So, when is it appropriate..

**Randy Parker** · Jan 26, 16, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by rockmom

I'm down for taking things into my own hands.

This is where I am at.

And I would go farther and say that if you're a person who feels like your life will be far better or far worse based on the White House occupant, or which party controls the House or Senate, you're doing life wrong.

While I am a very conservative person, the political world has become repulsive to me. And to answer Doc's original question, I did not vote for the office of President in 2012 because my party's candidate was lousy IMO (Romney). I always vote, but I don't always vote for every single race.

**TexasRanger** · Jan 26, 16, 09:27 AM

Last edited by TexasRanger; Jan 26, 16 at 09:28 AM. Reason: add text

**Cats3x** · Jan 26, 16, 09:36 AM

3rd Party is just as wasteful as not voting unless enough people start to do it.

**Habib** · Jan 26, 16, 12:56 PM

I'm at the point where I hope it's Trump v. Sanders. Neither are likely to be effective presidents with the state Congress is in. But the so-called establishment would lose their collective minds.

Maybe it would be the enema our democracy needs to make some changes away from the partisan, talking point driven stupidity that's led us to here.

**HammerTime** · Jan 26, 16, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by formerkywrestler

Some math to back up my claim. In KY all electoral votes go to the candidate who receives the most. IN 2012, for Obama to have received the most votes and change the outcome of KY's election 219,416 more votes would have been needed.

In KY 2% of the vote from a previous election is needed to qualify a party as a political organization. At this stage that party would have instant ballot-access. 10% is needed to qualify them as a political party and thus that party is eligible to host a primary. Ballot-access is a major hindrance to 3rd party candidates and not having to go through that process would help pave the way for a viable 3rd party.

Gary Johnson needed 18,881 votes to get to 2% and 162,658 votes to get to 10%...

I will forever vote 3rd party until this happens.

**spindoc** · Jan 26, 16, 01:23 PM

I might vote for Hammertime. Or MTGL.

**mcpapa** · Jan 26, 16, 01:35 PM

Once upon a time we had one of those "BGP candidates/appointees" threads. That was fun.

**HammerTime** · Jan 26, 16, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by spindoc

I might vote for Hammertime. Or MTGL.

That's also a good option. We should start this movement.

**spindoc** · Jan 26, 16, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Randy Parker

This is where I am at.

And I would go farther and say that if you're a person who feels like your life will be far better or far worse based on the White House occupant, or which party controls the House or Senate, you're doing life wrong.

While I am a very conservative person, the political world has become repulsive to me. And to answer Doc's original question, I did not vote for the office of President in 2012 because my party's candidate was lousy IMO (Romney). I always vote, but I don't always vote for every single race.

While I agree with this sentiment, this upcoming election has weighed heavier on me than others for some reason. I think I'll wake up, still cherish my family and my faith, still fix a bunch of friggin teeth no matter who's elected. That's not the point. Essentially my vote is one in a large pool that voices my say in whom I'd prefer to spearhead the direction of our nation. Sadly, the candidates this time, assuming the two jack aces in their respective leads, are the choices that I have, well, I'm just not sure I could in clear conscience vote for either. My children, and their children will suffer from the policy of either/both. So, that's my conundrum.

**Randy Parker** · Jan 26, 16, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by spindoc

While I agree with this sentiment, this upcoming election has weighed heavier on me than others for some reason. I think I'll wake up, still cherish my family and my faith, still fix a bunch of friggin teeth no matter who's elected. That's not the point. Essentially my vote is one in a large pool that voices my say in whom I'd prefer to spearhead the direction of our nation. Sadly, the candidates this time, assuming the two jack aces in their respective leads, are the choices that I have, well, I'm just not sure I could in clear conscience vote for either. My children, and their children will suffer from the policy of either/both. So, that's my conundrum.

I'm with you. I'll again not vote for President if it comes down to Clinton/Trump.

**UKMustangFan** · Jan 26, 16, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by Randy Parker

I'm with you. I'll again not vote for President if it comes down to Clinton/Trump.

Serious question....Why would you not consider voting for a 3rd party candidate?

**spindoc** · Jan 26, 16, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by Randy Parker

I'm with you. I'll again not vote for President if it comes down to Clinton/Trump.

Originally Posted by UKMustangFan

Serious question....Why would you not consider voting for a 3rd party candidate?

I can't speak for Randy, but it seems fruitless to do so knowing there's no shot they could be elected. But I'm warming up to it.

**Randy Parker** · Jan 26, 16, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by UKMustangFan

Serious question....Why would you not consider voting for a 3rd party candidate?

Originally Posted by spindoc

I can't speak for Randy, but it seems fruitless to do so knowing there's no shot they could be elected. But I'm warming up to it.

I would definitely vote for a 3rd party candidate, but not just because they were a 3rd party.

**UKMustangFan** · Jan 26, 16, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by spindoc

I can't speak for Randy, but it seems fruitless to do so knowing there's no shot they could be elected. But I'm warming up to it.

Correct in there's no shot for them to be elected. However, if we really want to change the type of candidate that the two parties are putting out there, the only way to do it is to give ballot access to 3rd party candidates.

If a 3rd party gets enough votes to gain access, I guarantee the R's and D's will start to take notice and really think hard about their core values and the candidates they keep running out there.

**Randy Parker** · Jan 26, 16, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by UKMustangFan

Correct in there's no shot for them to be elected. However, if we really want to change the type of candidate that the two parties are putting out there, the only way to do it is to give ballot access to 3rd party candidates.

If a 3rd party gets enough votes to gain access, I guarantee the R's and D's will start to take notice and really think hard about their core values and the candidates they keep running out there.

Agreed.

3rd party voting right now is a throw-away vote in the immediate, but could lay the groundwork for actual (and needed) change down the road.