Third Party Politics

**Fe 26** · 15 Sep 2006, 05:28 AM

I think he said what he meant the first time, spo.

**Diff-chan** · 15 Sep 2006, 10:33 AM

Great, Europe does something you like and it becomes an awesome idea that the US should adopt, but fuck if you don't like it, it’s obviously stupid. You hypocritical bastard.

A "neither" vote is a retarded idea, and Germany's government system is entirely different from ours.

**Fe 26** · 15 Sep 2006, 11:27 AM

Well how else do I keep two shit heads I don't like, out of office today? Not five months ago, or a year ago, but if two dipshits, today are running, how do I keep both of them out?

**Diff-chan** · 15 Sep 2006, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

Well how else do I keep two shit heads I don't like, out of office today? Not five months ago, or a year ago, but if two dipshits, today are running, how do I keep both of them out?

How does a neither vote resolve this conundrum? Whoever gets the most votes wins. If "neither" wins the majority its not like the seat goes unfilled.

**Fe 26** · 15 Sep 2006, 01:30 PM

They can do it all over again, with new canidates.

**Diff-chan** · 15 Sep 2006, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

They can do it all over again, with new canidates.

I think it's an infringement on the freedoms of the failed candidates if they can't run again (without a Constitutional Amendment). Also, sounds like a waste of money.

But again, this is all irrelevant. Do you have any idea how Germany's electoral and government system works? Because it's nothing like here.

**Fe 26** · 15 Sep 2006, 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by Diff-chan

I think it's an infringement on the freedoms of the failed candidates if they can't run again (without a Constitutional Amendment). Also, sounds like a waste of money.

But again, this is all irrelevant. Do you have any idea how Germany's electoral and government system works? Because it's nothing like here.

well make them wait one out then. If the people don't want them today, what makes them think they will want them next week? And I don't care if it waste their money. If Henze, Big Oil, or the RNA want to waste their money, they can go right ahead (and yes I realize some of the election process comes out of our pockets, but if something like this resulted in us getting a better leader, I'd find a way to cope.)

I don't really care how Germany's electoral and government system works. I want more options than "deal with it" and "pray that airforce one falls out of th sky" or "please fall down the whitehouse stairs and get hurt just bad enough that you can't lead the country."

God diff, you take nice fucking forevers to type up a reply

**Diff-chan** · 15 Sep 2006, 01:51 PM

And I don't care if it waste their money.

No, it wastes our money. Taxpayer money holding all these elections. Do you remember that special election in California? The state spent like $60 million on that.

I don't really care how Germany's electoral and government system works.

You should, because different governmental systems lead to different causes and effects and interactions. One effect may not be suitable in another place. A parliamentary system works ENTIRELY different from ours.

Anyway, in terms of voting systems, Germany has a Mixed Member Proportional Representation. Ours is FPTP. There's a difference and that difference is likely where it makes sense to offer a vote for nobody. It'd be cool if you can provide a link to show where this mythical "neither vote" is applied. Besides, Germany has more viable parties.

In any case, in our system the dude with the most votes wins, no matter how many they are (remember when Repubs said Clinton was illegitimate because he got <50%?), and I think it'd take a Constitutional Amendment to change that. I think, within the framework of this country an instant run-off system could work.

**Fe 26** · 15 Sep 2006, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Diff-chan

No, it wastes our money. Taxpayer money holding all these elections. Do you remember that special election in California? The state spent like $60 million on that.

uh yeah, I think I acknowledged that.

Originally Posted by Diff-chan

In any case, in our system the dude with the most votes wins, and I think it'd take a Constitutional Amendment to change that. I think, within the framework of this country an instant run-off system could work.

How about each party gives us more options? Like we can pick between three guys to be prez, from each side.