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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lurqer who wrote (114050)	9/7/2003 8:43:52 AM
From: Dennis O'Bell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I believe that an entrenched corrupt political duoply provided a Hobbesian Choice in 2000, (as I said at the time) between dumb and dumber. Hence, I suspect that many of Nader’s votes were merely in protest of the choice with which the electorate was presented. So, until the “system” is altered such that one doesn’t have to “hold one’s nose” when they vote, I think voting is a joke – and a cruel one. Oooh, "duopoly"... where'd you hear that one, in a Berkely coffee shop ? Anyone who was stupid enough to irresponsibly "protest" by voting in a presidential election for someone as unfit for the job as Ralph Nader should be simply ignored when they bleat about our government's policies. Reasonable adults will deal with situations as they are, by voting for the "lesser of two evils" if necessary. There isn't going to be any communist or socialist revolution in this country, and the Berkeley extreme left wing liberals might as well get used to it. The simple fact is that if a minuscule percentage of people who abstained or wasted their votes in the last election had responsibly voted, we would not be adventuring in Iraq, period. The election was that close.