The Daily Kos - who would have thought

[Magiccarpetrides]

Practicality vs. Idealism, eh? I'm basically a Libertarian, but I don't wear checkered flannel shirts Actually, I've voted Libertarian several times, but this election I'll vote for McCain. For practical reasons.

+1 Voting for a Libertarian will only help put Obama in office.....god thats a bad bad thought.

You know maybe after 4 years of Obama (2012) the world really will end....

Edited June 12, 2008 by Magiccarpetrides
crazy talk

[Guest nraforlife]

The other old saying is about cutting off your nose to spite your face.

You can go and say eff 'em all, I ain't voting. That's perfectly within your rights.

But then you have little grounds to complain. Politics means working within a system for change.

I don't recall ever saying not voting, just not belonging to a party that doesn't reflect your values anymore. Holding your nose and voting for whoever you think will best represent you is different from beng a card carrying member of that group.

[The Rabbi]

I don't recall ever saying not voting, just not belonging to a party that doesn't reflect your values anymore. Holding your nose and voting for whoever you think will best represent you is different from beng a card carrying member of that group.

That's true. You did not say anything about not voting. But effectively there is little difference between the two.

[Guest nraforlife]

But effectively there is little difference between the two.

Please explain why not belonging to, or supporting, any party that doesn't reflect your values equates to not voting? Thank God, I live in a country where you don't have to be a member of a political sect to get a job or to vote.

Way too many arseholes in both parties to give my allegiance to either.

[The Rabbi]

Voting for a candidate with zero chance of winning is tantamount to not voting at all. Only difference is you get to feel good about yourself.

And the Dems and GOP have no monopoly on a$$holes. Go look some Libertarian stuff sometime.

When you work within a political system you tend to get more of what you want. The Progressives from the 19th century had most of their agenda enacted by the major parties.

[Guest nraforlife]

Voting for a candidate with zero chance of winning is tantamount to not voting at all. Only difference is you get to feel good about yourself.

Thats your opinion and I respect that. But IMHO between Obama and McCain we are left deciding on the best of the worst. No matter who wins the country could be in for some deep excrement - pick your poison.

And the Dems and GOP have no monopoly on a$. Go look some Libertarian stuff sometime.

Ahh, but the Libertarians aren't the ones who have ridden this country almost to ruin.

When you work within a political system you tend to get more of what you want. The Progressives from the 19th century had most of their agenda enacted by the major parties.

Worked out pretty well hasn't it. Without a viable third party that the two majors need to deal with, its business as usual. Pander like mad, scare the old sheeple and divide and rule the younger ones. NO SSN reform, no drilling for our own oil, etc..

Its all about power, getting it and keeping it. A 3rd party scares the pants off the Dems and Republicans as their BS would not be as powerful.

But no need to debate a third party in this forum.

[The Rabbi]

Worked out pretty well hasn't it. .

Actually for someone who wanted to see the Progressive platform instituted it did. That's exactly the point. If you want actual change you have to work within the existing system, which is 2 party in this country. Going outside of that makes one irrelevant.

If all the people bitching and moaning about libertarian type principles would become active in the GOP it would move that party back towards those principles. By leaving they lose any influence they might have on national policy.

[towerclimber37]

I thought it was pretty good as well...I also read the comments though and thought that the guy who called himself a "pacifist" was confused.

he's not a pacifist, but he does make great points about being able to ensure his own tranquilism...