Vote Bush instead of third party

[Treylis]

Libertarians also have a hard time accepting the fact that 99.99999999999% of Americans do not agree with them.

Despite the fact that that number is nowhere near representative of how many Libertarian and libertarian-leaning people are out there--boy, the diehard Republican apologists just love to pretend that the LP and sympathizers are as small as humanly possible--I don't care. Our position is the only morally correct one. The fact that many people don't agree is immaterial to that, and we're working on it.

Don't challenge me to debate the issue with you. I've learned over the last few years that debates with libertarians almost invariably end in the non-libertarian agreeing to disagree and the libertarian often throwing perjoratives at the other guy. So I don't want to go there.

Oh, please. You guys will still be voting Republican when the Democrats openly advocate a total ban on all private gun ownership while the Republicans just advocate banning everything but single-shot shotguns. If you keep wanting to play your own little version of Soviet Five Year Plans with Presidential elections (this one is too important! we'll fight them next time!), you're going to learn that compromise will land you exactly nowhere.

Only an utter lack of moral principle can justify voting for a "lesser evil".

 

[Treylis]

Gun owners have only one real choice - Vote for President Bush.

Yeah, and the PATRIOT Act, among other things, leads me to think I'm eventually going to have to use those gun rights. (Will that man veto a single bill so I can see even some bare vestige of a spine?)

And before somebody trots out that tired old "Bush has John Ashcroft as AG" bit about him being pro-2A and supporting the "individual right" of folks to own guns... please quote the whole thing the next time, which says an "individual right, subject to reasonable restrictions."

Reasonable restrictions, eh? That's the exact same line you-know-who uses. One man's reasonable is another man's tyrannical, and can be hardly considered anything close to a strong support of the 2A. It's just more halfway compromising nonsense.

 

[Thumper]

Oh, please. You guys will still be voting Republican when the Democrats openly advocate a total ban on all private gun ownership while the Republicans just advocate banning everything but single-shot shotguns.

The Republicans just held the line regarding the AWB, podna...not the Libertarians...you want to know why?

Because they might as well be on the moon.

In other words, they are ineffective, inefficacious, nugatory,...they have ZERO power. Oh...except for Ron Paul...once again, note the (R).

 

[wasrjoe]

I'm not voting for Bush because I'm very far from Republican, and I'm not voting for Kerry because I'm not insane. My state is going to Bush anyway so my vote doesn't really matter. I don't know if I'm even going to vote libertarian because they kinda piss me off sometimes. I guess I'm hard to please.

Wasrjoe, the gay lovin' pistol totin' semi-closed boarderin' free speechipatin' legalized druggin' harsher DUI lawin' church and state seperatin' voter.

 

[GeneC]

Not one person has mentioned the war on terrorism, or terrorists. Does anyone here doubt, that in the last 3 years, if the terrorists could have done ANY damage in the US, they would have?

 

[R.H. Lee]

I've been voting straight Republican for 30 years. I'm still waiting for them to do something substantial for me-like grow a pair and stand up against the incrementalist liberty theft by the left. In fact, the next time I see the Republicans set up a "Register to Vote" card table down at the local supermarket, I'm gonna make 'em re-register me Independent.

 

[R.H. Lee]

Not one person has mentioned the war on terrorism, or terrorists. Does anyone here doubt, that in the last 3 years, if the terrorists could have done ANY damage in the US, they would have?

AFAIK, not ONE head rolled over that massive "intelligence" failure known as 9/11. NOT ONE. Is Norman "the minnow" Mineta still Sec of Transportation? Why hasn't GWB fired him?

 

[Zundfolge]

/me buys fix a beer

 

[GeneC]

Does a head have to roll for something to mean something( I think not)? I think alot of people doesn't understand the simplicity of this war, if terrorists CAN cause damage, they WILL, anywhere, anytime, anyplace, so the fact that they haven't in the US in 3 years is because they HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO. That should mean something. Another simple thing alot of people are burying their heads in the sand about is, they find it easy to sit here and talk about this right fading and that comfort, blah blah blah, but don't seem to realize, as soon as ANYONE else takes office, the war on terrorism will be right here at home. Can anyone say " MARTIAL LAW"?

 

[R.H. Lee]

Gene-How many Clintoon appontees did Bush leave in place after he took office? And why? Why didn't he clean house, rather than leave these moles in place? When I actively worked for, and voted for GWB, I thought I was getting a plain spoken down to earth God fearing Christian Conservative who understood what the Constitution meant. (Silly me ). Instead I got a waffling semi globalist who largely abandoned his base in favor of pandering to (almost) every interest group who came along, signed every liberty thieving bill that hit his desk, and is more interested in pandering to illegals than protecting the rights of the Americans who put him into office.

I don't want half measures, dodges and doubletalk. Somebody on this board said George Bush is where Adlai Stevenson was in 1954. I think that's about right.

 

[griz]

Let's see, GWB says he is for the AWB but is counting on congress to not let it come up for a vote. Now please explain how he differs from Kerry on this most vital of issues?

 

[Zundfolge]

Let's see, GWB says he is for the AWB but is counting on congress to not let it come up for a vote. Now please explain how he differs from Kerry on this most vital of issues?

Kerry would be actively campaigning for an AWB renewal ... he'd be demanding that congress send him one ... he'd be drafting executive orders to the BATFE to make sure less FFLs are handed out and maybe more restrictions on selling of "assault" weapons.

GW basically said to the people that he would sign a renewal if it crossed his desk (and then I bet he told Tom DeLay and Bill Frist to make sure it never crosses his desk) this way he gets to be all to everyone ... not a strategy I agree with, but you asked what the difference is.

 

[R.H. Lee]

Kerry would be actively campaigning for an AWB renewal ... he'd be demanding that congress send him one

Oh, yeah. I can see the press conference now. Flipper standing at the podium with DiFi on one side and Upchuckie on the other, both holding AK's

 

[Snaps]

I can't do that. I have no respect for Bush as a president and less for him as a man after I saw his response to the "prison abuse" thing.

Finially, I refuse to use my vote against kerry or anybody else.. I will only cast a vote for a candidate or for a party as a whole.. Not for bush to take one away from kerry.

 

[Treylis]

The Republicans just held the line regarding the AWB

Yeah... until the next ban comes along when we get even more so-called "RINOs" and Democrats in office. The line may have been held there, but we're still losing overall... and in much more ways than just guns. In case you hadn't noticed, the Republicans are pretty much a Big Government party nowadays. Think we'll ever hear from any of them in any significant number (or, god forbid, actions) about, say, eliminating the income tax or Social Security anytime soon, hah?

With friends like George "PATRIOT Act and $50 million DoJ grant to Project ChildSafe" Bush, who needs enemies?

 

[Silver Bullet]

MA is going to Kerry, why should I vote Bush instead of my mind?

Well, I live in California, so it doesn't matter who I vote for, the electoral votes will go to the Democrat.

I can kind of buy into this, the idea of "well Bush positively can't win in my state, so I'm going to use my vote as a wake up call to the Republicans" except for two things.

1. How can you be so sure Bush has lost your state ? (High Roaders living in Massachusetts are excluded from this question.) In the last ten years I've seen a lot of polls that are off, usually slanted towards the Democrats. Is this a case of people changing their minds or coming off the fence at the last moment to vote Republican ? Or is this a devious effort by the media to get the Libs to vote Lib or to get the Republican voters to stay home in what is actually a close election but is presented as a "done deal" ? Or is this a devious effort by the media to get Democrat voters out to vote to pile on to a perceived landslide ? I'd sure hate to read the newspaper the morning after the election and discover that I'd been snookered by the liberal media.

2. If Kerry wins by a margin of 10% instead of 4% of the popular vote, he and the media are going to be spitting out the word "mandate" every other sentence as justification for all sorts of liberal horrors (did I hear "HUD agreement" ?).

I have much more respect for a Democrat that stands up for what they believe in and votes for Kerry then a Libertarian that sells themselves out for the "lesser of evils."

Only an utter lack of moral principle can justify voting for a "lesser evil".

What I believe in is the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. And I believe that a vote for Bush will further the protections of those rights more than any other voting option I have. The Libertarian Party and Constitution Party and any other third party do not have a patent on that right; if a vote for Bush means a better RKBA, then that is the correct vote and is certainly not a sell-out. My allegiance is to the cause, not to any party.

One problem: the presidential vote is about much more than just RKBA issues.

Sure it is; I'm addressing this issue only from an RKBA standpoint. But, the items you bring up are 1) insignificant compared to losing Second Amendment rights, and 2) in most cases not Bush's fault at all or are falsehoods invented and propagated by the media, and 3) not anything that Kerry would do better. You're in way over your head if you think you can convince many people on this site that those are real issues and not bs invented by the media. You would do better to try and fly that banner over some site for Hollywood entertainers, television "journalists", or the funny people who think guns "just go off" by looking at them. All you can do on this site is make yourself irrelevant.

I'm gonna make 'em re-register me Independent.

Exactly the wrong thing to do. Stay registered as a Republican and then use your influence and vote in the Republican Primary to get someone nominated who is as pro-RKBA as possible. We have to nip these things in the bud, not wait to get involved until after nominees have been picked and then complain that we don't have a choice.

Work from inside an established party.

I believe this is the correct approach. Libs: your chances of changing America in the libertarian image are much better if you infiltrate the Republicans and then get your candidates elected and your ideas accepted (e.g. Ron Paul) than trying to create enough critical mass as a third party. You'll be leveraging off their numbers, money, and popular acceptance. It worked for the Socialists and the Democratic party.

For those of you not registered to vote yet, it's not too late. Kindly mosey over to this informative and useful little thread http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?threadid=86202

 

[RevDisk]

I'm not going to vote for Bush or Kerry. Thus, I can either not vote or vote third party.

 

[griz]

Kerry would be actively campaigning for an AWB renewal ... he'd be demanding that congress send him one ... he'd be drafting executive orders to the BATFE to make sure less FFLs are handed out and maybe more restrictions on selling of "assault" weapons.

Good answer. But I guess I'm just not convinced that W. is so firmly on our side. I think if it would sway the vote from one borderline state he would push for an AWB renewal.

Frankly I think he will win this November and I think he would be better than Kerry. But I can not vote for a bigger government anymore.

 

[Boats]

Only an utter lack of moral principle can justify voting for a "lesser evil".

Only with a complete divorce from reality can one rationalize that voting Libertarian makes any difference at all in a Presidential election.

Vote for the "irrelevant evil!" (Yeah, that makes a helluvalot of sense.)

 

[Bainx]

Rick_Reno summed it up quite well for me,

I'd be worried I'd get tar and feathered going door to door for him. He's lost a lot of votes in this part of the country. He's been a real disappointment.

I worked hard to help get him elected. I argued with friends and family members. Yes, he [and Ashcroft] really, really, really let me down with their total disregard for constitutional matters.

 

[MP5]

You're in way over your head if you think you can convince many people on this site that those are real issues and not bs invented by the media.

Sorry, I don't buy the whole liberal media conspiracy canard. Look at how the media were largely acting like mindless cheerleaders for the administration through the days immediately following 9/11 and the beginning of the war. I don't believe everything from the media either way.

And not real issues? Due process not a real issue? Right to privacy not a real issue? Sending our troops off to die based on lies not a real issue? Torture of POW's not a real issue? Crappy economic policy? Foolish foreign policy? Horrible environmental policy? That might not be significant to some folks, but it's all real to me.

I'm all for the second amendment, but there's a hell of a lot more going on out there politically, and I take it all seriously, not just one part. That'd be like voting for a president solely based on abortion rights issues. Are those important? Certainly. The only thing to worry about? For some people with a big personal stake in the issue, yes indeed. For me, no--just one part of the big picture.

You would do better to try and fly that banner over some site for Hollywood entertainers, television "journalists", or the funny people who think guns "just go off" by looking at them.

I like guns, yet I dislike Bush. It's possible to hold both views concurrently.

All you can do on this site is make yourself irrelevant.

Fine with me. I have little interest in fitting in or toeing party lines. I'm not part of any fixed political wing or advocacy group, and I make my own evaluations and decisions and am proud that as an American I can voice political opinions freely, even if some individuals don't like those opinions.

I consider it my patriotic duty to vote against Bush. His administration is shameful, dishonorable, and dangerous.

 

[tyme]

1. How can you be so sure Bush has lost your state ? (High Roaders living in Massachusetts are excluded from this question.)

Doesn't matter. Your vote will not change the outcome of the election. Only blocs of votes matter.

2. If Kerry wins by a margin of 10% instead of 4% of the popular vote, he and the media are going to be spitting out the word "mandate" every other sentence as justification for all sorts of liberal horrors (did I hear "HUD agreement" ?).

If Kerry wins by 10% because that extra 6% voted for Badnarik, Kerry will not be able to claim he has a mandate. If he wins by 10% with a typically pathetic showing by the LP (fractional percentage), it won't matter whether you or anyone else voted LP rather than for Bush; Kerry would still claim a mandate.

No, I will not vote Bush instead of 3rd party.

If you are going to vote 3rd party because you can't stomach voting for Bush for whatever reason you feel is valid, you can also consider voting for Nader. Nader won't win, but when he gets votes it really seems to piss off certain Democrats. I personally feel that pissing off those dems is a worthy cause

Flatrock, you want us to vote for Nader so he'll leech votes from the Dems in 2008? I doubt the 2004 vote count is going to convince him to run or drop out in 2008. Furthermore, you'll be hurting the LP (or whatever party you really agree with) by not voting for them. You also might give the ivory-tower academics the idea that a significant chunk of the population agrees with Nader's platform. That's very, very dangerous, IMO.

 

[Silver Bullet]

Sending our troops off to die based on lies not a real issue?

Recent bi-partisan commissions have established that the fault regarding info on Iraq lies with the Intel community, not the administration. Hardly a reason to vote against Bush for an alternative who would take our guns.

Torture of POW's not a real issue?

The Bush administration did not know or condone policy that was being conducted 8000 miles away. Hardly a reason to vote against Bush for an alternative who would take our guns.

Crappy economic policy?

What crappy economic policy ? What specific policies do you have in mind ? What policy of this administration do you feel is to blame for the economic downturn ? The economy started heading down the tubes a year before Bush took office. It was further compounded by 9/11 and the corporate scandals, both of which originated before Bush took office and for which Bush is not to blame. Hardly a reason to vote against Bush for an alternative who would take our guns.

Foolish foreign policy?

What are you talking about ? The fact that the socialist leadership of some European countries doesn’t like us ? So what ? I want a president who looks after American interests, not European interests. Hardly a reason to vote against Bush for an alternative who would take our guns.

I consider it my patriotic duty to vote against Bush.

If that’s what you’ve been told, what else can you do ?

Your vote will not change the outcome of the election. Only blocs of votes matter.

Somebody pointed out in a different thread here on THR about a month ago that if you take the attitude that your vote doesn’t matter, other people will do the same. That if you take the attitude that you vote counts, so will others. Besides, we are a bloc.

 

[tyme]

It matters for sending a message that the LP is a viable party. It doesn't matter for the election results. No state has ever had the party of its presidential electors decided by a single ballot. As was also pointed out in another thread weeks ago, by the time you get within a few hundred votes of a tie, individual votes don't matter because you're at the mercy of recounting errors.

 

[Boats]

Libertarians and "viable" in the same sentence? Someone in this thread has a wicked sense of humor.