Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)

14. I understood what you were saying.

Reply to still_one (Reply #13)

Fri Jan 13, 2017, 01:49 PM

Jan 2017

Having third, fourth and fifth party candidates (especially serious ones) is likely to prompt some people to vote who might otherwise stay home. More choice is always better, IMO.

But if someone disapproves of the system of politics itself (and there are a surprising number of us out here) we can only cast that vote by not voting. We can't do it by voting for a system-approved candidate of any persuasion - for us any vote is violation of our principles. That's why I'm opposed to mandatory voting systems such as Australia's.

But for those who are OK with the system (and there are far more of you than there are of us), the more choice the better.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

16 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

People were calling to Stephanie Miller's show with heartbreaking [View all] mfcorey1 Jan 2017 OP

i heard that caller Ohioblue22 Jan 2017 #1

There was no mystery what would happen if trump won. The stakes were never more clear. still_one Jan 2017 #2

The problem with democracy is there are too many damn choices GliderGuider Jan 2017 #3

47% of the voting populace didn't even bother to vote still_one Jan 2017 #4

So? That's their right isn't it? GliderGuider Jan 2017 #5

my point being, it wasn't because there were too many choices why they didn't vote still_one Jan 2017 #6

And my point is that voting for whoever you want to is OK, as is not voting. GliderGuider Jan 2017 #9

First of all I never implied or suggested that people didn't have a right NOT to vote. I was still_one Jan 2017 #13

I understood what you were saying. GliderGuider Jan 2017 #14

Then I misunderstood your original post. I thought you were arguing that more choice was bad, and still_one Jan 2017 #15

best they don't vote if they don't read, do research or view news besides Faux wordpix Jan 2017 #11

That's their choice, but they are the last one's I want to hear from if they lose their insurance still_one Jan 2017 #16

my sister and bil are heartbroken and terrified. mopinko Jan 2017 #7

I heard it too shenmue Jan 2017 #8

taxpayers should ALL be heartbroken at $40K/round of chemo IV drip wordpix Jan 2017 #10

Never, as long as I live, will I understand how people can be so heartless. smirkymonkey Jan 2017 #12