The W
Views: 97609497
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.7.07 1444
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Third parties Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(523 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (25 total)
The Goon
Boudin blanc
Moderator
Level: 94

Posts: 976/2421
EXP: 8066199
For next: 290489

Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 34 min.
#1 Posted on 31.10.04 1707.50
Reposted on: 31.10.11 1707.54
I am curious if anyone is considering voting for Nader or Badnarik or anyone other than President Bush or Senator Kerry. I've heard talk that in a couple of swing states, Badnarik might make a difference in the same way Nader did in 2000.

Along the same lines, did anyone vote Nader in 2000, and if so, were you content with that decision?
Promote this thread!
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 1747/2092
EXP: 6476064
For next: 174626

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 18 hours
Last activity: 17 hours
#2 Posted on 31.10.04 1716.53
Reposted on: 31.10.11 1719.04
I voted Nader in 2000. I lived in DC, so I'm not staying awake at night regretting my decision or anything.
Dahak
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 530/772
EXP: 1431708
For next: 54229

Since: 12.5.02
From: Junction City OR.

Since last post: 1934 days
Last activity: 1587 days
#3 Posted on 31.10.04 1815.31
Reposted on: 31.10.11 1815.33
Well, Nader was not allowed on Oregon's ballot because of very minor signature violations. Signature of person getting signatures didn't exactly match the original signature when they signed up as a signature gatherer. God Bill Bradbury is way too partisan.
But for some reason the 4, 5, and 6 parties got on the ballot. So I could vote for the Libertarians, Pacific Green, and Constitution. I guess they didn't have a problem getting enough signatures. Or maybe they wouldn't cut into Kerry's votes in a swing vote very much.

(edited by Dahak on 31.10.04 1627)
Guru Zim
SQL Dejection
Administrator
Level: 138

Posts: 2851/5993
EXP: 31496622
For next: 166438

Since: 9.12.01
From: Bay City, OR

Since last post: 19 days
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#4 Posted on 31.10.04 1822.55
Reposted on: 31.10.11 1823.00
I will be voting for Badnarik, but I live in California, and I don't think that it will make much of a difference.
Corajudo
Frankfurter
Level: 58

Posts: 325/810
EXP: 1507435
For next: 70120

Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 14 days
Last activity: 1 day
#5 Posted on 31.10.04 1825.39
Reposted on: 31.10.11 1826.04
    Originally posted by The Goon
    I am curious if anyone is considering voting for Nader or Badnarik or anyone other than President Bush or Senator Kerry. I've heard talk that in a couple of swing states, Badnarik might make a difference in the same way Nader did in 2000.

    Along the same lines, did anyone vote Nader in 2000, and if so, were you content with that decision?


I have voted Libertarians for President in the past and definitely considered them again this election. I did not vote for Badnarik though I did vote Libertarian for some of the local offices. I am worried about their current trend as it seems that the party platform is becoming more irresponsible and is not currently adding much of value to the national dialogue. Hopefully this is just a short-term aberration and stems from a need to try and have a different point of view from the two main parties on the war on terrorism.
PalpatineW
Lap cheong
Level: 77

Posts: 1364/1528
EXP: 4044343
For next: 146805

Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2738 days
Last activity: 2581 days
AIM:  
#6 Posted on 31.10.04 1856.07
Reposted on: 31.10.11 1856.12
I voted for Harry Browne in '00, and would have voted for Carla Howell for MA Governor in '02, but there was no way I wanted Shannon O'Brien in that office, so I pulled the lever for Mitt Romney, he of the perfectly coiffed hair.

As a fun side note, the Libertarian ballot initiative to end the income tax that year (2002) lost by about 5%. And this in Massachusetts.
PeterStork
Sujuk
Level: 64

Posts: 271/1006
EXP: 2155258
For next: 58851

Since: 25.1.02
From: Chicagoland with Hoosiers, or "The Region"

Since last post: 611 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#7 Posted on 31.10.04 1957.43
Reposted on: 31.10.11 1957.47
I voted for Nader in my first election four years ago; Bush screwed my birthday boy McCain and I had no love for Gore. Though I'm not a huge Green Party supporters, I wanted to help them get that 5% of the vote that helped for funding. So much for that.

This year, Ralphie isn't on the ballot in the Land of Lincoln, though he is registered as a write-in candidate. Badnarik is on the ballot, but rather than voting for evil, doofus or who the hell, I'll be throwing my vote away and writing in Homer Simpson.

Seriously.

(edited by PeterStork on 31.10.04 1959)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 211

Posts: 5286/16099
EXP: 138673809
For next: 58057

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 15 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on 31.10.04 2040.47
Reposted on: 31.10.11 2044.44
    Originally posted by The Goon
    I am curious if anyone is considering voting for Nader or Badnarik or anyone other than President Bush or Senator Kerry. I've heard talk that in a couple of swing states, Badnarik might make a difference in the same way Nader did in 2000.

    Along the same lines, did anyone vote Nader in 2000, and if so, were you content with that decision?
It's a shame that Nader gets any coverage at all when Badnarik and Peroutka don't, considering they'll all get around the same amount of votes. It's a safe bet to expect any potential "spoiler" role by anyone not named Nader to go woefully underreported.

Hmm, that was a tangent. To answer your question: Yes, I'm once again casting my vote for the LP candidate. Now that I apparently live in a swing state...well, actually that didn't affect my decision at all. Eh.
Downtown Bookie
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 344/647
EXP: 1102729
For next: 54397

Since: 7.4.02
From: The Inner City, Now Living In The Country

Since last post: 42 days
Last activity: 11 days
#9 Posted on 31.10.04 2043.26
Reposted on: 31.10.11 2044.52
I'll be voting for Michael Badnarik in this year's Presidential election. I've always believed in casting my ballot for the candidate that most closely represents my views and opinions, and this year that candidate is Badnarik.
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator
Level: 130

Posts: 2358/5183
EXP: 25266192
For next: 464454

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 50 min.
#10 Posted on 31.10.04 2202.58
Reposted on: 31.10.11 2210.19
    Originally posted by MoeGates
    I voted Nader in 2000. I lived in DC, so I'm not staying awake at night regretting my decision or anything.


Same for me, but I lived in MD. In fact, my whole family voted for Nader. We liked Gore, but not Lieberman, and we're not fond of the GOP, so we went 3rd party.

I hate both Big Two candidates, but if the polls call it close in MD, I'm going Dem. If not, Libertarian.
Karlos the Jackal
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 418/1747
EXP: 4944567
For next: 48303

Since: 2.1.02
From: The City of Subdued Excitement

Since last post: 171 days
Last activity: 2 days
#11 Posted on 31.10.04 2245.54
Reposted on: 31.10.11 2250.40
I voted for David McReynolds last year. I might regret it if I lived in Florida or something, but you have to, you know, follow your heart and shit.

This year, though, I'm not taking any chances. I like to throw votes to 3rd parties when I can, but too many races are too close for comfort this year.

--K
Phantom Lord
Salami
Level: 32

Posts: 159/213
EXP: 188770
For next: 17674

Since: 18.6.04
From: The Bensonhurst section of Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 3134 days
Last activity: 2930 days
AIM:  
#12 Posted on 1.11.04 0319.04
Reposted on: 1.11.11 0319.31
I voted for Nader in 2000. If certain events didn't happen I don't know who I would vote for this time around.

But it pisses me off when people say a vote for a third party is a wasted vote.

That's bullshit...no vote is a wasted vote.

I'm a member of the Independence Party. Technically we are alligned with the Reform Party and even though Pat Buchannan sabotaged the party in 2000, with the right publicity and money any third party candidate is a viable candidate.

Its just a matter of the masses educating themselves as to who is on their ballot.

Here in New York I think there will be like 6 different nominees for President.

But with that said, even though New York is a lock for Kerry...I'm still voting for Bush.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 4204/4700
EXP: 21361837
For next: 474825

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1177 days
Last activity: 974 days
#13 Posted on 1.11.04 0626.20
Reposted on: 1.11.11 0628.06
    Originally posted by CRZ
    It's a shame that Nader gets any coverage at all when Badnarik and Peroutka don't, considering they'll all get around the same amount of votes.
They may get more than Nader, when you consider that the two of them, as well as Cobb, will have greater ballot access in more states.

(edited by Grimis on 1.11.04 0731)
BWT
Boerewors
Level: 40

Posts: 217/360
EXP: 422716
For next: 18597

Since: 27.1.04
From: Philly

Since last post: 3100 days
Last activity: 2703 days
AIM:  
#14 Posted on 1.11.04 0713.31
Reposted on: 1.11.11 0714.29
I have thought about it and while I would lean towards voting for Michael Badnarik I don't think this is the election to vote for a third party candidate that is not going to win.
whatever
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 473/1735
EXP: 4871635
For next: 121235

Since: 12.2.02
From: Cleveland, Ohio

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 4 hours
#15 Posted on 1.11.04 0806.59
Reposted on: 1.11.11 0810.25
I voted for Nader in 2000 to try to get the 5% vote for the Greenies. Fat lot of good that did. There is no way in Hell I am voting anything but Kerry this year. However, I do very much wish there were more than the two parties available that had realistic national exposure/credibility.

(edited by whatever on 1.11.04 1437)
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1839/2042
EXP: 6247555
For next: 145244

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2942 days
Last activity: 155 days
#16 Posted on 1.11.04 0829.36
Reposted on: 1.11.11 0831.22
I voted for Nader in 2000 and have no regrets. I'd have voted for Michael Jackson running on the "Kid-Touchers For America" platform before I'd have voted for Joe Lieberman or Dubya.

I'm astonished that Nader is polling measurably this year, even with the name-recognition factor from 2000 working for him. In 2000, he had a recognizable (if minor) party backing him, had a wide variety of pundits and celebrities voicing their public support, and was running in an election that many viewed as a slam-dunk for the Democrats... and still only got < 3%. This year, he's having major problems getting on ballots, he's a pariah to much of the left, 99% of his former celebrity/pundit supporters have disowned him, and he's running as the candidate for an even fringier party, in an election that almost everyone agrees will be extremely close... yet he's still drawing percentage points in many polls. WTF?
Gugs
Bierwurst
Level: 83

Posts: 1257/1857
EXP: 5306720
For next: 125524

Since: 9.7.02
From: Sleep (That's where I'm a viking)

Since last post: 426 days
Last activity: 18 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#17 Posted on 1.11.04 0845.27
Reposted on: 1.11.11 0848.52
    Originally posted by vsp
    I'm astonished that Nader is polling measurably this year, even with the name-recognition factor from 2000 working for him. In 2000, he had a recognizable (if minor) party backing him, had a wide variety of pundits and celebrities voicing their public support, and was running in an election that many viewed as a slam-dunk for the Democrats... and still only got < 3%. This year, he's having major problems getting on ballots, he's a pariah to much of the left, 99% of his former celebrity/pundit supporters have disowned him, and he's running as the candidate for an even fringier party, in an election that almost everyone agrees will be extremely close... yet he's still drawing percentage points in many polls. WTF?


Nader was polling around 7% right before the election in 2000. This year, he has about 3%. His final numbers will be way down from 2000, because former Naderites everywhere (especially swing states) will decide that getting Bush out is more important than trying to get Ralph to 5% or whatever he needs. Thus, they'll go for Kerry.

(edited by gugs on 1.11.04 0947)
messenoir
Summer sausage
Level: 45

Posts: 195/449
EXP: 640751
For next: 19418

Since: 20.2.02
From: Columbia, MO

Since last post: 454 days
Last activity: 320 days
AIM:  
#18 Posted on 1.11.04 1059.40
Reposted on: 1.11.11 1100.16
I am writing in Kucinich. He's like the best possible Nader without the ego.
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 1748/2092
EXP: 6476064
For next: 174626

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 18 hours
Last activity: 17 hours
#19 Posted on 1.11.04 1233.53
Reposted on: 1.11.11 1236.18
    Originally posted by vsp
    I voted for Nader in 2000 and have no regrets. I'd have voted for Michael Jackson running on the "Kid-Touchers For America" platform before I'd have voted for Joe Lieberman or Dubya.

    I'm astonished that Nader is polling measurably this year, even with the name-recognition factor from 2000 working for him. In 2000, he had a recognizable (if minor) party backing him, had a wide variety of pundits and celebrities voicing their public support, and was running in an election that many viewed as a slam-dunk for the Democrats... and still only got < 3%. This year, he's having major problems getting on ballots, he's a pariah to much of the left, 99% of his former celebrity/pundit supporters have disowned him, and he's running as the candidate for an even fringier party, in an election that almost everyone agrees will be extremely close... yet he's still drawing percentage points in many polls. WTF?



The pollsters could put any name other than Nader on third after Bush and Kerry and it'd draw the same number of responces. There's always a small segment of the population that will just on principle not vote for the Dems or the GOP.
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator
Level: 130

Posts: 2361/5183
EXP: 25266192
For next: 464454

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 50 min.
#20 Posted on 1.11.04 1313.31
Reposted on: 1.11.11 1314.47
    Originally posted by Zeruel
    I hate both Big Two candidates, but if the polls call it close in MD, I'm going Dem. If not, Libertarian.


Well...

54-43 +/- 4.1% for Kerry by SurveyUSA (10/27 - 10/29)
56-39 +/- 4% for Kerry by The Baltimore Sun (10/25 - 10/26)

That's too close for me, so Kerry will get my vote.
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: Now I've seen everything
Next thread: Ralph Nader Has Gone Insane
Previous thread: Drudge: 2000 votes planted on Philadelphia voting machines
(523 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Third partiesRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.192 seconds.