odims_sphere Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 Completely infeasible, I know, but what if we could gather enough people to do a write in vote of "no one" for President. The headlines would read "NO ONE WINS!" Show our Government that we don't accept the choices you've given us, we'd rather live in Anarchy, then to be forced under these pathetic choices you've given us. Hrm... Anarchy through Democracy... interesting. To bad it's not possible. They just put in whoever the hell they want anyway. And just who is "They"?
Fierce Critter Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 I have stated, several times, that I - like my 81 year old father before me - want a "none of the above" choice on the ballot. I don't feel that we would do well with nobody at all running things. So I'm not too keen on just a "none" selection. But with "none of the above," if enough people voted that so it was the majority choice, then the response would be a new election with new candidates, and the ones who were not voted in on that previous ballot would not be able to run again, until 4 years later.
Scary Guy Posted November 30, 2007 Posted November 30, 2007 Secret organizations are "they", the people manipulating government to get what they want. Also corporations (and the media to a degree).
creatureofthenyte Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 that would be great. No one wins. Unfortunately, the number of people who are stupid enough to vote for the people who Are running, is still a staggeringly large amount.
GothicRavenGoddess (3) Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 statistically its more American not to vote... now a days, anyhow...
Gaf The Horse With Tears Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 Depends on why your not voting. If your not voting because none of the candidates are worthy of holding office... thats American. If soemone not voting because they don't care... well, that just self-centered and ignorant.
GothicRavenGoddess (3) Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 i was talking statistics...
Burrich1 Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 Wasn't that Richard Pryor's entire platform in Brewsters Millions when he ran for president?
odims_sphere Posted December 1, 2007 Author Posted December 1, 2007 statistically its more American not to vote... now a days, anyhow... The idea I'm getting at isn't "not voting", but rather Voting for No one. Or rather actually writing in on the ballot "no one" Every election Mickey Mouse gets write in votes, I wan't to know what it would be like if the election is won by "no one"
odims_sphere Posted December 1, 2007 Author Posted December 1, 2007 Wasn't that Richard Pryor's entire platform in Brewsters Millions when he ran for president? I haven't seen it... was it?
Fierce Critter Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 Depends on why your not voting. If your not voting because none of the candidates are worthy of holding office... thats American. Are you advocating this now? I got MAJOR shit thrown at me when I said I preferred not to vote at all when it's a matter of "lesser of two evils." The only thing that saved me from having to vote for Granholm or Devos was I ended up out on the road with Jon on his job that day. He ended up with an emergency after-hours call that got us back to our polling office 15 minutes after they closed. We tried. I would have voted Granholm. And not have been happy about it at all.
Burrich1 Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 I haven't seen it... was it? I think it was, but not out of any altruistic concerns for society. He just had to spend thirty million in thirty days to inherit three hundred million, but couldn't own anything at the end of the thirty days to get it. He found this to be more difficult than he expected and decided he could burn an ass load of cash running for president without actually trying to win. His campaign slogan was something like "vote none of the above." Pissed off the other people running if I remember right.
CandyQuackenbush Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 I think it was, but not out of any altruistic concerns for society. He just had to spend thirty million in thirty days to inherit three hundred million, but couldn't own anything at the end of the thirty days to get it. He found this to be more difficult than he expected and decided he could burn an ass load of cash running for president without actually trying to win. His campaign slogan was something like "vote none of the above." Pissed off the other people running if I remember right. OMFG! I love that movie!
Burrich1 Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 And just who is "They"? I am pretty sure "They" is the dame dude as "The Man" or "Big Brother." I'm fairly certain their watching right now.
Winter Steele Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 The last election I didn't even want to vote ! However my husband said that it was my duty to vote Ex-Marine and all. Anyway I figured after the close vote with George Bush and Al Gore it might make a difference? I'm not for certain.
Gaf The Horse With Tears Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 Are you advocating this now? I got MAJOR shit thrown at me when I said I preferred not to vote at all when it's a matter of "lesser of two evils." The only thing that saved me from having to vote for Granholm or Devos was I ended up out on the road with Jon on his job that day. He ended up with an emergency after-hours call that got us back to our polling office 15 minutes after they closed. We tried. I would have voted Granholm. And not have been happy about it at all. No, but it's far more in the spirit of what being "American" is, than not voting simply becuase you don't care. Look it up, I don't think I ever said it was un-American, just that I didn't and don't think it was, or is, a valid choice.
phee Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 If soemone not voting because they don't care... well, that just self-centered and ignorant. Which could be considered pretty American too
Gaf The Horse With Tears Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 Self centered ignorance is more a human condition than an American condition.
phee Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 Self centered ignorance is more a human condition than an American condition. I will agree with you on that...
SuZQZ Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 I shared with my parents this morning FC's and her dad's idea of having a "none of the above" choice on the ballot and we all think it's brilliant. Like she stated, if "none of the above" is the majority vote, it would force them to gather up new candidates for us to choose from.
GothicRavenGoddess (3) Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 Wasn't that Richard Pryor's entire platform in Brewsters Millions when he ran for president? I don't know... never heard of it... i read it somewhere...
CandyQuackenbush Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 Well back to the topic at hand... "They" are the ones that live inside your television, know what you buy at the grocery store. That's why they ask for your zip code. "They" are the ones that don't know what you want, but fill your head with lies of sweet sweet promises, and a troop withdrawl from Iraq.
Scales Posted December 1, 2007 Posted December 1, 2007 I would love to see a non-violent country running on market anarchy, hopefully within enough years the political system will evolve to fit smarter people. Pizza r go good with beer. I mike demokrucassie
Steven Posted December 2, 2007 Posted December 2, 2007 Im not afraid of anarchy and yet I must admit that at this current time I am unprepared for it. still, I think most people who wish for it or flirt with it dont ahve the werewithal to deal with the long term effects.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.