From: m_henderson@csc32.enet.dec.com (Marty Henderson)
Subject: Re: the wasted vote theory
Reply-To: m_henderson@csc32.enet.dec.com (Marty Henderson)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. (VMS Software Support - Colorado)
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:16:43 GMT

--
>I usually just lurk on the net but I just have to comment on this 
>idiotic idea of the "wasted vote" I keep seeing people espousing.
>People, there is no such thing as a wasted vote!  You should vote 
>your conscience.  Plain and simple.

>Look at it this way.  If you are really excited about George Bush
>you're going to vote for him.  If you're really excited about Bill
>Clinton you're going to vote for him.  Am I right so far?  I mean
>in general, if you have somebody that you *really* like you're going 
>to vote for him/her.  And I'll bet in such cases you're going to vote 
>for that candidate no matter what his/her prospects for winning are.  

>Suppose, for example, the economy right now was booming, unemployment
>was down, the deficit was being reduced, etc., etc.  In general 
>everything was peachy.  Well, I bet Bush would be a pretty popular guy 
>and the Dem's chances of electing somebody would be pretty slim.  Now, 
>suppose further that you are an ultra-liberal (a stretch for some of you 
>out there but bear with me :-) and the Dem's pick an ultra-liberal 
>candidate.  You really like the guy but you know he doesn't have a 
>snowball's chance in hell of winning.  So would you then vote Republican 
>even though it goes against your beliefs to do so, just to be on the 
>even though it goes against your beliefs to do so, just to be on the 
>winning team...just so your vote isn't "wasted"?  I think not.  I should 
>hope not anyway.  But this is exactly what you're doing if you are 
>dissatified with BOTH candidates and you vote for one of them anyway.
>You're voting AGAINST your conscience!

>I hate to burst people's bubbles out there but your single vote does
>not mean shit.  Its the combined votes of millions of people that not
>only determine the course of the country but act as a barometer of its
>collective mood, temperament, desires and frustrations.  

>In short, if you really like one of the big two then by all means vote 
>for him.  If you truly, truly, truly believe one is the lesser of two evils
>then vote for that one.  But if you are completely dissatisfied with both 
>candidates and think them equally bad then you should express that 
>dissatifaction in the voter's booth by voting for a third party - Libs, NAP,
>whatever.  Your dissatisfaction is a real and valid feeling that is shared 
>by many in the country but it will not be heard unless you act collectively 
>and express it with your vote.

Wasted or not - I'm voting for Perot (It has been announced that he will
still be on the ballot in Colorado). The average American is very ignorant
about how our government works. For example - when I start talking about
how the NSC (National Security Csomething) should be uprooted completely
because they hold tons of power AND they are not elected OR appointed - they
just "continue" from admin to admin and cause major problems for the prez -
my cube neighbor just laughs and calls me "paranoid". That person has no
clue and is very representative of the U.S. population in general.

I will make my "little personal statement" by voting for Perot and against
most incumbents. Our country is in poor shape - ECONOMY GOOD OR BAD !!!
Our government lies to us.

To quote Ross Perot from a Larry King show "There's coverup going on that'd
make ya sick".

Wake up America. You are being HAD !!!

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 M_Henderson               | "Could you please continue the petty bickering?
 Marty Henderson           |  I find it most intriguing."   ---    Data, 
 Woodland Park, Colorado   |  Star Trek, The Next Generation, "Haven"
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections