Quote:
Originally Posted by rdonj
Licker: I disagree that you have to be either a sheep or delusional to vote for one of the major candidates, that is too narrow of a grouping and does not account for all variables.
I also disagree with this - "So honestly, how would you know if these 3rd party candidates are worth listening to or not? Probably just because you've bought the lies the media and politicians would have you believe."
I don't know about you but I haven't heard ANYTHING about the 3rd party candidates. And I'm sure many others haven't either. I would bet more people just don't care about them because they get no media attention. How are we ever going to elect someone who doesn't get any air time? From what I can tell the majority of american voters get most if not all of their information from television. Sad, but it seems to be the case.
|
I agree, my first statement was a bit strong, but was only made in response to an equally strong, and equally limited statement.
As to the 3rd parties...
That's my point!
Do you think the Green party or the libertarian party does not roots? Why is it that you haven't heard what they are saying, other than that you are just taking what is spoon fed to you.
They have been on NPR, they have been in some newspapers, and they have had some limited TV exposure, but the main stream media doesn't touch them.
And why?
Because they know who is cutting them their checks for all the ad time they allow.
Take MONEY out of the political equation as much as possible and you'll start to hear more varied platforms and opinions. European nations do this, sure, they have their big parties, but the smaller parties are also heard from, with our winner takes all congressional design (which isn't necessarily a bad design, it's just been completely subverted by the haves to completely exclude the have nots) if you are not a repub or a dem you get very little monetary support (which is derived from the dnc and rnc) and have very little chance to actually compete.
Look at Obama and his earlier stance on what money he would use for the campaign, and how he completely discarded that stance when he realized he would benefit more by dropping it. Disgusting, and just another example of our politicians doing whatever they want since they know there are no consequences.
McCain is no saint here either, none of them are, that's my point. Voting for them is just casting your ballot for more of the same screw job we've become accustomed to.
For either of those candidates, if you support them and they win, write down what their campaign promises were, and then actually bother to track what and how they go about fulfilling them. Of course most people won't do this, hell most people don't even know what the promises are, other than in some incredibly pointless and generic sense.
Change? What the hell does that mean? It could mean anything, and it probably will since both campaigns are using it.
Re: OT: US President (US Dom Players only)
Hybrid Mode
