Check out our brand new Local Poker Communities! Get updates and interact with poker players in your area.
Visit the United States Poker Community | Visit the California Poker Community | Read more about the Launch of P5s Local

Compromising Voters

Reply to Thread
  1. tacoman98 tacoman98 is offline

    Tacoma, WA
    United States

    Posts: 298
    Joined: Nov 07

    Jun 18th, 2009 (6/18/2009 1:54pm)

    <SPAN>** It must be said at the outset that I have no numbers to support my position. I am speaking “off the cuff”, looking for a solution, any solution. **</SPAN>
    This a long post so I’ve broken it into many parts for easier consumption. Also, this format will give everyone the opportunity to respond to the individual parts within the article. The parts are Disenfranchised Voters, The Objective, The Proposal, and The Outcome.

    Cliff Notes:

    Voters from both parties are feeling that their party no longer speaks for them.

    Hopefully we can get the attention of the party leaders.

    I propose building up the Libertarian party, increasing their numbers to affect change.

    I propose a vote exchange program with equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans to commit to voting Libertarian.

    My proposal does not affect the outcome of elections, just the actions of the parties.

    My proposal is non-partisan and does not speak directly to individual policies, other than that of limiting the influence of special interest groups.

    I am not particularly skilled in organizing such an effort. My thoughts are completely random on this issue. Input from others is imperative. If someone with the necessary skills and available resources to act on my proposal is willing to do so, feel free. I do not claim ownership of any of the ideas I’ve set forth. I do ask that you keep me informed and allow me to participate in a fashion that’s appropriate.
    <SPAN>** I am not a writer so my punctuation may be less than perfect. I also openly admit that I do not have clear understanding of the words “effect” and “affect” and am too lazy to look them up. So, please no grammar police. **</SPAN>
  2. Hateflops Hateflops is offline 7 over par. ship it!

    Posts: 7,043
    Joined: Nov 05

    Jun 18th, 2009 (6/18/2009 2:04pm) in reply to tacoman98

    This is like the first post I've seen where the cliff notes are longer than the story.

    Cliff notes for the cliff notes!
  3. tacoman98 tacoman98 is offline

    Tacoma, WA
    United States

    Posts: 298
    Joined: Nov 07

    Jun 18th, 2009 (6/18/2009 2:05pm) in reply to tacoman98

    <SPAN>Disenfranchised Voters</SPAN>
    As a conservative I have always voted a straight Republican ticket. I and others feel disenfranchised as our party is not holding to its roots. We talk of moving to the Libertarian party, but are afraid of helping the Democrats along the way. Until the Libertarians are a viable party we won’t find a realistic platform to voice our opinions and affect change.

    Why I feel disenfranchised is not important as there are numerous reasons and many in the party feel the same. The same can be said of many Democrats. There is a tremendous volume of voters from both sides who feel that our selected parties have given into special interest and no longer work for the constituents.

    In the past, there have been grassroots efforts to shake things up with solutions such as, “throw the bums out”. This solution requires a large voter base to vote in opposition to the incumbent, no matter what his/her party affiliation. The objective is simple enough, to send a strong message to both parties that they must return to work as our employees and not as mouthpieces for special interest groups.

    The problem with “throw the bums out” are many. First, everyone wants to remove everyone else’s politicians and keep their own. Since we can’t vote for representatives from outside of our districts we can’t truly effect change. Second, change for the sake of change would let some unscrupulous individuals become elected. Third, many of us would actually help the party in opposition to our own beliefs.
    Thread Starter
  4. tacoman98 tacoman98 is offline

    Tacoma, WA
    United States

    Posts: 298
    Joined: Nov 07

    Jun 18th, 2009 (6/18/2009 2:05pm) in reply to tacoman98

    <SPAN>The Objective</SPAN>
    Before getting to my solution I want to discuss the objectives. First, I want to see all parties get back to their core beliefs. Their supporters, the constituents deserve it. The politicians must get back to working for those who elected them. Second, I want to see competition. You could say that it already exists but it really only exists for the independents and undecided. I am not pushing my own political agenda for a reason; I truly believe that everyone should be represented.

    The two party system has allowed the individuals within those parties to become complacent. They are busy working on becoming elected and re-elected and that requires money for campaigning. The money comes from special interest groups and the politician owes a huge debt to his/her contributors. They run on promises but immediately look for compromise to achieve their goals, repaying the debt. They know that conservatives will continue to vote Republican and liberals for Democrats, so upsetting the base doesn’t hurt very much.

    We must build up a viable third party. While there are a few to choose from, the Libertarians are by far the most logical from a sheer mathematical viewpoint. Libertarians appeal to many on both sides of the political spectrum as they are fiscally conservative and socially liberal. They are a true compromise for many middle roaders.

    As stated earlier, many conservatives have libertarian views. What stops them from voting Libertarian is the truth that a vote taken away from the Republicans is a vote for the Democrats. However, there is another truth. If the Libertarian party swells, the politicians will be forced to take notice and work hard to get those voters back.
    Thread Starter
  5. tacoman98 tacoman98 is offline

    Tacoma, WA
    United States

    Posts: 298
    Joined: Nov 07

    Jun 18th, 2009 (6/18/2009 2:06pm) in reply to tacoman98

    <SPAN>The Proposal</SPAN>
    I suggest starting a grassroots campaign to swap votes without compromising the actual outcome of near future elections. A website could be devoted to this endeavor that would do the following:

    1 Everyone who supported this idea would agree to vote a straight Libertarian ticket if one exists.

    2 Everyone would be required to E-Sign a statement that affirms what party they have voted for in the past.

    3 Each name would made public and each person would be paired with voting partner who has in the past voted the opposite. If the partner backs out, you would have the option of either backing out or being paired with someone else. The pairings would have to be from the same local districts.

    4 In the event of a particularly close race, you would be expected to inform the organization of your intentions regarding that particular race. This gives your voting partner the option to do the same.

    5 In the event that no Libertarian candidate exists, the participant is free to vote for their normal party affiliation.

    6 Under no circumstances should the Libertarians be allowed to control the movement. Their motives may be far removed from our objectives.
    Thread Starter
  6. tacoman98 tacoman98 is offline

    Tacoma, WA
    United States

    Posts: 298
    Joined: Nov 07

    Jun 18th, 2009 (6/18/2009 2:07pm) in reply to tacoman98

    <SPAN>The Outcome</SPAN>
    What are the potential outcomes? In a perfect world we would actually get some Libertarians elected which would go a long way towards true competition. While that is unlikely, a much stronger showing for the Libertarians would send a powerful message to the two parties currently in power. They would be forced to work on shoring up their base and get back to the work of the people.

    Even in the event that no Libertarian is elected, we need not worry about helping the opposition as the outcome of the election would not change. We are taking away votes from both parties in equal numbers. But, we are still affecting change.

    What about potential cheaters? We cannot dictate how someone votes. If a person states that they will do one thing but does another, there is nothing we can do about it. In fact we would have no way of determining who cheated. But, I believe that most people are inherently honest. I also believe that the percentage of dishonest people is likely proportionate in both parties and the affects of the dishonest will not change the outcomes.
    Thread Starter
Reply to Thread

Similar Threads