RE: Alternative Candidates (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events



Message

bzirk -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/4/2008 5:30:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

quote:

ORIGINAL: bzirk
The success of third parties is not so much about having a president elected but to influence how the voters think. I'd be satisfied with that. The Republican party needs a little shake up.

I agree we need to shake up the party, but just handing the presidency to the Democrat's offerings seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face. The consequences of 4 years of a liberal president with a Democratically controlled Congress is, IMO, the worst possible combination.


Believe me, I'm weighing that situation.



Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/4/2008 6:15:30 PM)

Jimbo, if the Founding Fathers had the same lack of dedication to principles as the majority of this country, we would still be colonies of England!

Our Founding Fathers put everything on the line, including their lives, for something they believed in, something that many said could never happen, and something that had never happened up to that point in history. There is not much difference between that and what those voting for third parties are doing. The only real difference between what the FF's did and what those who vote for third parties are doing is that we won't be executed if we fail.



PolarBear -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/4/2008 10:37:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

I didn't say you weren't voting. But if you are voting 3rd party, you might as well not vote. But it's your choice.

Not so. Voting 3rd party is a statement that we want to end the Republicrat duopoly, and help alternatives get federal funding and into the debates next time. Staying home would accomplish none of that.

And that *is* important. I just need to weigh whether it's important enough to risk a Democratic president.

quote:

He has what, a tenth of a one percent of registered voters behind him?

According to at least one poll, Barr has 6% support, with 7% coming from Republicans and 5% from Democrats.

A co-worker of mine said he is "very much a Democrat" but voted for Ron Paul in the primary, for much the same reasons I did. Barr has much in common with Paul. Just goes to show, he does not only sap from Republicans.



SovereignIsHe -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/4/2008 11:09:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

quote:

ORIGINAL: bzirk
The success of third parties is not so much about having a president elected but to influence how the voters think. I'd be satisfied with that. The Republican party needs a little shake up.

I agree we need to shake up the party, but just handing the presidency to the Democrat's offerings seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face. The consequences of 4 years of a liberal president with a Democratically controlled Congress is, IMO, the worst possible combination.


Voting for whomever they trod out there isn't going to shake up the party... So your speak of changing the party is much like what you claim a vote for anyone other than who the Democrats and Repulicans throw out there, pointless... Of course if things continue down the path they are going in a few election cycles it really won't matter since there will be no distictions between the two parties given that people believe change will happen even though they are doing the same thing over and over again...

John



djv1255 -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/4/2008 11:11:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bzirk
The success of third parties is not so much about having a president elected but to influence how the voters think. I'd be satisfied with that. The Republican party needs a little shake up.


Getting 2% percent for a third party presidential candidate is NOT going to shake up either party. Electing 5 to 10 people to Congress will shake up either party especially if the seats are considered "safe" seats.



Solus -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/4/2008 11:27:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djv1255

quote:

ORIGINAL: bzirk
The success of third parties is not so much about having a president elected but to influence how the voters think. I'd be satisfied with that. The Republican party needs a little shake up.


Getting 2% percent for a third party presidential candidate is NOT going to shake up either party. Electing 5 to 10 people to Congress will shake up either party especially if the seats are considered "safe" seats.






Unless that 2% gives the election to the democrats. That happened in 2000. Since then the Democrats have been more liberal. And I think that Bob Barr is predicted to get more than just 2%.



djv1255 -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 4:52:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Solus

quote:

ORIGINAL: djv1255

quote:

ORIGINAL: bzirk
The success of third parties is not so much about having a president elected but to influence how the voters think. I'd be satisfied with that. The Republican party needs a little shake up.


Getting 2% percent for a third party presidential candidate is NOT going to shake up either party. Electing 5 to 10 people to Congress will shake up either party especially if the seats are considered "safe" seats.


Unless that 2% gives the election to the democrats. That happened in 2000. Since then the Democrats have been more liberal. And I think that Bob Barr is predicted to get more than just 2%.


Losing the election will not shake up the RNC leadership because the media is saying Obama is going to win anyway.
If Barr got more votes than McCain, that might shake them up but that won't happen.



strangeharmony -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 8:59:12 AM)

As of now, I'm voting for a third party in November, though I don't know who yet. Why? Isn't this a waste of a vote? Actually I put a LOT of thought into how much my vote

I live in NJ, one of the most democratic states in the country. In the primary, I would have loved to vote for Huckabee if he stood a chance against McCain, but my vote wouldn't have made a difference. However, Obama and Hillary were of course very close, so I registered as a democrat and voted for Obama, because between the two I'd much rather see him as president, and my vote may make a big difference.

Now with Obama and McCain, I don't want blood on my hands from either candidates, and there is a lot of blood at stake. If the election were close in NJ, I guess I'd make a decision, but there's just little to no chance the winner would be anyone but Obama.

So I hope there is a better third party candidate out there... I'm starting my research now. Maybe if the popular vote counted I might choose a less of two evils.

Thanks for your time!

PS - I looked up Bob Barr, what makes him not a Republican?



JimboFletch -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 9:15:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky

Jimbo, if the Founding Fathers had the same lack of dedication to principles as the majority of this country, we would still be colonies of England!

Our Founding Fathers put everything on the line, including their lives, for something they believed in, something that many said could never happen, and something that had never happened up to that point in history. There is not much difference between that and what those voting for third parties are doing. The only real difference between what the FF's did and what those who vote for third parties are doing is that we won't be executed if we fail.

So now I have no principles for not wasting my vote? I showed my principles by volunteering to serve in the military during the most unpopular war in our history - including Iraq. And you? (Or is your principles only shown in the secrecy of the polling booth?)

Don't kid yourself because you don't convince me: There is NO comparison at all between the 3rd party voting done in the lap of luxury at no personal cost and the Founding Fathers' risking everything they were and owned. None.



Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 3:31:32 PM)

I served my country in the military for 20 years. That time period covered TWO wars (Gulf 1 & Gulf 2), plus Grenada, Lebanon, Somalia, Panama, Haiti, Bosnia, and many others. It also covered the Clinton years where the military was gutted by his budget cuts. I have been in public service for 27 years serving others, working for others as a firefighter, in the military, and now working for a Police Department.

And yes, I am making the comparrison between those of us who chose to follow what we believe in and what the Founding Fathers did. They sacrificed everything for a principle. I am willing to do the same thing. Are you?



JimboFletch -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 3:35:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky
And yes, I am making the comparrison between those of us who chose to follow what we believe in and what the Founding Fathers did. They sacrificed everything for a principle. I am willing to do the same thing. Are you?

Then, go ahead, sacrifice your vote. That's what you're doing.

Meanwhile, those voting for either Obama or McCain WILL be chosing your next president, possibly even one that never served and will stick it to the military.



Solus -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 3:53:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky
And yes, I am making the comparrison between those of us who chose to follow what we believe in and what the Founding Fathers did. They sacrificed everything for a principle. I am willing to do the same thing. Are you?

Then, go ahead, sacrifice your vote. That's what you're doing.

Meanwhile, those voting for either Obama or McCain WILL be chosing your next president, possibly even one that never served and will stick it to the military.


Well, I don't want Obama or McCain so I guess I'll be holding people like you responsible for either of them winning.

EDIT: It is not a matter of saying "don't vote for Obama". McCain will be a bad president. Obama will be a bad president. There are some who would be good presidents but they don't have as much of a chance.

If it was Obama vs McCain as the two major candidates, and Jesus was running as an independent without much of a chance, who would you vote for? Please note, I am not comparing any of the candidates to Jesus, i am simply pointing out the lack of logic in what you are planning on doing.



torath -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 4:09:04 PM)

I have seen many replies to this saying

"It's not a matter of being happy. It's a matter of being practical. Bob Barr isn't going to the White House. You might as well vote for Pat Paulsen for what good your trip to the polls will accomplish. You are settling for a loser who will not affect a single national policy in the next 4 years."

Last time I checked, the Bible did not instruct us to do something like vote because it will make an impact but because it is right. It may be a wasted vote but voting for a canidate who opposes the Word of God is wrong so if you cannot find someone to vote for in the big 2 you must as a christian vote independent or not at all. It does not matter if the vote "counts" in this world, God records all, including voting records in the next.



Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 4:15:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky
And yes, I am making the comparrison between those of us who chose to follow what we believe in and what the Founding Fathers did. They sacrificed everything for a principle. I am willing to do the same thing. Are you?

Then, go ahead, sacrifice your vote. That's what you're doing.

Meanwhile, those voting for either Obama or McCain WILL be chosing your next president, possibly even one that never served and will stick it to the military.


At least I am willing to stand up for something I believe in. You and tens of millions of others apparently are not willing to do that. THAT is exactly why this country is so messed up. You can go ahead and blame me and everyone else who refuse to go along with the status quo but we know who is really responsible.



JimboFletch -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 4:26:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Solus
If it was Obama vs McCain as the two major candidates, and Jesus was running as an independent without much of a chance, who would you vote for? Please note, I am not comparing any of the candidates to Jesus, i am simply pointing out the lack of logic in what you are planning on doing.

Do you honestly think Jesus would be running? That you'd pose such a question makes one wonder. He not only stayed out of Temple politics, He made no effort at gaining popular position.

You are doing nothing more than someone sitting at home arguing with the TV. You cannot possibly believe that your candidate can win. What you are doing is more like a soldier that throws his weapon away in hopes that the enemy will decide to do the same. Or ejecting the clip and running toward the enemy expecting he'll run away in fear.

You live in a fallen world. Waiting for the perfect person to put in the White House will be futility and vainity until Jesus returns.



JimboFletch -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 4:30:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky

At least I am willing to stand up for something I believe in. You and tens of millions of others apparently are not willing to do that. THAT is exactly why this country is so messed up. You can go ahead and blame me and everyone else who refuse to go along with the status quo but we know who is really responsible.

You kid yoursef. You are planning on doing absolutely nothing productive in November. But like those before you, you'll stand on the sidelines pointing fingers and bemoaning the system you "aren't responsible" for creating.



blessedinnyc -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 4:34:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky
At least I am willing to stand up for something I believe in. You and tens of millions of others apparently are not willing to do that. THAT is exactly why this country is so messed up. You can go ahead and blame me and everyone else who refuse to go along with the status quo but we know who is really responsible.

I know what you mean. I would rather not have to choose between a candidate that will start a war with Iran and force everyone to carry a computer chip to do business and a candidate that wants to increase the federal government's responsibilities (and expenses).

In any case, historically, libertarians like Bob Barr haven't canceled out the Green Party, so I think that third-party voters are a net positive for McCain. So if you're opposed to voting for Bob Barr because it's a waste, you are also supporting more votes for Barack Obama because you want all of the Green Party voters to go for him instead.

I don't see why voters should be attacked for choosing idealism over pragmatism. If everyone chooses pragmatism, you wind up with Illinois 2006 race for governor.

quote:

Then, go ahead, sacrifice your vote. That's what you're doing.


Well, here's what John Q. Adams had to say about this:

quote:

Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost

I intend to vote for the most libertarian candidate that went through the effort of getting his name onto my ballot- with the caveat he still needs to be a little concerned about how our country's finances and environment will look 40 years from.



Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 4:40:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

You kid yoursef. You are planning on doing absolutely nothing productive in November. But like those before you, you'll stand on the sidelines pointing fingers and bemoaning the system you "aren't responsible" for creating.


I was just as responsible as you are because I also used to believe that you had to vote for the republicrats. Then my eyes were opened and I saw that there are other choices.

By the way, you completely sidestepped Solus' question so I will repeat it for you, with a slight rephrasing of it: If Jesus were to be on the ballot along with McCain and Obama, who would you vote for?

I don't want any of these tangent answers that you normally give. I want an honest answer. Would you vote for Jesus or not, if He was on the ballot?



JimboFletch -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 5:13:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky
By the way, you completely sidestepped Solus' question so I will repeat it for you, with a slight rephrasing of it: If Jesus were to be on the ballot along with McCain and Obama, who would you vote for?

I answered the question.

Don't you get it, Jesus was not a politician because His kingdom was not of this world. Why is yours here?



JimboFletch -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 5:16:41 PM)

Jeff, if you want to play your game, there is already a topic in this folder that you have either missed or avoided with the title: Jesus Christ for President?

If you want to pursue that question, then go there and knock yourself out.



Solus -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 5:37:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Solus
If it was Obama vs McCain as the two major candidates, and Jesus was running as an independent without much of a chance, who would you vote for? Please note, I am not comparing any of the candidates to Jesus, i am simply pointing out the lack of logic in what you are planning on doing.

Do you honestly think Jesus would be running? That you'd pose such a question makes one wonder. He not only stayed out of Temple politics, He made no effort at gaining popular position.

You are doing nothing more than someone sitting at home arguing with the TV. You cannot possibly believe that your candidate can win. What you are doing is more like a soldier that throws his weapon away in hopes that the enemy will decide to do the same. Or ejecting the clip and running toward the enemy expecting he'll run away in fear.

You live in a fallen world. Waiting for the perfect person to put in the White House will be futility and vainity until Jesus returns.


The point is not wether or not Jesus is running but rather would you vote for him even if he had no shot at winning or would you simply vote for a bad candidate because they were not the worst.



JimboFletch -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 5:45:18 PM)

quote:

The point is not wether or not Jesus is running but rather would you vote for him even if he had no shot at winning or would you simply vote for a bad candidate because they were not the worst.

That is as phony a question as your asking if I'd marry Jesus if He were a woman and fell romantically in love with me. It shows both irreverance and lack of truly understanding the nature of this world and Christians.

And it is as useful as all "what if" questions - not at all.



Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 5:52:53 PM)

Obviously we are not going to get a straight answer from you. And it is such a simple question requiring only a yes or no answer.



Waffler -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/5/2008 6:30:10 PM)

FWIW, I haven't posted on Crosswalk for quite some time, but this topic caught my attention. I think that we are, perhaps, not examining some other issues raised by the original question:
1. "Isn't choosing the lesser of two evils still choosing evil?" This is a good question, and I suppose that the answer is, "Yes, but that's life". No matter what decision we make, there is an inherent element of evil, in that our sin nature is till there, and we live in a world that has been subject to the results of that fall. For example, if you believe that killing is wrong, is it more or less wrong to kill someone who is going to kill a family member or friend? In either case, when you make a choice, evil will be committed. I do believe that more often than not, our choices ARE the lesser of two evils. We all have different "bars" that we raise that determine how we decide. We also tend to choose based upon our personal safety or emotional comfort. Another example - a popular kind of question in this area is, "If you could go back in time and kill Adolf Hitler (or Stalin, or Mao, or any one of a number of mass murderers) as a baby - would you do it? For some, this is an easy choice; for others, it is agony. Gen. Curt LeMay made the decision to firebomb Japanese cities, in the hope that this act, as unspeakably horrible as it was, would prevent much higher casualties among both Japanese AND Americans. He said that if the U.S. had lost the war, he would probably be tried as a war criminal. I see a similar issue here. McCain is not my first choice for president, but I believe that for several reasons Obama would be worse, not the least of which is his stand on abortion. If I had my druthers, I'd vote for someone like Ron Paul, but I am absolutely certain he has no chance of winning, and if I can, even in a small way, influence the vote against Obama, I'll use that chance.
2. So far (at least I didn't see it anywhere), no one has posted two of what I consider to be two of the most important verses the Bible has on this subject:
Rom 13:1 "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God."
and,
Prov 21:1 "The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD; he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases."

These two verses indicate that, #1, God decides who does & doesn't get elected. #2, Even the president is subject to God's sovereignty.

In light of that, I think that we make far too much noise about politics. Jesus was not about politics - he was about people. If we put the effort that we put into arguing about politics & involving ourselves in debates, forums, etc. and instead practiced true Christian love, compassion, and humility, I think that the changes for which we so desperately hope might come about because people would have a reason to LISTEN to us, after having seen our actions.



JimboFletch -> RE: Alternative Candidates (6/6/2008 8:40:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky

Obviously we are not going to get a straight answer from you. And it is such a simple question requiring only a yes or no answer.

Oh grow up, man. Junior high students play "what if" games to make foolish points, not adults. Again your question is irreverent and shows one that doesn't have a firm grasp of the real world.
[8|]



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI