Skip to main content

With polls tightening in many battleground states and its looking like we really may NEED to win Iowa, I recall the Kos diarist on here who proudly proclaimed that she cast her early vote in Iowa for the Green candidate for President instead of for Obama.  Obama was not pure enough for her on some issue that I forget.  I thought then it was a foolish thing to do and my opinion has not changed.  This election is too important to risk a vote for a third party candidate.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Our right to vote our beliefs should never be (3+ / 5-)

    something we sacrifice to support a corrupt two party system.  I applaud her.  I will not follow her but I still think Obama is more part of the problem than the solution.

    An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

    by don mikulecky on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 02:23:14 PM PDT

  •  Third party voters in Florida (33+ / 0-)

    helped bring us the tragic and unnecessary invasion of Iraq. Let's hope that third party voters in swing states don't help to bring us an invasion of Iran.

  •  I think she was wrong (20+ / 0-)

    Basically Obama didn't fit her bill as a full blown liberal and her attitude was "my way or the highway." So she took the highway approach.  To me she was being selfish and put the line of our nation in danger. She should have thought rationally for the sake the entire nation and not only for herself.

    So if Romney wins she can thank herself for that. We can kiss fair treatment for women goodbye, back to insurance companies not insuring people with pre-conditions, back to more jobs being shipped overseas, more taxes laid on the middle class and so on. This election cannot be more decisive.

    NOT voting for Obama is a VOTE for Romney.

  •  Yuk. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ParkRanger, Smoh

    Everyone Chill the fuck out! I got this - unknown but credited to Barack Obama

    by natedogg265 on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 02:32:50 PM PDT

  •  It's bannable on this site to advocate for (19+ / 0-)

    or openly be in support of a Third Party candidate in a viable Democratic election. That's a long-standing site rule.

    All that aside, from a practical level, I agree strongly with you that the election is too critical of a time to screw around. I am proud to be a (d)emocratic Socialist, and I'm glad to work with at the grassroots level toward building the kinds of reform I see best represented in the ideals of someone like Bernie Sanders, who -- like myself -- knows the value of practical alliances with Democrats, as a much, much larger and more viable political force which has electoral backing, toward strategic reform. So for Presidential elections, yes, it comes down to either the Democrat or the Republican winning. At least at this historical juncture, and by a wide, wide margin. The Republicans are finding out what happens when those with views further afield from their own don't vote with them a la some Tea Party members and some Libertarians, losing them but also with these people equally unrepresented by any larger, protective entity more in alignment with their views. Equally, because the Democratic Party basically aligns with my points of view, at least socially and regarding equity, I vote for Democrats as a practical measure.

    And I live in a Blue District.

    So that's my perspective on this.

    People can both focus on building a grassroots coalition and then also joining forces with larger groups for political reform, albeit incrementally (which it will be, sorry to say, but otherwise, the instability would be profound).

  •  I do NOT applaud her. (13+ / 0-)

    I feel sorry for her in her short-sightedness. But I feel much more sorry for the millions of American women and working families who will incur real hardships under a Romney administration if voters like her determine the outcome of this election.

  •  Thats fine (7+ / 0-)

    Just means she'll be forgotten once the President wins re-election.

    If at first you don't succeed, vote Teapublicans out and try again. You have to be persistent if you want anything out of life.

    by Final Frame on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 02:35:52 PM PDT

  •  Look (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    looty, ZenTrainer

    Just vote for who you want. Good for her, she voted for who she wanted. That is why we vote.... to give our opinion on who should lead. EVERYONE gets that right in this country.

    There is only ONE winner and MANY losers.

    I hope she does understand that by giving her vote to the Green party that we are one vote closer to giving the election to Romney, which is probably the greater of the two evils in her mind, and maybe she didn't think that through.

    But sometimes votes to make a point do work, and if Democrats lose because of Green party votes, Democrats will have to rethink who they are and what they stand for. And it will prove that her vote DID matter!

    Don't slam people for voting. That is totally against what we are all about here.

    •  Uhh, that's been tried. It does not work. (28+ / 0-)
      ... if Democrats lose because of Green party votes, Democrats will have to rethink who they are and what they stand for. And it will prove that her vote DID matter!
      There was this incident in 2000 that you might recall. How much change did that bring about?

      Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

      by Nowhere Man on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 02:42:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Nobody is slamming her for voting. (12+ / 0-)

      We are slamming her because she WASTED her vote.

      This isn't Germany or any other country that has a parliamentary system.

      Our system of government, for better or worse, can barely function with two parties much less three or four.

      If you don't like that, then amend the Constitution or write a new one and get it approved.

      But don't WASTE your vote.

      OK. And now we begin the part of the show where we pull out individual words and phrases of the commenter to try to determine the "real" meaning of the comment.... let the games begin.

      by hillbrook green on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 02:42:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It is not a waste to vote your convictions (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RuralLiberal, Odysseus

        And to refuse to cast a vote against your convictions when a core value is involved.  I refuse to vote FOR austerity on Social Security and Medicare.  No BS grand bargain.

        •  SCOTUS will have the final say on both of those (14+ / 0-)

          issues, as with all legislation.

          This election will decide the shape of SCOTUS for the next generation. One more Alito/Scalia/Thomas type, and SCOTUS will be arch-conservative for a long, long time.

          So voting Green in this election is not only a vote FOR austerity, it's a vote FOR dismantling Social Security and Medicare.

          Just sayin.

          •  It's also a vote for the overturn of Roe v. Wade. (11+ / 0-)

            Romney has already said he would appoint judges he believed would return abortion to the states and disenfranchise millions of women in conservative parts of the country.

            An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. - Gandhi

            by missLotus on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 03:57:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It's also bannable on this site (9+ / 0-)

              and I've seen that same commenter talk about voting Green Party for President now for days. Oh, are we letting that slide now?

              This election is too close to suffer fools gladly, as the saying goes.

            •  And your point about women's rights (9+ / 0-)

              Every time I see someone saying they'll vote Third Party, or have, my mind goes to two places:

              1. Thanks for overturning Roe Vs. Wade, you jackass
              2. Thanks for overturning "ObamaCare, you jackass (because my insurance, bless the Gods, finally was changed with the alteration to the preexisting conditions clause, which now puts $600 desperately needed in our pockets each month -- part of which goes right into my child's college fund now instead).

              •  Exactly. (5+ / 0-)

                It's wonderful that Obamacare is now helping your family in multiple ways, too. That's great news, MO. :)

                An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. - Gandhi

                by missLotus on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 04:10:03 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Lord knows, we needed it (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  highacidity, wishingwell, mskitty, Smoh

                  We are now looking to move (finally) because of this, to a house with more than the four rooms we currently have... groan, we're packed in like sardines over here in a shoebox. It's been great. I was literally a hostage to my stupid insurance company, which was jacking rates up and up and up.

                  Yes, we're seeing material differences.

                  I also read today that California reached a lower unemployment rate than it had in YEARS (around 10% statewide).

                  Things look good from where I sit.

                  Also, I think we'll see gay marriage approved if Obama is reelected. Honest to God, I do.

                  •  Congratulations on the all-around great news! (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mahakali overdrive

                    I remember conversations with you about your insurance rates and know how important the ACA is to you and your family. Hopefully, you'll all get to stretch out soon and expand your space. :)

                    And yes, gay marriage. Make it happen! It's time for the LGBT community to have equal rights in this country. I can feel so many attitudes shifting. This is not the time to turn back, no matter how much the right keeps trying to yank us into the past.

                    An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. - Gandhi

                    by missLotus on Sun Oct 21, 2012 at 05:31:25 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  I'm SO afraid it will be taken away from us. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mahakali overdrive, missLotus

                  Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

                  by Smoh on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 05:37:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So am I, Smoh, so am I (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    missLotus

                    and by "us," I include not only you and I, but all others who may have FUTURE opportunities to switch or get insurance despite preexisting conditions -- which everyone has, according to insurers, it would seem.

                    I am truly concerned about that.

                    I truly see that a good reform was made, a concrete and important reform which made change in peoples' lives and which will keep making change.

                    Unless people elect Romney to office. And that happens both by voting for the guy and also, by not voting for his opponent. Basic math.

                  •  Same here. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mahakali overdrive

                    I have a preexisting condition now, and though we currently have decent insurance through my husband's employer, what happens if we have to someday switch policies? Not to mention all of the people in this country who are now covered because of Obamacare. What happens to them?

                    An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. - Gandhi

                    by missLotus on Sun Oct 21, 2012 at 05:23:41 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  We only have health insurance (9+ / 0-)

                because of Obamacare.

                We have insurance though PCIP, which is funded by Obamacare.  Otherwise, a pre-existing condition would prevent us from getting coverage.

                •  Congratulations! (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Smoh, missLotus

                  That's wonderful. I so completely understand! I had insurance, but the policy was over twenty years old. With "cancer" on my record, oh boy, I couldn't drop the policy. What if I ever needed another surgery? I'd be dead. And they just kept increasing the rates and the deductible was unusably high too. Plus, no one would take my plan where I live :/

                  Health insurance coverage is NO JOKE. I'm very glad to hear you secured coverage and know ObamaCare is one seriously good thing for many people like you and I.

                  •  I'm in your boat - two rounds of cancer with a (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mahakali overdrive, missLotus

                    stroke in between.  Plus I had the genetic testing done that revealed I have lousy genes.  My kids can't have the testing done because it is reported to both health and life insurance companies.  All my kids are boys, but I have a granddaughter now and I'm furious!

                    Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

                    by Smoh on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 05:41:48 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I have two daughters myself. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      mahakali overdrive

                      And when I think about what Mitt Romney and his goons want to do to women, it makes me livid. My mother is politically active for the first time in her life during this election. She finally opened her eyes to what was going on, and the dustup earlier in the year with birth control made her stop and pay attention. Even though we're in a red state, the President will have one more vote in this election than he did in 2008.

                      An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. - Gandhi

                      by missLotus on Sun Oct 21, 2012 at 05:33:17 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  My family is currently insured. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mahakali overdrive

                  But it's the same policy we've had through my husband's company since before we had children. After two pregnancies I now have a preexisting condition, and I worry a lot about what happens if Obamacare goes by the wayside and we have to switch policies. My thoughts are for the future, not only for myself but for the people in my very poor state who depend on social services to keep them above water and their kids fed.

                  It's great that you're insured now. :)

                  An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. - Gandhi

                  by missLotus on Sun Oct 21, 2012 at 05:27:09 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  It must be magnificent (7+ / 0-)

          to have such conviction.

          To be able to ignore everything else in the universe and concentrate on one shiny object.

          To be true to YOURSELF ONLY no matter what the cost to everyone else.

          What will your core values say when it comes to the soldiers that will be killed if Mr. Clueless-on-foreign-policy Romney gets elected?

          What will your core values say when Medicare is converted to a voucher system if Mr. My-VP-is-Paul-Ryan Romney is elected?

          What will your core values say when your children spend their old age in poverty if Mr. I-will-give-social-security-to-Wall-Street Romney is elected?

          To paraphrase: No core value is an island, my friend.

          OK. And now we begin the part of the show where we pull out individual words and phrases of the commenter to try to determine the "real" meaning of the comment.... let the games begin.

          by hillbrook green on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 03:40:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  BS will so undermine Social Security (0+ / 0-)

            Over time that it makes little difference.  I can still vote for many liberal Democrats in Minnesota but I will not give any candidate a mandate to shred the safety net.

            •  I'm sorry (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Ahianne, Cedwyn, Nowhere Man

              but I don't understand your argument.

              If you think SS is doomed, then how can protecting SS be your core value?

              Isn't that a little like tilting at windmills?

              As this thread has shown, there are many many issues that are at stake in this election.

              If you limit your outlook to one issue, an issue that you apparently have already given up for doomed (I totally have no idea how you can base your ideals on what you consider to be a lost cause - what are you? like a martyr or something?), it must be very easy for you to make decisions, but what value does your decision have?

              I really truly don't see how people can be one-issue voters. This is life, not some storybook. Life is complicated. Life is hard. When you boil your whole life and outlook down to one single issue, what happens to the marvelous complexity of our existence?

              So you don't care if hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians die in a meaningless war as long as social security is protected?

              You don't care if women lose the freedom to choose as long as social security is protected?

              You don't care if Medicare is gutted as long as social security is protected?

              You don't care if poor people starve to death or die from preventable illnesses as long as social security is protected?

              You don't care if the Supreme Court reverts to the days of Chief Justice Taney as long as social security is protected?

              You don't care if all the wealth accrues to  less than 1% of the population as long as social security is protected?

              Theoretically, you would let all these things happen as long as social security is protected and yet you believe that social security is doomed anyway?

              Have you thought this through, my friend?

              OK. And now we begin the part of the show where we pull out individual words and phrases of the commenter to try to determine the "real" meaning of the comment.... let the games begin.

              by hillbrook green on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 05:44:08 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Titling at windmills. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Cedwyn

                President Obama and VP Biden have both denied this posters one-note-band allegations. But he keeps repeating them. As others have said, he must be very young because he seems unaware of how politics works, the orls of the POTUS filling SCOTUS, the role of Congress, etc. It's to tilt at windmills to try to educate this poster. Only time and a Romney election might do it. I am afraid this child must be left behind. The nation cannot afford the cost of his education.

          •  I think it's called the "memememe" vote. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Quicklund, Cedwyn

            Cats are better than therapy, and I'm a therapist.

            by Smoh on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 05:43:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  so, great (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Quicklund, Cedwyn

          You are not cancelling out the vote of someone who wants to END Social Security and Medicare.

          I feel like channelling that Samuel L. Jackson spot: Wake the FUCK UP!

        •  And by not voting for the Democrats (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Quicklund, Cedwyn

          you are GUARANTEEING you will get austerity on Social Security and medicare. Period. Point Blank. End of Story.

          It really is just that simple. I don't understand why more people don't get it.

          "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

          by Whimsical on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 08:05:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  You are a child (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Quicklund, Nowhere Man

          Nader ran because he thought there was too much corporate influence in politics.

          Bush won.  The Supreme Court appointees he named both voted for the majority in Citizens.  The two Surpreme Court justices Obama named were in the minority.

          So now we are awash in big money.

          So voting for Nader helped bring about the exact opposite of what they supposedly wanted.

          The bitter truth of deep inequality has been disguised by an era of cheap imported goods and the anyone-can-make-it celebrity myth - Polly Toynbee

          by fladem on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 09:14:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I am confused about this. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Cedwyn

        Your "ammending the Constitition" point. We didn't start out as a country of 2 parties, I'm not sure that's what our founding fathers had in mind.

        I do get that the founding father of this site has two parties in mind. Well, one really. :-) So it's seems a bit silly to go Green here.

        Tracy B Ann - technically that is my signature.

        by ZenTrainer on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 06:51:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  2-party America (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Nowhere Man, hillbrook green

          The system set up in Constitution will gravitate to a 2 party system. It is a winner-take-all system. Therefore one big party will always dominate two small opposition parties. So the small opposition parties will merge and for a 2nd big party.

          It is no accident there has never been period where three viable parties competed against one another. It's the same reason no baseball team bunts on every single at-bat. The rules do not prohibit it, but doing so is not a winning strategy.

    •  Look, I really don't give a crap who she votes (6+ / 0-)

      for, but this is a blog for Democrats, period.

      She deserves to be criticized.

    •  Really? (5+ / 0-)
      to give our opinion on who should lead.
      That is what opinion polls are for. We vote to elect the person who comes closest to what we think is best for the country.

      I have never understood the thick headed people who don't understand that this country votes within a two party system and no matter how many times you click your heals and say "there's no one like X," it won't change the system.

      If people didn't learn from Bush/Gore than they really are too stupid to be taken seriously.

      Most of the people taking a hard line against us are firmly convinced that they are the last defenders of civilization... The last stronghold of mother, God, home and apple pie and they're full of shit! David Crosby, Journey Thru the Past.

      by Mike S on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 04:10:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Good article from Daniel Ellsberg (9+ / 0-)

    http://www.commondreams.org/...

    basically the point is to defeat Romney - which even people very disappointed by Obama can probably get behind.

    An ambulance can only go so fast - Neil Young

    by mightymouse on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 02:49:41 PM PDT

  •  In '72 I voted for (7+ / 0-)

    Shirley Chisholm for president by writing her in. I was young and desperately wanted to see a woman as president.  And Congresswoman Chisholm was awesome.

    I'm not sorry I did it but, even though I like a lot about Jill Stein, these days I know better than to cast my vote in any direction but Obama's.

    We cannot afford to do otherwise.

    Re-elect Senator Debbie Stabenow (MI). Screw Pete Hoekstra.

    by BitterEnvy on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 03:06:17 PM PDT

    •  I voted for John Anderson (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BitterEnvy, Ahianne

      in my first Presidential election; I liked Jimmy Carter but was very disappointed in him, but at the same time as a native Californian I could not inflict Ronald Reagan on the rest of the country. (Since Carter conceded before the polls closed in California, the point was moot anyway.)

      "If we ever needed to vote we sure do need to vote now" -- Rev. William Barber, NAACP

      by Cali Scribe on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 03:16:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah, I regret not voting for Gore in 2000 (8+ / 0-)

      That's my big motivation. No, I didn't vote for Nader. But I didn't vote at all. I didn't like Clinton because I saw him as hawkish, DLC, and pro-NAFTA, which bothered me. So I was a pretty low-info voter at that time, but I knew there was an election. I remember when I found out Bush won, I was shocked. I was shocked. I was so upset. But you know, I didn't vote; what right did I have to be upset?

      I've never forgotten that lesson. Ever.

      •  If you live in Florida (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mahakali overdrive, fladem

        Please do not let me know. Still have nightmares about that debacle.

        I mainly blame the repubs and their voter purge, bad ballot design and Nader supporters. But those who sat on their hands are just as culpable. Erase just one of those things and we would have had President Gore. And Florida would not be the butt of so many election jokes. :(

        Sigh.

        •  California, but still (0+ / 0-)

          it bothers me. Again, no one knocked on my door or explained that the election was close. I've talked about this a lot on this site. It's why I value GOTV so much. I had no television, the Net was pretty young and not a major news source then, an infant, and I hadn't ever voted for President before. I'd voted in some local elections. But I didn't know voting for President was important, and I didn't know that the race -- or all Presidential races really -- was close, and that voting made a difference. I had the standard, received wisdom many teenagers get that "It's all a scam."

          I knew about Clinton though from having had TV during part of his Presidency, although I didn't much watch it critically; it was just on in the background in the house where I lived then. This was through the Lewinsky trials and such. That was some years before.

          So I know what it's like to be a low-information voter. And I swear GOTV would have made 100% difference.

        •  My Stepson in FLorida wanted to vote Nader. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Odysseus

          i'm in Utah so I convinced him to trade votes & vote for Gore and I held my nose & voted for Nader here where it meant less than nothing.

      •  me neither eom (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mahakali overdrive

        "...annoyingly ethical,"

        by chicating on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 06:36:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Voting 3rd party should be equivalent to GBCW (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ParkRanger, MKS, Smoh, fladem, Quicklund

    3rd party voters should find a 3rd party site.  

    "The Democratic Party is not our friend: it is the only party we can negotiate with." Rebecca Solnit The Rain on Our Parade.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 03:12:17 PM PDT

  •  Green Party is competing with Democrats for votes (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wishingwell, SadieSue, elmo

    and hate us as much or more than the GOP. They're not
    nice.

  •  It worked so well in 2000 (9+ / 0-)

    with the election of President Nader.

    This Rover crossed over.. Willie Nelson, written by Dorothy Fields

    by Karl Rover on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 03:30:53 PM PDT

  •  It is in Iowa. (0+ / 0-)

    But I'm voting Green in Maryland where Obama is guaranteed to
    win.

  •  I have never understood third party voting (5+ / 0-)

    I suppose because there has never been an election in which I have voted where I disliked both candidates equally, or felt that neither candidate was closer to my own views that some other, hopeless third party.

    At base, I suppose I'm against it because it implies that you think both parties are equally evil.  And I have never thought that.  I have never imagined that Democratic shortcomings are somehow equal to Republican exploitation of fear and hate.  I have never been able to think that the nation would be just as badly off had Gore been president than what happened in reality.  There are differences between the parties, and they are real enough to matter on a whole range of issues.

    That a party is not perfect is not a valid argument for not voting for it.  And anyway, it presupposes that there is a prefect party in the first place.  Were I to read the Green Party platform, I suspect there might be some things in it I would not like.  Does that mean I should form my own party, halfway between the Greens and Democrats?  What would be the point?  Just so I could feel good about voting all the time?

    I can forgive actual socialists and libertarians for having their own parties.  They are ideologies to themselves.  Bot for a liberal to wast a vote on the Greens, or a conservative to wast his vote on the Constitution Party is an exercise in political masturbation.  The nation already has a left-leaning and a right-leaning party.  We don't need clones of either.

    All your vote are belong to us.

    by Harkov311 on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 05:15:57 PM PDT

    •  Well here in Nashville we have a fake Dem (0+ / 0-)

      running against Corker. And it doesn't really matter because Corker is going to win. I was going to write in my own name but a lot of folks are voting for 3rd party candidates whose names are on the ballots.

      Tracy B Ann - technically that is my signature.

      by ZenTrainer on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 06:58:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  That's how Hitler got in. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Stupid and Narcissistic (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SadieSue, Ahianne, Quicklund, Cedwyn

    If people understood our governmental system, they would NEVER vote a third party on a national level. Why? SCOTUS!

    Now, there are many reasons I believe that "greens" have good sense. If there were a Green Lobby group in the House, they could probably force compromise on many bills.

    If Ralph Nader were not such an egomaniac (and I've known him personally, and guarantee this is true) we wouldn't have GW, Citizens United, or the Iraq War! If the Greens had, instead, targetted a couple dozen house seats they could have improved this nation immeasurably.

    •  We need the Democratic Party (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Quicklund

      Honestly, I don't understand what it is with these Green people.  Why don't they join the Democratic Party?  They'll have a voice on here and god knows how much more attention we're able to give Democratic candidates that are progressive than Green people are able to give their own candidates.

      It's also the same concept for Rocky Anderson.  He was the most anti-war Mayor in history, even being Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah but he left the Democratic Party because he thought Obama was too pro-war or not liberal enough.  Gee, there are thousands of Kos readers who believe the same thing but they aren't going to frickin abandon the Democratic Party and let the election fall into the hands of Mitt Romney.

      Come on Rocky:  Think.  THINK!

  •  5 HR for an opinion (0+ / 0-)

    If this is why you think people should support Obama maybe you are proving my point.  Thank you.  I'll wear them with pride. Meanwhile I'll go on working to get Obama elected.  I almost killed myself in 2008.  Congestive heart failure. But I worked 5 hours a day for months.  What you have done is some thanks.

    An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

    by don mikulecky on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 07:22:08 PM PDT

  •  Maybe this person doesn't get the Democratic Party (0+ / 0-)

    The truth is, the Democratic Party is becoming more progressive now than it used to be in the early 21st century.  Back then, the Democratic Party was under the DLC banner and was, quite frankly lackluster.

    Nowadays, more people are being drawn to the Democratic Party than ever.

    I wonder if this Green voter recognizes that Jill Stein has said complete and utter nonsense over Barack Obama cutting Medicare and Social Security (when in fact he's just cutting waste).  Perhaps this Green voter should understand that it's the Democratic Party that created these programs.

    Also, I'm supporting Jerry Tetalman for Congress in California's 49th Congressional District and he's more green than most Democrats running for Congress or in Congress.  He's open to third party ideas, particularly the Green Party so perhaps this Green voter should be optimistic, rather than pessimistic.

    •  Does Jill Stein push a Obama-is-SS's-enemy meme? (0+ / 0-)

      That explains this poster then. I thought he was just obstinate in his opinion. Thanks for letting us know he is pushing a Green Party Talking Point (a.k.a. "a Green Party lie")

      That much is HR territory.

      •  It is no lie (0+ / 0-)

        That Obama has eligibility age and COLA on the table and I extremely strongly oppose those changes.  If you all do not want to know the impact fine.

        •  Once again, who created Medicare, Social Security? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mahakali overdrive

          The Democratic Party, not the Green Party.

          Sure, Obama has eligibility age and COLA on the table but they are ON the table.  Just like when during a 2008 Democratic presidential candidate, Obama said all options were on the table with regards to handling Iran.  Eligibility age and COLA aren't implemented yet.  I'm sure if there's significant opposition to this, Obama will listen.  He's not tone deaf.  He's not Romney and the GOP.  Democrats know they won't make changes to Medicare and Social Security if seniors and others don't want them.  Their goal is to strengthen it.

          First things first, Obama has to help Congress manage the debt while at the same time being proactive when it comes to assisting the many foreclosures and people unemployment.

          Anyway, Jill Stein's statement on the Don Lemon show on CNN stated that President Obama was going to put Medicare and Social Security on the chopping block.  I'm thinking, where does Dr. Stein get her information from?

  •  calling Greens "pure" is like calling (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight, fladem, Quicklund, Cedwyn

    coal "clean." Neither is the case and can never be.

    The Green Party is responsible for giving us one of the most incompetent, disastrous, blood-thirsty Presidents in U.S. history...George Walker Bush.

    The Green Party has blood all over its hands and is anything but pure, despite their attempts to tell everyone that they are morally superior to everyone else (hint: they aren't.)

    •  It is possible to abstain from voting for POTUS (0+ / 0-)

      altogether without hurting Obama or bringing us closer to Pres Romney.  

      For example, I live in Calif.  If I just don't want to vote for President Obama, due to my extreme opposition to certain of this Administration's policies, I am not hurting his chances of winning.   Abstaining also does not mean I want Romney to win.  

      Calif is not a swing state. The calculus would be different in Ohio, Florida, etc. I almost certainly would vote for President Obama if I lived in a swing state. But I don't.  I can choose to abstain from some races,  and I don't see anything wrong with my position.  I can also abstain, if I wish, from voting for DiFi for Senator, because I know she will win. We are not in danger of losing her seat.

      My POV, for what it's worth...

      •  Wasn't meant as a reply, but a new comment. (0+ / 0-)

        Guess I messed that up.

      •  If you're in a safe state, I think it'd be better (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        i love san fran, Cedwyn

        to vote for Obama or a Green than not vote at all, anyway. Votes are the best polling barometer, after all, and each vote shows where someone leans.

        Never attribute to malice what is owed to ignorance or honest disagreement.

        by ConfusedSkyes on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 08:37:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  It's important for President Obama (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Quicklund, Cedwyn, i love san fran

        to win the popular vote as well as the electoral vote. A vote for him is not wasted; a non-vote is.

        "It doesn't matter what I do....People need to hear what I have to say. There's no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn't matter what I live. --Newty

        by Vico on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 09:10:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The margin of victory (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Quicklund, i love san fran

        will matter if the result is a 269 tie.

        The popular vote matters in terms of the mandate Obama will get.

        You are hurting Democrats and the left of center cause in the country with your vote.

        The bitter truth of deep inequality has been disguised by an era of cheap imported goods and the anyone-can-make-it celebrity myth - Polly Toynbee

        by fladem on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 09:20:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  What are you doing on this site then (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        i love san fran

        since you do not want to advance the Democratic Party, WTF are you doing here?

        •  oh my goodness (0+ / 0-)

          First, thank you very much to those who gave their points of view about how my abstaining may not be harmless.  I appreciate your thoughts and the information you provided,  and I will definitely take them under advisement.  Had I not expressed my POV at all, I would not have received any input, so I'm glad I wrote that comment.  Again, thank you.

          Second, in response to Quicklund - before I answer your question, I'll ask you a question.  Do you actually believe that my mild comment about abstaining in two of the many races/ballot initiatives in November means there is no reason for me to be here?  That I "do not want to advance the Democratic Party?" That there is nothing I could be doing to advance the Democratic party or its core values because I talked about abstaining?  A WTF directed at me even?

          Before directing a WTF at a person's rather mild POV comment in a diary specifically discussing voting for 3d Pty candidates, maybe take a deep breath.  

          I've been here quite a long time, check my UID.  I've done, and I do plenty.  All those Orange to Blue candidates have received donations from me and I have donated $$ to the Obama campaign, too.  But I'm not going to write a detailed list of the political, charitable, and social justice work I do pretty much 24/7.  I know who I am and what I do.

          Also note, I was careful in my original comment not to attack or disrespect President Obama, or try to start a fight about any particular policy.  I simply stated a POV.

          Might I suggest you take your own sig line to heart?

          Peace among us.

  •  I wouldn't vote for the Green Party this time (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Odysseus

    around for obvious reasons stated in many comments, but I have to say that I am itching to vote for a party who better represents my politicaly view points, and the Democrats and Obama haven't done that strongly enough.

    There might be real important reason why that was the case, but I just think it could turn out that there would have been more important reasons for that to never have happened like that. Only time will tell.

    And I think that on this site one should be allowed to voice that opinion without being bullied into mocking someone as "purist" or "wasting your vote". Even if it is a waste of the vote, I would expect people here to fight for a system, where voting for a third party isn't by default a waste of your vote, nor a bannable offense. It sounds a bit disturbing to me ....

    It feels nobody wants to stand up for the real issues that have to be solved and changed. All what is done is hush-hushing over the "little people" who happen to make the mistake to say what they really mean.

    To remind a person several times, who didn't vote for Obama, that it is a bannable offense to support another candidate on this site .... really nice.

    If I am going to vote ever in this country, which I can't and won't, I will vote for those candidates, who fight a system that doesn't work, not by using the existing system, but by outside pressure of the two parties. And I like the Green Party, they should become a movement. Like the labor movement, civil rights movement, anti-war movement. They all should combine behind a party and gain strength.

    •  Voting for Obama to reject Romney (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Quicklund, i love san fran

      The strongest possible statement that I can make in politics today is to support President Obama's re-election.  The margin of victory needs to be much larger.  Frankly, I'm stunned that anyone besides Romney's 1% base is voting for him, but I recognize that it's unrealistic to expect him to get only 1% of the vote.

      I am unhappy with President Obama on several points.  If Romney was going to lose 49 states, I'd happily vote Green.  But it's most likely that Romney will win more electoral college votes, and probably have a closer national popular vote than McCain, and that's really unacceptable.

      -7.75 -4.67

      "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

      There are no Christians in foxholes.

      by Odysseus on Sat Oct 20, 2012 at 11:01:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  of course, I know and agree with you at that one, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Odysseus

        but just because unfortunately there are besides the 1% another 40+ %, who vote for the right-wing nuttery and racially-based homphobes, doesn't mean that "being amazed" about it, is enough. And because of the two-party system, you will always going to be in the grip of those right-wingers, who can force you to vote against your conscience and interests. How long should that go on?

        •  Ask Rich Whitney. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mimi, i love san fran

          I and 10% of other people in IL voted for him against the criminal Blagojevich.

          Ask Ross Perot.  I and 20% of other Americans voted for him against Poppa Bush and Bill Clinton.

          10% and 20% are not enough.  I don't know what the proper path for the Green party is, but I'm pretty sure that being a spoiler for Democrats is a bad path.

          There are many incumbents every year who go unchallenged.  Maybe the best thing for the Greens to do is to pick those races and fight.  Spread the message where you know there will not be interference.

          There are states like California, Louisiana and Washington, where the "Top2" jungle primary format means that a Green candidate might make it to the General election as a real alternative. Run in those races, but don't pick races where there are dozens of candidates splitting the vote.

          There are issues that are not being discussed and tools that are not being used.  Brazil has shown that sugar cane can produce ethanol at 3x the efficiency of corn.  Why isn't the Green Party looking to turn Louisiana into the center of American biofuels, instead of Iowa?

          Again, I don't know what the best path is.  But their are achievable goals short of winning the presidency that would be good for the country.  Achieve them.

          -7.75 -4.67

          "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

          There are no Christians in foxholes.

          by Odysseus on Sun Oct 21, 2012 at 08:40:13 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Why? Answer us why. (0+ / 0-)

      This site was created to advance The Democratic Party. So why would you think this site would embrace the creation of another competitor?

      The USA is a 2-party nation. If you want to change than, you will have to create a new American Constitution. This site is not about re-writing the Constitution. Such a site would be interesting, but this is not that site.

      •  Don't worry, all I am saying is that (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        greenbell, Quicklund, i love san fran

        the Democratic Party is too timid to represent the interests of the people who feel left of the center.

        And yes, I would love to see a new American Constitution.
        I know that this site is not about re-writing the Constitution, but may be this site should be in support of such, acknowleging that there is a definite need for it for the US staying or becoming a better Democracy. The current Democratic Party has been too easily been forced to agree to undemocratic principles and laws.

        And I think I should be allowed to voice that feeling without being seen a traitor of the Democrats or this site's primary goal to "elect better Democrats" or the Obama election we have in front of us.  I am not nuts to not understand what it means today to vote for a third party. But I don't see a future for this site, if it doesn't start being unafraid of supporting goals and ideas (like rewriting the American Constitution or at least some of it) that would lead to  fairer, more democratic, more equality based policies.

        Just imagine you lose out to the right-wing nuts. May be if that would happen you might be burdened with the "timid by-stander stereotype" (like we Germans were). Telling you from experience it's not fun to be (even rightfully) categorized that way. And it could happen. I don't want that to happen.

        Shannika's front page diary today expresses very well how stereotyping weakness, timidity, angry black man syndrome, girly man etc. plays out. It could cost Obama the election. And the Democrats haven't fought against it and helped out Obama to overcome that "innate" fear, which is a result of the two-party system.  

        •  Theorizing about a new Constitution is fine (0+ / 0-)

          It's interesting.

          But until that Constitution is in place, we are operating on the current playing field. And on this playing field you and I have two choices:

          A) Help the Democrats hold power

          B) Help the GOP hold power

  •  screw nador (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Quicklund

    That asswipe brought us bush jr. So screw him and his enablers.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site