The 2012 U.S. Presidential Election Is Today (Hypothetical)

Post Reply New Topic

Who do you vote for?

Well, I dunno...

The real question for me is who I'll vote for if Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination. I don't think I can bring myself to vote for any of the other front running republicans. I'd probably end up voting for the Constitution or Libertarian party candidate. In that scenario, Obama winning another term would probably be preferable to Mitt Romney or whoever since Rand Paul would probably run in 2016 and be a favorite for the nomination.

I really don't think Romney could be as bad as Obama.

Sometimes I wish the real election could be more like this. Find a way to merge the Primary into the General election. I think the Primary election is a fiasco and a big waste of time and money.

If we elected with a Range or Score based system instead fighting for the biggest slice of the vote pie it might work.

I don't, because all it does is split the opposition vote and helps the corrupt politician in office or helps a corrupt scumbag get into office.

IMO that just shows what a terrible election system we have. We shouldn't be surprised we're stuck with 2 dominating political parties. It's the result of a flawed system.

I'd rather candidates faced a system similar to what is used in most Olympic competitions. Everyone is Judged and Scored based on merit whether there are 2 or 20 people. There is no so-called "Spoiler" in the contest.

Olympics wouldn't work for such thing. People would end up giving 5 points to their favorite candidate and 0 to everyone else because that is the best move if you want to maximize the effect of your vote.

There are better alternatives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze%27s_method

Everybody would just need to rank candidates from best to worst. Actually only ranking a guy over all others and leaving the others tied does not improve your vote, it reduces weight from your vote, so you would have to think of ranking the other candidates.

The only problem is that people may be too stupid to understand how to use it.

It's Achilles heel is that it would make hanging chads seem like a non-issue. There would never be an end to the recounts and few people would trust that the results are harder to rig than they are now. It would also not be a substitute for the electoral college system.

I sure hope not. Imagine: talking about cutting Medicare and Social Security. That is just plain bad. I hope that Romney would never stoop so low.

1.} Vote to re-elect Pres. Obama

2.} Jon Huntsman

3.} Someone else

4.} Not vote at all

It could just be implemented electronically. But yes, people are way too stupid to grasp how the matrix works even though it is very simple.

But they can't get over adding fractions.


The electoral college system is the most horrible BS to ever be invented. An octopus picking between rep and dem flags would be more effective than the electoral college.

What about Stephen Colbert? At least he is the most honest and entertaining candidate of the lot.

A day is coming when neither medicare or social security will be sustainable. Then what?

ruveyn

I don't think Romney really does anything different than Obama. Honestly, he'd probably be more effective at implementing Obama's agenda than Obama is. He could of did everything Obama did in his full term in one year, he'd only have token opposition in both parties. Obama in his 2nd term won't be able to push any legislation, deadlock isn't such a bad thing. The only thing I'd be worried about in an Obama 2nd term would be judges, hopefully none of them die or retire in those 4 years, I doubt Romney would appoint anybody much better tho. If Romney wins, then we'd have to wait until 2020 at the earlier to get a real candidate in the GOP. I don't think we can wait that long.

I respectfully disagree with you, that said I will be pushing for someone other than Mitt Romney winning the Republican Primary.

Then, we'll raise taxes on the rich. I wonder why no-one ever thought of that?