(08-21-2020, 05:18 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(08-21-2020, 04:51 PM)HandsomeRob86 Wrote: This line of thinking is why there are only 2 major parties. Every candidate is equally valid on their own. If enough people ‘protest’ vote a third party can win. The two party system is how the Dems ended up so extreme in the first place. Choosing not to support that (two party) is a reasonable thing, but I admit it’s scarier to vote 3rd party when you see some of the positions adopted by the mainline. I am still not certain how I will vote, other than Biden will not be it.

In my more than 30 but less than 40 years on this planet, the only independent candidates who ever won a statewide race are Jesse Ventura, Angus King, and Bernie Sanders. That's just three examples. But a third party candidate for president has to win not one but between 20 and 30 statewide races. All at the same time. the last third-party candidate to win the presidency of the United States was Abraham Lincoln in 1860. But in most of the states he ran in, he was one of only two candidates on the ballot. 


in each of these three cases, polling indicated that the candidate had a good chance to win, well in advance of the election date.

if the polls indicate that it's actually a three-way race, sure, voting for the third party might not be a waste. Otherwise, it expresses that you don't care which candidate wins

Regarding your last sentence, one could also be in a state that’s dead red or dead blue where it doesn't matter what you do. Free to vote your conscience. 

Really, I doubt we'll ever see some third party candidate win a presidential election. The closest I've ever seen was Perot, and he only got close to 19%. It certainly won't be the Libertarian party. Too many people afraid of their own ox being gored.

---

(08-21-2020, 05:27 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote:

(08-21-2020, 05:11 PM)Jagsfan4life9/28/82 Wrote: We mostly agree. That’s what I meant about "flavor of the day". 

But really, a candidate running for the executive branch of the federal government pitching the idea of defunding the police is silly, considering all state and local police departments are not under the federal government's purview. Sure, she could be thinking federal, like DEA, FBI, ATF, etc, but those agencies aren't who the "defund the police" crowd have a beef with. Really, it's just lip service. 

And on the subject of drugs, my take is the federal government shouldn't be involved in any way. Let the states decide. It's just one example of how the federal government is bloated and overgrown. So yes, if it's defund the DEA, I'm all for it.

---

Why aren't you voting for Trump again? Didn't you say in this very thread he's great for America? Maybe that was sarcasm? 

And more insults. Go, angry Trumper, go! There's some clouds to shout at.

It's ok little fella, we know your sore after your convention flopped. But take heart, this election will eliminate the Albatross Harris from running again in the future and that can only help your party. Plus now that they have to let him out of the basement maybe old Uncle Joe will come give you a sniff to perk you up.

And yes, Trump's been better for America than I expected he would, but what I really enjoy is how much he pisses of the left, it's terrific entertainment watching those people lose their minds every damn day. He's of course still too moderate for my tastes, so I'll vote Jorgenson in November, but in the meantime, boy is it fun to laugh at you.

Oh, you think I'm a Democrat. Are ever right about anything? 

Back to the subject, Trump's too moderate? In what way(s) exactly?

---