stephanie is: 
at work.
aren’t i always at work?? it feels like i never left last night. bleh.
happy birthday to persis and katy it seems there are lots of november birthdays. i have two friends with birthday’s coming up on the same day.
i am still trying to decide who to vote for. i hate both bush and gore. out of the two of them i would vote gore. however i’d like toread more into nader. i just can’t get past this feeling that if i vote for nader i would basically be throwing my vote away since he is so far behind the others… hrmmm….
danny just told me his work may send him to asia next year to set up new data centers.
why be content with the lesser of two evils. A vote for Nadar will send a powerful message to the two parties.
A “short term” assignment to Asia would be very kewl. But anything over a month would be tough I think.
While there is no way we’re going to see him in office this year, voting for nader is a good thing because if he gets 5% of the vote the Green Party will then be able to get campaign funding, so that it can potentially compete more fairly in future elections.
Also, voting for a candidate that you don’t like is definatley throwing your vote away. at least if you were to vote for a third party, you’re also helping send the message that this democracy cannot continue to be a two party fiasco
i’ll give you pikachu to keep you comapny while danny is gone
Nader cannot win but vote for him anyway.
Even Nader acknowledges he can’t win. It’s not conceivable. Nader has as much chance as Richard Simmons of being sworn in as leader of this country following these elections. The reason to vote for him is to get that magical 5%. Vote for Nader, get three parties next election.
That, and I’d hate to see the poor guy crushed.
Re: Nader cannot win but vote for him anyway.
im a treehugger, nader nader nader
gore and bush both need good swift kicks in the arse
Re: Nader cannot win but vote for him anyway.
thats great and all, but will you be content with having some dipshit in office for the next 4 yearz while you wait for this 3rd party to appear? The party exists, funding is not going to make them win or lose. If they seriously had something more to offer, people would vote for them.
Re: Nader cannot win but vote for him anyway.
he does have more to offer, the problem being the two party system doesn’t cater to anyone but the democrats and the republicans. they wouldn’t even let nader into the debates. how is he supposed to show people how much he has to offer when they won’t even give him a chance? bleh to stupid democrats and republicans. (the quiz i took said i was a socialist, isn’t that nice? hehe)
Re: Nader cannot win but vote for him anyway.
>thats great and all, but will you be content >with having some dipshit in office for the next >4 yearz while you wait for this 3rd party to >appear? The party exists, funding is not going >to make them win or lose. If they seriously had >something more to offer, people would vote for >them.
you’re looking at the majority of the population as if they had the same interests in mind that you do. Most people are probably barely aware of Nader, and if nothing, are terrified of voting outside the general conception of 2 parties.
Funding for the green party will heavily increase their chances for at least more recognition *and* respect in the next election. Do you think it’s better to at least possibly effect long term change as opposed to the short term?
They do have something to offer, however, they don’t have anywhere near the exposure to get the word out, and we live in an ingorant and lazy society that won’t even bother to seek out the information, instead willingly be tube fed spin reports disguised as news… The Green Party had 6 million dollars in campaign funds, as opposed to gore/bush who both had 100million+ (bush being closer to 200million) With numbers like that, there is no way that they can get their message out.
the main problem with this election is that whomever wins is going to heavily effect the supreme court, as chances are 4 people will most likely retire in the coming term. So at the very least, a democratic vote will ensure womens and minorities rights.
Re: Nader cannot win but vote for him anyway.
“It should be recalled, too, that we didn’t get legal abortion in the first place because nine men in black robes were kind enough to allow us to have it. Women fought for it by every means possible, illegal as well as legal. Surely the anti-Naderites of the left can agree that Roe vs. Wade wasn’t the author of women’s liberation, just as Brown vs. Board of Education did not create the civil rights movement. Deep social change is made by deep social movements, not by edicts. …
A presidential election gives Americans that rare chance to register what we want for our country. What a shame to waste it every four years on candidates we increasingly detest.
In the past week, a desperate Democratic Party has stepped up its quadrennial effort to lobotomize voters of conscience with the nightmare scenario.
Forget the nightmare. Vote your dreams. If we can’t do that, then we’re not being practical. We’re merely forfeiting our rights and responsibilities as citizens of a democracy — and our determination to build a better nation. “
quoted from here
Just keep buying into the machine.
Yeah, it looks like I’m going to have be content with some dipshit for the next four years regardless of whether I vote for Nader or not seeing as how George W Bush couldn’t put his shoes on if they were velcro and Al Gore is the biggest can’t count, charasmatic but rock stupid politician the Democrats have put on the block in recent history.
I was torn by the same decision, but here is a really awesome article on Nader and how you’re not really throwing away a vote, especially if you life in a “safe state”.
And of course the most important reason to vote for Nader is to vote AGAIST the two party corportate backed government.
Anyways, read on….
Safe at any Speed!
More of my friends have November birthdays than any other month. There are one or two for every month, except for Nov. which are about 6 or 7. There are a few more around March, too, but not nearly as many
thank you!
props to my homey stephanie for the reck-uh-nition!
thanks:)
short and long term
Yep, in the swing states a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush. Nader deserves the vote and the 5% count for federal funding. The short term disadvantages of the Nader vote would be having bone-head Bush in office for 4 years. The long term advantage would be the possibility of a viable 3 party system. The loooonnnggg term disadvantage of would be a Supreme Court stacked to turn back time – and those positions are for LIFE.
I am in a battlefield state and will do Nader trading.
check out The Libertarian Party – my personal favorite.
=)