Voting for Third Parties

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Should party labels be removed from ballots?

  • Yes.

  • No.

  • Other?


Results are only viewable after voting.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,965
55,358
136
You can't have three viable parties in the US until our election law fundamentally changes.
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,452
2
0
You can't have three viable parties in the US until our election law fundamentally changes.

Then maybe it's time a "third party" upsets and replaces one of the two current parties that are both completely out of touch with the people... the republican party is probably the first to fall
 

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
Or they could co-opt the libertarian message in return for votes. They tried this with the tea party and it worked, then it all blew up in the leadership's faces. Probably because they were just paying them lip service, eventually such groups get frustrated then you wind up with a Ted Cruz. How the leadership stands in relation to the tea party in the next few cycles will determine whether the Republicans can stay viable imo.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,361
32,992
136
The idea that libertarians aren't well funded doesn't make sense to me. Less government is exactly what big business and the filthy rich want.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
22,256
6,443
136
That's pretty much the opposite of democracy. While I'd love an informed populace it isn't grounded in reality. It's tough to sort out good information from bad information as it is. Many of the people you think of as informed are actually misinformed. Democracy is all about every person having the right to vote for what they believe are their best interests.

Doesn't that make my case? If a large part of the population can't make an informed decision, why should they be involved in the process? No one is served by ignorance, problems aren't solved, the quality of life for everyone is degraded by voting based on feelings.
I don't know how to fix the system, but I do know that encouraging everyone to vote won't help, because it can't help. We would be as well served by a coin toss.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,361
32,992
136
Doesn't that make my case? If a large part of the population can't make an informed decision, why should they be involved in the process? No one is served by ignorance, problems aren't solved, the quality of life for everyone is degraded by voting based on feelings.
I don't know how to fix the system, but I do know that encouraging everyone to vote won't help, because it can't help. We would be as well served by a coin toss.
It isn't up to you or me to decide what is in the best interests of someone else.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,744
6,761
126
This, exactly.

Unfortunately the opposite is true. People who know nothing, like a chimp choosing which stocks to buy, will often beat the experts. The real danger is from people who are sure they know whom they should vote for because these are the fanatically certain.

People will search forever for an answer to the question as to what form of government we should have and this and that fad will come and go. But there is only one government that provides total freedom and that is the government of the self presided over by real self knowledge. Those who know, know, and those who do not will search forever for answers out there and never find them.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,784
6,343
126
Libertarians as a Third Party won't work. A Centrist party might have a chance.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
22,256
6,443
136
It isn't up to you or me to decide what is in the best interests of someone else.

That's exactly what democracy is. If we didn't need to make decisions for others, we wouldn't need government.
What we desperately need is honest informed decisions, we need real information without slant or spin, and we need voters that can think logically, and grasp the long term consequences of the votes they cast. Unfortunately, we're moving in the opposite direction.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,361
32,992
136
That's exactly what democracy is. If we didn't need to make decisions for others, we wouldn't need government.
What we desperately need is honest informed decisions, we need real information without slant or spin, and we need voters that can think logically, and grasp the long term consequences of the votes they cast. Unfortunately, we're moving in the opposite direction.
Every person has the right to vote for who they want to make decisions for them. That's what I mean. You take that basic element away and I guarantee things will get worse faster than you can imagine.

You think you know what is right for everyone. I think I know what is right for everyone. There probably isn't much we agree on. So are you the stupid one or am I? Maybe we're both stupid and the guy throwing darts to decide who to vote for is the smart one.

The fact that remains is that what may be best for the country may be bad for some people and those people have the right to vote for what's best for them even if it fucks everyone else. Liberals have been telling you your whole life that your conservative policies are going to fuck us all, you want us to take away your right to vote?
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,452
2
0
The idea that libertarians aren't well funded doesn't make sense to me. Less government is exactly what big business and the filthy rich want.

Do you know who hates capitalism? Capitalists. They want buddies in the government to do favors for them. subsidies and tax "loopholes".

Libertarians as a Third Party won't work. A Centrist party might have a chance.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/uss...=on&tx=on&ut=on&va=on&wa=on&wv=on&wi=on&wy=on

EVERYONE i've ever had take that quiz ended up on the bottom half of the chart. Some right, some left. Where would a centrist party end up?

Every person has the right to vote for who they want to make decisions for them. That's what I mean. You take that basic element away and I guarantee things will get worse faster than you can imagine.

You think you know what is right for everyone. I think I know what is right for everyone. There probably isn't much we agree on. So are you the stupid one or am I? Maybe we're both stupid and the guy throwing darts to decide who to vote for is the smart one.

The fact that remains is that what may be best for the country may be bad for some people and those people have the right to vote for what's best for them even if it fucks everyone else. Liberals have been telling you your whole life that your conservative policies are going to fuck us all, you want us to take away your right to vote?

I want ME to make decisions for ME. Not be 1/300,000,000th of a voice.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,361
32,992
136
Do you know who hates capitalism? Capitalists. They want buddies in the government to do favors for them. subsidies and tax "loopholes".
The solution to that is to get money out of government, not to get rid of government. Get rid of government and rich people will still be able to pay people off to get what they want. They can just hire a personal army to take everything we own. You think your guns are going to be enough to compete with a billionaire?



http://www.politicalcompass.org/uss...=on&tx=on&ut=on&va=on&wa=on&wv=on&wi=on&wy=on

EVERYONE i've ever had take that quiz ended up on the bottom half of the chart. Some right, some left. Where would a centrist party end up?



I want ME to make decisions for ME. Not be 1/300,000,000th of a voice.
Yes, well, lots of psychopaths also want to make decisions for themselves. Rapists, too. Why shouldn't I be allowed to beat the shit out of my children? Doesn't affect you, it's none of your business. I want to drink and drive, too. You should just stay out of my way while I do.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,359
4,640
136
The idea that libertarians aren't well funded doesn't make sense to me. Less government is exactly what big business and the filthy rich want.

You would think that but it is not really the case. Big business loves regulations that keep other ***panies and small business out of their market. Put up as many hurdles as possible, for Gignormous Corporation it really doesn't cost that much since they already have a staff of lawyers while ma-and-pop goes bankrupt before producing their first widget.

The truth is you can't get any meaningful change to the political system unless we are willing to force major campaign funding reform and then hold politicians to at least a moderate standard of ethics with sever penalties for breaking those rules of ethics. With out this any new party would just quickly be***e the old one.
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,452
2
0
The solution to that is to get money out of government, not to get rid of government. Get rid of government and rich people will still be able to pay people off to get what they want. They can just hire a personal army to take everything we own. You think your guns are going to be enough to compete with a billionaire?



Yes, well, lots of psychopaths also want to make decisions for themselves. Rapists, too. Why shouldn't I be allowed to beat the shit out of my children? Doesn't affect you, it's none of your business. I want to drink and drive, too. You should just stay out of my way while I do.

Why are you arguing to get rid of government? That's not what we're discussing is it?

Yes, but a rapist takes the choice away through force, he or she has now deprived their victim in having a say in the matter.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,361
32,992
136
Why are you arguing to get rid of government? That's not what we're discussing is it?

Yes, but a rapist takes the choice away through force, he or she has now deprived their victim in having a say in the matter.
How are you going to make decisions for yourself without getting rid of a representative government altogether?
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,452
2
0
How are you going to make decisions for yourself without getting rid of a representative government altogether?

Maybe i'm not understanding your question. Are you saying we're incapable of making choices without a government? My point is other people, whether elected through some democratic proccess or not don't know what's best for me, nor can i expect that they would care.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,361
32,992
136
Maybe i'm not understanding your question. Are you saying we're incapable of making choices without a government? My point is other people, whether elected through some democratic proccess or not don't know what's best for me, nor can i expect that they would care.
I'm not saying anything of the sort. I said you have the power to vote for people to represent you, to which you responded:
Every person has the right to vote for who they want to make decisions for them. ...
...

I want ME to make decisions for ME. Not be 1/300,000,000th of a voice.
How are you going to make decisions for yourself without getting rid of a representative government altogether?
How does the current system prevent you from making your own decisions and how do you change that without removing representative government?