Originally posted by Oliver North
I find that logic to be entirely circular though:Why don't you vote for a third party?
- They aren't viable
Why aren't third parties viable?
- People don't vote for them
Why don't you vote for a third party?
- They aren't viable
Why aren't third parties viable?
- People don't vote for them
Why don't you vote for a third party?
- They aren't viable
Why aren't third parties viable?
- People don't vote for them
Why don't you vote for a third party?
- They aren't viable
Why aren't third parties viable?
- People don't vote for them
...
and so forth
If democracy, to you, is about lesser evils and not getting what you want, sure, I can't tell you to follow my advice and you might be foolish to.
I disagree.
It goes like this:
Why don't you vote for a third party?
- They aren't viable
Why aren't third parties viable?
- People don't vote for them
That's wrong: people do vote for them. So why don't you actually vote for them?
- Not enough people vote for them so they are not viable.
Don't you see that as part of the reason they are not viable?
-Yes.
End of discussion. Now suck my...
-I'll stop you there. Have a nice day.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I disagree.It goes like this:
Why don't you vote for a third party?
- They aren't viable
Why aren't third parties viable?
- People don't vote for them
That's wrong: people do vote for them. So why don't you actually vote for them?
- Not enough people vote for them so they are not viable.
Don't you see that as part of the reason they are not viable?
-Yes.
End of discussion. Now suck my...
-I'll stop you there. Have a nice day.
When you are asked your opinion do you give it or do you try to say you have an opinion that is more popular?
FYI, you don't win anything if you manage to vote for the winner.
Originally posted by Archaeopteryx
When you are asked your opinion do you give it or do you try to say you have an opinion that is more popular?
I think your question is scary and makes little sense.
Why would I do anything other than give my opinion when someone asks for it? To do anything else other than give the opinion would be assholish (unless you are at work...then giving your opinion may not be a good idea...or if the guy asking your opinion is doing it to just argue or troll).
But, if it is an honest question for your opinion, you should just give it instead of being a dick about it. That's my opinion on your question, at least.
Originally posted by Archaeopteryx
FYI, you don't win anything if you manage to vote for the winner.
That makes no sense since your vote contributed to the winner winning.
Also, you don't win because you weren't the actual candidate...if you want to get all philosophical and smartassy. Do I win since I made that last comment?
Originally posted by dadudemonYouTube video
Also, you don't win because you weren't the actual candidate...if you want to get all philosophical and smartassy. Do I win since I made that last comment?
Originally posted by Archaeopteryxso just to be clear... it's not reasonable to consider whether a candidate might win when you're deciding whether or not to vote for them?
When you are asked your opinion do you give it or do you try to say you have an opinion that is more popular?
FYI, you don't win anything if you manage to vote for the winner.
where would you draw the line, there? like, if you found some guy who's opinions matched yours perfectly who was asking people write him in as president, and he had maybe 1000 or so subscribers on his channel, would you jump on board that train?
what if there's one 3rd party candidate with whom you share a 75% rate of agreement on key issues, and another who rates at 85%. but the 75%er is much more popular and seems to have more momentum to his campaign. is it never relevant to consider which one has a better chance of winning before you cast your vote?
Originally posted by red g jacksIf all you care about is getting to say afterward that you picked the winning horse, then sure. But if you're someone who has a modicum of principle, then no.
so just to be clear... it's not reasonable to consider whether a candidate might win when you're deciding whether or not to vote for them?where would you draw the line, there? like, if you found some guy who's opinions matched yours perfectly who was asking people write him in as president, and he had maybe 1000 or so subscribers on his channel, would you jump on board that train?
what if there's one 3rd party candidate with whom you share a 75% rate of agreement on key issues, and another who rates at 85%. but the 75%er is much more popular and seems to have more momentum to his campaign. is it never relevant to consider which one has a better chance of winning before you cast your vote?
not really. if you care about 'getting what you want,' a compromise can be more effective than sticking to some principle in many cases.
say you decide to vote for the 75%er and he wins, whereas if you had voted for the 85%er he wouldn't have come close.
afterward, you get a candidate who you share 75% of your views with in office, as opposed to the opposition with whom you might have agreed with only 30% of the time.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
If all you care about is getting to say afterward that you picked the winning horse, then sure. But if you're someone who has a modicum of principle, then no.
I have a modicum of principle. That's why I don't double dip. I also have the sword of omens...and I have sight beyond sight. Obama wins the election.
Originally posted by red g jacksSo strategic voting? Where you want a government that shares your principles?
not really. if you care about 'getting what you want,' a compromise can be more effective than sticking to some principle in many cases.say you decide to vote for the 75%er and he wins, whereas if you had voted for the 85%er he wouldn't have come close.
afterward, you get a candidate who you share 75% of your views with in office, as opposed to the opposition with whom you might have agreed with only 30% of the time.
Originally posted by red g jacksFor many people it is about picking the winning side. Not because they truly care about policies and the administration of the nation, but because they want to claim they supported the winner. At least that's how it is with many sports enthusiasts, and I assume politics is the same, just without instant replays.
isn't that generally how this process works? why else do we even pool our interests into a single candidate?
Originally posted by dadudemonDon't try to frighten us with your sorcerer's way, DDM. Your sad devotion to silly puns hasn't helped you conjure up a recognizable reference, nor has it given you clairvoyance enough to guarantee the president's re-elec---*ack*
I have a modicum of principle. That's why I don't double dip. I also have the sword of omens...and I have sight beyond sight. Obama wins the election.
Originally posted by Lord Lucieni can only speak on my experience, but generally i think that political affiliation is more permanent than fickle sports fans.
For many people it is about picking the winning side. Not because they truly care about policies and the administration of the nation, but because they want to claim they supported the winner. At least that's how it is with many sports enthusiasts, and I assume politics is the same, just without instant replays.
generally people who vote have basic issues they care about and a loose ideology they follow.. there are exceptions but i don't think you'll generally find republicans flocking to obama to 'support the winning team' and vice versa.
Core supporters who stick with their team no matter what are... admirable. Also stupid, IMO.
I've known and heard from too many people who have tossed out the line: "I won't vote for ___ because they have no chance of winning." Or a line to that effect. Whatever their reason, those people suck. As do inflexible loyalists. What happened to people voting for issues they care about? It seems to be more and more about victory and claiming personal identity with a leader or party. As a white Canadian I can't really relate, but it's why the black guys who voted for Obama because he's black piss me off.
EDIT: No, scratch that--I CAN relate. White Canadians are just as ghetto as black Americans.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Don't try to frighten us with your sorcerer's way, DDM. Your sad devotion to silly puns hasn't helped you conjure up a recognizable reference, nor has it given you clairvoyance enough to guarantee the president's re-elec---*ack*
In order: Seinfeld and Thundercats. 🙂
Is this the part where we touch tips?