Is this really Super?

TheOutlaw's picture
Submitted by TheOutlaw on Mon, 02/25/2008 - 10:24am. ::

Is Super Better?

This article really upset me. It seems to say that the people should relinquish their power to those who know better. For the better of the Party?? Give me a break. Stupid self righteous Democrats.

oh well. whatever happens happens I suppose.


Reggie's picture
Submitted by Reggie on Mon, 02/25/2008 - 11:49am.

Good piece. No need to be bothered with pesky choices. In true Dem fashion, life's important problems (like choosing a candidate) are handled for you. I agree that a 40% stake is a middle finger in your face.

On the other hand, maybe the Florida & Michigan Dem Delegates should ultimately have a place to plant ass at the "convention"?? Rules or not, LET'S THINK OF THE VOTERS!! *ignores extended middle finger from former paragraph*

I thought I heard Nader is lacing- up this season too. WOW what a dilemma for The Outlaw!!


TheOutlaw's picture
Submitted by TheOutlaw on Mon, 02/25/2008 - 12:00pm.

Yeah. Democrats just need a chance to waffle and they'll take it. All covered in Syrup.

I mean, they say they are going to penalize Mich and Flor. okay, so no one campaigns there. It just doesn't seem fair to reverse that decision. But it seems as the damn dems just like to waffle on everything. flippity floppity.

yeah, Nader is lacing them up. Hardly a dilemma for me. I appreciate the choices and I appreciate the issues that Nader brings up. Illinois is so blue that I will most likely waste my vote on Nader.


Rob's picture
Submitted by Rob on Mon, 02/25/2008 - 3:22pm.

Fixed yr busted ass link, Outie.


TheOutlaw's picture
Submitted by TheOutlaw on Mon, 02/25/2008 - 4:38pm.

It's no secret that I am a computer moron. It's all because of my distaste for digital sound.

In addition, that article reminded me of why I was so turned off from the political to begin with. Basically, it is saying that regardless of who you vote for, some other more important people are going to choose who they want anyways. Or even the folks you vote for, will do whatever the hell they want.

Anyhow, I turned 18 on Election day of the first Clinton Campaign. I wanted to vote for Perot. I was informed that from my father that I would be wasting my vote. So I figured if my vote is a waste why even bother?? So. I didn't bother. Years later I finally woke up and saw the light and quit being so apathetic.

I must admit I am a champion of lost causes. Can't help it. I suppose I should pick better battles. But isn't that just as disenchanting? I know that Nader is probably not the answer. But back when I supported him 8 years ago, it felt right to me. Old Ralphy probably isn't going to bring about much change anymore but i still value his ideas.

That is the nice thing about Obama's campaign. Rhetoric or not, he is inspiring people to do "something". Which is better than nothing. But i suppose I could still be just a waste.


Ruth's picture
Submitted by Ruth on Mon, 02/25/2008 - 6:24pm.

I think there is a lot of pressure to make the rank and file too submissive. I refuse to believe that individuals and small groups are insignificant if they are willing to work for a cause. I don't believe that all choices are made for me. A single vote is not particularly powerful on the national stage. This is not a surprise, you are one among millions of voters. One vote is important locally. You are only as impotent, however, as you choose to be.

I was all for Perot but he was ultimately a very disappointing candidate. Talk about waffling... I think the republicans are awfully flippy-floppy, too. First they hate McCain, now they tolerate him, later they'll love him.

Rather than blithely taking satisfaction from flinging votes at the same third option and not actually doing anything of meaning, you could demand more attention to the issues that matter to you. If Nader really is the ideal president and you think that he is the most qualified to be leader of the free world, go for it. Will he act in your best interests? Do you think Nader, too, has the fortitude to keep up with the job?

If you are looking to be less apathetic, voting is not enough. Simply saying he is not a member of the other two parties is not enough. You are backing the underdog and it is meaningless ranting if you do not work for it. What are your issues? How will Nader fix them? Convince people. Voting just to "throw away" a vote is at essence no less apathetic than not voting at all. I keep hearing lots of fury and "He is better," with little more. I hear more often "I am throwing away my vote." I hear a lot of "dems suck" and "repubs suck." OK I don't disagree, how exactly will Nader be an improvement?

Throwing away your vote sends no message at all. After the votes are counted, does the winner ever look back at the "throw away" voters? What precisely did you accomplish?


Haydesigner in San Diego's picture
Submitted by Haydesigner in ... on Mon, 02/25/2008 - 8:01pm.

"First they hate McCain, now they tolerate him, later they'll love him."

Oh so very true, you can bank on it. Especially after hearing a ton of hateful racist or sexist (depending on who the Dem nominee is) memes for months in the lead up to the election. The mindless masses will be brainwashed in to mindlessly believing that McCain is the only thing between them and the mindless infidels.

I was listening to Sean Hannity on the radio in Florida (hey, there is no other talk radio apparently in central florida other than christian hate conservative hate radio) the day after super tuesday. It was amazing how quickly he started puckering up to McCain after he won. And I mean it was some serious, serious ass-kissing.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.