|
|
Post by d murphy on Aug 13, 2012 22:47:00 GMT -5
the blog post today almost gives me hope for the catholic church.
|
|
|
|
Post by razmoudah on Oct 5, 2012 3:09:45 GMT -5
Okay, first let me say that I refuse to vote Republican or Democrat, as the two parts have together screwed the entire country over.
Now, let me mention that I've read the blog you linked, and I want to know why I never heard anything about it until now. Seriously, facts like that could possibly crush Romney's run for presidency, and although I can't say I want to see Obama win I also don't want to see Romney win, so anything that would be guaranteed to absolutely crush one side (even if it means the other gets the win, as my wanting a non-Republican and non-Democrat President is extremely unlikely) is something I'd definitely want to see used. Hopefully Obama or someone else is saving it as an 'October Surprise' for that final stretch before the election itself, even if at the time that article ran it would've already been far to late for the Republican Party to find someone else.
|
|
|
|
Post by d murphy on Oct 8, 2012 1:08:32 GMT -5
yeah... i'd love a third party to have a chance. i'd also love to vote for a candidate without just picking the "less worse" one, but the reality is that either the democrat or republican is going to win 99.99% of elections unless one or both parties drop out, opening the door for an independent (theorhetically an independent could still establish his own party this day and age, but he'd have to be a superstar, and most likely would be splitting one of the major parties in half, ensuring that both he and the party he split from are defeated (should romney lose in 2012 and the democrats secure the presidency for multiple terms following this election, i could see this happening within the republican party 10-15 years down the road). so i tend to compare the candidates against each other and vote accordingly rather than vote in a protesting manner.
|
|
|
|
Post by razmoudah on Oct 22, 2012 22:38:51 GMT -5
The problem is that most people vote in a similar manner. If everyone voted for the candidate they truly wanted there would be a lot fewer total votes for the 'main' two. I'm not saying one of them wouldn't win (the Electoral College effectively guarantees them the win), but those two parties would definitely take notice if they barely managed to beat the others and it would help facilitate a change, especially if the winner of the popular vote was neither a Republican nor a Democrat, as that may get a movement started to finally do away with the Electoral College.
|
|
|
|
Post by d murphy on Oct 23, 2012 23:25:33 GMT -5
i saw a suggestion for a voting system wherein you voted for multiple candidates that i think would be the best. basically a vote for a candidate suggests you feel that candidate is competent and wouldn't mind their winning, while no vote is no confidence. this would encourage voting for third party candidates as it wouldn't be just throwing a vote away as you could also vote for one or both of the big parties, and ultimately would probably make races much closer. i feel like i would potentially vote for multiple third parties and ignore the republican and democratic candidates.
|
|
|
|
Post by razmoudah on Nov 5, 2012 18:35:48 GMT -5
I can see advantages and disadvantages to such a system. The biggest advantage is obviously it makes it much harder to force things into being just a two party race irregardless of how many nominees there actually are. The biggest downside though is that it can become much harder to definitively state a clear winner, as it suddenly becomes much easier for two or more candidates to have the same number of votes and come in first, which means it needs to have some type of system to decide a final victor in the instance of a tie.
|
|
|
|
Post by d murphy on Nov 5, 2012 23:53:34 GMT -5
i don't think ties would be that common with such a large number of voters.
|
|
