[speakeasy]

Would you vote for Hillary in 2016?

[EisenBarde]

Ron Paul 20whatever

[Hades]

I voted for him in 08 when I didn't know any better. To be honest I haven't liked any political candidates in several years.

[A War You Cannot Win]

Choosing a presidential candidate in America is like deciding which hand you would want severed from your body. Either way, you're still losing something.

[InternationPlayboy]

(04-03-2013 02:31 AM)A War You Cannot Win Wrote:  

Choosing a presidential candidate in America is like deciding which hand you would want severed from your body. Either way, you're still losing something.

I don't know if that was a very good analogy. I would choose my left hands down considering I'm right handed.

I think the better analogy would be choosing between a giant douche and a turd sandwich (Yeah I stole that shit from South Park).

I didn't vote last election, but I voted I would have voted for Ron Paul. Would I vote for Hilary? Hmmm... Good question, I would have to see who she's up against. Bill was the man. If he could run again I would vote for him in a heart beat.

[A War You Cannot Win]

I think in most cases one candidate is bound to be better than the other one, just not in any appreciable and beneficial degree to the average citizen.

[Lazarus]

(04-03-2013 02:59 AM)InternationPlayboy Wrote:  

I didn't vote last election, but I voted I would have voted for Ron Paul. Would I vote for Hilary? Hmmm... Good question, I would have to see who she's up against. Bill was the man. If he could run again I would vote for him in a heart beat.

That's the problem with American politics, you guys vote too much based on the candidate's personality and not enough based on the party and what they stand for

[Teedub]

Whoever you vote for, corporate interests and the system win. Absolutely pointless voting in America, you need a revolution. So does Europe, but at least it's fairer, you have tons more choice, especially in places with Proportional Representation.

[Samseau]

(04-03-2013 04:34 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

Whoever you vote for, corporate interests and the system win. Absolutely pointless voting in America, you need a revolution. So does Europe, but at least it's fairer, you have tons more choice, especially in places with Proportional Representation.

So true. America's election system sucks. There is no way for third parties to make it in America.

In France, for example, they have a two-round voting system. In the first round, you get two votes. The top three candidates at the end of the first round advance to the second round, where you only get one vote.

In this way, French citizens can vote for their favorite parties in the first round, but when it comes down to "picking the lesser of two evils" then Frenchies can just vote on the guy they like the most.

In Australia, citizens get two votes: your first pick and your second pick. If your first pick does not win, then your full vote goes to your second pick.


In both France and Australia, third party representation is quite high. I think around 10% of Australia's politicians are third party. Not sure the number in France but I know it's higher than America.

I believe the most significant change that could ever happen to American politics is to change the voting system so people can vote for a third party without feel like "they are throwing away their vote."

[Teedub]

(04-03-2013 06:21 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

(04-03-2013 04:34 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

Whoever you vote for, corporate interests and the system win. Absolutely pointless voting in America, you need a revolution. So does Europe, but at least it's fairer, you have tons more choice, especially in places with Proportional Representation.

So true. America's election system sucks. There is no way for third parties to make it in America.

In many places in Europe (Scandanavia and Holland to name a few), there are like 10 parties and stuff. If a party gets, say, 8% of the vote, they get 8% of the seats. So, even parties with 'far right' views etc get their fair share of a voice. I much prefer this system, but I am sure there are flaws, which I'd like Vicious and other non-Brit Europeans to help me figure out.

[Hannibal]

(04-03-2013 04:34 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

Whoever you vote for, corporate interests and the system win. Absolutely pointless voting in America, you need a revolution. So does Europe, but at least it's fairer, you have tons more choice, especially in places with Proportional Representation.

Good post, I was just going to write something like this.

The parties may have different objectives and all that, but they still whore out to corporations.

[dragnet]

I could maybe go for Warren 2016. Maybe. I think the Dems ought to close the door on Hillary if at all possible.

[Hyperion]

Democracy itself is a highly questionable idea unless you have an ethical voting base. It strikes me as very odd that people are incapable of understanding this. I highly recommend reading Hans Hermann Hoppe or watching one of his lectures on youtube. Prepare to have your worldview altered.

Obviously Ron Paul was the only worthy candidate last time. People hate politicians yet somehow believe a system which can only lead to more political solutions is a good thing. It's nothing more than the authorization of stealing property from people you don't know. 80% of people aren't informed or intelligent enough to be voting anyway.

Regarding Hillary, if she wins then I'm not going to be in the US during those four years. The Clintons are as scummy as it gets.

[Kabal]

(04-03-2013 07:14 AM)Hyperion Wrote:  

Democracy itself is a highly questionable idea unless you have an ethical voting base. It strikes me as very odd that people are incapable of understanding this.

"[Democracy] can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largesse out of the public treasury."