Green, Libertarian, Constitution, and Justice Party candidates for president to debate- moderated by - Polidicks

[QUOTE=smurfy;38104516]If no candidate gets more than 50% of the electoral vote, the House of Representatives decides who becomes President and the Senate decides the VP Which is kind of fucked tbh[/QUOTE] No. You're getting that confused with a tie.

[QUOTE=Cone;38102624]Surely including third parties in the debates would at least give them a higher chance of catching the majority vote? Steps should be taken to try and widen the horizons more regardless of how effective said steps may be; I just want them to acknowledge that there are issues with the system and attempt to remedy them, rather than just letting two parties get all the attention.[/QUOTE] All that does is lead to vote splitting, which allows a minority vote to win the election. We need to restructure the entire voting system before we can even consider additional parties.

[QUOTE=CommieTurtle;38102512]Because anyone that knows anything about how our political system works knows that voting for anything but republicans or democrats in a presidential election is, unfortunately, throwing away your vote.[/QUOTE] but that's the point, it will continue to be that way unless it includes more people in debates...

[QUOTE=Kabstrac;38115852]Maybe the general public would vote for these parties if they were actually included in the main debates and had good media coverage. Canada can do it, so can you![/QUOTE] Canada's electoral system isn't completely fucking stupid.

Hopefully, with pragmatic reforms, we can have elections like those in France. In France, the Communist, National Front, and Center parties all got a large share of the vote in the first round. The Socialist and Conservative still ended up in the final round, but nominations from the three losing Presidential Candidates make a huge difference in which of the two guys win.

Oh god Virgil Goode is worse than Romney lmao

[QUOTE=person11;38116229]Hopefully, with pragmatic reforms, we can have elections like those in France. In France, the Communist, National Front, and Center parties all got a large share of the vote in the first round. The Socialist and Conservative still ended up in the final round, but nominations from the three losing Presidential Candidates make a huge difference in which of the two guys win.[/QUOTE] What the fuck is pragmatic reform?

Something that is based in solving a problem and not proving a point with meaningless ideology dick waving [editline]20th October 2012[/editline] It also means small incremental reforms. For example, France's system is not very different from ours. The United States is only a few laws from having a good electoral system and a fair two party presidential system. [editline]20th October 2012[/editline] And before anyone starts advocating for a multiparty system, please note that 2 party presidential systems are the most stable kinds of democracies I believe. If we really wanted a system that catered to more than two major parties, we might as well go to a Parlamentary system.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;38115902]Canada's electoral system isn't completely fucking stupid.[/QUOTE] Ech, we're not that great either. Our system is super First-Past-the-Post. I mean, our Prime Minister (Who's a cunt) recently got a large majority in the House of Commons. But he only got ~43% of the vote, if I remember correctly. Plus we have an appointed Senate which is essentially a place for long-time party supporters to sit around and make fat money for doing jack-shit, basically. Also the Governor-General. I mean, it's just a figurehead position, but still, needing Royal Approval for laws is shit. I'm not opposed to honoring our close relationship with Britain and the Royal Family, but fuck off, our laws are our laws.

[QUOTE=Cone;38102624]Surely including third parties in the debates would at least give them a higher chance of catching the majority vote? Steps should be taken to try and widen the horizons more regardless of how effective said steps may be; I just want them to acknowledge that there are issues with the system and attempt to remedy them, rather than just letting two parties get all the attention.[/QUOTE] Adding third parties would let not a single candidate to get the majority vote!

[QUOTE=redhaven;38117677]Adding third parties would let not a single candidate to get the majority vote![/QUOTE] If nothing else that should prove that First Past the Post is faulty, rather than a third party.

[QUOTE=redhaven;38117677]Adding third parties would let not a single candidate to get the majority vote![/QUOTE] An alternative vote system would fix that.

[QUOTE=Megafan;38117721]If nothing else that should prove that First Past the Post is faulty, rather than a third party.[/QUOTE] Unfortunately the minority who benefit from it are the ones who decide if/when our system changes.

[QUOTE=Bassplaya7;38102489]No Ron Paul?[/QUOTE] Ron Paul disqualified himself forever when he embraced the same brand of crazy that Santorum and Bachmann did.

[QUOTE=Madman_Andre;38118688]Ron Paul disqualified himself forever when he embraced the same brand of crazy that Santorum and Bachmann did.[/QUOTE] Ah, he never did that. Santorum and Bachmann were strict social conservatives with mixed fiscal conservatism and neocon foreign policies- Ron Paul is a social conservative-libertarian and fiscal liberal with a non-interventionist foreign policy. They're hardly anywhere close to each other, and you really need to stretch it to find an apt similarity between their actual policy.

[QUOTE=Kabstrac;38117960]how about have all the candidates for each party fight each other to the death and whoever wins is president[/QUOTE] paul ryan would beat everyone because he does p90x lol

[QUOTE=Aspen;38119409]paul ryan would beat everyone because he does p90x lol[/QUOTE] Well Gary Johnson climbed Mt. Everest :v:

This is going to be starting soon

here we go

[QUOTE=Kabstrac;38117960]how about have all the candidates for each party fight each other to the death and whoever wins is president[/QUOTE] required viewing for all residents!

Funny how there's 4 candidates in this debate and there apparently was not enough room for 3 candidates in the major debates. They're trying to destroy any chance of anyone who's not either a Democrat or Republican of becoming president by diluting the third parties even further, does nobody see that? Way to go, major media corporations.

Man it sucks how nobody pays attention to the third party candidates, Stein and Johnson are decent

Virgil Goode is hilarious. Rocky Anderson is pretty cool though I'm surprised I haven't heard of him before.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;38157558]Virgil Goode is hilarious. Rocky Anderson is pretty cool though I'm surprised I haven't heard of him before.[/QUOTE] Virgil "Andrew Jackson" Goode

[QUOTE=jordguitar;38156209]required viewing for all residents![/QUOTE] [img]http://blogs.e-rockford.com/willpfeifer/files/2011/08/starshiptroopers2.jpg[/img]

Johnson is really growing on me. He's a good speaker.

[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;38157638]Johnson is really growing on me. He's a good speaker.[/QUOTE] He is an excellent speaker. However, I can't find myself to follow someone who wants to privatize education and healthcare. If he was a leftist libertarian then he would be my guy.

[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;38157638]Johnson is really growing on me. He's a good speaker.[/QUOTE] What's amazing is that he also has a cold. He's sort of countering it by getting really mad :v:

woo go jill stein you tell em about global warming

[QUOTE=yawmwen;38157698]He is an excellent speaker. However, I can't find myself to follow someone who wants to privatize education and healthcare. If he was a leftist libertarian then he would be my guy.[/QUOTE] I don't think I could fully endorse any of these candidates for president (not that I could fully endorse Obama or Romney, by the way), but that's what I appreciate about this. They've all got very clearly defined and distinctive views, and they're three-dimensional, as opposed to playing purely to the right or left. I mean, look at Goode. He's clearly not in his element with this crowd, but he's thoroughly upfront with it. "I don't support legalization of drugs, and if you want that, don't vote for me." It's refreshing.