I think it should be called the "Less Government For Reals Party". That way the Elite will have a harder time explaining away when they infiltrate it and have their Uber-Statist Warmonger plants always win elections.
Printable View
I think it should be called the "Less Government For Reals Party". That way the Elite will have a harder time explaining away when they infiltrate it and have their Uber-Statist Warmonger plants always win elections.
The problem with not voting is that you get lumped in with the huge group of people who are just too fucking lazy or uninformed to vote, so your non-vote will get interpreted as such. In fact, the opportunity to vote legitimately is a good thing, but the problem is that it's legitimacy has been corrupted. By voting for a party outside the corrupt entrenched Republicans and Democrats, you are expressing that you value your right to vote, but you refuse to comply with the stranglehold two-party paradigm by bothering to take the time and effort to vote against it.Quote:
Originally Posted by midnight rambler
Look at it this way. Your action is going to be interpreted as supporting one of these four groups:
% of Republican Slaves
% of Democrat Slaves
% of People Refusing to submit to corrupt two-party slavery
% of Stupid Lazy People
You don't want to be confused as part of that last group. With each passing election, you'd like to see a bigger percentage appearing in that third group. That third group is your "candidate", even if it includes votes for Jill Stein, because it represents a movement toward busting up the century-long two-party headlock.
Also, the "not voting" route is too fatalistic. It's inconsistent with the ApocalOptimist philosophy! ;)
I'm starting to like this Gary Johnson idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shami-Amourae
What if you just voted within your state run elections, and nothing for the National Administration/Presidential.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
As it is a position dictatorial in nature, to pushing a red button.
The 'vote' of each of these characters in the images below counts every bit as much as yours. lol The joke's on you! lololololololQuote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
http://doctorbulldog.files.wordpress...t-shirts02.jpghttp://bobmccarty.com/wp-content/upl...-mug-shots.jpg
And who is assigned to determine who should vote?Quote:
Originally Posted by midnight rambler
The way America started out one could only 'vote' as an 'elector' if: 1) one was a man, and 2) one owned land.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnQPublic
Now 'those *assigned* to determine who should vote' want to include illegal aliens...oops, pardon me, I believe the term is now 'undocumented aliens'.
I've thought those same things but anymore I'm thinking they'll just report the same ol' byline "the LP got .0001% of the vote" nothing to see here move along, you wasted your vote etc.. When we can see how openly the system is rigged and how little anyone cares to look even just a little it's damn disheartening. The crap the GOP pulled was in full view of everyone and what happened? NOTHING! The silence is deafening and that silence is pure complicity...what else can explain it? And to imagine that all this happened in this age of technology! This shit would have been yelled from the rooftops a 100 yrs ago and the scum would have been called to account.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
I don't think the "man" thingy is going to go over too well these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by midnight rambler
I think the original idea was "one vote per responsible family". Right now a lot of couples cancel each other's votes (and that is probably by design).
Well, that's the root of the problem, isn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnQPublic