Vote

no, Ralph Nader is a vote for dubya

no Nader is a vote to continue to break america of the two-party system.

any other idiot would tell you a vote for nader is a vote for bush...

i voted for the purple m&m

Yawn.

I might vote for Nader on account of it's really fun to say the word "Nader."

I have a question,

I was told I'm registered republican cause I voted for a libertarian or something in a local election, how does this work if I want to vote for kerry? I mean do I have to go and fill out anything to change what I'm considered?

I dunno much about the whole voting thing, I'm going to try and vote in Nov tho.

point: Jane S.

as far as your question, Peon: vote whoever you want. my old roomie was registered republican, but he always voted democrat.

Nader is a non-vote. Even if he won he'd make a shitty President; he has no clue whatsoever about the demands of elected office. If Sen. Kerry doesn't win then there will be more wars and even more people will lose their jobs.
If you want to aid the 3rd-party cause then start locally. Voting third-party for the Presidency is murderous to the country's future.

I meant like do I have to go ahead of time to change my voting card or something and fill out forms or can I just show up on election day and hand them my voters registration card and vote. Cause I saw something on the news a long time ago but I forgot what I saw but it was something about having to fill out forms and voting if you voted for a different party before.

I'm not a republican I was more a libertarian, but that gets old quick when you vote for them and they don't even mention the person you voted for in the results on teh radio and news cause they didn't get very many votes.

[QUOTE=Ozymandias]Nader is a non-vote. Even if he won he'd make a shitty President; he has no clue whatsoever about the demands of elected office. If Sen. Kerry doesn't win then there will be more wars and even more people will lose their jobs.
If you want to aid the 3rd-party cause then start locally. Voting third-party for the Presidency is murderous to the country's future.[/QUOTE]
[i]The economy is on the upswing. The economy is on the upswing. The economy is on the upswing. The economy is on the upswing...[/i]

and peon, all you have to to is let them know when you go in to vote that you want to change your party. it's usually just a verbal thing.

i think he meant this election, specifically.

[QUOTE=alex cassun]i think he meant this election, specifically.[/QUOTE]
if you're not registered to vote, yes, you have to do that before hand, i think the cut off is the 18th of october for this year. if you're talking about just changing your affiliation, it's not big thing, just let them know when you show up.

if you're talking "he" ozy "he", then why would nader be any worse than kerry or bush? or better yet, how would bush or kerry be any better than nader?

what i believe he ozy he is saying is that this election has more riding on it than most. politics in america today is the most heated its been in decades (or so the tv tells me), and so what he ozy he is saying, i think, is that its more important to remove Bush II from office than it is to have Nader get your vote. I happen to agree.

[QUOTE=alex cassun]what i believe he ozy he is saying is that this election has more riding on it than most. politics in america today is the most heated its been in decades (or so the tv tells me), and so what he ozy he is saying, i think, is that its more important to remove Bush II from office than it is to have Nader get your vote. I happen to agree.[/QUOTE]

Hey Cassun, are you worried about Bush' bump?

im always worried if theres a bump in the bush.

Peon, you're only a registered Republican if you registered Republican when you registered to vote (just because you once voted for a Libertarian doesn't make you a Republican). Secondly, registered Republicans can vote for whoever they want. This is all assuming that your state doesn't have fucked up rules.

I, as a Californian, shall vote for Nader because Kerry has my state in the bag. What about your state? Are you a swing state? And? So? Regardless, I'd vote for Nader even if I was in Ohio. I couldn't support the Dems when they put so much money and effort into shutting out Nader. Anyway, the swing state question is an easy way for undecideds to choose, and then we can stop arguing about whether one should vote for Nader or Kerry.

Voting for a 3rd party is voting for a 3rd party, therefore helping a 3rd party. If 3rd parties don't get exposure, if 3rd parties don't take notice by winning votes, 3rd parties will never get the attention of the major parties or the public. The media does not give air time to 3rd parties as it is. Secondly, 3rd parties won't cause a domino effect. Arizona isn't going to fall to the Greens if the Greens conquer California. If we tell 3rd parties to work at the local level, it will take decades for any party to build anything worth the Dems and Reps. Plus, isn't telling 3rd parties to stay out of the Presidential race just telling them to wait? Not now, 3rd parties, right now isn't a good time.

And who gives if Nader'll be a shitty President... There are a lot of things Nader as President won't do himself but will be done just because he was voted in (setting precendents, disrupting the two parties, progressive policies now part of popular opinion). Voting for Nader isn't really about voting for the man but the tremendous message that he carries. If I had it my way, I'd advocate all 3rd party voters (and non-voters--that way, he'd win) to vote for Nader, unite and command a presence (it would help all 3rd parties in the long run). Of course, 3rd parties have their individual interests.

I like to write things down.

[QUOTE=alex cassun]what i believe he ozy he is saying is that this election has more riding on it than most. politics in america today is the most heated its been in decades (or so the tv tells me), and so what he ozy he is saying, i think, is that its more important to remove Bush II from office than it is to have Nader get your vote. I happen to agree.[/QUOTE]
i happen to think that voting in such a manner - as to rid yourself of one person rather than voting who you think will do best - is falling into the 2 party system trap. most people say "give it 4 more years and then you can vote who you think will do best" but in 4 more years we'll be back in the same position, voting to get one person out, rather than to vote in the best person. this election is about removing bush in many people's eyes, when election shouldn't be about the removal of the worst, but the electing of the best. not about the lesser of any 2 evils, but the best of all of the candidates.

so i ask again, what makes kerry the better option, other than "he's not bush"?

too...many...paragraphs

Thank you Trypdwyre and Atheistcharlie

I will prolly write Nader in unless he keeps bad mouthing the Green Party. He pissed me off when he started talking shit after they didn't nominate him. But I will consider voting for Kerry if starts talking about issues Liberals/ progressives care about like IRV voting, Electoral College Reform, Cutting Corporate Welfare (He has but no specifics), decriminalization of marijuana, legalization of gay marriage, cutting military spending, Healthcare for everyone, End the war on drugs, Pull out of WTO and NAfTA......

But Kerry is big fucking pussy just like every democrat canidate other than Kucinich. Even Howard Dean didn't have the balls to talk about all this shit.

They don't need a Presidential candidate to talk about or fight for these issues. That's what really gets me about the Dems. Maybe I should blame focus groups.