Is voting for Republicans or Democrats worthless?

a reply to: LSU2018

Not only would I, I do..

I dont believe there really is much of a lesser of two evils.

When i have to choose a lesser of two evils usually i default to the challenger. If the incombant isnt good there is a better chance the new person will be better or less skilled at profiteering due to not being the incombant.

As far as the two parties I really only see a difference in rhetoric.


More Republicans should be ashamed of the deficit this year. The economy is about as good as it can be and still have economic recovery era debt.

Voted last week to expand patriot act and FISA...so not real strong liberty or fiscal conservative being practised, hence no lesser evil for me.

At least Democrats raise money for their spending. Republicans cut taxes then spend twice as much as the previous budget.


So I don't see a real choice in practice as a blanket party vs party.

originally posted by: Grambler
I would say that would apply to most third party candidates as well

The Third Party candidates are typically not being funded by lobbyists looking to promote their agendas.

But I disagree that this means anyone with and r or d next to their name is establishment and should be rejected
.

Both parties are feeding at the same trough and just like pigs I know what we should be doing with them.

a reply to: Irishhaf

I didn't care for any candidate in 2008 or 2012 so I didn't vote. Trump shared a lot of policies that I liked, that's why he got my votes. I liked Jim Webb, too, but he didn't make it past the first DNC debate. I think he was the first democrat picked off because his message would have resonated with moderates on both sides, as well as independents and he would have beat Clinton for the candidacy.

If you're straight ticket/straight style voting, or voting to spite the opposing party, then yes, it's wholly worthless.

I cannot for the life of me understand why people are too lazy to research who's up for election, and compare. The idea of voting straight ticket because of one decent candidate you actually support while simultaneously voting in people you never would have on their own is STUPID. That's how you get useless limp dick governance. You have to consider the candidate individually and see how they all stack up against each other, or you screw yourself out of choosing potentially better people for the job.

This is what needs to change, the laziness and blind idiot party loyalty. If people spent more time looking into who they're voting for instead of trying to whip a middle finger around, we might have some actual civic progress is this goddamn country.

a reply to: luthier

I just can't bring myself to do it yet. In time, perhaps. And I'd be willing to bet that I'm not alone in that department. If someone can enter the scene in commanding fashion and grab the attention of millions, and I shared the same views, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

originally posted by: Nyiah
If you're straight ticket/straight style voting, or voting to spite the opposing party, then yes, it's wholly worthless.

I cannot for the life of me understand why people are too lazy to research who's up for election, and compare. The idea of voting straight ticket because of one decent candidate you actually support while simultaneously voting in people you never would have on their own is STUPID. That's how you get useless limp dick governance. You have to consider the candidate individually and see how they all stack up against each other, or you screw yourself out of choosing potentially better people for the job.

This is what needs to change, the laziness and blind idiot party loyalty. If people spent more time looking into who they're voting for instead of trying to whip a middle finger around, we might have some actual civic progress is this goddamn country.

I agree with this.

My point is that to vote for someone based merely on their party is ridiculous, as you say here, but to reject them sfor the same is equally ridiculous.

And it is also ridiculous to assume any third party person must be better based merely on their party.

Sure.. but
The person that do not vote have no right to disagree with the results

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: KansasGirl
Your question can be answered with a question: has anything changed, concerning those in power, in the past, say 60 years?

Not really, unless you note that what has changed is that we have had more and more rights and privledges quietly taken from us and have fallen for more and more manipulation of us.

I think the answer is yes, it's pointless, and until we stop voting in the same people (individuals controlled by big money/special interest groups), can even be argued that it's harmful.

Again that is oversimplified the in my opinion

So no republicans or democrats ever were worth voting for because they have all only ever done bad things for 60 years?

Voting Ron Paul was worthless cause republicans all suck

Explain to me how rejecting Ron paul helped solve the problem you are outlining

Rejecting Ron Paul DIDNT solve the problem. The problem is that there is only the one Ron Paul.

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: KansasGirl
Your question can be answered with a question: has anything changed, concerning those in power, in the past, say 60 years?

Not really, unless you note that what has changed is that we have had more and more rights and privledges quietly taken from us and have fallen for more and more manipulation of us.

I think the answer is yes, it's pointless, and until we stop voting in the same people (individuals controlled by big money/special interest groups), can even be argued that it's harmful.

Again that is oversimplified the in my opinion

So no republicans or democrats ever were worth voting for because they have all only ever done bad things for 60 years?

Voting Ron Paul was worthless cause republicans all suck

Explain to me how rejecting Ron paul helped solve the problem you are outlining

Rejecting Ron Paul DIDNT solve the problem. The problem is that there is only the one Ron Paul.

Exactly!

So we shouldnt reject good people like him based merely on the r next to his name.

That is as dumb as voting for someone merely because there is an r next to there name.

Any vote that is counted is not worthless. What is worthless is voting for someone on the basis that they aren't of either of the two parties.

"We hate party loyalty, blind partisanship, so vote third party!" seems to me quite ironic.

originally posted by: Propagandalf
Any vote that is counted is not worthless. What is worthless is voting for someone on the basis that they aren't of either of the two parties.

"We hate party loyalty, blind partisanship, so vote third party!" seems to me quite ironic.

Exactly the point.

The very people who mock people for voting based on a party cast votes for people based merely on which parties they are not in.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Propagandalf
Any vote that is counted is not worthless. What is worthless is voting for someone on the basis that they aren't of either of the two parties.

"We hate party loyalty, blind partisanship, so vote third party!" seems to me quite ironic.

Exactly the point.

The very people who mock people for voting based on a party cast votes for people based merely on which parties they are not in.

The nature of voting is this...many people vote against something and are mocking. Its human nature.

In fact the system was set up to protest someone not doing good work.

The whole reason the midterms are now is for checks and balances. If the public wants to limit a party or president.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Propagandalf
Any vote that is counted is not worthless. What is worthless is voting for someone on the basis that they aren't of either of the two parties.

"We hate party loyalty, blind partisanship, so vote third party!" seems to me quite ironic.

Exactly the point.

The very people who mock people for voting based on a party cast votes for people based merely on which parties they are not in.

The nature of voting is this...many people vote against something and are mocking. Its human nature.

In fact the system was set up to protest someone not doing good work.

The whole reason the midterms are now is for checks and balances. If the public wants to limit a party or president.

Yes I agree.

But it illustrates the irony of deriding people who vote for people based on party, and yet cast their vote purely based on partys (which partys not to vote for) as well.

That is why I dont consider anyones vote worthless at all.

a reply to: LSU2018


Me either, my main issue with Trump was trust I still consider him a democrat even if I like some of the stuff he is doing.


Most of the time I vote third party, but Webb is one I would have voted for happily. Now most of my effort is pushing the VPOA and trying to help members get into office at the lower levels of politics.

a reply to: Grambler

Agreed. But the motives for voting against the parties vs for them are not the same. The intent is not the same. Nor does it appear ironic except at a very surface level.

In fact I would say supporting the parties at this point seems like a mental illness to me.

But like you said. This is my personal opinion.

Any vote is better than no vote.

Just to preface I vote for Republican and democratic candidates sometimes. I consider I dividual voting records. I do not vote based on party.

a reply to: Irishhaf

I've always voted Republican or not voted. I feel like my vote for Trump was as independent as it gets because he was usually a democrat, then Republican, so who really knows. I would have voted for a mashed turd if it could make, and keep, the promises Trump gave me. Party made no difference. I liked Webb because he didn't kowtow when asked if black lives mattered or all lives mattered, plus he wanted to end Affirmative Action and was a proud military man. I don't know where that would have ended up if he'd kept going, but I liked what I'd been hearing before he was picked off, and I'm about as Conservative as they come. There were only two other people I would have gotten out to vote for in 2016 and that was Ben Carson or Carly Fiorina (MAYBE, because I started to dislike her more and more).

Addendum video