5 Votes Against BO

[Joe in PNG]

Third parties don't work in our current system. If we had preferential voting like Australia, then yes, it would work out that you could vote your party of choice, and give your preferences to the party kind of close.
But sadly, we don't. And sadly, when people vote 3rd party, the main parties ignore that vote. Instead they would rather poach votes from the other main party, and adjust their policies accordingly.

The Libertarians have been running presidential candidates for how many years? And to what effect?

And another thing. Third parties can be pure in their ideology because they aren't in power. If they were to get into office, they find they don't have absolute power to rule by decree. They have to somehow do that messy bit of compromise and dealing to get anything done, because a good part of the people don't necessarily agree with that ideology.

Which is typical of a large group of people.

[TGS]

Well if my vote helps bring about the downfall of the USA, then so be it.

A supremely socialist dictator is probably what this country needs anyway to wake people up.

[ChrisG]

And sadly, when people vote 3rd party, the main parties ignore that vote. Instead they would rather poach votes from the other main party, and adjust their policies accordingly.

When people hold their noses and vote for a major party candidate that's "less bad than the the other guy", isn't the party able to ignore those voters' actual preferences and continue to offer substandard candidates? It seems to me that my vote is ignored either way, and so I prefer to vote my conscience. I have no illusions that my one vote will shake up the system either way, but I like to think that if the entire electorate voted their conscience instead of "strategically", we'd see the emergence of viable third (and fourth, fifth...) parties.

[Joe in PNG]

As for why Romney isn't really the guy we like, allow me to make an analogy. Imagine if you will that 10 members of this forum are tasked with selecting a general issue carry pistol (they will also have to carry it) for a mumblemumblesomthing. Chances are, the Glock 17 would win out, with strong preferences for the M&P 9mm and the H&K P30 LEM 9mm.
However, if another 10 from another forum were to be added, one with a distrust of 9mm, compromise will be a bit harder. Thus, you'd likely wind up stuck with something in .40S&W. And so it goes.

[Joe in PNG]

When people hold their noses and vote for a major party candidate that's "less bad than the the other guy", isn't the party able to ignore those voters' actual preferences and continue to offer substandard candidates? It seems to me that my vote is ignored either way, and so I prefer to vote my conscience. I have no illusions that my one vote will shake up the system either way, but I like to think that if the entire electorate voted their conscience instead of "strategically", we'd see the emergence of viable third (and fourth, fifth...) parties.

You know, if people would have drank Zima, it would be successful...

Well, it may happen that people start voting 3rd party. Or that I hit the powerball. Historically, in our country, I wouldn't bet on it. Until you start having lots of 3rd party mayors, governors, state representatives, and congressmen, 3rd party is an utter waste.

There's an old expression- everyone wants the bums voted out except theirs. Many are happy with the two big parties.

[ToddG]

It seems to me that my vote is ignored either way, and so I prefer to vote my conscience.

Almost 20,000,000 people "voted their conscience" in '92, earning Ross Perot exactly zero electoral votes but ushering a guy named Bill into the White House. Just sayin' ....

[ford.304]

Almost 20,000,000 people "voted their conscience" in '92, earning Ross Perot exactly zero electoral votes but ushering a guy named Bill into the White House. Just sayin' ....

And in 2000, they didn't, and we ended up with George W... and from my perspective, at least, it's not that much of an improvement. Reasonable people are welcome to disagree, though.

I will say, though - the biggest move any republicans have made in the direction I would prefer, in my lifetime, only happened after they were thrown out of congress in 2006.

[Joe in PNG]

Almost 20,000,000 people "voted their conscience" in '92, earning Ross Perot exactly zero electoral votes but ushering a guy named Bill into the White House. Just sayin' ....

*Raises Hand* Guilty.

[JConn]

If I have a choice between one party that definitely wants to limit the 2A and one that probably won't because the NRA is too important to them, well... that choice is pretty obvious. I'm not ready to give up on our country yet. Eventually I may go all John Galt, start voting 3rd party and take myself out of the process. As of right now I still hold a bit of hope that our current system may right itself.

[BLR]

If it's your opinion you want to express, you would be better served by regular communication with your elected officials - your Reps and Senators.

Casting a vote for a 3rd party candidate, right now, is a fools folly. You're opinion is not relayed very efficiently in that mode, but if you take the time to write your politician, the point gets across. And typically they write back.

The "I'm not happy with 'W'" vote got us: Fast and Furious, Benghazi, $6T more debt, a crippled auto industry but booming UAW (and crippled IUAW), empowered "Obama Phone-ers," a DAA that is in direct and obvious conflict with the Constitution, and so on.

So if someone really wants to "send a message" - write a letter. It's more effective.

By all means, vote Libertarian in local/state/non POTUS elections though. That's how the party grows and gains momentum.

But throwing away a POTUS vote "just to stand your ground" shows a lack of understanding IMO.

Oh, and for the record, most non academic economists agree that Slick Willy and Jan the Man gave us the crippled mortgage economy we are now suffering
through. So, thanks to the Perot crowd for that.

ETA: The GOP would do well to fold in the Tea Party IMO. Much like the Dems did w/ the socialists. But again, that JMO.