eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni
Level: 65
   
Posts: 972/1084
EXP: 2307840
For next: 27800
Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan
Since last post: 2496 days
Last activity: 2493 days
|  #1 Posted on 14.9.04 1003.17
Reposted on: 14.9.11 1004.47 | According to the Washington Post, crazy people vote. A lot more than you think they do.
Should we deny the right to vote to somebody just because they may not always know exactly what is going on in our reality? I don't think so. It's the caretakers duty to make sure that they don't abuse the situation (such as using an insane person to essentially cast two ballots for whomever you like), but is there really any major difference between a "crazy person" voting and somebody who has payed no attention to the campaigns at all, and is selecting their candidate on a whim?
At the very least, it opens the possibility for some very interesting elections. | Promote this thread! |             | OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 101
Posts: 2193/3014
EXP: 10556103
For next: 161609
Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Since last post: 22 days
Last activity: 4 days
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #2 Posted on 14.9.04 1036.29
Reposted on: 14.9.11 1036.46 | Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
According to the Washington Post, crazy people vote.
Which explains Zell Miller. | Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Level: 46
Posts: 218/508
EXP: 672645
For next: 39134
Since: 6.1.04
From: New York
Since last post: 266 days
Last activity: 14 hours
| #3 Posted on 14.9.04 1044.29
Reposted on: 14.9.11 1044.36 | Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
According to the Washington Post, crazy people vote. A lot more than you think they do.
Now we know where Nader's & Perot's numbers came from... | jvincion
Linguica
Level: 19
Posts: 65/68
EXP: 34911
For next: 866
Since: 7.11.02
From: Seattle, WA
Since last post: 3172 days
Last activity: 3063 days
| AIM: |  |
| | ICQ: |  |
| |
| #4 Posted on 14.9.04 1117.03
Reposted on: 14.9.11 1117.12 | I don't think it's fair to call people who vote for third party candidates crazy. Especially since you might raise the ire of our resident dictator. 
I'd say that third-party voters for the most part are somewhat idealistic and definitely disenfranchised with the two-party system. Certainly, some of the third party candidates bring good ideas to the table - ideas worth getting behind and voting for - but they don't have the financial backing or publicity to really be viable on a large scale. This could all change after a few (or many) more presidential elections, but then again, a majority of people are happy with (or just don't care about changing) the status quo. | Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Level: 46
Posts: 220/508
EXP: 672645
For next: 39134
Since: 6.1.04
From: New York
Since last post: 266 days
Last activity: 14 hours
| #5 Posted on 14.9.04 1130.19
Reposted on: 14.9.11 1131.01 | Originally posted by jvincion
I don't think it's fair to call people who vote for third party candidates crazy. Especially since you might raise the ire of our resident dictator.
I'd say that third-party voters for the most part are somewhat idealistic and definitely disenfranchised with the two-party system. Certainly, some of the third party candidates bring good ideas to the table - ideas worth getting behind and voting for - but they don't have the financial backing or publicity to really be viable on a large scale. This could all change after a few (or many) more presidential elections, but then again, a majority of people are happy with (or just don't care about changing) the status quo.
Of course I didn't mean ALL the people who voted third party were crazy!! (sorry Zims  )
I was commenting more on the sanity of the candidates I mentioned, rather than the voters themselves. I have no problem voting third-party, but why is it that the last two "mainstream" third-party candidates seem to have been a bit, shall we say, off...? | | ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE |
| | | | | |
