Quoted from bumblethru

I will vote for ron paul. He is the ONLY candidate that has a rock solid, common sense plan. It would be disingenuous to vote otherwise.

The only problem I have with that is, will it be a wasted vote if it's realistic he can't win (honestly)

Is there such a thing as a wasted vote?  As long as people vote with their head and their heart and honestly believe the person they vote for is a viable electable candidate, then that is not a wasted vote in my opinion. Even if they are not electable, it still is a factor in sending a message when all the votes are tallied.  You have to vote the way you feel regardless of the 2 party system....IMHO!

Quoted from joebxr

Is there such a thing as a wasted vote?  As long as people vote with their head and their heart and honestly believe the person they vote for is a viable electable candidate, then that is not a wasted vote in my opinion. Even if they are not electable, it still is a factor in sending a message when all the votes are tallied.  You have to vote the way you feel regardless of the 2 party system....IMHO!

Is there such a thing?  I honestly believe there is.  Voting for a candidate just because you don't like the rest of the field of candidates in a particular party - knowing that the candidate you really WANT hasn't got a snowballs chance in actually winning, is just like giving the vote to the other party.

For instance - I'm going to use Mr Koza as an example.  Please - don't take this personally Mr K.

Hypothetically, Koza has NO chance of winning - his message just isn't getting out there strong enough, but you don't like Andrea, even tho she may be the majority preferred.  Now, you KNOW you don't want THE ONE to win - but you like Koza, so you vote for him.  He gets (again, hypothetically) 100 votes in the election, Andrea gets 200.  But THE ONE gets 201.  The 100 votes wasted (again, hypothetically) on the first candidate COULD have gone to the candidate that had a sure chance of beating THE ONE ... but instead, we're saddled with THE ONE ... when, in actuality, 2/3's of the people DIDN'T want her.

Thinking back on that paragraph gives me a headache ... but yes, I can def. see how a vote can be wasted.

Again, TK - please don't take that personally, it was just an example.

But the person that voted for TK DOESN'T feel their vote is wasted becuase in their mind they feel TK is the best choice.  Isn't that really what voting is all about,.... voting for who you feel is the best and right choice to represent you?  And if you don't vote for them, how do you know they have a snoball's chance.....there may be many more that agree with your choice and that "dark horse" may ultimately have a chance.

There is no such thing as a wasted vote.  Those who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 didn't waste their vote...
they helped elect George Worst Bush.

  Ron Paul will likely not get the GOP nomination, so voting for Paul in the general election is a vote for Obama.

Quoted Text

Is there such a thing as a wasted vote?  As long as people vote with their head and their heart and honestly believe the person they vote for is a viable electable candidate, then that is not a wasted vote in my opinion. Even if they are not electable, it still is a factor in sending a message when all the votes are tallied.  You have to vote the way you feel regardless of the 2 party system....IMHO!

I'm voting for Ron Paul because he is the only candidate with an economic plan that will lower the deficit sooner rather than later, because of his committement to the Constitution, to liberty, life, to our troops, and most importantly because he is not afraid to speak the truth no matter how unpopular that may be to some and because he is HONEST. His economic plan will be a job maker.

Americans are conditioned to believe that every election is the end all of all elections.  A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for a governing philosophy...Yes, in the short term, it may get Obama elected.  But, over time and election cycles, as the numbers grow, and those voices are heard, the battle between the big government statists and the limited government constitutionalists will come to a head.  How that ends, nobody knows.

I will be writing in Ron Paul in the general if he's not the party nominee.

there are no wasted votes....and the current 2 'primary parties' and the status quo that exist may exist with a lesser thread count than last election....that's how it works.....America's values from the past are for 'the people'....not a government
that pretends to know what the people want(as the hippies/yuppies think it should be, their kids are their future-----eat it).......

do you know the foundation you have laid and do you know what is in the mirror?

The two party system does suck... but the alternative also leaves much to be desired.
In some European countries, there are dozens of minor parties who form coalitions to broker their votes to a larger group.
The result is not representative of the people.

Quoted from Box A Rox

The two party system does suck... but the alternative also leaves much to be desired.
In some European countries, there are dozens of minor parties who form coalitions to broker their votes to a larger group.
The result is not representative of the people.

I dont think our 2 party system sucks.....I think it has clogs in it......the people have been sandpapered so much that the grain of what we once were as pioneering Americans with heart, has been
sanded out by the paradox of too many laws/regulations/entitlements......

is this our precipice?

maybe the new tech era will flush out the 'clogs'