Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamBlue  Quote:
Originally Posted by Skepticologist The best we can do is to vote for the candidate who represents the greatest potential for change, because the status quo is completely unacceptable. From my perspective, that candidate is Barack Obama. I don't figure he'll be our savior, but because he offers the best hope of something different, I'm willing to give him a shot at it. | IMHO it seems like most intelligent people would not want the job, i.e. put your whole family thru that wringer we call the media among other things. I myself would not do it and don't understand people who do, thus I feel a full disconnect.
To me, it seems like corporate America owns both the parties and I really do not like what they are doing to our government thus I am a registered libertarian, it may be a wasted vote today but we have to start somewhere and the more votes a third party gets the more other Americans/media will take them seriously.
Oh yeah and welcome back An-Jel  |
I personally don't think a third party is a viable answer. In fact, I'm unconvinced that the party system of politics itself is a viable answer. You hit the nail on the head when you intimated that the two existing parties have been bought and sold by corporate America. After all, under our present system, no one can approach viability as a candidate for high office without a huge infusion of money, and where else is that money going to realistically come from? Here's a clue: The nickel-and-dime contributions of ordinary Americans who are already struggling to maintain their positions in the lower rungs of the middle class will never even begin to outweigh the donations of their employers.
Consequently, the intelligence of a serious candidate is essentially a moot point. His or her viability is determined not on the basis of his or her intelligence or personal characteristics, but on his or her backers, and not insignificantly, his or her wealthiest backers.
I recall having been completely non-plussed by George W. Bush's election in 2000, and even more completely non-plussed by his re-election in 2004. I asked myself how the American people who, after all, are the ones who actually pull the levers in the voting booths, could possibly have voted an obvious simpleton and social Neanderthal into office, not just once but twice. And the only answer I could come up with is that they were totally and completely duped by practitioners like Karl Rove and Rush Limbaugh who are expert in pulling emotional strings that have nothing to do with actuality and everything to do with the perpetuation of power by the ruling class in America.
Ostensibly, the American system of government is based on majority rule. And the majority the founding fathers had in mind when they conceived of this country was not a majority of dollars, but a majority of people, with or without dollars.
Abraham Lincoln idealized an American government "of the people, by the people, and for the people". Unfortunately, his vision as morphed into a government "of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich", and that's a completely different ideal.