|
|  |
| |
|
| | The Truth Seekers Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts | | Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | Views: 762 | | Jan 15, 2008 7:26 am | | Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # | 
Danielle (Dani) Cutler | | Forgive me Greg- I wanted to move this to its own thread so that the "one issue" thread didn't get off course. :-)
Greg wrote:
"I know it's not a political issue, but that is the theme I am working on when I say vote for anyone who is not a Dem or Rep. Thus, you know your candidate cannot win and the feeling is liberating because you are one more light in the darkness of the old school, where reside the classrooms of the elite."
-- I honestly feel this theory is flawed, my friend. From a primary perspective, I know the candidate I intend to vote for cannot win, Kucinich. He is a democrat. He is not elitist. Are you honestly saying that if he were running on the democrat ticket (knowing his positions, of course), that it's better NOT to vote for him, simply because of his party affiliation? It just doesn't make any sense, at least from a primary perspective. He's the least like any of the other democrats running that I've seen!
Now, if you're talking after the primaries and the general election, then it's a different story. But again it's SO much more than just seeing a party name.
You vote *for* someone, not *against* another. I did that in '04, and I regret it. I'll never make that mistake again.
What I am conflicted with now is this. Once I see what a third party has to offer, I will base my decision that way. Especially if Clinton gets the nom. But if Obama gets it, well, I would seriously consider voting for him because it would be an even bigger step forward for the United States than to have a woman in the top seat, IMO. Clinton is still white, and carries that acceptable privilege with her.
So you see all the things I'm thinking of-- it's just not as easy in my eyes as you make it out to be Greg. :-)
"Power to the people. It will happen but, unfortunately, not in our lifetimes unless a powerful alien life form shows up and tells us to change our ways or the planet will be destroyed."
--Hey- didn't Kucinich see a UFO? ;-)
Dani
PS- I would absolutely love to get a dialog going on this topic!
TS #42 Now Available!
http://www.truthseekerscast.com
Join the network!
http://truthseekers-network.ryze.com/Private Reply to Danielle (Dani) Cutler | | Jan 15, 2008 8:55 am | | re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # | 
Raymond Wong | | I think it's really the same point, don't vote for someone because they can win, vote because you prefer them over the other candidates. Once the election rolls around, we know that the Kuciniches and Pauls (or even Richardsons) of the world will not get their party nomination, so it'll come down to the other parties, but in the primaries, the other parties only have maybe 1 candidate, so in states with open primaries (where you can vote for any party's candidates), trying to get big party candidates for real change and beliefs is the same thing.
It's not that they can't win THIS TIME, it's that this refusal to settle for the status quo is the only way to EVER bring about change. If people immediately jump to the 2 most likely candidates, then real alternatives wil never show up.
People like to blame the "Nader effect" for our current administration, but these people are actually the ones in denial about how badly the Gore campaign bungled the 2000 election to have it come down to 1 state.
So for me, yes, I'm voting and encouraging others in open primaries to vote for the different candidates. Even if they're not perfect, they're a damn site better than the ones we know we're eventually going to get anyway. And the fact is, this DOES make a difference. It's the failed Dean campaign last time that showed them that THIS time, all these other candidates needed to at least be let in, to take a chance and see if the country as a whole is demanding change yet. point being, by being willing to vote for someone who can't win but is right for you, you help bring about the day when it really does happen.Private Reply to Raymond Wong | | Jan 15, 2008 12:31 pm | | re: re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # | 
Frederick A. Babb | | "But if Obama gets it, well, I would seriously consider voting for him because it would be an even bigger step forward for the United States than to have a woman in the top seat, IMO."
To me...IMO...this is just as wrong as voting for someone to lose. Should we vote for Obama because he is black...regardless of his stance on issues and how he always seems to be able to miss key voting issues so as to not have a record of his stance on them? Just as we should not accept people not voting for Obama because he is black, we should not endorse voting for him because he is. People should cast their vote for him based on if their political beliefs are reflected in his agenda.
Not to pick on you Dani, but this type of logic is what is wrong with the voting public. Too many times politicians are voted for the wrong reasons. "He (or she) is from my state, my party, my church, etc." instead of "I like his (or hers) stance on the issues and believe he (or she) can do the job I want from the position they are running for."
Getting to Greg's view, I don't particular like voting for a democrat or a republican because they have demonstrated they are not part of the problem in the US political ring...rather they ARE the problem. Each candidate promises...maybe even sincerely...to do what they feel is right for the nation, but once in power the political party and its agenda prevent them from playing out their personal programs. Also, I have a problem with two supposedly opposite political parties unitying to assure that no third party can get enough clout or opportunities to make them half way honest again. In that sense, I can appreciate Greg's idea. Why vote for the problem and keep it in power?Private Reply to Frederick A. Babb | | Jan 15, 2008 1:57 pm | | re: re: re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # |
Jenny | | If it Hitler was running against Hillary--who would you vote for?
I'd vote Hillary in a heartbeat.
I wish it was as simple as simply voting for the person you like the most.
Jenny
Liberal Lounge II--For Political Debate Safe From Neocon Trolling
http://ll2-network.ryze.com/
Author J.R. Turner
http://www.jennifer-turner.comPrivate Reply to Jenny | | Jan 15, 2008 2:38 pm | | re: re: re: re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # |
Frederick A. Babb | | Ironically, Hitler was voted into his reign of terror. Kind of like deja vu with Bush...lol. Private Reply to Frederick A. Babb | | Jan 15, 2008 3:09 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # |
Jenny | | I'm perfectly aware that Hitler was voted in--that was why the question works to make my point.
Jenny:)
Liberal Lounge II--For Political Debate Safe From Neocon Trolling
http://ll2-network.ryze.com/
Author J.R. Turner
http://www.jennifer-turner.comPrivate Reply to Jenny | | Jan 15, 2008 3:17 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # | 
John James O'Brien | | If every person dropped declared party affiliation and ent back to the days when it was kind of rude to ask someone who they are voting for, then no political party would have a "base" to take for granted...or manipulate. They would have to work for every vote, every time.
Private Reply to John James O'Brien | | Jan 15, 2008 6:54 pm | | re: re: re: re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # |
Danielle (Dani) Cutler | | Jenny, that question just seems too extreme to me, but I do see your point. :-)
This is why I think of opting out of voting this time around altogether. When you take into account how little my vote matters with the current setup, I'd just rather not vote at all than vote against someone.
There are other ways to help and bring change to this country, equally if not more important than voting. Writing, speaking out, working to change the system so our vote might actually count and mean something again. I mean we aren't even getting into all the problems with the process itself, (Diebold, etc.), so it just becomes more and more complicated.
Fred, I understand what you're saying about voting for someone simply because of (insert reason here). I'd still rather vote for someone because of a positive reason though, vs. a negative one. It's rather like the one-issue voter. Some vote for the candidate who will work for the one issue that is most important to them. Well, in this case, Obama would break a huge barrier if he were elected president. Same thing if say, Colin Powell were to run.
But I spin it round and round in my head all the time. How I end up voting (even by just not voting at all), must still be pretty important to me to put so much thought into it. I wish it were as important to the majority of America. Which brings us right back to party lines and voting to keep others out.
I think here however, the consensus is: it's complicated!
~Dani
Something special in honor of MLK
http://www.truthseekerscast.com
Join the network!
http://truthseekers-network.ryze.com/Private Reply to Danielle (Dani) Cutler | | Jan 16, 2008 6:37 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # | 
greg cryns | |
John said, "They would have to work for every vote, every time."
Exactly. I think John is closest to my point of view. I would just add that they
would have to work even harder to KEEP our confidence for the next election.
I remember Bobby Kennedy's son saying in 2004 on a panel discussion, "The
real work comes AFTER the election." He is spot on.
It matters not who you vote for, in the long run (long being only about 10 years
maybe) because you are voting for whoever pulls the pursestrings and that
is..... ta da, the corporations, the banks, the insurance companies.
Dani, I am sorry to tell you that neither Hillary or Edwards or OBama has a
snowball's chance in hell to get real national healthcare into place. I think we
will get an OBama or Schwartzeneger type of hybrid where the insurance companies
handle things like they do now. It will be nothing like Canadian healthcare
though. The rich will get the benefits, the people will suffer as usual.
They are like the puppets of The Godfather. See how they all folded on the Iraq
issue? Like puppets except Kucinich and the fellow from Wisconsin.
What good would it do ANYONE if Hillary or OBama were elected. Oh, you might say
that one of them could turn around Bush's abysmal record in foreign relations.
At least you know where Bush stands. Where does Hillary stand or Obama?
Really, who are they other than part of the establishment?
Let's say by some stroke of God's finger Kucinich were to win. First of all he
cannot win as a Democrat. Know why? Because the power Dems won't let him win.
That would be like allowing the Green party candidate to win.
How many people can we name in that
picture? ONE? Does that say anything about ourselves?
Speaking of the Green
Party, get a load of this. Here are their 10 Key Values:
Grassroots Democracy
Social Justice
Ecological Wisdom
Non-violence
Decentralization
Community-based Economics
Feminism
Diversity
Responsibility
Future Focus
Neither Dems nor Reps can come out and say what they really want to say because
they will be torn to shreds by both the Parties and the blindfolded and
brainwashed American citizenry.
Here is the Green Party website. How can you NOT support something like this?
How can you support the Democrats after reading this?
http://www.gp.org/index.php
Bruce thinks the Democrats are pro-thepeople. I think the Democrats are
pro-Democrats and pro-keepingtheirgrimyjobs (hey, that might be a good domain
name:
www.keepyourgrimyjob.com ) The Democrats won't really change anything because it
costs $100 million to win the election, right? How can they afford not to take
Big Pharma money.
By the way, did Hillary accept any Big Pharma money? OBama? Wait, I don't know
either but I will Google it for you.
Well, golly gee, if this is correct, do you see a problem?
"These are the figures as compiled by OpenSecrets. Hillary Clinton received
$269,436 from the pharma/healthcare sector, while Barak Obama garnered $261,784.
Right behind was Mitt Romney, with $260,535 (please click on the chart to make
it bigger). One caveat: this is as of Oct. 29.
As an aside, it’s interesting to contrast the contributions with the rhetoric.
Last week, Clinton said: “I’ve taken on the drug companies. I’ve taken on
the health insurance companies. I’ve taken on the oil companies, and I intend
to keep doing it.” Perhaps, she meant take them on until they contribute still
more."
http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/01/big-pharma-and-its-presidential-bets/
Well, you say, they all must take the dirty money to get the grimy job. The
assumption with saying that is that Hillary will turn her back on Big Pharma
once she is in office. Are you a gambler? How much would you bet she will do
that?
So, gimme a break. How much better is Hillary than, say, McCain? In fact, I'm
beginning to like him better except that he is now screaming "CHANGE"
just like Hillary and OBama and Mitt Romney and Edwards. Anybody else worth
mentioning that may win and whom you may vote for because he or she might win?
Vote for a 3rd party candidate so you can tell people that you did that and so
the winners of the grimy election will begin to know that we no longer love the
OLD SCHOOL way of doing things and we ain't gonna take it any more, you Masters
of War.
Stand up and be counted. You can't do that if you vote for a major party
candidate. Your vote gets lost in the grime.
By the way, I have an ex political junkie
son, Toby. Listen to his podcast of today. I think you'll get a kick out
of it.
http://www.gregcryns.com/mp3/podcast-_5.mp3
greg
Private Reply to greg cryns | | Jan 16, 2008 8:16 am | | re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # |
Danielle (Dani) Cutler | | Well now...
Definitely plenty of things to think about! I knew about Hillary in bed with the Pharma companies, but not Obama. Not that it surprises me.
I will have to check out your son's podcast!!!
Dani
Something special in honor of MLK
http://www.truthseekerscast.com
Join the network!
http://truthseekers-network.ryze.com/Private Reply to Danielle (Dani) Cutler | | Jan 17, 2008 1:14 am | | re: re: Voting for anyone but a Democrat or Republican | # |
John James O'Brien | | Greg, agree entirely that the front runners are simply the status quo. the extremes of the current administration are just that, extremes of the fundamental problem. Extremes may be extreme, but the fundamentals are the norm and if the norm is not acceptable, then the exremes are mere distraction (albeit one's that are court-worthy).
Don't hold out much hope, I am afraid. There are so many places and people that I love in the States, and long missed family, not to mention business opportunities. But simply cannot bear to bring myself to go there - I'd be either heartsick or in arguments all the time. I expect beggars, homeless, and such in Mumbai...there's no excuse in Cincinnati.Private Reply to John James O'Brien | | |
| |
| |
