Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LemonHead who wrote (4413)	11/8/2000 5:17:16 PM
From: All Mtn Ski	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13056

Hopefully we'll double or triple that in 2004. As a general supporter of third parties, I was disappointed that Nader didn't get 5% for fed funds, the "scare" tactics apparently worked and people who would have voted for Nader, voted for Gore to avoid a Bush win. Now those people looks to have lost on both fronts: no Gore and no 5% for Nader. Tom

To: LemonHead who wrote (4413)	11/8/2000 9:58:46 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 13056

My first thought was how sad it was that Browne couldn't even outpoll Buchanan. But then I remembered all the public money Buchanan had to spend, and the name recognition he has, and realized it wasn't that bad after all. However, until the LP can get a realistic platform, it will forever be a minor fringe party.

To: LemonHead who wrote (4413)	11/9/2000 3:27:29 PM
From: Liatris Spicata	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 13056

Lemon- I guess I cannot be too concerned with the sheer number of popular votes when the election appears to be decided by people who cannot cast a ballot without screwing it up. I guess I've got my dander up a bit that people's inability to follow simple instructions when filling out a ballot receives more than a dismissive "serves you right for acting so stupidly". I've seen the ballot: it did warrant scrutiny, but it was not confusing to anyone with basic sense of how to look at a document. And of course, the voters had every opportunity to review the ballot before entering the voting booth, but they chose to vote without familiarizing themselves with the ballot ahead of time. I suspect that's indicative of the thoughtfulness that they bring to bear on the entire election process. Illustrative Comment from CNN: <<I went to the polls for one specific reason, to vote for Gore. I hit the second hole. I am sure I did. What was going on in my mind was somehow my right to vote had been taken away from me," said Lillian Gaines, 67, one of three residents who filed a lawsuit Wednesday in Palm Beach County Circuit Court seeking a new election>>> Am I the only one to think that such morons as Ms. Lillian Gaines- or the people they elect- shouldn't be deciding the rules I must adhere to and the taxes I must pay? Sheesh, the dimwit contends her "right to vote had been taken away from [her]", not that she had made a stupid blunder which, by exercising a modicum of care or a scintilla of preparation, she could easily have avoided. It is truly a tyranny to live under the whims of the likes of Ms. Gaines. Of course, it's always somebody else's fault: Ms. Gaines typifies the norm in this country of evading responsibility for one's own actions or errors. Not that I need any convincing on the subject, but this election has only reinforced my opinion that there needs to be some qualification for the voting franchise other than a body temperature of about 98.6F. My modest suggestion: bring back the literacy test, with a requirement to know something about the structure of government and the philosophy of the founding fathers of the USA. But such a requirement would not suit the preferences of the likes of Al "I Didn't Know There Was Fundraising Going On" Gore or his con-artist boss, and so will almost certainly not happen unless our society suffers a major collapse. Larry