesday?

I am pretty sure I'm leaning towards Ron Paul, at least based on the fact that he addresses a broader range of issues on his web site, include the environment, for example.

So, Libertarians, who will you be voting for? (Even if that means writing the person onto the ballot.)

I just cannot in good conscience vote for either McCain/Palin nor Obama/Biden.

Are there any demographic studies on the expected 3rd party voting trends this year?

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Wow, I wake up to see Obama and Barr in a 5:5 dead heat

Why Barr over Paul?

Paul will only be on two ballots, IIRC. Barr will be on 45+.

D.C. is one of the few where he is not there...at least the sample I've seen.

But I see your point.

I think RP is the better candidate but BB will have more national synergy.

 

[Xavier434]

Our system of representation is not perfect, but it is solid enough to the point where I can rest easy knowing that a Libertarian president or controlled house/senate is no where near our future if it is to ever happen at all.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Wow, I wake up to see Obama and Barr in a 5:5 dead heat

Why Barr over Paul?

Paul will only be on two ballots, IIRC. Barr will be on 45+.

D.C. is one of the few where he is not there...at least the sample I've seen.

But I see your point.

I think RP is the better candidate but BB will have more national synergy.

RP does not endorse BB.

 

[mxyzptlk]

semi real question because I already suspect the answer but, how does one 'write-in' a candidate? Well, I guess a better way to phrase it would be, are there any states/districts where such a thing is even possible in a presidential election, because there is no such option here in my district.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: mxyzptlk
semi real question because I already suspect the answer but, how does one 'write-in' a candidate? Well, I guess a better way to phrase it would be, are there any states/districts where such a thing is even possible in a presidential election, because there is no such option here in my district.

On my sample ballot, the major candidates are listed with a "check box" to the right of their names and below that list, still within the Presidential Candidate section, is an option to write in the name of a candidate.

Sort of like...

Name X (Obama)
Name X (McCain)
Name X (Nader)
Name X (Satan...Sinthia McKinney)

Write in: ____________

 

[mect]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Aren't you? Where do you get this moral passion against corruption and thuggery?

No, I am not religious. I derive my passion against corruption from secular ethics.

"Secular ethics is a branch of moral philosophy in which ethics is based solely on human faculties such as logic, reason or moral intuition"
So could you please describe how moral intuition is rational.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Dissipate
The authors used the word 'creator' because they were religious.

Open your mind.

They used the word, "creator," because it doesn't leave anyone out, it doesn't divide us. The word can mean God, or any deity, to those who believe in one. Or it can mean the environment, nature, to those who do not believe in a deity.

But Dissipate has reached the common conclusion that "Religion is inherently corrupt. It is the teaching of mystical beliefs as means of comforting oneself in the face of existential inconveniences, such as death.", and not a science, generally corrupted, the real intention of which is to destroy the ego so the true self or God or some Creator can emerge. It isn't, therefore, too likely he is going to open his mind to this, otherwise, rather obvious point. Creator must be a guy with a beard, no, some mystical mumbo jumbo?

But, otherwise, he seems to have no problem being a mystic himself with his secular ethics and metaphysical moral intuition. "Good and evil exist, all right, but there just isn't any God."

It's sort of like not having your cake but eating it too.

 

[alchemize]

Yup. If there isn't an adequate third party candidate on the ballot then I'm writing in Dave McCowen.

 

[AstroManLuca]

I'm voting Obama for President, but I might vote third-party in the U.S. Senate election.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

And these so-called 'experts,' 'mentors,' and 'experienced professionals' have absolutely no agenda of their own. The 'knowledge' they have imparted is completely pure and unfettered by any biased personal conviction. None of them derive their income from the political institutions they rabidly support. *ROFFLE*

Yes, everyone has a bias, however the experts, mentors, and experienced professionals have far less of a bias than half-wits with little education. When you do the cost-benefit analysis, the ignoramus comes out looking bad, while the experienced, educated professionals come out looking good.

You live in a box, as we all do, and the minute you tried to actually break out of that box and do something significant without the approval of those 'experts,' 'mentors' and 'experienced professionals,' they would have you thrown in prison rape room.

Seriously, lay off the YouTube conspiracy crap.

What does shorting or bond financing have to do with anything? Those are natural phenomena in a market economy. I use public services that the political establishment has indeed force fed me. If you can explain how I can alter these public services when the political horde has chosen them for me, then we can talk about paying taxes. Saying I must pay taxes for public services is like saying I should charge you for a pie I have smashed into your face and shoved down your throat. Paul is indeed anti-science if he rejects evolution and talks about 'creators.'

1) The fact that you thought China and other foreign countries would dump our T-bills immediately, and when it was explained to you that they don't benefit from doing such lunacy, you said those foreign countries would actually dump them over time, at which point I said "Why is that bad?" and at which point you proceeded to exit the thread.

2) You are perfectly free to live in a cabin in the woods or flee the USA if you don't like always being forced to use public services, and therefore you must pay taxes. It comes with the territory, welcome to the 20th century (which means you're still a century behind).

3) There are plenty of scientists who have been documented as saying they believe in god and/or a creator. Your contention is utterly baseless, even IF Paul completely rejected evolution (which he has only partially done).

This is coming from someone whose entire view is mainstream political and economic dogma.

Mostly common sense, reading, and experience.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: mect
"Secular ethics is a branch of moral philosophy in which ethics is based solely on human faculties such as logic, reason or moral intuition"
So could you please describe how moral intuition is rational.

Moral intuition is indeed rational to a large extent. The vast majority of the human race does not consist of nihilists (a debunked philosophy), but rather of people who understand that there are rational limits to their actions. If our moral intuitions were way off base the human race would have killed itself off long ago.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Evan
Yes, everyone has a bias, however the experts, mentors, and experienced professionals have far less of a bias than half-wits with little education. When you do the cost-benefit analysis, the ignoramus comes out looking bad, while the experienced, educated professionals come out looking good.

Right, because all of the experts in the USSR knew it was best to kill off millions of people. It was a fantastic feat of social engineering. After all, those people were just half wits with little education. Can I buy you a ticket to North Korea? They have plenty of experts there to help you into your government provided living quarters.

Seriously, lay off the YouTube conspiracy crap.

Never mentioned any conspiracies. Many of the laws that have set you up as either a tax cattle or a government parasite were written long before you were born. And while you can go to any law library to look these laws up I would wager a large sum of money that you are completely unaware of the vast majority of the laws that keep you in your box, and even if you were aware of them you would have to hire an expensive lawyer to even begin to interpret any of them. Oh wait, we have nothing to fear, the 'experts' have written those laws and they have all of our best interests at heart. Too bad you would never have the time or resources to even test any of those laws. Your behavior has been modified to minimize the possibility of triggering any of them to be used against you. Heck, you would never challenge a government institution if your life depended on it.

You are a snide coward who sees a deity in the bureaucracy. A deity never to be challenged, at least not by the likes of you.

1) The fact that you thought China and other foreign countries would dump our T-bills immediately, and when it was explained to you that they don't benefit from doing such lunacy, you said those foreign countries would actually dump them over time, at which point I said "Why is that bad?" and at which point you proceeded to exit the thread.

Clearly it would be bad for you if the fed gov couldn't borrow money from foreigners. Your beloved government's ability to rack up deficits would be diminished.

2) You are perfectly free to live in a cabin in the woods or flee the USA if you don't like always being forced to use public services, and therefore you must pay taxes. It comes with the territory, welcome to the 20th century (which means you're still a century behind).

You are perfectly free to be ruled by your experts in North Korea. If you were born in North Korea would you say the same thing about 'public services?' What is the fundamental difference between a North Korean government expert and a U.S. government expert?

3) There are plenty of scientists who have been documented as saying they believe in god and/or a creator. Your contention is utterly baseless, even IF Paul completely rejected evolution (which he has only partially done).

Evolution is a theory supported by reason & evidence, which is what the scientific method is based on. To deny reason & evidence and reject evolution is patently anti-science for that particular theory.

Mostly common sense, reading, and experience.

More like obeying the government 100% of the time always and forever because of a fetish for 'expertise.'

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: OFFascist
I voted for McCain in the presidential election, the rest of the ballot I voted Libertarian.

Obama is the antithesis of Libertarian.

Right.... so libertarians should vote for the socially authoritarian, fiscally populist McCain/Palin ticket? In relative contrast, Obama's socially liberal, fiscally liberal ticket is the shining light of libertarianism.

If Obama is a "shining light of libertarianism" then we live in some very, very dark times.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Right, because all of the experts in the USSR knew it was best to kill off millions of people. It was a fantastic feat of social engineering. After all, those people were just half wits with little education. Can I buy you a ticket to North Korea? They have plenty of experts there to help you into your government provided living quarters.

I'm not sure what made-up bullcrap about fringe people living in fear under a brutal dictatorship has to do with experts and professionals in the USA. Please stay on topic, otherwise you just look kind of sad.

Never mentioned any conspiracies. Many of the laws that have set you up as either a tax cattle or a government parasite were written long before you were born. And while you can go to any law library to look these laws up I would wager a large sum of money that you are completely unaware of the vast majority of the laws that keep you in your box, and even if you were aware of them you would have to hire an expensive lawyer to even begin to interpret any of them. Oh wait, we have nothing to fear, the 'experts' have written those laws and they have all of our best interests at heart. Too bad you would never have the time or resources to even test any of those laws. Your behavior has been modified to minimize the possibility of triggering any of them to be used against you. Heck, you would never challenge a government institution if your life depended on it.

The fact is you are now claiming another conspiracy; that someone lawyers all over the U.S. are purposefully distorting laws for their personal gain, when reality just isn't that mysterious and interesting. Fact is lawyers (like any profession) are paid to follow the law, understand the law, and practice lawfully. The fact that you can't be more specific than some broad nonsense about lawyers lying about "laws" (whatever that general statement means) is telling. You can't actually cite examples because you know you don't have a leg to stand on. What sort of things are being distorted? Specifically now, I know you can do it!

You are a snide coward who sees a deity in the bureaucracy. A deity never to be challenged, at least not by the likes of you.

Reality kiddo.

Clearly it would be bad for you if the fed gov couldn't borrow money from foreigners. Your beloved government's ability to rack up deficits would be diminished.

No one buys this deflectionary nonsense; please explain why some countries dumping T-bills progressively over time would "destroy" us as you claimed? I'll be waiting for your next non-answer.

You are perfectly free to be ruled by your experts in North Korea. If you were born in North Korea would you say the same thing about 'public services?' What is the fundamental difference between a North Korean government expert and a U.S. government expert?

The fact that they are nothing alike; one is free to research, talk, and write at will about what they've seen, witnessed and believed. The North Koreans? Not so much. Now, if you can, please explain why you shouldn't pay taxes? Woops, there's those damn specifics again.

Evolution is a theory supported by reason & evidence, which is what the scientific method is based on. To deny reason & evidence and reject evolution is patently anti-science for that particular theory.

You see, this is why education is so important; had you gone to school you would have learned more about if/then statements.

More like obeying the government 100% of the time always and forever because of a fetish for 'expertise.'

You fail yet again.

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Oh, I forgot to mention the candidate I voted for! I am proud to announce that none of those scumbags get my consent to continue raping America.

Our society is shaped by the free people that create technology, wealth, and beauty. The government represents the worst in us and its existence implies there is something to fear. But there isn't. If any of you truly want change, then you need to start small and with the people in your area. Start reading more, help out someone you know, create the world that you want to live in. BE the person you want others you know you by. That's real change, that's change you can believe in. Not the empty promises that politicians give.

 

[First]

^ Jesus H. Christ, you really need to step outside the bomb shelter buddy. :laugh:

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: Evan

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Right, because all of the experts in the USSR knew it was best to kill off millions of people. It was a fantastic feat of social engineering. After all, those people were just half wits with little education. Can I buy you a ticket to North Korea? They have plenty of experts there to help you into your government provided living quarters.

I'm not sure what made-up bullcrap about fringe people living in fear under a brutal dictatorship has to do with experts and professionals in the USA. Please stay on topic, otherwise you just look kind of sad.

Because we're all humans and we all have governments. And if one government can terrorize (like Germany or Russia) then any government can. And you're forgetting that we've done it before. Japanese internment camps, slaughtering Native Americans, rounding up Hispanics and shipping them off. You can justify it however you want to, but treating humans like this is evil. No matter which imaginary lines in the ground they happen to reside in.

Originally posted by: Evan

Never mentioned any conspiracies. Many of the laws that have set you up as either a tax cattle or a government parasite were written long before you were born. And while you can go to any law library to look these laws up I would wager a large sum of money that you are completely unaware of the vast majority of the laws that keep you in your box, and even if you were aware of them you would have to hire an expensive lawyer to even begin to interpret any of them. Oh wait, we have nothing to fear, the 'experts' have written those laws and they have all of our best interests at heart. Too bad you would never have the time or resources to even test any of those laws. Your behavior has been modified to minimize the possibility of triggering any of them to be used against you. Heck, you would never challenge a government institution if your life depended on it.

The fact is you are now claiming another conspiracy; that someone lawyers all over the U.S. are purposefully distorting laws for their personal gain, when reality just isn't that mysterious and interesting. Fact is lawyers (like any profession) are paid to follow the law, understand the law, and practice lawfully. The fact that you can't be more specific than some broad nonsense about lawyers lying about "laws" (whatever that general statement means) is telling. You can't actually cite examples because you know you don't have a leg to stand on. What sort of things are being distorted? Specifically now, I know you can do it!

Why is the system so complicated and screwed up that it takes hiring a professional to decrypt the language in our courts? Shouldn't the government work for us?

Originally posted by: Evan

Clearly it would be bad for you if the fed gov couldn't borrow money from foreigners. Your beloved government's ability to rack up deficits would be diminished.

No one buys this deflectionary nonsense; please explain why some countries dumping T-bills progressively over time would "destroy" us as you claimed? I'll be waiting for your next non-answer.

Foreign countries hold United States bonds and hold dollars as reserves. Once dollars are not the hot currency to hold and once foreign countries think the United States will not be able to pay back our debt (because we can't even handle our own) then everyone will swap their dollars for something else.

Originally posted by: Evan

You are perfectly free to be ruled by your experts in North Korea. If you were born in North Korea would you say the same thing about 'public services?' What is the fundamental difference between a North Korean government expert and a U.S. government expert?

The fact that they are nothing alike; one is free to research, talk, and write at will about what they've seen, witnessed and believed. The North Koreans? Not so much. Now, if you can, please explain why you shouldn't pay taxes? Woops, there's those damn specifics again.

Could you explain when I agreed to pay the government for their services? We live our daily lives around the concept of voluntary association. But we make an exception for government, for some reason. Its the same kind of logic regarding murder. We live our lives acknowledging that murder is wrong, but we fully condone some of our friends and family slaughtering people in a place far away because we make the exception for government. Its for a just cause of course!

 

[SleepWalkerX]

Originally posted by: Evan
^ Jesus H. Christ, you really need to step outside the bomb shelter buddy. :laugh:

I have.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: mect
"Secular ethics is a branch of moral philosophy in which ethics is based solely on human faculties such as logic, reason or moral intuition"
So could you please describe how moral intuition is rational.

Moral intuition is indeed rational to a large extent. The vast majority of the human race does not consist of nihilists (a debunked philosophy), but rather of people who understand that there are rational limits to their actions. If our moral intuitions were way off base the human race would have killed itself off long ago.

This is no more rational than saying it's God that keeps humanity alive. You still have this mystical appeal in your thinking. You might as well say we were created in God's image as say we are innately moral. Six of one and half a dozen of the other.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I have a hard time believing that the true Libertarians of this forums are voting for Obama over Barr.

 

[Moonbeam]

Too bad this died. It was interesting.

 

[JD50]

I was torn between voting third party (as an EFF YOU to the Repubs) or voting for McCain (as an EFF YOU to Obama) but I think I'm going to go third party. Although I really can't stand Obama, and I'm really concerned about him standing up to Nancy "stretch" Pelosi and Harry "The Body" Reid, in the long run I'm much more concerned about sending a message to the Republican party to get back to their conservative roots. IMO, as a conservative, a better short term vote would be for McCain, while a better long term vote would be for a third party candidate. I'm young, so I'm thinking long term here.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: bamacre
Already voted for Baldwin (you left him off the list).

Good choice, because you know a Christian would never have any agenda in politics.

Yeah, I guess an atheist would never have any agenda in politics either :roll:

 

[Evander]

I love Ron Paul but will only be a "qualified" write in candidate in 1 state: CA, but will be on the printed ballots of MT, LA
To the best of my knowledge, if you write his name on the D.C. ballot or any other state it will not be counted or worse yet, may be counted as a vote for McCain since they are both Republicans (not sure on that, but that's what I've heard).
Your best 2 choices for a write in candidate are Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin. Even though Ron Paul endorsed Baldwin, I think voting for Barr is the better choice because I'm a Libertarian and want to show support for my party, and even though Baldwin is not running on a religious platform, his party's platform is very religious. But Baldwin is running as a pro life candidate and opposes gay marriage. These 2 issues don't directly affect me, but Barr's platform is more tolerant of personal choice which is what I support. Barr also has several years of political experience since he was a former GA congressman. Granted he had a voting record that a Libertarian couldn't be proud of in during his republican days (pro Patriot Act, pro War on Drugs), for the last 5 to 6 years he has been consistently pro-liberty and has been active in the ACLU.
So there you have it - Bob Barr is your man (if you agree, please donate to his campaign- I put in $25 myself and you can use paypal). Also make sure you check out the 3rd party Vice Presidential debate on Nov 2 at 8:00 Central - the Libertarians, Constitution Party, and Nader's VP will be participating:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=165222
You might be interested to know that Barr is winning the early voting race in PA:
http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/