What is one trying to prove by voting for Nader in the last elections?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

thereds

Diamond Member
Apr 4, 2000
7,886
0
0
My roommate admitted that he voted for Nader and it got me thinking. Everyone with a semblance of a brain knew that it was going to be come down to either Bush or Kerry.

So what's the point of wasting a vote by using it on Nader?

The roommates reason was that both Kerry and Bush are idiots.
 
A

aswedc

Diamond Member
Oct 25, 2000
3,543
0
76
What was the purpose of voting for Kerry in a red state? Just as useless.
 
T

thereds

Diamond Member
Apr 4, 2000
7,886
0
0
Originally posted by: KillerCharlie
Originally posted by: thereds

The roommates reason was that both Kerry and Bush are idiots.
Click to expand...

I agree, but that doesn't mean you vote for Nader...
Click to expand...

Yep, atleast that's what I thought. You figure who is the bigger idiot and vote for the other.
 
meltdown75

meltdown75

Lifer
Nov 17, 2004
37,548
7
81
Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing.

Consider that perhaps someone actually supports or supported Mr. Nader at the time.
 
LtPage1

LtPage1

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2004
6,311
2
0
It means that you consider the system so messed up, that you'd rather vote Green and contribute to maybe one day having a truly democratic multiparty system, than vote for one of the two who can win, neither of whom you'd like to see President.

It's not an untenable position, if you really understand the situation. Myself, I voted for Kerry because I knew Bush to be far more incompetent, and his policies (to me) to be far more unnacceptable than Kerry's.
 
preslove

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
64
91
What is one trying to prove by voting for Nader in the last elections?
Click to expand...

That you're a moron? I went to a nader speech last election just to see it. It was pretty desperate. If you look at his career after 'unsafe at any speed' you'll see a sleazy, backstabber, with questionable ethics.
 
FallenHero

FallenHero

Diamond Member
Jan 2, 2006
5,659
0
0
Originally posted by: LtPage1
It means that you consider the system so messed up, that you'd rather vote Green and contribute to maybe one day having a truly democratic multiparty system, than vote for one of the two who can win, neither of whom you'd like to see President.

It's not an untenable position, if you really understand the situation. Myself, I voted for Kerry because I knew Bush to be far more incompetent, and his policies (to me) to be far more unnacceptable than Kerry's.
Click to expand...

I voted Nader because Bush and Kerry represented what I DIDN'T want in office. I knew nader wasnt gonna win, but I still want a third party out there. I will continue to push for a third party until one happens or I die. I dont care which party (as long as they arent extreamists), but we need a third one.
 
MidasKnight

MidasKnight

Diamond Member
Apr 24, 2004
3,288
0
76
Originally posted by: meltdown75
Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing. :thumbsup:

Consider that perhaps someone actually supports or supported Mr. Nader at the time.
Click to expand...

 
Amused

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,375
19,601
146
Nader??? Dammit, I thought it said "Vader!"

I was voting to bring order to the Galaxy.
 
R

raildogg

Lifer
Aug 24, 2004
12,892
572
126
Originally posted by: thereds
My roommate admitted that he voted for Nader and it got me thinking. Everyone with a semblance of a brain knew that it was going to be come down to either Bush or Kerry.

So what's the point of wasting a vote by using it on Nader?

The roommates reason was that both Kerry and Bush are idiots.
Click to expand...

Symbolism, dude. Nader was an alternative to the BS from Bush and Kerry. The Republicans and Democrats are the same parties with some minor cosmetic differences. I do not vote and do not want to vote. Our politicians, like most politicians, are not doing such a lovely job if you know what I mean. Their goals are how to get re-elected. They will pander to special groups for a period to get their support and once that group is no longer needed, they'll do the same to another group. I want a politician to think about everybody, to think long term and short term. But I have yet to find one. Maybe I'm not searching hard enough.
 
D

Dimmu

Senior member
Jun 24, 2005
890
0
0
Originally posted by: MorrisDancer
A vote for honesty and integrity is never a wasted vote.
Click to expand...

Well spoken, sir! Well spoken, indeed! Now if only we could all agree on who's honest and who has integrity...
 
mugs

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
The reason so few people vote for a third party candidate is not because the third party candidates are not capable of being president, it's because they think they have no shot at winning. If people ignored that and voted for whomever they thought would do the best job, it would not be long before a third party candidate was president. By voting for a third party candidate, you are helping to show other people that a third party candidate CAN be a viable candidate for the presidency. It is not a wasted vote.

However I would not have voted for Nader, I would have voted for Badnarik.
 
E

EyeMWing

Banned
Jun 13, 2003
15,670
1
0
Originally posted by: meltdown75
Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing.

Consider that perhaps someone actually supports or supported Mr. Nader at the time.
Click to expand...

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Now you're making BIG logical leaps, and talking pure nonsense.
 
destrekor

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: FallenHero
Originally posted by: LtPage1
It means that you consider the system so messed up, that you'd rather vote Green and contribute to maybe one day having a truly democratic multiparty system, than vote for one of the two who can win, neither of whom you'd like to see President.

It's not an untenable position, if you really understand the situation. Myself, I voted for Kerry because I knew Bush to be far more incompetent, and his policies (to me) to be far more unnacceptable than Kerry's.
Click to expand...

I voted Nader because Bush and Kerry represented what I DIDN'T want in office. I knew nader wasnt gonna win, but I still want a third party out there. I will continue to push for a third party until one happens or I die. I dont care which party (as long as they arent extreamists), but we need a third one.
Click to expand...

we already have more than two. what is wrong with the system is how much funding the presidential candidates get to promote themselves (and not the money they use of their own, but of random donations). most candidates not aligned to the democrats or republicans don't see that kind of funding. proper funding and a candidate worth seeing in office is all that is needed, just like with the main parties. we have had a few presidents who weren't of the main two parties.
 
E

EatSpam

Diamond Member
May 1, 2005
6,423
0
0
Some people prefer to vote their principles instead of voting for who they think will win or the lesser of two evils.

And your roommate is right, Bush and Kerry both suck. Kerry sucks so bad he lost to George W. Bush. Bush sucks for reasons that are obvious to any thinking individual, no matter their political opinions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom