Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Pollster1; Jim Noble
Yes. We have a moral duty to vote, especially when we're informed. I maintain that extends to the General. Remaining silent in the general is a way to falsely inflate the plurality "win" of the victor.

I hope a truly viable third-party candidate happens. JNoble has pointed out that conditions are uniquely aligned for a plurality win favoring conservatives.

But in the event it's a mish-mash with no clear or viable one to vote for, the General vote, even if it's to Pat Paulsen, speaks and sways influence.

30 posted on 05/02/2012 11:02:40 AM PDT by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent * By the way, Ted, voting for Romney is voting stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Finny
even if it's to Pat Paulsen, speaks and sways influence.

In hopelessly Blue states Romney should not get one vote, but he will because people have a delude notion that if they don't vote for a winner they have thrown their vote away.

This election is the best opportunity we will have to raise up a protest vote in those bluer than blue states, but we won't. I most assuredly will die in a free country, but my grandchildren will very likely lose their freedom and never be free again.

I know a lot of patriots deny this reality, but by the time this comes about, it will be a lot like skynet. Since I am not a libertarian I believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible, and this looks a lot like Revelation.

48 posted on 05/02/2012 11:57:14 AM PDT by itsahoot (I will not vote for Romney period, and by election day you won't like him either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson