Now that the debates are over, who do you think will win? Has your opinion changed? (I'm still more interested in who you think is going to win, not who you are going to vote for.)

I woke up today, and my morning piss was longer than 20 seconds. Election over, Romney wins.

/gibby

I just learned that the kool-aid in Jonestown was blue. Election over, Romney wins.

/Gibby

Romney, but it will be close.

I think Obama will win. The only thing I really care about is Gary Johnson getting 5% of the vote. If he does that, success.

Roseanne

Gary Johnson is probably getting my vote.

WebFire;1308175 wrote:

It's very tempting.

We need another choice, such as "Who loses?" - "We do!"

like_that;1308188 wrote:It's very tempting.

And it's a lie. 5% has not made a difference before. 5% on election day does not change 1461 other days of indifference.

I think Gary Johnson will win the election and he has my vote.

ccrunner609;1308249 wrote:we all lose cause congress still sucks

Ding Ding Ding.
Hey, we agree on something.

gut;1308276 wrote:And it's a lie. 5% has not made a difference before. 5% on election day does not change 1461 other days of indifference.

Oh, just because something hasn't made a difference in the past means it will never make a difference? Might as well give up. Thanks! :thumbup:

like_that;1308188 wrote:It's very tempting.

Do it.

justincredible;1308381 wrote:Oh, just because something hasn't made a difference in the past means it will never make a difference? Might as well give up. Thanks! :thumbup:

What's the definition of insanity?

You guys are going to disenfranchise yourself, and potentially allow the re-election of a proven failure all the while trying to justify your choice with the moronic belief that Obama and Romney are the same. I really do not understand it.

Even if you get your magic 5% number (WTF did that come from - sounds like some bullshit), what you still fail to grasp is candidates look at voting blocs. There is little use trying to appeal to a non-homogenous and changing bloc, as these 3rd party voters often are. Even if not, it's still a relatively small group in comparison to other solidified voting bases. So your idea that candidates are suddenly going to take notice of you and start to appeal to you is not based on any logic or reality that I can see.

Let me explain it more simply. Your 5% does not cost a candidate an election because you aren't voting for the other guy (and that's really the name of the game). But also your 5% can't win the election, because a candidate may find it difficult to win your vote without alienating other votes in his base. So you end-up being written off, just like you are doing to yourself.

As I stated in 2009, I'm voting for Matt Hull.

justincredible;1308382 wrote:Do it.

Make me a moderator?

ernest_t_bass;1308391 wrote:As I stated in 2009, I'm voting for Matt Hull.

I would vote for him, but I am worried that he would kill himself and his chest pained running mate would be president.

gut;1308390 wrote:What's the definition of insanity?

You guys are going to disenfranchise yourself, and potentially allow the re-election of a proven failure all the while trying to justify your choice with the moronic belief that Obama and Romney are the same. I really do not understand it.

Even if you get your magic 5% number (WTF did that come from - sounds like some bullshit), what you still fail to grasp is candidates look at voting blocs. There is little use trying to appeal to a non-homogenous and changing bloc, as these 3rd party voters often are. Even if not, it's still a relatively small group in comparison to other solidified voting bases. So your idea that candidates are suddenly going to take notice of you and start to appeal to you is not based on any logic or reality that I can see.

Let me explain it more simply. Your 5% does not cost a candidate an election because you aren't voting for the other guy (and that's really the name of the game). But also your 5% can't win the election, because a candidate may find it difficult to win your vote without alienating other votes in his base. So you end-up being written off, just like you are doing to yourself.

What you fail to grasp is that IDGAF what you think.

gut;1308390 wrote:What's the definition of insanity?

Believing your only options are a D or a R. Why vote for people from only two parties when it obviously hasn't worked. At some point you have to stand up for other options.

Here is how the American public align with Johnson and Romney. But hey, Romney has that magic "R" next to his name so good for him.

hasbeen;1308424 wrote:Believing your only options are a D or a R. Why vote for people from only two parties when it obviously hasn't worked. At some point you have to stand up for other options.

No. You must listen to gut because he knows what is best for you.

justincredible;1308431 wrote:No. You must listen to gut because he knows what is best for you.

I don't wanna.

Is IDGAF the phrase of the day?