Group Pushes Kerry-Nader Vote Swap

[joshw10]

To me this sounds like a scheme to get Nader more votes. Kerry supporters in non-battleground states will be more likely to hold up their end of the deal, their candidate having nothing to lose or gain by their vote. Nader supporters will probably vote for Nader anyway.

 

[Luck JF]

I think the mistake here is assuming that people who want to vote for Nader would otherwise vote for Kerry. Nader himself thinks both parties are corrupt and he certainly does not favor Democrats over Republicans, so why would his supporters?

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: Luck JF
I think the mistake here is assuming that people who want to vote for Nader would otherwise vote for Kerry. Nader himself thinks both parties are corrupt and he certainly does not favor Democrats over Republicans, so why would his supporters?

Well his supports might see reality and decided that a sweaping their vote and supporting kerry is better then throwing away a vote and supporting nader.

 

[joshw10]

The real Nader supporters don't seem to care about this. They want to see Kerry lose.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: joshw10
The real Nader supporters don't seem to care about this. They want to see Kerry lose.

Link?

 

[lordtyranus]

Originally posted by: joshw10
The real Nader supporters don't seem to care about this. They want to see Kerry lose.

If that is the case, why don't we offer a similar program? Bush has so many strong states that we could easily afford a 2 for 1 swap even.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus

Originally posted by: joshw10
The real Nader supporters don't seem to care about this. They want to see Kerry lose.

If that is the case, why don't we offer a similar program? Bush has so many strong states that we could easily afford a 2 for 1 swap even.

But There are only 7 real nader support 3 of which are un jail and the other 4 are in CA.

 

[joshw10]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus

Originally posted by: joshw10
The real Nader supporters don't seem to care about this. They want to see Kerry lose.

If that is the case, why don't we offer a similar program? Bush has so many strong states that we could easily afford a 2 for 1 swap even.

Don't try to do too much for Nader now. You already got him onto the ballots with your signatures.

 

[Pliablemoose]

I'll even volunteer for this...

I live in Texas, & will vote for Kerry if there any voters in swing states that'll vote Nader for me there...

PM me & I'll send a link to my eBay feedback...

We need a vote swapping sticky in P&N

 

[b0mbrman]

Is it only because there's a loophole that you're all willing to vote trade?

If it was explicitly illegal and because "the EC isn't perfect and it doesn't give all voters a fair shot to let their voices be heard," would you vote trade anyway?

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

if this was illegal I would not do it. because there is nothing prohibiting this, and I want Bush to lose I am gonna go through with this. I've already signed up 3 of my friends to do this as well.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Whether or not it is currently illegal anywhere, it should be illegal everywhere.

Why do you say so?

Because the minute you start legalizing constitutional manipulation is the minute the constitution is worth nothing.

Said the ardent Bush supporter. And yet you'll still vote for him, just because he pretends that he'll do something about abortion. Of course, you're in FAVOR of the constitutional manipulation Bush has in mind.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
if this was illegal I would not do it. because there is nothing prohibiting this, and I want Bush to lose I am gonna go through with this. I've already signed up 3 of my friends to do this as well.

Heaven forbid you develop ethics before they're forced on you legally. :roll:

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Said the ardent Bush supporter. And yet you'll still vote for him, just because he pretends that he'll do something about abortion. Of course, you're in FAVOR of the constitutional manipulation Bush has in mind.

What exact manipulation of the constitution is Bush doing, anyway? Anything that can compare to the complete lack of ethics required to circumvent 200+ years of voting precedent? Voting is the most sacred thing we have in this country. Finding ways to bend the system is, therefore, just about the most vile thing I can think of.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

What exact manipulation of the constitution is Bush doing, anyway? Anything that can compare to the complete lack of ethics required to circumvent 200+ years of voting precedent? Voting is the most sacred thing we have in this country. Finding ways to bend the system is, therefore, just about the most vile thing I can think of.

Cry me a river. I have been an attorney for the federal government for the last 6 years, and can't see any ethical boundary that would be crossed by this brand of vote-swapping (as opposed to, say, buying and selling votes for profit). If you really can't think of any activity more vile than this, we should switch jobs for a year so you can get some perspective on what constitutes truly bad behavior.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

I'm gonna set aside my ethics for the greater good of our country and our world. I truly believe we are headed in the wrong direction with Bush, and it's not as if this vote pairing system is illegal anyways. It makes sense, and hopefully if enough people catch on it will force some change to the dated EC system.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
I'm gonna set aside my ethics for the greater good of our country and our world. I truly believe we are headed in the wrong direction with Bush, and it's not as if this vote pairing system is illegal anyways. It makes sense, and hopefully if enough people catch on it will force some change to the dated EC system.

:thumbsup:

I live in a swing state so I can't participate, but I would have if I could.

 

[Infohawk]

Here's my problem with this. People who are dumb enough not to understand that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush won't understand how this works.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
I'm gonna set aside my ethics for the greater good of our country and our world

I wonder if Ben Franklin ever said anything catchy about what people who think that way deserve.

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: lordtyranus

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Don't sweat it, CycloWizard. The Rnc has already launched hundreds of 'cloned' vote-swapping sites. The sites are not designed to swap Bush for Nader votes, but rather Kerry votes for......nothing. :laugh: Sometimes, you have to fight fire with fire...

A large grassroots movement in the 2000 Democratic vote-swapping movement could in fact, have the opposite of the intended effect.

Meh. I'm not concerned with the outcome of election. Foolishly, I'm trying to argue principles with the extreme libs on this board, immediately after they demonstrate that they have none.

Ah bull$hit. This is not a lib/republican thing. It is about what is right and wrong.

For those not keeping score:

EC = Crap
Vote Swapping = Correction of that Crap.

Desired result = The person with the most votes in the presidential election wins the game, regardless of whether that person is Bush or Kerry.

That is what is right. Screw the EC and its punishment of where people live. If our elected officals won't change the system, then we will.

The government says EC = good, and therefore that is how we vote in this country. Don't like it? Move somewhere else. You = bigot.

So you must also be opposed to the pleabargain. Not contemplated by the framers, sidesteps the constitutional guarantee of a trial by jury - an attempt to stretch the Constitution to fit the reality of courts that are too busy to try every case.

 

[b0mbrman]

The difference is that plea bargains are to save time and money, not arrive at a conclusion other than what the constitutional process would bring.

The only mission of vote swapping is to elect an official who would not have won under normal circumstances--that is, at a conclusion opposite what constitutional intent would dictate.

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I'm sure it'd be just fine if it were the Republicans considering it. Don't say that it wouldn't be, because that would be a big, fat lie.

:roll:

Unlike yourself, I'm capable of realizing wrongdoing regardless of the perpetrator. No one should be allowed to manipulate democracy. If you want your vote counted elsewhere, you should move there. I haven't even changed my voter registration from Indiana to Missouri, despite the fact that it would be a lot more valuable here in Missouri and I live here now, simply because I'm not really from Missouri and the people of this state should be able to vote as they see fit without outsiders such as myself interfering.

Maybe you should take a long look at how your party is trying to jimmy the system in several states. Suppressing black voters in Florida and Detroit, screwing with registration in Ohio, electronic voter fraud in several sates in 2002, etc. It's almost on the party platform at this point.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I'm sure it'd be just fine if it were the Republicans considering it. Don't say that it wouldn't be, because that would be a big, fat lie.

:roll:

Unlike yourself, I'm capable of realizing wrongdoing regardless of the perpetrator. No one should be allowed to manipulate democracy. If you want your vote counted elsewhere, you should move there. I haven't even changed my voter registration from Indiana to Missouri, despite the fact that it would be a lot more valuable here in Missouri and I live here now, simply because I'm not really from Missouri and the people of this state should be able to vote as they see fit without outsiders such as myself interfering.

Maybe you should take a long look at how your party is trying to jimmy the system in several states. Suppressing black voters in Florida and Detroit, screwing with registration in Ohio, electronic voter fraud in several sates in 2002, etc. It's almost on the party platform at this point.

So this is a case then of two wrongs making a right?

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
The difference is that plea bargains are to save time and money, not arrive at a conclusion other than what the constitutional process would bring.

The only mission of vote swapping is to elect an official who would not have won under normal circumstances--that is, at a conclusion opposite what constitutional intent would dictate.

Yes and No. Plea bargines allows the state to strong arm people into pleading guiltiy even if they are not. trh

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
The difference is that plea bargains are to save time and money, not arrive at a conclusion other than what the constitutional process would bring.

The only mission of vote swapping is to elect an official who would not have won under normal circumstances--that is, at a conclusion opposite what constitutional intent would dictate.

Wrong. The EC in its present condition punishes people by where they live instead of protecting them which is kind of why the EC was first........ oh never mind.

So please explain to my when the EC is not extended to the State level if it is such an honorable ideal rooted firmly in the constitution that you so proudly wave?

It does not seem to matter that in any given state the 1 or 2 big cities with the largest population decide who wins the governors seat. Hell, why would anyone in the UP of Michigan even bother voting? There are ample votes in the Detroit metro area (highly democratic btw) to trump all of the UP votes combined.

No, we DON'T do that because it is irrelevant WHERE in a state you live. 1 voter, 1 vote. Most votes wins. No county by county EC! But for some reason, you would have us believe that it IS relevant when applied to the presidency. Ahhhhhh, now it DOES matter where you live. That's why we have to EC! So little states have a say in who is president.

 

[b0mbrman]

Why not? We're the United States of America....not the United Unions of Counties

BTW, in this thread, I'm not arguing for or against the electoral college....just arguing that it's in the constitution