Interesting Item

[Guest Guest]

I'm sorry, but who are you to tell me how to vote and if my vote were wasted or not! The audacity of such a comment; you want me to make my choice based on your beliefs and your values and not my own? You want to tell me what the choices are, what my choices are and how I should decide, after I followed this election for far too long? I decided that both candidates were not suitable to run this country; therefore I didn't vote for either one - I made an informed choice (it may not be to your liking, but an informed choice) and cast my vote as I have every right to.

Now you imply that I have no right to make my own choice/decision and need you to tell me? What's next in your view, following someone into the booth to ensure that that person votes for one of the two parties, only? What you say is totally preposterous - I only pray that this is the direction our county does not go in; and I can only hope that this was not one of the two competing directions for the country proposed by either candidate.

It is this type of thinking that truly frightening and that will certainly bring down our democracy as we know it!

Touchy, aren't we. Then why discuss politics at all?

No one told you how to vote. It was simply explained to you that the vote you cast had zero likelihood of helping to choose the next president. So you wasted your vote.

And if your ability to read and process information is reflected in the way you just distorted what you were told, then maybe it's just as well that you threw your vote away.

[wu-su]

If you criticize others' political views, be prepared to present and defend your own. And don't play the part of the victim when you were the aggressor. Again, who did you vote for?

I didn't blindly vote for the Democrat or the Republican; that much I can say. And who I voted for, frankly, is none of your business.

[wu-su]

Touchy, aren't we. Then why discuss politics at all?

No one told you how to vote. It was simply explained to you that the vote you cast had zero likelihood of helping to choose the next president. So you wasted your vote.

And if your ability to read and process information is reflected in the way you just distorted what you were told, then maybe it's just as well that you threw your vote away.

I always thought every vote counted?

[wu-su]

If you criticize others' political views, be prepared to present and defend your own. And don't play the part of the victim when you were the aggressor. Again, who did you vote for?

Extinguisher, I am quite impressed with your knowledge of the ballot… congratulations. Frankly, besides a third party vote for president, I voted for one additional third party candidate, one republican and two democrats.

And by the way, it would be rather foolish of me to broadly call party-identifying citizens as “sheep” who “blindly” vote; they are more akin to puppets being manipulated by a group of well financed marionettes.

Please, hold on… before you go off again, let me say that I sincerely respect those who follow their consciences and adhere to their principles; and I would concede that a large number of people today consciously and intelligently vote and vote closely along the beliefs and philosophies of individuals and/or party. I admit that there is nothing wrong with sustaining ones' values and ideology along party lines.

[wu-su]

Touchy, aren't we. Then why discuss politics at all?

No one told you how to vote. It was simply explained to you that the vote you cast had zero likelihood of helping to choose the next president. So you wasted your vote.

And if your ability to read and process information is reflected in the way you just distorted what you were told, then maybe it's just as well that you threw your vote away.

No one may have told me directly who to vote for but frankly (from my perspective) a vote for McCain in NJ was destined to be a losing one and a vote for Obama in NJ was one of millions expected to be cast – either vote, in my opinion, had zero likelihood of helping to choose the next president. (And somehow I ascertained that no other candidate had any chance to win – figured it out all by myself, in fact).

So rather than waste my vote, I decided to take a position that expressed my belief that neither major party candidate was worth my vote (in my view and opinion); and I went for someone closer to my personal philosophy and viewpoints. I believe that what I did is acceptable in a representative democracy. Furthermore, to illustrate how I do not waste my vote, if there are only two candidates on the ballot, and I don’t like either one, I will not cast a vote. This I feel is using your vote intelligently and with purpose.

We are all unique, all different, and we each have different outlooks on so many facets of the life around us. Touchy, not in the least or at least I hope not; frustrated and impatient, at times I would agree.

[Guest Extinguisher]

I didn't blindly vote for the Democrat or the Republican; that much I can say. And who I voted for, frankly, is none of your business.

In other words, you believe that how others vote is your business and even malign them as sheep and blind voters, and when asked how you voted, you refuse to defend why your unidentified, preferred candidate is better than the Democratic or Republican candidate? You expect others to respect your views, while you don't respect the political views of 95% of others.

[Guest Extinguisher]

Extinguisher, I am quite impressed with your knowledge of the ballot… congratulations. Frankly, besides a third party vote for president, I voted for one additional third party candidate, one republican and two democrats.

And by the way, it would be rather foolish of me to broadly call party-identifying citizens as “sheep” who “blindly” vote; they are more akin to puppets being manipulated by a group of well financed marionettes.

Please, hold on… before you go off again, let me say that I sincerely respect those who follow their consciences and adhere to their principles; and I would concede that a large number of people today consciously and intelligently vote and vote closely along the beliefs and philosophies of individuals and/or party. I admit that there is nothing wrong with sustaining ones' values and ideology along party lines.

No need for snarky compliments about being knowledgeable -- I simply read and kept my sample ballot.

Whenever you'd like to share and defend your views on your preferred candidate for President, you know where to find me.

[Guest Extinguisher]

No one may have told me directly who to vote for but frankly (from my perspective) a vote for McCain in NJ was destined to be a losing one and a vote for Obama in NJ was one of millions expected to be cast – either vote, in my opinion, had zero likelihood of helping to choose the next president. (And somehow I ascertained that no other candidate had any chance to win – figured it out all by myself, in fact).

So rather than waste my vote, I decided to take a position that expressed my belief that neither major party candidate was worth my vote (in my view and opinion); and I went for someone closer to my personal philosophy and viewpoints. I believe that what I did is acceptable in a representative democracy. Furthermore, to illustrate how I do not waste my vote, if there are only two candidates on the ballot, and I don’t like either one, I will not cast a vote. This I feel is using your vote intelligently and with purpose.

We are all unique, all different, and we each have different outlooks on so many facets of the life around us. Touchy, not in the least or at least I hope not; frustrated and impatient, at times I would agree.

None of the other candidates on the ballot for President had any kind of coherent platform on any of the major issues (such as the economy or foreign policy). I understand that nonparticipation in an election conveys a message, but you actually voted for one of the other candidates, thereby endorsing his or her positions (or lack thereof). I'd like to understand why your preferred candidate is a better choice than Obama or McCain, but you won't engage in that discussion. In my opinion, I think that's because you can't make a convincing argument in defense of your preferred candidate.

[wu-su]

None of the other candidates on the ballot for President had any kind of coherent platform on any of the major issues (such as the economy or foreign policy). I understand that nonparticipation in an election conveys a message, but you actually voted for one of the other candidates, thereby endorsing his or her positions (or lack thereof). I'd like to understand why your preferred candidate is a better choice than Obama or McCain, but you won't engage in that discussion. In my opinion, I think that's because you can't make a convincing argument in defense of your preferred candidate.

Frankly, I can make a convincing argument in defense of my preferred candidate; and who knows, perhaps some day we will engage in the exercise. Nonetheless, I don't think it particularly fair to categorically state that the third party candidates were devoid of a platform on major issues, including the economy and foreign policy - the ones that readily come to mind are the Green Party, the Libertarian, the Constitution, Nader's Independent Party and the Socialist Party.

I'll leave you with this concerning my desire to avoid a dialogue concerning my stance on this (don't take the intimidate, threaten, coerce literally, please):

TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 20 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1971

§ 1971. Voting rights

( No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the Senate, or Member of the House of Representatives, Delegates or Commissioners from the Territories or possessions, at any general, special, or primary election held solely or in part for the purpose of selecting or electing any such candidate.

When used in the subsection, the word “vote” includes all action necessary to make a vote effective including, but not limited to, registration or other action required by State law prerequisite to voting, casting a ballot, and having such ballot counted and included in the appropriate totals of votes cast with respect to candidates for public office and propositions for which votes are received in an election

[Guest Extinguisher]

Frankly, I can make a convincing argument in defense of my preferred candidate; and who knows, perhaps some day we will engage in the exercise. Nonetheless, I don't think it particularly fair to categorically state that the third party candidates were devoid of a platform on major issues, including the economy and foreign policy - the ones that readily come to mind are the Green Party, the Libertarian, the Constitution, Nader's Independent Party and the Socialist Party.

I'll leave you with this concerning my desire to avoid a dialogue concerning my stance on this (don't take the intimidate, threaten, coerce literally, please):

TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 20 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1971

§ 1971. Voting rights

( No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the Senate, or Member of the House of Representatives, Delegates or Commissioners from the Territories or possessions, at any general, special, or primary election held solely or in part for the purpose of selecting or electing any such candidate.

When used in the subsection, the word “vote” includes all action necessary to make a vote effective including, but not limited to, registration or other action required by State law prerequisite to voting, casting a ballot, and having such ballot counted and included in the appropriate totals of votes cast with respect to candidates for public office and propositions for which votes are received in an election

Wu-su, you're being evasive, nonresponsive and trying to play the part of the victim (again).

I previously stated that the third party candidates for president did not have a coherent platform on major issues such as the economy and foreign policy. If you disagree, what is the Green Party's platform on foreign policy? Do you think the Libertarian foreign policy of isolation is coherent? Do you think the nationalization of major industries advocated by the Socialist Party is coherent? Really??

As to your Voting Rights Act citation, that's your self-victimization part. Re-read the citation you copied and pasted -- unless you did not exercise your voting right fully and freely, I'm not sure what that citation has to do with this discussion. Rather, this discussion was triggered by you voluntarily posting on this Board and stating your opinions on the Obama candidacy and the election results, to the point of calling Democratic voters in Hudson County "sheep" and "blindly voting." If you want to criticize others, be prepared to answer questions about why you think your political views are better.

I stand by my prior statement, you cannot make a convincing argument for your preferred candidate. Your non-responsive response confirmed it.