I said she was better at hiding it.
OJ was helped out by a fucking incompetent job done by the LAPD too.
I voted independent.
Voting for Gary Johnson isn't just a vote for the least awful candidate, it also sends a message to the two big parties that they need to get their shit together or their voters WILL go another way. It erodes the "nobody votes 3rd party because they can't win because nobody votes 3rd party" circular logic, and adds more competition to the race, forcing the two "main" parties to either shape up or lose more votes. More competition is always good. A vote for Johnson this time might actually enable a voting option more suited to what you want down the road, be it third party or R/D.
I decided against him because 1.) I don't vote based on the team they represent and 2.) he is kind of a silly person.
Yes, but Weld has come through this election looking the sanest, most respectable statesman your country has.
So the libertarian party has pushed the Republican Party to be more about free trade and open markets? Is that why they are now presenting a candidate that wholeheartedly opposes free trade?
Gas isn't saying they've had an effect. He's saying that once people start voting third party in greater numbers - enough to actually sway close votes - then the Big 2 will be forced to adjust, to address the issues the third parties raise.
That's not what I said at all. I said that voting Johnson (or Stein for that matter) shows the two parties that voters are willing to break their two party system if they continue in this matter. The actual platform of the third party candidate is irrelevant. All that matters is showing that they have started getting so bad that the "nobody votes for 3rd parties because nobody votes for 3rd parties" tautology is now threatened. This will both motivate the major parties to be less awful, and encourage MORE independent candidates to run - one of which you might like better.
How...nice.
I'll be happy to do this once the two options are both so run of the mill it won't really matter. I just don't see that this time. Trump really will cause irreparable damage. Anyone who makes the Bush years look good isn't something I'm willing to risk.
So you only vote 3rd party when you know it doesn't matter because Texas is going red regardless, yes? So much for conviction.
Gary Johnson isn't my ideal candidate, either. He doesn't take the office or his candidacy seriously, and underinformed on foreign policy as well as other problems. But this year is the best chance to crack the 2 party system we've had since Perot, and as far as I'm concerned, anyone who doesn't go third party THIS year might as well stop pretending their 3rd party votes in other years were anything other than political vegan crossfit - just something done to enabling the vocal looking-down-one's-nose at others with no actual principal behind it.[DOUBLEPOST=1478632517,1478632374][/DOUBLEPOST]
That's kind of putting the cart before the horse... or rather, "I'll be happy to pay my insurance premium if a fire breaks out, but not until then."
From what I hear, if you were really serious about that you'd vote for McMullin, he's the only candidate that even worried Trump.
For those interested, here is a scan of the lawsuit. Essentially they want 4 precincts to not be counted yet (or at all? confusing legalese), pending any litigation, because as many as "150-300 or more" voters might have joined the queue after closing time (which would seem to go against the statute in the tweet above):
That's nothing like what I said. Right now I have 3 options, and I've chosen the one which I feel causes less harm. If I see an instance where taking the protest vote does the most good, I'll take it.
I think part of what Gas is saying is that until one party sees its losing significantly due to a 3rd party, they won't wise up and put out a better candidate, and if they did put out a better candidate, you wouldn't need to vote 3rd party.
3 USC 5 and Bush v. Gore mean that, unless they can make their way to the Supreme Court, it's less than two months. Not much consolation but...
That's bullshit though. Voting for more extreme (only in different ways) candidates aren't going to cause the other two parties to 'wise up', any more than Trump being a candidate will do the same for Republicans. Until the safe gerrymandered districts are disbanded and redrawn to represent the neighborhoods, this will never end.
Even Sarah Palin would arguably be "better" than Trump. This is a very low bar.
Ah, I see, it's continuous coverage. My bad.
Right, I should've clarified. I had yours on until that one was sent to me.
Cool
I really want the lawyer to call it a kangaroo court and tell the judge to suck his balls.Sadly Trump knows better than to employ people like him.Cool
My point was though that this year more than any others was the best possible years for a third party to have a real effect. And it didn't. Which says a lot.
He's not on the ballot in Texas. Johnson is the only 3rd party candidate on the ballot in all 50 states.
You'll pull the bullet out of the wound when it won't hurt to do so.
The only reason to vote for Clinton is because you don't like Trump, and the only reason to vote for Trump is because you don't like Clinton. And the only reason not to vote for a 3rd party candidate is to continue to prop up the two party system so that things continue to get steadily worse every election.[DOUBLEPOST=1478637631][/DOUBLEPOST]
Ha ha ha ha ha ha...[DOUBLEPOST=1478637754][/DOUBLEPOST]
This is a chicken/egg debate. You say they didn't have an effect so you won't vote for them, I say they won't start having an effect until people demonstrate their viability by voting for them.
He doesn't live in Texas, McMullin *was* on the ballot where he lives.
