I refuse to vote...

[cybrsage]

So, you get the greater of two evils.

As I said above, people like you are going to devalue democracy - and put it at risk.

There's plenty - again as I said above - for you to push for to improve elections, but in the meantime, the lesser of two evils is an important choice. Bush v. Gore mattered.

I agree and I can't believe people don't understand this basic concept.

I agree with you both. I will also add that if you do not vote you lose the right to bitch about who wins. You refuse to take part in the process? Shut The Frell Up.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I agree and I can't believe people don't understand this basic concept.

The basic reality is that people complain about power in politics and go out and make sure it stays exactly as it is. The system is designed for exactly that. You have no choice, not in the real world. Why should something change that works for those running it?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I agree with you both. I will also add that if you do not vote you lose the right to bitch about who wins. You refuse to take part in the process? Shut The Frell Up.

So if there are two people and one kicks you in the nuts and the other in the teeth you have no right to complain unless you pick one for your overseer? Hell yes you do. I have a right to complain as long as one cent comes from my paycheck.

 

[Mean MrMustard]

Excellent. As long as you are voting D/R, you are voting for a continuance of the problem.

This since 2004 and never looked back.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

No, I'm saying that having an agenda about issues so different from the rest of country that Bush and Gore are 'the same' is a radical agenda.

Yeah, sorry, I misread your post and edited that line out.

So why are you a hypocrite about fiscal conservatism when it comes to Bush adding hundreds of billions - trillions over years - the debt to make the rich richer lowering their taxes even more, something Gore would not have done, since you say there is 'no difference you care about between them'? I could cite other examples of differences involving large amounts of 'fiscal conservatism', but the point is made - YOU 'talk the talk' but don't walk the walk, ignoring the differences so you can sit on a pedestal.

I am not a hypocrite. I didn't like Bush or Gore. Both parties are fiscally irresponsible and I believe Gore would've made the tax cuts as well whether you do or not. Gore probably would not have invaded Iraq, that's true, but no one had any idea that Bush would do something so stupid way back in 2000.

Back to the Republicans though, they are fiscally conservative only when it comes to talk and not action. Or put another way, they're only interested in cutting spending when the spending affects Democrat programs (and vice versa).

Democrats: "Cut military spending!!!" (They're right to an extent, of course)
Republicans: "Cut other government programs!!" (They're right to an extent, of course)

I've bashed the rabid lefties here enough, so now I'll take aim at the radical righties. I'm tired of the "hard work" bullshit I hear on an almost daily basis from them. There are lots of people who work a hell of a lot harder than any of these guys (and certainly harder than me) and these folks will never be rich or maybe even middle class. I'm tired of seeing certain people here complain when capital gains tax increases are mentioned. How is it fair or just that investment gains are taxed LESS than income made from labor?'

I have zero faith that either major party will tackle these issues and the other important ones.

You haven't convinced me you actually have any coherent agenda, just a nice label "fiscal conservative" with no substance.

Do a search -- I've outlined my top 10 or so priorities numerous times in these forums.

What does your agenda actually have for policies - not just a name? What would you have the nation actually do, that's so different trillions of dollars in R vs. D don't matter?

See above.

Showing some irrationality, voting for bad policy for no justification shown.

With your 'logic', why not be willing to vote for Hitler 'just to not vote R or D', even though you 'don't agree with him'? You don't make the case R and D are worse than Ron Paul.

Because I think many (not all) of Paul's positions are correct and I believe he'd keep his word unlike Rs or Ds. I didn't think any of Hitler's policies were good.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I agree with you both. I will also add that if you do not vote you lose the right to bitch about who wins.

I disagree. If one penny of my money is taken in taxes, I have the right to complain.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

^^^I believe his point has something to do with every R or D candidate lacking integrity, lacking convictions, and being beholden to SIGs, rather than to average Americans. From that perspective, all of them can, and should, be considered "the same."

On the flipside, candidates like Ron Paul -- and maybe one or two others in National politics -- appear to have an over-abundance of integrity and personal convictions, while also managing to avoid being bought and paid for by SIGs.

Sadly, Ron Paul's agenda is too radical for most, including myself, to accept as a whole -- regardless of his upstanding moral character.

So, at the end of the day, we're guaranteed to end up with one of the two morally bankrupt evils...

Thanks, you summarized my view better than I did.

 

[Mean MrMustard]

I agree with you both. I will also add that if you do not vote you lose the right to bitch about who wins. You refuse to take part in the process? Shut The Frell Up.

So if there are two people and one kicks you in the nuts and the other in the teeth you have no right to complain unless you pick one for your overseer? Hell yes you do. I have a right to complain as long as one cent comes from my paycheck.

:thumbsup:

 

[cybrsage]

I disagree. If one penny of my money is taken in taxes, I have the right to complain.

That is because you are a perpetual whiner. You think you can whine about something being bad when you dediced to not take part in the process.

 

[cybrsage]

So if there are two people and one kicks you in the nuts and the other in the teeth you have no right to complain unless you pick one for your overseer? Hell yes you do. I have a right to complain as long as one cent comes from my paycheck.

No one is kicking you in the nuts or teeth. You are simply saying you are going to whine about the results of something you refused to take part in.

The reason nothing changes is because of people like you who whine about the person who wins but refuse to vote.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

That is because you are a perpetual whiner. You think you can whine about something being bad when you dediced to not take part in the process.

It goes both ways -- did you vote for Bush? If so, I can blame people like YOU for throwing away billions and billions of dollars on useless wars.

I will not vote for either major party at this time. Voting for Ron Paul will not help him somehow win the election. Therefore, I can't change a damn thing.

 

[cybrsage]

It goes both ways -- did you vote for Bush? If so, I can blame people like YOU for throwing away billions and billions of dollars on useless wars.

If you did not vote, you are just a crybaby who likes to whine about things while refusing to do anything about them.

I will not vote for either major party at this time. Voting for Ron Paul will not help him somehow win the election. Therefore, I can't change a damn thing.

It is people like you who keep the system as they are. Crybabies who whine about things never changing while never doing anything to change things.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

If you did not vote, you are just a crybaby who likes to whine about things while refusing to do anything about them.

It is people like you who keep the system as they are. Crybabies who whine about things never changing while never doing anything to change things.

Please tell me how voting for a candidate who has zero chance of winning helps the situation.

 

[cybrsage]

Please tell me how voting for a candidate who has zero chance of winning helps the situation.

If you take 10 million crybaby whiners who all refuse to vote because they have your mindset, there are 10 million lost votes.

Each voice is but a whisper, but when combined they make a might shout.

 

[Craig234]

Yeah, sorry, I misread your post and edited that line out.

No problem.

I am not a hypocrite. I didn't like Bush or Gore. Both parties are fiscally irresponsible and I believe Gore would've made the tax cuts as well whether you do or not. Gore probably would not have invaded Iraq, that's true, but no one had any idea that Bush would do something so stupid way back in 2000.

Saying that Gore would have passed a tax cut for trillions for the rich is just absurd, going against his history and the party's policies.

It might be convenient for the 'two sides of the same coin' story, but it's false.

Claiming it lets you avoid dealing with the fact that ignoring a difference between the parties for trillions in more debt is a reason to vote for one party over the other.

Back to the Republicans though, they are fiscally conservative only when it comes to talk and not action. Or put another way, they're only interested in cutting spending when the spending affects Democrat programs (and vice versa).

Democrats: "Cut military spending!!!" (They're right to an extent, of course)
Republicans: "Cut other government programs!!" (They're right to an extent, of course)

I've bashed the rabid lefties here enough, so now I'll take aim at the radical righties. I'm tired of the "hard work" bullshit I hear on an almost daily basis from them. There are lots of people who work a hell of a lot harder than any of these guys (and certainly harder than me) and these folks will never be rich or maybe even middle class. I'm tired of seeing certain people here complain when capital gains tax increases are mentioned. How is it fair or just that investment gains are taxed LESS than income made from labor?'

I agree with that point, but it's a seaparate issue and does not address the falsity of the 'two sides of the same coin' issue.

Trillions of dollars differently is not the same coin.

I have zero faith that either major party will tackle these issues and the other important ones.

Regardless, they won't do 'the same', either. Progressives have a very, very different approach than the corporatists.

Your head in the sand 'don't vote for any of them' doesn't solve anything.

Do a search -- I've outlined my top 10 or so priorities numerous times in these forums.



See above.

Sorry, no. If they haven't made an impression, they'd have to be restated for discussion.

Because I think many (not all) of Paul's positions are correct and I believe he'd keep his word unlike Rs or Ds. I didn't think any of Hitler's policies were good.

'Keeping their word' is overrated when 'their word' is to do bad things. Bush kept his word to have a big tax cut. Herman Cain could keep his word to not appoint any Muslims. Etc.

You don't think any of Hitler's policies were good? Funny, he was kind of popular with a lot of people before WWII. Restoring the German economy was one issue you should like.

Regardless, it doesn't address the criticism of your 'logic' that it's better to vote for really bad policies just to not vote R or D.

I'm not saying you can't take that position, just that you should justify it a lot better than you did if you are going to.

Just a sloppy 'R and D sucks so it's ok to vote for any crappy candidate instead' isn't enough - you are responsible for the policies you support.

I won't even require you to prefer Paul's policies, IF you can make the case that his bad policies are justified by the R and D being *so* evil it's important to oppose them.

You haven't made that case.

I'll stick to my position: support change to the system and in the meantime vote where your vote does more good, picking R or D most of the time (and yes, IMO D is better).

You are still ignoring trillions in the Bush tax cuts among other important policiy differences affecting 'fiscal conservatism'.

You really have not made any case that 'R and D are no different'. That comes across like 'tin foil hat' irrationality.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

You are still ignoring trillions in the Bush tax cuts among other important policiy differences affecting 'fiscal conservatism'.

I'm not ignoring them. They were wrong but as I said, I believe if push came to shove, Gore would've also done the same thing.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

If you take 10 million crybaby whiners who all refuse to vote because they have your mindset, there are 10 million lost votes.

Each voice is but a whisper, but when combined they make a might shout.

You didn't really answer my question, but I'm not surprised.

Have fun getting stuck with the same cast of liars and corrupt buffoons every election.

 

[cybrsage]

You didn't really answer my question, but I'm not surprised.

Have fun getting stuck with the same cast of liars and corrupt buffoons every election.

I did answer it, you just did not like the answer because it requires you to actually vote instead of just crying about how you are useless and meaningless. You, and the millions of other crybabies like you, are the problem. If you actually went out and voted for the person you wanted, and the millions of others as whiny as you did the same, you would see massive change.

Sadly, you and the millions of people like you, will sit at home and cry about the results they do not like instead of actually going out and voting. Voting is not hard, you should do it.

 

[dank69]

So if there are two people and one kicks you in the nuts and the other in the teeth you have no right to complain unless you pick one for your overseer? Hell yes you do. I have a right to complain as long as one cent comes from my paycheck.

I don't believe that both are committing equal evils. Your analogy may work for your viewpoint, but it doesn't work for people who see things the way I do.

I'm not ignoring them. They were wrong but as I said, I believe if push came to shove, Gore would've also done the same thing.

That is a terrible cop out. Republicans are the ones who cut taxes while increasing spending. Dems increase spending as well, but at least they don't cux taxes below spending. So the giant deficit we face now is on you and people like you. You people didn't vote for Democrats to keep it from happening. Now you justify it by saying it would have happened anyway. Bull shit.

 

[Craig234]

I'm not ignoring them. They were wrong but as I said, I believe if push came to shove, Gore would've also done the same thing.

Which as I said as absurd. You may as well claim Gore would have destroyed the EPA if elected just like Republicans want to. Gore did not campaign on it like Bush and it goes against Gore's history and the Democratic position - perhaps you've forgotten Clinton/Gore's anti-deficit bill that RAISED taxes on the rich, not cut them.

 

[Ausm]

The basic reality is that people complain about power in politics and go out and make sure it stays exactly as it is. The system is designed for exactly that. You have no choice, not in the real world. Why should something change that works for those running it?

Interesting take and I think you should checkout Dylan Ratigan's show he has some really interesting solutions to fix the horrible state American Politics are currently in.

 

[cybrsage]

That is a terrible cop out. Republicans are the ones who cut taxes while increasing spending. Dems increase spending as well, but at least they don't cux taxes below spending. So the giant deficit we face now is on you and people like you. You people didn't vote for Democrats to keep it from happening. Now you justify it by saying it would have happened anyway. Bull shit.

From his view, dem and rep are both evils. Fine, but he should vote a third party then. Not doing that while complaining third parties are not viable (which is do to no one voting for them) is quite silly.

 

[cybrsage]

You may as well claim Gore would have destroyed the EPA if elected..

He would have renamed it the Church of the Environment and required all businesses and citizens to tithe to it routeinly.

 

[Nebor]

I think Craig nailed it when he noted that non-voters don't usually have a political agenda or plan for the country. I think this is likely even more prevalent amongst conservatives who feel that there are no candidates that represent their views, combined with the innate conservative disinterest in governing.

I don't have an agenda, I don't complain about how things are going, and I don't vote. I'm just not a political person, it doesn't interest me, and voting is a waste of time, even if you are interested in politics.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I did answer it, you just did not like the answer because it requires you to actually vote instead of just crying about how you are useless and meaningless. You, and the millions of other crybabies like you, are the problem. If you actually went out and voted for the person you wanted, and the millions of others as whiny as you did the same, you would see massive change.

Why is this such a difficult concept for you to understand? I don't like ANY of the candidates. None. Nada. Zilch. The major-party candidate I really wanted to run (Mitch Daniels) didn't.

Oh, and massive change? You don't get it. Rs and Ds will continue being elected regardless of any action I take. When was the last time a candidate who wasn't a Republican or Democrat won the White House? Ross Perot was the best hope to end their hold on government and he wasn't even close to winning.