XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.home.repair, talk.politics.guns   
   From: j_carlson@gmx.com   
      
   On 6/29/2024 10:51 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:   
   > On 6/29/2024 1:24 PM, J Carlson wrote:   
   >> On 6/29/2024 10:15 AM, Ed P wrote:   
   >>> On 6/29/2024 12:50 PM, J Carlson wrote:   
   >>>> On 6/29/2024 7:03 AM, Ed P wrote:   
   >>>>> On 6/29/2024 9:51 AM, Ralph Mowery wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> After that in the main election I vote for the party I think meets my   
   >>>>>> ideals.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> That is why I've always been independent.  Both parties suck   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Well, goody for you. You still are typically going to have to choose   
   between   
   >>>> a Democrat and a Republiscum/QAnon in most races. But now you have no say   
   in   
   >>>> who the parties' candidates will be.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Yeah, neither would be my first choice but would my one vote make a   
   >>> difference in this race?   
   >>   
   >> No one vote *ever* decides a race   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> They both suck so I'll vote the lesser of two evils.   
   >>   
   >> Both major parties do suck, and they suck worse today that they did in the   
   >> past. But only one party is dedicated to authoritarianism and destroying the   
   >> rule of law and the very notion of constitutional governance. That's the   
   >> Republiscum/QAnon party.   
   >>   
   >> As a committed small-"l' libertarian, I always vote for the Libertarian   
   >> candidate as a matter of principle, and where I live, there are virtually   
   >> always Libertarian candidates on the ballot for all major offices. It is my   
   >> contention that a person claiming to be principled and moral *cannot* vote   
   for   
   >> a Republiscum/QAnon, as they are the party of insurrection and general   
   >> lawlessness.   
   >   
   > Forgot to mention, some state have open primaries.  Choose your ballot at   
   the   
   > polling place, but only one.   
   >   
   > You say one vote matters,   
      
   I didn't say that. I said the opposite. One vote virtually never matters, i.e.,   
   is decisive.   
      
   > but when you vote third part in this country, you are   
   > just taking away from one, not helping the other.   
      
   If you vote for a third party, it's a symbolic vote. But it can still have   
   importance to show how a sizable part of the electorate feels.   
      
   > We really do need a good sensible third arty.   
      
   The nature of winner-take-all (or "first past the post") elections is that   
   third   
   parties disappear. You *always* get two big parties one of which wins the   
   election. What we really need is some form of proportional representation, so   
   that at least in the legislature, more than two parties win seats.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)