Which presidential candidate will you vote for?

seen on the tumblrs

  Quote

libertarians who say not voting is the same as casting a vote because “none of these options are good enough”

actually ANYONE who says that

are you so blinded by your own self-absorption that you don’t realize the rights of a LOT of people are genuinely at stake, here?

look, if this election were less polarized, I could give a shit less if you wanted to make a meaningless statement by not voting. but by not voting in THIS election, you’re saying to women, people of color, queer people, and everyone who isn’t rich that you care more about your own ideology than you do about the reality of those people losing their rights and living in a world that is much worse for them.

and you can just go fuck yourself.

requisite amy poehler gif

i think it applies to third party candidates as well though

do you think mitt romney is going to be better for the rights of people who would be targets of illegal assassinations? i sure don't.

mitt romney is going to be worse in every way and i think the ability to say nah im just gonna not vote/vote third party/vote for romney because obama is worse than bush is something that comes from a place of privilege. vote for obama if only for the sake of the women in your life. or the lgbt people. or the people of colour (most of them). then work to change the system so your favourite candidate is viable rather than pretending we live in any sort of

yeah its choosing between two evils but just. fuck's sake, look at the GOP agenda. tell me you'd rather have that then obama's agenda. just honestly tell me that. because when you say "i'm not voting" or "i'm voting third party" you're literally saying "i'll risk it!" in this political system.

(sorry smetty)

IMO, good politics is boring. And what gets attention in the media is everything which is the complete opposite. So maybe, just maybe, there's already lots and lots of good politics being done in America, but it just doesn't get the attention it deserves. It either isn't reported, or, if it is, people aren't interested or just assume the cynical position when it comes to government in general. People rather spend their days talking about 10 Teapartiers spreading the word in the middle of nowhere, instead of discussing actual policies.

To a certain extent I believe all the cynicism towards government is being fed by the inability of people to actually understand what's going on. Wether that's because they aren't given the proper information, or just don't have the capacities is open. But I do think an awful lot of information is already readily available. So in my point of view, the cynicism is just a way for people to rationalise their disinterest/inability to understand what's going on. And it's a given that it is hard to understand what's going on, even if all information is available and people are interested.

edit.: this post was on a completely different tangent...as usual.

edit2.: and yes, i do think it's always better to vote than to not vote. and if you vote, vote for the person with the policies closest to your heart instead of going for the strategic option. The more people voting for third partiers, the more chance those third partiers actually getting some political power. Look at friggin UK, for instance.

I see the danger and harm of the military industrial complex, banking/wall street corruption, and the drug war as more harmful to humans than the slim possibility that abortion becomes illegal. I'm for gay rights also but I don't consider gay marriage to be really all that important aside from the financial benefits. Why gay people want to become apart of some pseudo-religious tradition that's treated with virtually no respect in modern culture today anyway... I get they want equality, but I think its being approached incorrectly. So overall I don't see much of a difference in a Romney/Obama presidency and I would rather send my support towards a third party in my state that will turn blue no matter what anyway. Trying to make third party candidates feel guilty because they don't fall in line is the wrong attitude. If Romney gets elected its the fault of the people who voted for him, not voter minorities which are trying to support real activists who aren't propped up by special interests.

well fuck it then. im a privileged lower class white male. im voting third party. politely deal with it?

plus i dunno if you've noticed, but Romney's campaign is completely falling apart. This is Obama's election to lose.

We will see how strong that mandate that got him into office in 08 will be this year. If it is, I don't think you have anything to worry about.

On another tangent, I'm completely in love with Nate Silver's blog 538:

http://fivethirtyeig...gs.nytimes.com/

Political analysis in optima forma!

edit.: typooooo

  Quote

That leaves the Associated Press national poll as the standout number of the day, showing a positive trend for Mr. Romney. The forecast model now gives Mr. Romney almost exactly a one-in-three chance (33.3 percent) of winning the Electoral College. That is little changed from Tuesday, but it nevertheless is his highest figure in our Electoral College forecast since July 29 and isconsistent with a trend toward improved polling for Mr. Romney of late.

Yeah if Romney can win with this kind of campaigning then America is truly fucked anyway so you might as well vote third party or catch the next plane to Costa Rica. I'll also note that if I was in a swing state I think I would still hold the same position that I have, but I might lie and actually vote for Obama on election day. I really think the only way this country/independents move more to the left again is through third parties. The two parties goal these days is to divide people unnecessarily, to continue a cycle of pointing fingers so that its always mostly one sides fault depending on your cultural perspective.

im tellin you, if a truly progressive wing pops up again in the Democratic Party, Ill vote for them any chance I get. Until then,\

  On 8/23/2012 at 7:18 AM, goDel said:

The more people voting for third partiers, the more chance those third partiers actually getting some political power. Look at friggin UK, for instance.

AAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. I don't think you have a clue about what's going on in this country.

  On 8/23/2012 at 7:12 AM, disparaissant said:

i think the ability to say nah im just gonna not vote/vote third party/vote for romney because obama is worse than bush is something that comes from a place of privilege.

The idea that only people in a position of privilege would make an argument for not voting or participating in neoliberal democracy is honestly pretty offensive. You'll have to explain it to all the queer/minority anarchists I know.

Good fuzzy-wuzzy centre left liberals voting for the "least bad" mainstream option here (the third party Liberal Democracts) in the last election basically just gave them the power to prop up a minority Conservative party in coalition. The result? A crushing right-wing austerity policy which is targeting the most vulnerable in society - the poor, the unemployed, the disabled.

The system doesn't work.

That last bit was more of a reply to goDel by the way.

Anyway, maybe things are so much worse in the US that voting for Obama is the only way to keep abortions legal and whatever else the big issues are over there. I know things are different there - that there's more of a difference between the two big parties on social issues - and so I can understand that kind of tactical voting mentality...

But it would stick in my throat voting for Obama. Because I am anti-war and anti-capitalism. And you shouldn't kid yourself that voting for him will actually make things better for minorities and vulnerable people in the US. It might stop things from getting much worse (at least in certain ways - it will STILL be getting worse in others), but people will still be persecuted for their race or their sexuality, people will still be exploited by their employers, capitalism will still run roughshod over the environment and brown people will continue to be exploded by drones on the other side of the world. If you can't understand why that makes people reluctant to support him, I don't know what to say.

This inarticulate post brought to you by 3.5 hours sleep

  On 8/22/2012 at 7:30 PM, eugene said:

. rich people = capable and successful people.

This is what conservatives actually believe.

I'm out of this thread for now, sorry for shitting all over it.

  On 8/23/2012 at 7:12 AM, disparaissant said:

seen on the tumblrs

 

  Quote

libertarians who say not voting is the same as casting a vote because “none of these options are good enough”

actually ANYONE who says that

are you so blinded by your own self-absorption that you don’t realize the rights of a LOT of people are genuinely at stake, here?

look, if this election were less polarized, I could give a shit less if you wanted to make a meaningless statement by not voting. but by not voting in THIS election, you’re saying to women, people of color, queer people, and everyone who isn’t rich that you care more about your own ideology than you do about the reality of those people losing their rights and living in a world that is much worse for them.

and you can just go fuck yourself.

 

requisite amy poehler gif

 

i think it applies to third party candidates as well though

do you think mitt romney is going to be better for the rights of people who would be targets of illegal assassinations? i sure don't.

mitt romney is going to be worse in every way and i think the ability to say nah im just gonna not vote/vote third party/vote for romney because obama is worse than bush is something that comes from a place of privilege. vote for obama if only for the sake of the women in your life. or the lgbt people. or the people of colour (most of them). then work to change the system so your favourite candidate is viable rather than pretending we live in any sort of

 

yeah its choosing between two evils but just. fuck's sake, look at the GOP agenda. tell me you'd rather have that then obama's agenda. just honestly tell me that. because when you say "i'm not voting" or "i'm voting third party" you're literally saying "i'll risk it!" in this political system.

 

(sorry smetty)

i don't think mittens vs obama would create an appreciable difference in the life of the average american. if you're wanting to change politics that affect your life, state government is the way to go. people can actually make a difference there.

also, i care about women's rights and lgbt rights. that's why i'm voting for a candidate that supports those things: jill stein. i don't care if it's not practical--if we only followed practicality, there'd be a lot more evil in the world.

  On 8/23/2012 at 11:41 AM, Iain C said:

That last bit was more of a reply to goDel by the way.

 

Anyway, maybe things are so much worse in the US that voting for Obama is the only way to keep abortions legal and whatever else the big issues are over there. I know things are different there - that there's more of a difference between the two big parties on social issues - and so I can understand that kind of tactical voting mentality...

 

But it would stick in my throat voting for Obama. Because I am anti-war and anti-capitalism. And you shouldn't kid yourself that voting for him will actually make things better for minorities and vulnerable people in the US. It might stop things from getting much worse (at least in certain ways - it will STILL be getting worse in others), but people will still be persecuted for their race or their sexuality, people will still be exploited by their employers, capitalism will still run roughshod over the environment and brown people will continue to be exploded by drones on the other side of the world. If you can't understand why that makes people reluctant to support him, I don't know what to say.

 

This inarticulate post brought to you by 3.5 hours sleep

this is pretty much exactly what i was trying to say. i understand being RELUCTANT to support him, i am reluctant as HELL to support his idea of the liberal social order and all that garbage. but on the other hand, there's mitt romney.

we have two choices and that is the current state of american politics. we need to do something to change that, for sure. but voting isn't what's gonna do it.

  On 8/23/2012 at 5:25 PM, Hoodie said:

  On 8/23/2012 at 7:12 AM, disparaissant said:

seen on the tumblrs

 

  Quote

libertarians who say not voting is the same as casting a vote because “none of these options are good enough”

actually ANYONE who says that

are you so blinded by your own self-absorption that you don’t realize the rights of a LOT of people are genuinely at stake, here?

look, if this election were less polarized, I could give a shit less if you wanted to make a meaningless statement by not voting. but by not voting in THIS election, you’re saying to women, people of color, queer people, and everyone who isn’t rich that you care more about your own ideology than you do about the reality of those people losing their rights and living in a world that is much worse for them.

and you can just go fuck yourself.

 

requisite amy poehler gif

 

i think it applies to third party candidates as well though

do you think mitt romney is going to be better for the rights of people who would be targets of illegal assassinations? i sure don't.

mitt romney is going to be worse in every way and i think the ability to say nah im just gonna not vote/vote third party/vote for romney because obama is worse than bush is something that comes from a place of privilege. vote for obama if only for the sake of the women in your life. or the lgbt people. or the people of colour (most of them). then work to change the system so your favourite candidate is viable rather than pretending we live in any sort of

 

yeah its choosing between two evils but just. fuck's sake, look at the GOP agenda. tell me you'd rather have that then obama's agenda. just honestly tell me that. because when you say "i'm not voting" or "i'm voting third party" you're literally saying "i'll risk it!" in this political system.

 

(sorry smetty)

 

i don't think mittens vs obama would create an appreciable difference in the life of the average american. if you're wanting to change politics that affect your life, state government is the way to go. people can actually make a difference there.

 

also, i care about women's rights and lgbt rights. that's why i'm voting for a candidate that supports those things: jill stein. i don't care if it's not practical--if we only followed practicality, there'd be a lot more evil in the world.

if you don't care that it's not practical then you can't say that you honestly care about those issues but instead surrender to emotions or perhaps democratic ideals. a vote for stein will not benefit women or lgbt in any way because she has no chance to win.

i understand that long term-wise there might be some sense in voting for her but it's more like a gamble at this stage.

  On 8/23/2012 at 7:23 AM, compson said:

I see the danger and harm of the military industrial complex, banking/wall street corruption, and the drug war as more harmful to humans than the slim possibility that abortion becomes illegal. I'm for gay rights also but I don't consider gay marriage to be really all that important aside from the financial benefits. Why gay people want to become apart of some pseudo-religious tradition that's treated with virtually no respect in modern culture today anyway... I get they want equality, but I think its being approached incorrectly. So overall I don't see much of a difference in a Romney/Obama presidency and I would rather send my support towards a third party in my state that will turn blue no matter what anyway. Trying to make third party candidates feel guilty because they don't fall in line is the wrong attitude. If Romney gets elected its the fault of the people who voted for him, not voter minorities which are trying to support real activists who aren't propped up by special interests.

Good response to that tumblr argument. Thank you for saying it with less fire in your words than I would have, lol

reproductive rights arent just about abortion, gay rights arent just about marriage.

i blame the HRC for making everyone think it is. those fuckers have some ridiculous blinders on.

Right, and this election isn't just about reproductive and gay rights. Those are causes to be sympathetic to, for sure, but Obama has made too many other horrible war-mongering decisions for me to feel OK voting for him.

but now we're back at square one. you don't want to vote for obama because feelings.

that was what the original argument was about.

edit: also social welfare programs. how can you seriously ignore the impact a gop president would have on those?

  On 8/23/2012 at 5:25 PM, Hoodie said:

i don't think mittens vs obama would create an appreciable difference in the life of the average american. if you're wanting to change politics that affect your life, state government is the way to go. people can actually make a difference there.

 

also, i care about women's rights and lgbt rights. that's why i'm voting for a candidate that supports those things: jill stein. i don't care if it's not practical--if we only followed practicality, there'd be a lot more evil in the world.

the first election where the candidate I voted for actually won was decided by 16 votes (I forget what the court officially counted) - it was between a moderate Democrat incumbent in the Texas House of Representatives and a former Denver Broncos linesman who was running as a quasi-Tea Party candidate. Voting local and state level is crucial, and yet hardly anyone even bothers. It's quite frustrating.

Also, I will repeat this stance - the fact that the Electoral College exists absolutely validates the "lesser of two evils" argument. I'm not one to chastise 3rd party voting though, especially if it's a 'decided" state.

  On 8/23/2012 at 6:48 PM, luke viia said:

  On 8/23/2012 at 7:23 AM, compson said:

Trying to make third party candidates feel guilty because they don't fall in line is the wrong attitude. If Romney gets elected its the fault of the people who voted for him, not voter minorities which are trying to support real activists who aren't propped up by special interests.

 

Good response to that tumblr argument. Thank you for saying it with less fire in your words than I would have, lol

That articulates how I feel about the fucking lameass Democrats who blamed Nader for "taking" votes from Al Gore in particular.

  On 8/23/2012 at 7:05 PM, disparaissant said:

but now we're back at square one. you don't want to vote for obama because feelings.

that was what the original argument was about.

 

edit: also social welfare programs. how can you seriously ignore the impact a gop president would have on those?

My bad, I shouldn't have used the word "feel." I should have said, "I refuse to vote for Obama." I voted for him last election, and I feel like it was a waste. Do what you want. The hot button issues do not sway me. I live in a progressive area (WA), and it is because of local politics, not federal laws. Gay folks here enjoy lots of rights, no thanks to Obama. These are issues that can be worked at the state level. War-mongering and corporate interests - the things that actually worry me for the future of this country (and others) - are not issues that can be worked at any level beside the federal. So my vote is not for Obama.

I think we should not invade other countries preemptively. If this is not going to happen with Obama and it will with Romney, then I'll vote for him (edit: Obama, that is).

@luke

i think this is where we're just gonna part ways. not everyone is blessed to live in a nice progressive area, and i feel like voting to help the people who aren't so blessed is more important than voting over something that's not really gonna change no matter who's in office. war-mongering, corporate interests, indefinite detention, well. i'm not convinced that any candidate will be able to change that considering it's so ingrained in the actual office at this point. no president in history has ever given up powers gained by their predecessor and nothing will convince me that this is going to change. not through voting. especially considering how pie-in-the-sky theoretical the candidates we're talking about are.

http://www.isidewith.com/results/57285078

idk who jill stein is. i'll probably vote for obama

You're right, and I see what you mean, but I just can't keep voting for the lesser of two evils. Let me throw my vote away for a 3rd candidate - or express my true opinion of 'no confidence.' It is, at the least, better than not voting at all, and IMO it is also better than voting for someone I don't trust.