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: Dennis O'Bell who wrote (114096)	9/7/2003 12:51:50 PM
From: lurqer	Respond to of 281500

"duopoly"... where'd you hear that one, in a Berkely coffee shop ? Actually the word is used just a little further south - usually in the same sentence as Wintel. voting in a presidential election for someone as unfit for the job as Ralph Nader Just to quash an apparent misapprehension on your part, I didn't vote for Nader. As for "unfit for the job", don't you think a very good case could be made against the “fitness” of either of the "major" candidates? Reasonable adults will deal with situations as they are, by voting for the "lesser of two evils" if necessary Obviously, the duopoly has you "hook, line and (especially) sinker". Guess we just have a different definition of reasonable - mine starts with some reasoning. The simple fact is that if a minuscule percentage of people who abstained or wasted their votes in the last election had responsibly voted Perhaps you need to review our electoral system. In many states (including the one, in which I dwell), the voting trend was sufficiently established long before the election, that a "protest vote" had no effect on the outcome. If you kept letting politicians, with a vested interest, define your terms (like responsibly), I agree there is little chance for improvement. JMO lurqer