(Untitled)

[gunslnger]

Why I Refuse to Vote for Barack Obama

I am not a purist. There is no such thing as a perfect political party, or a president who governs in accordance with one's every ethical judgment. But some actions are so ruinous to human rights, so destructive of the Constitution, and so contrary to basic morals that they are disqualifying. Most of you will

Comments

[the_rukh]

That's what happens when you watch fox. You start believing things that having nothing to do with reality and are just based in fear and propaganda.

[marina_herriott]

/when you watch fox/
I've began to watch FOX month ago 'cause now I share FOX's opinions. Before I watched CNN. 4 years ago I supported Obama. Now I understand how his foreign policy is dangerous for the world and the domestic policy - for the country.

[fizzyland]

How exactly is the President's foreign policy 'dangerous for the world'?

[ddstory]

He refuses to bomb things and prefers to apologize, apologize, apologize. That's... PROVOCATIVE! And DANGEROUS!

[hikarugenji]

It really is a quandary, one that I posted about on this forum before. I am 100% certain that Obama supports my views and positions better than Romney does, and that I would vastly prefer an Obama second term to a Romney presidency. I don't agree with this "they're both the same" stuff you sometimes see from third-party supporters. On the other hand, the platform of the Green party comes closest to my ideal political ideology than any of the other platforms. I think that both sides have merit -- the idea that I would be giving a vote or half-vote to Romney if I voted for Jill Stein, and the idea that I should vote my conscience if I honestly think a third party represents my interests better.

I already sent in my absentee ballot (I'm overseas) but I ended up going with Obama -- I would have voted Green for more local elections that they actually had some chance of winning but no candidates were running in them. I wasn't completely happy with the decision, though.

[yes_justice]

Its a first across the finish line winner take all race. Third party is not viable. Its just a protest vote.

If you vote 3rd party, you may feel good, but ultimately it will have little effect other than to split the vote for the candidate who is closest aligned to you.

I think 3rd party can work, but from the bottom up, not top down.

[allhatnocattle]

In other words...
We don't vote for third parties because they can't win.
Third parties can't win because we don't vote for them.

C'mon! I thought USA had a sports culture where fans would cheer for the Detroit Lions/Cleavland Browns/Chicago Cubs/Toronto Maple Leafs/etc no matter their chances of actually winning.

[yes_justice]

Well, Ross Perot thought so.

Jesse Ventura 2016!

[rjf_snyker]

If i was american citizen. I vote for Romny. He is very cheerful politician.
http://www.vesti.ru/only_video.html?vid=449366

[fizzyland]

With wealth exceeding 9 figures, he damn well should be cheerful. But that's no criteria for choosing a leader.

[rjf_snyker]

"With wealth exceeding 9 figures, he damn well should be cheerful."
I suspect that is Gazprom stok

[fizzyland]

I'm going to need a translation on that last phrase, please.

[fizzyland]

Short of a Parliament-type government like Canada(and even they still use first-past-the-post representation) with proportional representation, I don't see third parties being able to break in.

My moral comfort zone has been expanded, probably due to disappointment with every candidate I've ever liked, starting with Nixon.

[kayjayuu]

Especially with deep pocket lawyers on either of the two major sides.

[notmrgarrison]

But even without that, what does a third party do running a candidate for president?

Ross Perot had the net effect of taking votes from Bush and Dole, Nader took votes from Gore and Kerry.

[yes_justice]

I've ever liked, starting with Nixon.

[underlankers]

That article's a disingenuous piece of trash and it's not worth responding to beyond that.

[yes_justice]

Hey, drone striking american citizens could be someones deal breaker. Seems fair enough.

[underlankers]

Obama was running on expanding Afghanistan as far as 2007. If people are disappointed that he is in fact escalating it, they weren't paying attention the first time.

[a_new_machine]

He certainly didn't say he'd be drone-striking American citizens primarily for protected speech, which is what he did to al-Awlaki. I mean, that was straight-up assassination, dealing out the death sentence with no trial or process, solely because the citizen happened to be elsewhere. Pretty chilling.