|Date:||November 24th, 2003 07:42 pm (UTC)|| |
Pete: I would vote for Satan himself if he was on the Democratic ticket.
Too many people voted their whatever last election. This time it bit people in the ass.
wow, another LP member, yeah, I'm the same way and I agree.
Be interesting to see how this plays out...
Mm. I'm actually a registered Green, and I will be voting Democrat even if the ticket is comprised of maggot-infested roadkill and a puddle of chunky vomit. My personal opinion is that, this time around "voting one's conscience" has to mean "voting Democrat," or there is no hope of beating the Shrub.
Have I mentioned lately how much I hate the Republican party? *retch*
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 04:14 am (UTC)|| |
The probem is...
As violently as I hate the Republican party, I also hate the Democratic party...while Bush's short-term damage is grave, it is at least potentially reversible...
If the entire democratic platform were to be enacted (or the Greens for that matter--much as I agree with their environmental stances--I even ran as a fusion Green/Libertarian candidate once), the country would fall just as surely as if we stay on the current course that Bush is setting...
You see my dilemna? Purity of platform from either party leads to doom...but Dean seems to be an "impure" enough Democrat that he might actually be a "classical liberal." (Otherwise known in the modern political parlance as a "libertarian.")
|Date:||November 24th, 2003 09:22 pm (UTC)|| |
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 04:10 am (UTC)|| |
Re: Oh yeah...
All hail the Baloney Sandwich...
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 07:41 am (UTC)|| |
(Once again, it's me Chris)
Glad to hear that some of you Liberatarians are finally coming around. ;)
One of my biggest complaints about Liberatarians in general is that voting liberatarian is too easy. You, for the most part never have to be responsible for anyone actually getting elected. So your ideas never have to be put to the test of actual use. You guys get to sit back in the background and say "things would be different if we were running things" without having to worry about being put to the test about it.
Politics to me is all about compromise and game theory. I like to find the candidate that best represents my views and that has the best chance of winning.
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 07:48 am (UTC)|| |
To be fair, we generally run to win--at least at the local level. We run federal candidates that we know will lose:
(a) to build awareness of the party,
(b) to pass state vote count thresholds for avoiding petition requirements,
(c) and because noone in politics believes you're "for real" if you don't run candidates...
FWIW, IMHO, YMMV...
But yes, a lot of people voted for 3rd parties this past presidential election--and the result is what we got...
But did the democrats get the message that their message was lost on these "third party" voters? No...they just wrung their hands about how unfair it was that these "spoiler" candidates lost them the election...
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 11:09 am (UTC)|| |
I didn't complain about 3rd party candidates "stealing" the election. 8) It'd be hypocritical of me, since Perot helped Clinton win in 92.
When Gore lost in 2000, part of me was upset with the whole Florida mess. But where Gore really lost the election was when he lost his own home state of Tennessee. And Arkansas, Clinton's state. It's a sad state of affairs when you can't carry the home district. (True story: There was a governor's election in Florida where both candidates lost their home districts. When the people who know you best don't approve of you....)
What really freaked me out about Nader and the Green party was his platform of having all elections be completely paid for by the government. Did anyone who voted for him really think that one through????
As far as the current state of the union....when Perot cost Bush the elections, the Republicans went and got themselves organized. As it is now, the Democrats are still a party in chaos. 9 freaking candidates. We are soooo screwed. Republicans tend to have more money than us, and we're dividing our money 9 ways. We're probably going to spend all of our money in the primaries just to have Bush eat us alive in the general election. ARRRRRUGH!
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 05:20 pm (UTC)|| |
Well, if Bush turns out to have been right about WMD, or if the whole Iraq thing is a painful but distant memory in a year...
I still think Bush has little chance of winning...
|Date:||November 26th, 2003 08:22 pm (UTC)|| |
I don't see how Bush can lose right now.
Economy is doing great. He's got a huge warchest.
His opponents are in disarray. And the way we elect
presidents HEAVILY favors states with small populations.
And they tend to vote republican.
I'm already braced for another 4 years of the man...
|Date:||November 26th, 2003 09:20 pm (UTC)|| |
Well...guess we'll have to batten down the hatches and try to preserve what's left of the constitution...
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 11:10 am (UTC)|| |
And that is why I support Instant Runoff Voting or some variation thereof. No worries about a wasted vote!
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 05:18 pm (UTC)|| |
Yep...hey, it works for Fandom!
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 11:27 am (UTC)|| |
My 2 cents
Poysonally I describe myself as midway between Libertarian and Green. I don't mind the government being involved in things that help people, that work, and that cannot be done well when private. Notable examples currently include rails, roads, welfare, army, courts, energy delivery, protective service (fire and police and such) and medical insurance - some of these are well-funded, some are not, and some are currently partially or wholly privatized.
I don't come to those conclusions in a vacuum. I look at the historical data of performance of both private and public where both are available and I also keep in mind certain tenets of the democratic ideal.
Many (L/l)ibertarians feel most of this should be privatized, either from a financial perspective or from a moral perspective or some combination, feeling that private business would do a better job and be more ethical about it all than government. I won't go into my rant about it in your journal but I have one :-)
I do want to see the Libertarian Party a viable force in US politics for all that I disagree with many of its stated tenets. At least the party makes a good-faith effort to be honest and upfront, which is more than I can say for the GOP. And No, I don't consider the Democratic party equally as bad. It has bad spots but it is as near as I can see inherently more honest than the GOP.
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 05:18 pm (UTC)|| |
Re: My 2 cents
We'll have to talk about it more at Arisia! ;)
as I wrote in my own Journal not too long ago, I am a registered Republican, and I didn't vote for Bush in 2000. My current favortie is Clark. What I've seen of his ideas look right to me. I think he's the best person to pull us out of the mess that Dubya has managed to put (thrown?) us in.
|Date:||November 25th, 2003 05:17 pm (UTC)|| |
Problem with Clark...
...is that a dear friend and coworker's father served under him overseas, and apparently he's the last person in the world we'd want as a leader...now that's an anecdotal and individual experience, but tha's all I've got to go on, really.