It is currently Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:31 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

Who is getting your vote in the presidential elections?
Bush (U.S) 22%  22%  [ 10 ]
Kerry (U.S) 31%  31%  [ 14 ]
Bush (non U.S) 4%  4%  [ 2 ]
Kerry (non U.S) 42%  42%  [ 19 ]
Total votes : 45
Author Message
 Post subject: Who is getting your vote in the presidential election?
PostPosted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 1:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2003 4:48 pm
Posts: 31
Location: London, UK
Okay I know there is another post about this but it has completely gone off course. Please vote and (optional) give reason(s) why?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 2:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 8:29 am
Posts: 1076
Location: USA
where is nader?

If i was 18 I"d vote nader.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 2:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2003 4:48 pm
Posts: 31
Location: London, UK
Eh, I see your point but Nader is just a wasted vote, no? :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 2:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 8:29 am
Posts: 1076
Location: USA
Could you say a vote for someone who does not win is a wasted vote?

Then come election day %50 of the voters will waste their vote.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 2:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2003 4:48 pm
Posts: 31
Location: London, UK
DryFire wrote:
Could you say a vote for someone who does not win is a wasted vote?

Then come election day %50 of the voters will waste their vote.


Ehh, someone who does not have a chance I call a wasted vote.

Anyway I wanted to keep the pole simple as possible without too many options. At first I only had 2 options but decided against it, as the US vote is what counts. I would also like to see opinions from rest of the world.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 9:40 am
Posts: 636
Location: USA
I decided to not vote Kerry is not an option and will not vote for Dubya again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2004 10:37 am 
Offline
SPCR Reviewer

Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 6:33 am
Posts: 8636
Location: Sunny SoCal
I can't vote in your poll. I won't vote for either Kerry or Bush so according to your criteria, my vote is wasted...

_________________
Main Box: Intel i3-3225, Intel DH77EB, 16GB Corsair RAM, 256GB Samsung 830, SS360GP PSU, CM PS07 case.
Music Server: Intel DH77EB + i3-3220, 2xSamsung 2TB F4, Pico PSU, Fractal Define Mini, 2xScythe Fans @250 rpm.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2004 11:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 7:35 pm
Posts: 114
As a side note, your vote is certainly not wasted if you vote for an independent for 2 reasons.

1) Both main parties desporately want your vote. You think Kerry really gives a crap about *Picking random, easily demonstrated example* organic growing methods? He clearly hasn't cared enough to get his wife to influence how Heinz grows THEIR tomotoes one way or the other. However, because the third party vote is so crucial, they'll court your oppinion. It could easily be argued people willing to vote third party are more influential than people who are hardline either way. NO ONE really gives a flip about the middle ground, because the middle ground doesn't vote. Third party votes are still votes, and both sides want the votes of unhappy people who demonstrate THEY WILL VOTE.

2) Money and time on the ballot. Look at the difficulty Nader had getting on the ballot. While I personally feel the reason is because Nader is a frightening idiot, it wouldn't have taken many more people voting for him before the Green party got a default slot and federal dollars. Remember, for a third party candidate, the magic number isn't 50%, it's 5%. At 5% whole new worlds in what's "possible" open up. At 5% you get invited to debates, get federal grants for campaign finances, and get to be on the ballot without the legal hassle. While I think the third party front runner this election is a fool, there are some third party candidates I wouldn't mind seeing get a seat at the table. It'd certainly make things more interesting.

** Note for the uneducate Americans and for the foreign readers: The 5% number is simplified, but largely accurate. See: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/featu ... rties.html for more, granted highly biased, information. **

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 11, 2004 2:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 8:29 am
Posts: 1076
Location: USA
right rbsteffes that's exactly what i'd want to do. I don't really want nader to win , but I want an independant to be in teh debate (actually a real debate would be an nice start, I'll leave that for later).

For a while independants have served to bring up issues that the major parties would not touch the with a 10m pole.

And nader is the most well know independant.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2004 3:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2003 4:48 pm
Posts: 31
Location: London, UK
Point accepted. :oops:

Shame I can't edit my poll.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:27 pm
Posts: 341
Location: Sweden
Bush actually got 2 non-US votes!? I wouldn't be surprised if he was polled the most disliked person in the entire world.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:34 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Posts: 11811
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
disliked is a very kind word. :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
Mike Chin,
Editor/Publisher, SPCR
Support SPCR with your donations!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 11:27 am 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2003 2:19 pm
Posts: 5316
Location: St Louis (county) Missouri USA
When you defend yourself these days, you'll likely get sued, or at the very least, "disliked".

Of course if you don't defend yourself, you'll be attacked again, beaten up on again, or worse. It's the rock/hard-place thing. Strong presidents of the USA will always be disliked. Weak presidents like Carter for instance, didn't defend the country, invited more attacks, but were very "likeable".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 01, 2004 2:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:27 pm
Posts: 341
Location: Sweden
You are absolutely right, Bluefront.
But unfortunately this is not the reason for disliking him.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group