Nader and Badnarik way ahead in the polls!!!!Big lead!!!

LOL lol lol lol lol lol LOL lol LOL lol LOl lol lol !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What? Where?


I don't like Badnarik, he's a "liberal" version of Bush in my eyes.

 

Libertarian does not equal "liberal". He is a libertarian version perhaps but certainly not a liberal version.

 

Thanks, I found this out earlier today as well.

 

What is the point of this thread? How immature.

 

I think it's interesting how Nader and Badnarik are often grouped together, since they're fundamentally opposites of each other in many ways.

 

True. But I don't think they're often grouped together, other than for being third party candidates.

While Nader is a socialist, Badnarik is a capitalist -- or rather anarcho-capitalist.

However, on social issues, they are pretty much the same.

 

As if someone with a non-anglo saxon name like Badnarik will ever be elected....he might as well be a "******"

Only a joke that happens to be based in fact, sadly.

 

Where is the name "Badnarik" from?

 

Not sure, it sounds Eastern Eurpoean to me....

Anyway, its longer than 6 letters and doesn't end in -son.

 

Well Kennedy was Irish, which is technically Celtic, not Anglo-Saxon. Okay bad example........

 

i tried farting but accidently squirted a few drops of urine.

 

I don't know what I am doing as far as voting--I can tell you a few things though:

My State is going for Bush anyway.

I don't like Bush one bit.

I refuse to vote for Kerry, I hate him more than Bush.

So it looks like Mike might be getting my vote....since I am a Libertarian.

 

If Nader had the actual chance of winning the election, then I would vote for him. But there is no point in voting for either Nader OR Badnarik, because the truth is: NEITHER OF THEM WILL EVER WIN!

If you vote for anything other than republican or democrat then you might as well just vote republican. Because time after time, it has been proven that if there was no libertarian votes then Democrats would have an EASY victory.

But that's part of what the republican party depends on. So go ahead, vote Nader or Badnarik. You are really helping!

 

Smart girl! I agree completely. It just a fact, why can't some people see this.

 

I have no clue. Maybe because they don't want to see.

 

I agree with personface too. I would like to see a time when a third party does rise up, but that time isn't NEARLY here.

 

I would like to see a time too...sadly, it won't happen.

 

It won't happen because people such as yourselves continuously say it won't happen.

Obviously, any person with half a brain knows that Nader or Badnarik will not win. I'll be the first to admit that. But that's not what voting for a third party candidate is about.

There are usually two primary reasons why people vote for a third party:

1) It is a means of protesting against the corporate-owned, two-party duoploy that controls all politics in this country.

2) When you vote for third party candidates, you are helping to get that particular party recognized -- even if they only receive 1 or 2% of the votes. At least it's a step in the right direction. We're not going to break free from this two-party system overnight.

BUT WE NEED TO START SOMEWHERE!

I am really starting to sound like a broken record player, but, as I have said, to me, Bush and Kerry are the same. They are both elites who serve the elites and the major corporations. They don't serve you and me. They also both support the Partriot Act and the hopeless situation called the war in Iraq. I could go on and on about how they are both the same, but I've been over it already. I'd only be covering old ground.

Foreign policy and civil liberties mean more to me than healthcare and education at the moment.

 

I hear you, I really do, I just see Bush as far worse than Kerry, if I truly saw them in the same light, then I would vote third party this time.