Third Party Candidate??

[memphismason]

Who would be the Strongest Third Party Candidate? Ron Paul????

I know a third party has no chance in this election, and I have always felt like a vote for them is a vote thrown away. But someone once told me, vote for who you think is the best choice, and if it isn't one of the two major party cand., then your vote will go down as a person who is ready for change.

This could be the election where a cry for a third party could be heard the loudest.

Well I think we are screwed when any of these three take office. So who does everybody think would tally up the most votes for a third party? and maybe why?

[Marswolf]

I know a third party has no chance in this election, and I have always felt like a vote for them is a vote thrown away. But someone once told me, vote for who you think is the best choice, and if it isn't one of the two major party cand., then your vote will go down as a person who is ready for change.

Tell that to the people who voted for Nader in Florida instead of Gore.

[memphismason]

Tell them what....that their vote was recorded as a person seeking change?

Or they threw their vote away?

What the voters in Florida did, by voting for Nadar and not Gore, they helped relect George Bush.......

oh so maybe your saying they might think they vote didn't count as a vote for change as much as it was counted as a vote against Gore. That makes sense to me. Is that right?

[Marswolf]

Uh...I think 99% of them would have rather seen Gore elected. They didn't throw their vote away; they elected someone they would have voted against.

[Guest EasilyObsessed]

your vote will go down as a person who is ready for change.

Then vote for Hillary or Obama....they cant stop talking about change.

[memphismason]

Right, I agree. So now basically you have not answered the original question, and managed to make yourself look smarter than me. Which is fine I am by no means very smart, nor am I very good in the arena of politics. This is only my second presidental election I can vote in. Hell I was born when Regan was in office. So see you are smarter than me, by age alone. With more age comes more wisdom.

Look, I know you don't like me because I am a mason, for some reason or another. That is fine. I can accept that. But trying to make me look stupid, c'mon man, can't we all just get along?

Look I will stand by my statement, A third party candidate can not win this election, but this could be the best opportunity that a cry for a third party could be heard, and heard in a good way. Florida independents (the ones that thought Gore was the lesser of two evils) basically spit in the wind. My little pee-brain can understand that, but that doen's answer my question..........

Who would be the best third party candidate in this years election?

[memphismason]

I know it is silly to even talk about this, seeing as though I live in Memphis. Shelby county will be a democratic county, because that is how we roll.

[Guest slothful1]

I cannot conscientiously support either major party's presidential candidate this year (barring some extremely unlikely events between now and November) so I'm definitely voting 3rd party, or possibly write-in.

[memphismason]

Who in your opinion would have the largest amount of votes for a Party Candidate????????

Ron Paul? Ralph Nadar? King Willie? any name is acceptable.....I was just curious what other gun owners opinions might be.

[Guest slothful1]

As for who the best 3rd party candidate would be, I haven't given it much thought, expecting to choose from what's available when the time comes. Since the candidate is not going to win, his or her identity is not quite as important to me as the general political/philosophical stance they represent.

[memphismason]

I am in the same boat Sloth....that is why I was asking. Just to spark thought.

[Mike.357]

A vote for a third party candidate in this election will be a vote for the Democrats. Anyway tossing your vote away will have the same end result as if you had voted for Hobama.

I do not know how someone can look at themselves in the mirror and say they will vote third party in this presidential election. I think almost all sane people agree that there is no good choice this time. Well when is the last time there was a good choice?

It is as simple as this. Do you want the country to go to hell in a basket at lightspeed, or at a little slower pace? If the Dem's get in look for lightspeed disaster. If McCain gets in the downhill run will be a lot slower. McCain will do no where near the damage in 4 years that Mrs. Clinton or Obama willl do.

When you waste your vote on Ron Paul or Pat Paulson or Donald Duck it will be on your conscience if the Repubs lose the election by the amount of votes that went third party.

I do not think with age comes wisdom but with youth comes naivity.

[saintsfanbrian]

Here is my opinion on 3rd party candidates.

At this time, America is not ready for a President that is not a "Republican" or a "Democrat" (quoted because lately there isn't much difference between the two.) The way to get a third party candidate in the presidency is to start small. Elect more to the local City/County Council. Once there, start electing on a state level. Once they have a strong foot hold there, then go national for Congress or Senate.

Now, in the upcoming election the choice unfortunately is back to the Bush - Gore election, we do not really have a STRONG candidate to vote for on either side of the aisle. Can you "hold your nose" and vote for McCain? Or will you help assure that a Democrat will get in office by voting Ron Paul/Other?

You can vote for whomever you want, that is the beauty of this country, but voting 3rd party, while "showing you want a change" will not actually get you anything. In this country, change actually STARTS at the community.

Okay, I will step down off of the soap box.

[Guest db99wj]

Here is my opinion on 3rd party candidates.

At this time, America is not ready for a President that is not a "Republican" or a "Democrat" (quoted because lately there isn't much difference between the two.) The way to get a third party candidate in the presidency is to start small. Elect more to the local City/County Council. Once there, start electing on a state level. Once they have a strong foot hold there, then go national for Congress or Senate.

Now, in the upcoming election the choice unfortunately is back to the Bush - Gore election, we do not really have a STRONG candidate to vote for on either side of the aisle. Can you "hold your nose" and vote for McCain? Or will you help assure that a Democrat will get in office by voting Ron Paul/Other?

You can vote for whomever you want, that is the beauty of this country, but voting 3rd party, while "showing you want a change" will not actually get you anything. In this country, change actually STARTS at the community.

Okay, I will step down off of the soap box.

Exactly. Great post.

[Marswolf]

Right, I agree. So now basically you have not answered the original question, and managed to make yourself look smarter than me. Which is fine I am by no means very smart, nor am I very good in the arena of politics. This is only my second presidental election I can vote in. Hell I was born when Regan was in office. So see you are smarter than me, by age alone. With more age comes more wisdom.

Heh, heh. With age, does not always come wisdom. Sometimes it is atrophy.

I'm not going to pretend that I'm not smart - and experienced - but I don't joust with unworthy opponents. and I'm absolutely not an elitist or snob.

I was trying to give a concrete example of why voting on principle is not always the best move. I have done the same with not necessarily bad results. I voted for Perot the second time he ran because I considered both major candidates to be repugnant. But I pick my races to make a point. You don't reasonably sink the ship to make a point, as the Nader folks in Florida did. But in my case, I'm glad they were stupid.

[memphismason]

Here is my opinion on 3rd party candidates.

At this time, America is not ready for a President that is not a "Republican" or a "Democrat" (quoted because lately there isn't much difference between the two.) The way to get a third party candidate in the presidency is to start small. Elect more to the local City/County Council. Once there, start electing on a state level. Once they have a strong foot hold there, then go national for Congress or Senate.

Now, in the upcoming election the choice unfortunately is back to the Bush - Gore election, we do not really have a STRONG candidate to vote for on either side of the aisle. Can you "hold your nose" and vote for McCain? Or will you help assure that a Democrat will get in office by voting Ron Paul/Other?

You can vote for whomever you want, that is the beauty of this country, but voting 3rd party, while "showing you want a change" will not actually get you anything. In this country, change actually STARTS at the community.

Okay, I will step down off of the soap box.

WOW.

[Marswolf]

Look, I know you don't like me because I am a mason, for some reason or another. That is fine. I can accept that.

I think I need to address this - once.

I don't dislike anyone because they are a Mason. I don't like anyone because they are a Mason. I thought I had made it clear that I have friends who are Masons and that they have tried to get me to join. I don't like or dislike anyone because they are in the local Masonic, Moose or Elk's Lodge.

As far as I am concerned, they are all social clubs with some really silly secret goodies, sort of like fraternities, which are great if you are 18. When you grow up, you should do adult things. But adults do childish things all the time. I count myself proudly among those folks.

The only problem I have with any of these groups is if they start to look down on folks who are not members and make social and business decisions base on who is a member and who is not....

If I find an elitist group like that, I don't join them and I openly oppose them. Un-intelligence offends me. Sorry.

People who join any group because they think it somehow makes them special sicken me and degrade them in terms of my view of their intelligence.

But then, I tend to be an individualist who judges everyone based on their intelligence and analytic capability.

Basically, group membership doesn't matter unless the members think that membership makes them somehow "special." If you believe that, you aren't just a member, you are also foolish.

[Guest GUTTERbOY]

I have an argument with myself every four years on this subject. I am a libertarian in principle, and generally if I voted for the person who I agreed with the most, it would be third party. On the other hand, I try to look at the election in a more strategic manner- there's usually some third-party candidate who would be my first choice to be in office, and then there are the two big candidates, one of whom I would rather have in office than the other.

On the one hand, I can make a vote on principle, albeit a vote that is highly unlikely to elect the person I want. On the other hand, I can vote to ensure that we don't get the worst candidate in office. And as much as I might like to vote on principle, I've so far ended up yielding to the reality that my vote is best used to try to get the best electable person in office.

I do support the libertarian party at the local level, and I think that's best- we've got the best chance at the bottom level to establish legitimacy and move upward from there.

[Marswolf]

In short, you choose to use your intelligence?

Good move.

Edited April 17, 2008 by Marswolf

[memphismason]

I think I need to address this - once.

I don't dislike anyone because they are a Mason. I don't like anyone because they are a Mason. I thought I had made it clear that I have friends who are Masons and that they have tried to get me to join. I don't like or dislike anyone because they are in the local Masonic, Moose or Elk's Lodge.

As far as I am concerned, they are all social clubs with some really silly secret goodies, sort of like fraternities, which are great if you are 18. When you grow up, you should do adult things. But adults do childish things all the time. I count myself proudly among those folks.

The only problem I have with any of these groups is if they start to look down on folks who are not members and make social and business decisions base on who is a member and who is not....

If I find an elitist group like that, I don't join them and I openly oppose them. Un-intelligence offends me. Sorry.

People who join any group because they think it somehow makes them special sicken me and degrade them in terms of my view of their intelligence.

But then, I tend to be an individualist who judges everyone based on their intelligence and analytic capability.

Basically, group membership doesn't matter unless the members think that membership makes them somehow "special." If you believe that, you aren't just a member, you are also foolish.

Mars I hate that you feel that way. I can assure you that the sterotype you have placed on me, is not correct. I do think I am special, I know I am.

We do more than sit arround and think we are special, and look down or noses at people. I really hate that you have viewed me in this light.

I really have enjoyed being on this board. I have been able to purchase a very nice handgun from a member, and maybe even have sparked an interest in the Fraternity in some people's mind. I wasn't aware that I was going to be attacked on numerous occasions, just for having pride in something I belong to. I also belong to the NRA & GOA, and I think I am special for being involved in those organizations also.

The statements I made regarding your replies to my post, were based on the hostility you have expressed towards me for being in a group than you are not a member of.

You said "sort of like a fraternity". It is a Fraternity. The oldest known.

The next time I see a child that has been burned and is recieving the medical attention that his family could not afford, I will be sure to let him know that Marswolf, the 59 year old Super Moderator on TGO boards thinks what we do is foolish.

Edited April 17, 2008 by memphismason

[memphismason]

I am going to offer my apologizes for asking a question that no one was wanting to answer. I didn't know what person could bring the most fight as a third party candidate, and so I asked what everyone thought, and not one answer.

A lot of good ideas have been talked over, but the question has never been answered. I will stick to gun only related topics, from now on.

I am sorry everyone.

Edited April 17, 2008 by memphismason

[Marswolf]

OOOOO. I'm a Super Moderator on a gun board. The force is with me.

Beware all of you Super-Masons --- Beware.

Edited April 17, 2008 by Marswolf

[memphismason]

OOOOO. I'm a Super Moderator on a gun board. The force is with me.

Beware all of you Super-Masons --- Beware.

Does that include me, I'm Super? At least that what it says on my underwear.

[Guest Doindonuts]

To answer your question, from what I see Ron Paul has a lot of people who believe in him. I see signs and bumper stickers for him all around, and he has a huge following on the internet. The man wants less government in our lives, is that a bad thing? Personally I don't think so.

[saintsfanbrian]

If I were it would probably be Ron Paul.