jimk

i just read an interesting editorial in barron's this morning.

the writer recommends that if i haven't made up my mind by now, i shouldn't vote. that if i do not have a formed opinion on which one of these dickheads will come closer to representing my views at this point, i am the moron for not educating myself well enough, and my vote will just muck up the election. and that the campaigns are just smoke & mirrors & don't mean a damn thing.

kinda harsh, but there is definitely some cranky wisdom to it, i think.....at least as far as trying to get someone like myself to really look at issues & where the candidates stand (or claim to stand) on them.

the writer goes on to say that if i'm going to go vote anyway, without a thought-out opinion, that i should vote across the board to throw out incumbents. judges, alderman, presidents..........if i don't KNOW they're doing something good, get 'em out. change is always good.

wow. i thought i was reading a conservative, business-head paper. i am very impressed with how much this writer made me think today.

__________________
raw power is a guaranteed o.d.

raw power is a laughin' at you & me

-iggy

flstf

I think not voting is an excellent choice for some folks.

Like I said in another thread, my wife defected from behind the iron curtain years ago, where almost all the people were forced to vote even if there were only communists running. They were forced to show support for the system.

Some people here probably do not approve of any of the candidates and should feel free to not have to show support for our current corrupt system. Also if a person has no idea what the issues or candidates are about, I would hope they stay away from the polls as well.

I have a feeling that most of us would not like the resulting government if we convince the 50% of people that currently don't give a damn to vote. Or not, maybe it wouldn't make any difference after all, LOL.

SecretMethod70

I think not voting is a viable choice but not the best choice. If a person can't decide between the two main party candidates and is considering not voting, I think it's a good thing to find some third party candidate whom you can find some general agreement with and vote for that person. You don't need to know a lot about them at this point, since they're not going to win, but it will help work towards providing more choice the next time around.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

aliali

If you don't know, don't vote. If you are going to vote anyway, vote 'em all out. Makes sense to me, but I wouldn't stand in a long line to pursue this stategy.

flstf

Yeah, I've voted Libertarian many times in the past. But I don't think they will make much progress in my lifetime. There are just too many people who depend on a big government for their livelyhood and sustenance, And it is in the interests of those in power to keep it that way, so it gets worse every year. I do think it is important that the the 3rd parties stay viable so there is some choice after we have an economic collapse.

The way it stacks up now, a vote for the Libertarian takes some votes away from the Republican and a vote for Nader takes some away from the Democrat. At least that's what the pundits say.

I'll probably go with the Libertarians tomorrow which I'm told will help the Democrats again.

I live in Ohio and have been getting 2 or 3 phone calls a day from the major parties. The more they call me the more I feel like staying out of it, LOL.