mitt, mitt, mitt

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Sounds eerily similar to the idea tha Obama winning in 2008 was going to lead to an elevation of America's prestige abroad, that our enemies would see our point of view, our relations to the Muslim world would dramatically improve...

"The planet will start to heal, the levels of sea will stop rising" ... blah blah blah...

That by the way has all been proven to be nonsense.

yep, they're both full of ish.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yep, they're both full of ish.

OK - all things being equal - I'll take the new guy.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

OK - all things being equal - I'll take the new guy.

which is no good move.

try taking the third guy.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

which is no good move.

try taking the third guy.

Sadly, a vote for the third guy is the same as a vote for the current guy. That is the way the math plays out - today. Unless the third guy is Ralph Nader.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Sadly, a vote for the third guy is the same as a vote for the current guy. That is the way the math plays out - today. Unless the third guy is Ralph Nader.

not necessarily, and not if enough people did it.

[Antitrust32]

my vote for Gary Johnson will NOT in any way shape or form be a vote for Pres Obama. nor is it in any way shape or form a vote for non-Pres Romney.

and you wonder why nothing changes... the majority of this country believes that there are only two choices.. and SOMEHOW (not sure how) they believe one is less evil than the other?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

my vote for Gary Johnson will NOT in any way shape or form be a vote for Pres Obama. nor is it in any way shape or form a vote for non-Pres Romney.

and you wonder why nothing changes... the majority of this country believes that there are only two choices.. and SOMEHOW (not sure how) they believe one is less evil than the other?

A vote for Gary Johnson, in this election, is a vote for Barack Obama. That is a statement summarizing the fact that the mathematical outcome is the same.

It is also identical to writing in your own name at the ballot box. And pretty close to just staying home.

I respect your conviction in your beliefs. Unfortunately, elections are won or lost by the counting of votes, and on that basis all the justification you put into Gary Johnson evaporates when the count is made.

Those are the facts. Anything else is like Quixotic tilting at windmills.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Sadly, a vote for the third guy is the same as a vote for the current guy. That is the way the math plays out - today. Unless the third guy is Ralph Nader.

No offense, but this is an ideology that is precisely why the country is doomed.

Your corporate puppetmasters offer you a choice of two evils, then use their corporate-controlled media to get you to believe that going off the menu will result in you getting the evil that you tolerate less than the evil that only makes you throw up a little.

How about "don't vote for evil"?

The reality is that a vote for Romney or Obama only weakens the country and does nothing to force the change we so desperately need. So the prospect of getting Romney by sacrificing ideals that you believe in (not assuming you do, you may really believe Romney can make a difference) is no bargain anyway you look at it.

Will a third party candidate get elected? Absolutely not. Not a chance in hell.

Can the entrenched system ignore 20 million voters who essentially tell both of them "No Thanks"? No, they can't.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Can the entrenched system ignore 20 million voters who essentially tell both of them "No Thanks"? No, they can't.

That's where we disagree. They can and will ignore 20 million people who threw their vote away. They could and did ignore the 20 million Ross Perot voters that gave us Bill Clinton.

They also ignored all the John Anderson voters from the Reagan-Carter race in 1980. When was the last time you actually heard anyone MENTION John Anderson?

The fact is there are two viable parties. We do not yet have a coalition government like the UK, Israel, or Italy where such coalitions exist. And I'm not sure that's any better.

If you don't vote for Romney in 2012, you are, in mathematical effect - NOT intent - endorsing a second term for Barack Obama and all the threats to your freedom that will certainly follow with it.

[jms62]

[quote=joeydb;892612]That's where we disagree. They can and will ignore 20 million people who threw their vote away. They could and did ignore the 20 million Ross Perot voters that gave us Bill Clinton.

They also ignored all the John Anderson voters from the Reagan-Carter race in 1980. When was the last time you actually heard anyone MENTION John Anderson?

The fact is there are two viable parties. We do not yet have a coalition government like the UK, Israel, or Italy where such coalitions exist. And I'm not sure that's any better.

If you don't vote for Romney in 2012, you are, in mathematical effect - NOT intent - endorsing a second term for Barack Obama and all the threats to your freedom that will certainly follow with it.[/QUOTE]

What threats to our freedom Joey?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by joeydb

That's where we disagree. They can and will ignore 20 million people who threw their vote away. They could and did ignore the 20 million Ross Perot voters that gave us Bill Clinton.

They also ignored all the John Anderson voters from the Reagan-Carter race in 1980. When was the last time you actually heard anyone MENTION John Anderson?

The fact is there are two viable parties. We do not yet have a coalition government like the UK, Israel, or Italy where such coalitions exist. And I'm not sure that's any better.

If you don't vote for Romney in 2012, you are, in mathematical effect - NOT intent - endorsing a second term for Barack Obama and all the threats to your freedom that will certainly follow with it.

god..the melodrama Joey..Please.

And of course, we all know who Ralph Nader gave us