Interesting article. Why I Wont Be Voting For Barack Obama. By a liberal.

[BlvdBrawler]

But you know you're not voting for someone who has even a 0.00000000001 chance of winning, so what's the difference? Either way it's purely a vote on principle. And I'd imagine you'd be closer to your beliefs than Gary Johnson

The difference is this.

A lot of people talk about the two-party system being bullshyt. They say they want to do something about it, but what are we gonna do? Are we gonna go to the streets and force a revolution? No, of course not. What we can do, is not vote within that two party system, and that's about all we can do.

Tons of people complain about it, but I'm actually doing something about it. I also happen to think he's the best man for the job, so it works out.

And again, I don't want to be the president, at all.

 

[daze23]

But you know you're not voting for someone who has even a 0.00000000001 chance of winning, so what's the difference? Either way it's purely a vote on principle. And I'd imagine you'd be closer to your beliefs than Gary Johnson

maybe part of his 'principle' is to vote for someone he feels is more qualified than himself

 

[daze23]

The author seems more like a Libertarian than a Liberal. Furthermore, who is he voting, or who does he support, or will he be another armchair activist that will figure out elaborate reasons to cut himself out the process.

uh, did you read it?

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Why not just vote for yourself as a write-in? What's really the difference between that and voting for Gary Johnson? Either way you're voting for someone whose views you agree with that has zero chance of winning on principle.

You never know, bro.

IF dude makes a big enough stink, their party might get some clout behind them for 2016, as well as some truly independent representatives in Congress. Its like business. The more competition there is, the more each company has to fight to get your $$$ (or here, vote)

Like I said elsewhere Im not crazy about libertarians. But if they can make a legit break from either party, and espouse some policies/views that make sense and appeal to folks, I am all for it. We need a wedge and an out from this shyt we have now.

 

[HacksawJimThuggin]

I completely agree with this article. I'm not voting for a dude because he's the lesser of two evils. I'm not cool with the President killing innocent civilians with drones; and I damn sure ain't cool with essentially supporting or condoning that practice via a vote that helps put that same individual in office. If Obama wins, then so be it; he's a better candidate than Romney IMO. But the right to vote is also the right to NOT vote, and I'd rather not have the treacherous acts of our country's leader on my conscience by knowing that I helped put him in a position of power.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

I completely agree with this article. I'm not voting for a dude because he's the lesser of two evils. I'm not cool with the President killing innocent civilians with drones; and I damn sure ain't cool with essentially supporting or condoning that practice via a vote that helps put that same individual in office. If Obama wins, then so be it; he's a better candidate than Romney IMO. But the right to vote is also the right to NOT vote, and I'd rather not have the treacherous acts of our country's leader on my conscience by knowing that I helped put him in a position of power.

Name a war-time president that HASN'T authorized an attack that killed innocents.

 

[BlvdBrawler]

Name a war-time president that HASN'T authorized an attack that killed innocents.

WAR CRIMINALS!! ALL OF THEM!!!!

 

[HacksawJimThuggin]

Name a war-time president that HASN'T authorized an attack that killed innocents.

name a war-time president that I've voted for

 

[MeachTheMonster]

name a war-time president that I've voted for

So you just wont be voting for anyone. Cause you know it doesn't matter who gets in office more military action is inevitable, and innocents will die

 

[Mr swag]

yea cuz hilary would have sloved this

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

You never know, bro.

IF dude makes a big enough stink, their party might get some clout behind them for 2016, as well as some truly independent representatives in Congress. Its like business. The more competition there is, the more each company has to fight to get your $$$ (or here, vote)

Like I said elsewhere Im not crazy about libertarians. But if they can make a legit break from either party, and espouse some policies/views that make sense and appeal to folks, I am all for it. We need a wedge and an out from this shyt we have now.

I agree with this. And I totally understand voting for a 3rd party candidate that has momentum that you can see reflected in the polls. I don't understand voting for Gary Johnson...or Jill Stein. Gary Johnson has no momentum or movement. Gary Johnson will not get more than 1% of the vote or make any appreciable impact in any state. That's a fact.

If there is a 3rd party candidate that catches a fire and does have a real movement that can be built upon, you'd see it in the polls. So I'm trying to understand the thought process of someone who votes for a 3rd party candidate that has statistically negligible support, and see if there's any logic to go along with the blatantly obvious emotion. There's no difference between voting for Gary Johnson and writing in yourself. And this is coming from someone who voted for Nader in FL in 2000. I told myself all that shyt about principle, but it was pretty much an emotional act...and an unwise one.

 

[Pazzy]

lol @ anybody that believes in a politician. the only thing a politician is guaranteed to do is LIE. it just makes me laugh how you have people all disappointed in obama actually thinking that he was going to change everything. of course, he's NOT. how the hell can he change YOU and the world at hand if people don't want to change the way they think. if you want to change something, you can start with yourself. don't wait for someone in a suit running for office to change your thought process.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

I agree with this. And I totally understand voting for a 3rd party candidate that has momentum that you can see reflected in the polls. I don't understand voting for Gary Johnson...or Jill Stein. Gary Johnson has no momentum or movement. Gary Johnson will not get more than 1% of the vote or make any appreciable impact in any state. That's a fact.

If there is a 3rd party candidate that catches a fire and does have a real movement that can be built upon, you'd see it in the polls. So I'm trying to understand the thought process of someone who votes for a 3rd party candidate that has statistically negligible support, and see if there's any logic to go along with the blatantly obvious emotion. There's no difference between voting for Gary Johnson and writing in yourself. And this is coming from someone who voted for Nader in FL in 2000. I told myself all that shyt about principle, but it was pretty much an emotional act...and an unwise one.

it's people like you that let that idiot bush into office. You should be ashamed of yourself. I wasn't old enough to vote yet but I coulda told you bush was a bad idea.

 

[Mike Otherz]

lol @ anybody that believes in a politician. the only thing a politician is guaranteed to do is LIE. it just makes me laugh how you have people all disappointed in obama actually thinking that he was going to change everything. of course, he's NOT. how the hell can he change YOU and the world at hand if people don't want to change the way they think. if you want to change something, you can start with yourself. don't wait for someone in a suit running for office to change your thought process.

basically. vote for the less garbage candidate and if you have the energy hold their feet to the fire a la Tea Party. thats the best you can hope for.

 

[BlvdBrawler]

I agree with this. And I totally understand voting for a 3rd party candidate that has momentum that you can see reflected in the polls. I don't understand voting for Gary Johnson...or Jill Stein. Gary Johnson has no momentum or movement. Gary Johnson will not get more than 1% of the vote or make any appreciable impact in any state. That's a fact.

If there is a 3rd party candidate that catches a fire and does have a real movement that can be built upon, you'd see it in the polls. So I'm trying to understand the thought process of someone who votes for a 3rd party candidate that has statistically negligible support, and see if there's any logic to go along with the blatantly obvious emotion. There's no difference between voting for Gary Johnson and writing in yourself. And this is coming from someone who voted for Nader in FL in 2000. I told myself all that shyt about principle, but it was pretty much an emotional act...and an unwise one.

I don't see how it's an emotional act, breh. I'm not trying to make a statement here. In fact I'd say it's significantly less emotional than voters who are going to vote "for the black guy" or vote "for the republican". I'd say more than half of the people who vote don't take a fact-based approach towards it. I have, and I'm voting for the guy who I think is the best suited for the job.

It doesn't matter to me if he is actually going to win, what matters to me (it is my vote after all) is that, after having researched the candidates, Gary Johnson is the guy who's beliefs most closely line up with my own, and so he gets my vote. I'm not trying to change the world here, breh, I'm just doing what I think everyone should do. Maybe in a year or 20, there will be a viable 3rd or 4th party candidate, and then in ya'lls eyes it'll make more of an impact or whatever. But to me, it's not about that. I have one vote to cast, and I think Gary Johnson is the guy for the job. Plain and simple.