<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
Since the number of votes that a candidate has won by in the last
few elections has been small, then even a small turnout by third
party candidates *should* worry the Democratic and Republican
Party top brass. Theoretically, they would change their stances
on various political issue in order to woo those third party
voters back, since the races are so close that it really could
matter. Plus, if one or more third parties get 5% of the vote,
then they are official parties that will be guaranteed to be on
the ballots in future elections without having to petition each
state individually. They will also have access to some of the
funds that the two major parties have access to.<br>
<br>
A two party-dominated system leads only to divisiveness and
disenfranchisement of voters who care about any issues that both
parties agree on. Three or more more-or-less equal parties leads
to consensus building and politicking to woo voters. Which system
would you prefer?<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
On 11/04/2012 01:21 AM, Scott Dredge wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:SNT124-W2088997F5F601D3077BC2BE4650@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr">
Paul - I used to want a 3rd party (the common sense party), but
I don't see how it would solve what you're calling 'issues that
are never brought up because both sides have agreed to screw the
public on them'. Reason being that unless this 3rd party is
larger than the the Republicans & Democrats combined,
they'll not have sufficient votes to counteract the alliance.<br>
<br>
<div>
<hr id="stopSpelling">Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2012 23:48:40 -0700<br>
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</a><br>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">thansen@moscow.com</a><br>
CC: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] third party candidates<br>
<br>
<div class="ecxmoz-cite-prefix"><br>
Thanks for being part of the problem.<br>
<br>
If, like me, you care about issues that are never brought up
because both sides have agreed to screw the public on them,
then think about voting third-party as an alternative to not
voting at all.<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
On 11/03/2012 04:38 PM, Tom Hansen wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:AD1956A7-34EB-42FD-BC80-2364AF555CF6@moscow.com">
<pre>Excellent suggestion, Mr. Rumelhart!
Now, I'm gonna expect all you "smaller government" types to vote for Gary Johnson (Libertarian). I mean it's only right, right Mr. Rumelhart?
As for me, I'm gonna vote for Obama, 'cuz Michelle Obama is H-O-T, and we haven't had a hot lookin' first lady since . . .
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="ecxmimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>Jackie Kennedy
Pro patria!
Seeya at the polls, Moscow, because . . .
"Moscow Cares<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" target="_blank">"
http://www.MoscowCares.com
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
"</a>We're a town of about 23,000 with 10,000 college students. The college students are not very active in local elections (thank goodness!)."
- Dale Courtney (March 28, 2007)
On Nov 3, 2012, at 4:22 PM, Paul Rumelhart <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="ecxmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com"><godshatter@yahoo.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote>
<pre>I would just like to remind people out there to take a look at the third party candidates that are on your particular ballot for the Presidential race. For Idaho, it's Rocky Anderson (Independent), Virgil Goode (Constitution), Gary Johnson (Libertarian), and Jill Stein (Independent).
If you live in a State that is a shoe-in for one of the main two candidates, for or against, consider voting third party. In my opinion, breaking the two-party stranglehold on the political system is one of the best things we could do for this country. It would do wonders to break the polarisation of our citizenship that is causing a lot of harm, it would mean that certain issues that both parties currently in power agree upon would have to be re-evaluated if third parties were stronger in elections (to avoid losing votes to those third-party candidates), and it would force a multidimensional look at political topics instead of trying to shoe-horn everything into one axis, liberal or conservative.
Paul
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="ecxmoz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
=======================================================
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
======================================================= List
services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994. <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
=======================================================</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>