[X] My Assistant

[Zerxer]

I agree with voting for the candidate you want but I'm just saying, which no one can really argue against at this point in time, that voting for someone not in one of the 2 major parties is about the same as just staying home and not voting at all. No one can deny that there's really no chance for a 3rd party to win the presidency so long as they're not being supported as much as the other 2 such as not being included in major debates or being funded as well as the others or whatever else.

I congratulate you for sticking to your beliefs and trying to help one of the others win, don't get me wrong, it's just not something I would do until they actually have a real shot at winning when our country becomes more than just 2 major parties. I'd feel like I was wasting my vote instead of possibly using it to curve the state over to one of the 2 major parties that was at least not as bad as the other (which in this case was indeed Obama since honestly who actually wanted Palin to be VP??) since you know one of them is going to win.

During this election, did a third party even win any of the states?

[RedGardevoir]

No, very rarily do any third party canidates win a state though they do sometimes win counties they're very unlikly to win a state.

[berettapunk]

i understand why you feel that way about voting third party. yeah i know it seems pointless. but, if people dont start making the change happen themselves, and start telling their friends, and start telling family, and telling strangers, then how would the change ever happen? if you are not willing to help the change even tho you know it will help things, then where does that leave you?

fear runs this country and the 2 major parties are loving it. cuz they know they will not lose the power they have gained over us. if americans would stop being scared of things, and grew up and realized that if they voted differently for once, the 2 major parties would start to shape up. do you think the people who started the revolution were popular when they started what our government would now call "terrorist activities"? yes, according to our current government, our founding fathers were terrorists. i dont condone osama or say anything he has done is good. in fact its the opposite! the founding fathers attacked the government itself, modern terrorists attack the people to instill fear. so anyone condoning what modern terrorists do is a fool.

but do you think they were popular when they started their cause? no, they were told to behave themselves and conform to british society. what if they had? there would have been no american revolution, we would be the british empire in its fullest form really.


why wouldnt you want to be a part of some real change in this country? i figured a lot of people did since that has been a popular word this year. although all that has changed is the color of our presidents skin, i have no problem with that, im ecstatic we have a president that isnt white(tho i myself am white) it makes me feel that all those arguments and fights with bigots and nazis throughout my life really meant something. that maybe people can finally move on and not worry what color, nationality, or religion our neighbor is. but im getting off point...again...but all that is all that has really changed, the man has put many of washingtons bureaucrats into his cabinet!

if we want change we have to vote for the people who wont pick lobbyists and bureaucrats as their personal advisors...

all im saying really is if no one helps the cause, it will never take off. so in a matter of speaking you are killing it by saying you wont support it until it is popular.

[Zerxer]

No, I'm saying I wouldn't support it until they're actually more well known. They don't have to be popular, just need the rest of the world to know that they actually exist and what their stand is. You won't do much by simply telling your friends about them since most people don't really make political choices just based off what their friends tell them; they like to rely on the news and political channels more and make decisions off what the candidate themselves say at rallies and debates. What we need is for some big companies to support those 3rd parties and get them recognized more so that they actually have a shot at being voted for by more people.

[berettapunk]

but the big companies are the problem. thats how we get the crap with the oil industries and all the other stuff. you just stated plain and simply you like the lobbyists and bureaucracy in politics. the people need to educate themselves and stop being a flock of sheep that obey what the news tells them. that is what the problem is. seriously think about what you just said. the people can not depend on what candidate a corporation supports because that candidate will answer to them instead of the people. that goes with the news media as well. they are all big corporate business' that are looking out for their best interests, not the american peoples. so the more people they can get to support their candidate, the better off they will be. please, i beg you to stop and think about what you really just said...

[Zerxer]

Not all big companies out there are evil. Oil, yeah, obviously. I'm just saying they need more support from people who can help fund them to have commercials on TV and to get them into the big political debates because that's the only way they stand a chance at getting recognized by the majority of Americans.

[Pumpkin King]

I have an idea! How about Zerxer and berettapunk take this to the debate section to liven that forum up a little?

[Lord Raven]

The entire topic can be moved there.

[berettapunk]

what political parties need is some sort of revenue share like the nfl teams get. that way everyone has an even playing field to start from so every american can have a real choice...i dont see how that wouldnt be fair. yeah you can say o well the candidate that gets the most money obviously has the most support, not always true. it just makes it harder to figure out which candidate is which because you only get to see a few on tv after that because the rich one spams his bs so no one else gets spotlight. thats not very democratic imo.

[Zerxer]

The entire topic can be moved there.

lol I was considering that. I'm done now anyways. To actually be on topic for once, I guess we'll see how good of a president Obama is in a couple months.

[berettapunk]

it will definitely be an interesting four years. i hope he does good for this country, but with all the washington insiders he picks every day for his cabinets, he losses more and more of what little faith i had for him in the beginning.

[Vibrancy]

Just need to add a FUCK YEAH SEAKING in here.

[Kaname Madoka]

LOL FOXKAIYA.


I think he's been doing a great job so far, but it's only been 3 months since he was elected. I'm going to wait a while before I start flapping my gums about everything he's done wrong.