SFist: Team Nader-Gonzalez Speak in SF Tomorrow About Something or Other

bluecanary

Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:52:42 -0800

2:30 in the afternoon on a freaking Tuesday. I see who their target demographic is. Idiots.

aj

Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:32:58 -0800

With the crisis at the moment, and Nader's fantastic track record "reforming the two-party system" so far (e.g. 2000), what could possibly go wrong?

mamcart

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:06:37 -0800

1. Wow, so this article suggests Nader and Gonzalez ever left San Francisco. Who knew! 2. "Conversely, if you knew, without question, as many states do, that Obama was going to lose yr state, a vote for him would mean nothing at all; it wouldn't even count, basically." In a more serious vein, before you get all down about your vote "not counting" in certain states, it's worth checking out your state's electoral votes policy, first of all. Some states are not "winner take all." So while my former state of Nebraska for example *always* goes Republican, theoretically the other candidate could take some EC votes away, based on percentage--and this year it's looking like Obama will at least take away a couple EC votes from NE (if not the entire state; and OK sure NE is only worth 3 or 5 EC votes, but still, we're looking at principle here! ;) If NE's in play, then TX and other Republican strongholds are as well). Secondly, and in my Pollyanna voice, I'd just like to remind you all that even if you are in a state you're "sure" will go to the other side, it's still worth voting. I personally keep getting into conversations with conservative Republicans who swore they'd never vote for a Democrat, but are now considering Obama. So there's definitely a chance that states that traditionally go one way could vote quite differently this year.

MalcoveMagnesia

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:36:50 -0800

"minor" parties such as the Greens or Libertarians would get noticed more if the Presidential Debate Commission (made up of Dems & Repubs) allowed them into the debates. The lack of debate access or any kind of mainstream media coverage for the other parties really strangles true democracy in this country.

reynard

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:03:36 -0800

Preface: I'm voting for Obama by absentee ballot in Texas (a state that he will likely lose, but which looks like it could possibly be a swing state). But normally I would support any third party or independent with my vote over the alternative: supporting our seriously broken two-party system. Barack Obama will win California, overwhelmingly; it's definitely not a swing state. That means you could safely vote for a third party or independent without worrying that you're throwing yr vote away. Conversely, if you knew, without question, as many states do, that Obama was going to lose yr state, a vote for him would mean nothing at all; it wouldn't even count, basically. It's called the Electoral College. I'm not campaigning for Nader. But in times like this, it's easy to forget how broken the whole system really is, beyond what can be fixed from the inside. Obama has already made a lot of compromises, and we're sure to see more of that. No one person can fix the mess created by hundreds of years of corruption and political sabotage wrought by greedy Washington, not even Obama.

The Angry Young Man

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:35:58 -0800

Christ. What do THEY want?!

cowsaysmeow

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:35:12 -0800

Aw, nutz, bad link - I meant this

cowsaysmeow

Mon, 29 Sep 2008 15:32:50 -0800

I'm just wondering if this chick ever found a date to the luncheon...