A Better USMB Poll

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The other poll deals with the reality that one of two candidates will win. This poll deals with pipe dreams.

No, the other poll is merely a circle jerk for two candidates. So is this one. The only difference is the candidates.

If you want a poll who's purpose is to find out exactly who everyone on USMB is going to vote for, then I recommend Dissent's poll.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/239650-who-are-you-voting-for.html

I can't. Mitt Romney isn't on his poll.

He's there at the bottom.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What I find amusing is that both the 3rd party voters and the people on the right are laboring under the false notion that voting 3rd party will make any difference at all.

What I find amusing is that people voting for the establishment parties are laboring under the false notion that voting establishment will make any difference at all.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Yeah your poll sucks.

What do you want?
A. the end of the world
B. not the end of the world

You make no sense at all.

Your analogy makes no sense at all.

 

[peach174]

Romney knows that the private sector grows jobs, Obama doesn't.

 

[Liability]

Romney

A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama.

This is why you are being dumber than normal.

A vote for the incumbent is a vote for the incumbent.

A vote for a third party is akin to not voting at all or throwing your vote in a pile of shit.

A vote for Mitt is a vote for Mitt.

Figure it out. A vote for the idiot incumbent perpetuates his imbecilic efforts along the very lines of what he has already showed us he wishes to achieve. No fucking thanks.

A vote for Mitt may be imperfect. Indeed, it is imperfect. The GOP has INDEED helped the very process to which we take urgent exception. And Mitt is far more an old guard establishment GOP-er than most of us would like -- unless you happen to prefer the incumbent of course. NONETHELESS, putting in Mitt and a solid GOP/conservative (they aint synonymous) majority WILL help put the brakes on the momentum the incumbent has going for his moronic agenda.

A vote for a 3P is wasted. It will not help defeat Pres. Obama which DOES mean it might as well be a vote to continue the Obama agenda.

Oddball is partly right. Nobody else owns his vote. Still, his vote does have potential consequences. And nay vote that perpetuates the Obama agenda or at least which fails to TRY to put the brakes on that crap has particularly odious consequences.

And if you consider the only viable choices (the incumbent vs. Mitt) to be shit or shit, then you are missing the point. The shit we have is not just a known shitty entity but one which comes with an agenda that needs to be derailed. A vote for even a shitty alternative at least holds out the prospect of putting on the brakes and altering the course.

 

[GoneBezerk]

You have to understand the OP is insane.

Why is this better? A vote for those two is a vote for Obama.

 

[CausingPAIN]

Jill Stein

hmmm. now where's that bogus ballot form just for this occasion.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Romney

A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama.

This is why you are being dumber than normal.

A vote for the incumbent is a vote for the incumbent.

A vote for a third party is akin to not voting at all or throwing your vote in a pile of shit.

A vote for Mitt is a vote for Mitt.

Figure it out. A vote for the idiot incumbent perpetuates his imbecilic efforts along the very lines of what he has already showed us he wishes to achieve. No fucking thanks.

A vote for Mitt may be imperfect. Indeed, it is imperfect. The GOP has INDEED helped the very process to which we take urgent exception. And Mitt is far more an old guard establishment GOP-er than most of us would like -- unless you happen to prefer the incumbent of course. NONETHELESS, putting in Mitt and a solid GOP/conservative (they aint synonymous) majority WILL help put the brakes on the momentum the incumbent has going for his moronic agenda.

A vote for a 3P is wasted. It will not help defeat Pres. Obama which DOES mean it might as well be a vote to continue the Obama agenda.

Oddball is partly right. Nobody else owns his vote. Still, his vote does have potential consequences. And nay vote that perpetuates the Obama agenda or at least which fails to TRY to put the brakes on that crap has particularly odious consequences.

And if you consider the only viable choices (the incumbent vs. Mitt) to be shit or shit, then you are missing the point. The shit we have is not just a known shitty entity but one which comes with an agenda that needs to be derailed. A vote for even a shitty alternative at least holds out the prospect of putting on the brakes and altering the course.

It never has before, so why should I fall for it now?

 

[Liability]

A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama.

This is why you are being dumber than normal.

A vote for the incumbent is a vote for the incumbent.

A vote for a third party is akin to not voting at all or throwing your vote in a pile of shit.

A vote for Mitt is a vote for Mitt.

Figure it out. A vote for the idiot incumbent perpetuates his imbecilic efforts along the very lines of what he has already showed us he wishes to achieve. No fucking thanks.

A vote for Mitt may be imperfect. Indeed, it is imperfect. The GOP has INDEED helped the very process to which we take urgent exception. And Mitt is far more an old guard establishment GOP-er than most of us would like -- unless you happen to prefer the incumbent of course. NONETHELESS, putting in Mitt and a solid GOP/conservative (they aint synonymous) majority WILL help put the brakes on the momentum the incumbent has going for his moronic agenda.

A vote for a 3P is wasted. It will not help defeat Pres. Obama which DOES mean it might as well be a vote to continue the Obama agenda.

Oddball is partly right. Nobody else owns his vote. Still, his vote does have potential consequences. And nay vote that perpetuates the Obama agenda or at least which fails to TRY to put the brakes on that crap has particularly odious consequences.

And if you consider the only viable choices (the incumbent vs. Mitt) to be shit or shit, then you are missing the point. The shit we have is not just a known shitty entity but one which comes with an agenda that needs to be derailed. A vote for even a shitty alternative at least holds out the prospect of putting on the brakes and altering the course.

It never has before, so why should I fall for it now?

It has happened, before, though: many times before. Perhaps not to the degree you prefer, but that is not the hallmark of whether it happened in the past or not. That whole notion of gradual movement offends your sensibilities a bit unduly.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

This is why you are being dumber than normal.

A vote for the incumbent is a vote for the incumbent.

A vote for a third party is akin to not voting at all or throwing your vote in a pile of shit.

A vote for Mitt is a vote for Mitt.

Figure it out. A vote for the idiot incumbent perpetuates his imbecilic efforts along the very lines of what he has already showed us he wishes to achieve. No fucking thanks.

A vote for Mitt may be imperfect. Indeed, it is imperfect. The GOP has INDEED helped the very process to which we take urgent exception. And Mitt is far more an old guard establishment GOP-er than most of us would like -- unless you happen to prefer the incumbent of course. NONETHELESS, putting in Mitt and a solid GOP/conservative (they aint synonymous) majority WILL help put the brakes on the momentum the incumbent has going for his moronic agenda.

A vote for a 3P is wasted. It will not help defeat Pres. Obama which DOES mean it might as well be a vote to continue the Obama agenda.

Oddball is partly right. Nobody else owns his vote. Still, his vote does have potential consequences. And nay vote that perpetuates the Obama agenda or at least which fails to TRY to put the brakes on that crap has particularly odious consequences.

And if you consider the only viable choices (the incumbent vs. Mitt) to be shit or shit, then you are missing the point. The shit we have is not just a known shitty entity but one which comes with an agenda that needs to be derailed. A vote for even a shitty alternative at least holds out the prospect of putting on the brakes and altering the course.

It never has before, so why should I fall for it now?

It has happened, before, though: many times before. Perhaps not to the degree you prefer, but that is not the hallmark of whether it happened in the past or not. That whole notion of gradual movement offends your sensibilities a bit unduly.

The same thing is always said. Vote for the "lesser of two evils," and yet government always grows. It grew under Reagan, and it grew under both Bushes. So why in the world would Romney be any different? Spending will increase, militarism will increase, the debt will increase, our borrowing will increase, and the Fed's money printing will increase. As it relates to health care, Romney's already backtracking on repealing Obamacare, but even if he did he'd just replace it with some other government scheme that has nothing to do with free markets. So what's "lesser" about him? That he might, and I do mean might, spend a bit less than Obama? Big deal.

 

[PredFan]

No, the other poll is merely a circle jerk for two candidates. So is this one. The only difference is the candidates.

If you want a poll who's purpose is to find out exactly who everyone on USMB is going to vote for, then I recommend Dissent's poll.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/239650-who-are-you-voting-for.html

I can't. Mitt Romney isn't on his poll.

Sure is. Down at the bottom. Do you really know that little about your candidate that you don't understand his given name is Willard? Wow....and we expect you to make an educated choice for president...that's scary.

All I know about him is that he's not obama. Not much else is necessary really.

 

[PredFan]

No, the other poll is merely a circle jerk for two candidates. So is this one. The only difference is the candidates.

If you want a poll who's purpose is to find out exactly who everyone on USMB is going to vote for, then I recommend Dissent's poll.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/239650-who-are-you-voting-for.html

I can't. Mitt Romney isn't on his poll.

He's there at the bottom.

Yeah, I didn't know his real name was Willard. I thought Dissent was just being an ass.

 

[Papageorgio]

Why is this better? A vote for those two is a vote for Obama.

Because a vote for anybody else is a wasted vote.

Another one that thinks their position is superior to anyone else's.

 

[PredFan]

What I find amusing is that both the 3rd party voters and the people on the right are laboring under the false notion that voting 3rd party will make any difference at all.

What I find amusing is that people voting for the establishment parties are laboring under the false notion that voting establishment will make any difference at all.

You miss the point. The people on the right believe that the ones voting 3rd party will give the election to obama, but I guarantee you that if you took all of the people who vote 3rd party and give them to Romney, he will still lose.

The 3rd party voters themselves well, at least some of them believe that their vote will send a message. It won't.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Why is this better? A vote for those two is a vote for Obama.

Because a vote for anybody else is a wasted vote.

Another one that thinks their position is superior to anyone else's.

And yet if I voted in this poll I'd have to vote other. I thought the satirical nature of this thread was obvious.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What I find amusing is that both the 3rd party voters and the people on the right are laboring under the false notion that voting 3rd party will make any difference at all.

What I find amusing is that people voting for the establishment parties are laboring under the false notion that voting establishment will make any difference at all.

You miss the point. The people on the right believe that the ones voting 3rd party will give the election to obama, but I guarantee you that if you took all of the people who vote 3rd party and give them to Romney, he will still lose.

The 3rd party voters themselves well, at least some of them believe that their vote will send a message. It won't.

Well that does make your point a bit clearer.

 

[Papageorgio]

I disagree.

You don't say?

I think Romney's individualist, capitalist fundamentals alone will go far to instill the confidence required to free up markets......certainly over more collectivist policy of Obama.

I tend to agree, I think the economy starts to rebound in November if Romney is elected.

 

[Papageorgio]

Because a vote for anybody else is a wasted vote.

Another one that thinks their position is superior to anyone else's.

And yet if I voted in this poll I'd have to vote other. I thought the satirical nature of this thread was obvious.

Sorry Kevin, I don't see it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Another one that thinks their position is superior to anyone else's.

And yet if I voted in this poll I'd have to vote other. I thought the satirical nature of this thread was obvious.

Sorry Kevin, I don't see it.

It's not exactly thinly veiled, but alright.

 

[Liability]

The same old same old -- not even cleverly rehashed -- from Kevy.

Meme: The lesser of two evils is still evil.

Rejoinder: The lesser of two evils is LESS evil.

Kevy can't think.