Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bun-kun
lol you've totally misread Umbrae's post. He's calling for a more democratic race than a 2 party election. We understand that if we would vote for Nader is a vote for Bush, why did you think Bill Mahr and Michael Moore begged Nader not to run.
|
Got down on their knees and begged him not to run even!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bun-kun
Umbraes makes a valid point of choosing lesser of two evil, and Kerry IMO is the lesser of 2 evil. It's kinda unfair to us American to be force feed the 2 candidates, that or we're just stuborn or just plain ignorant of what other party are out there. <shrug>
|
Exactly, runoff voting would be a lot more fair and give smaller political parties a voice in government where today they are shut out unless they can manage a large enough voice that one of the two main candidates takes notice and starts campaigning for their causes. One of the biggest fears in the drafting of the Constitution was the injustice that often came about because of democracies. A majority tends to do what they want, rather than do what is truely fair and just. Just take a look at some of the injusticies that used to be popular in the United States (slavery, treatment of Native Americans, women's rights). Today gay marriage is being pretty much ignored by both candidates because it's such a political suicide issue. To come out for or against it (though how Bush could be anymore against it I have no idea) would alienate them from that seductive moderate target voter. A third candidate could give these kinds of groups a voice in their government.