ROFLMAO re #2.

Ummmmm *twinkle*?

Mik re #24.

I was an Official Green Party Re-Count Observer in Ohio 2004. I concur 100% with what you are saying.

The lesson of our so called democratic republic is. to paraphrase Joe Stalin.

“It is not important who casts the ballot. It is he who counts the ballot that matters.”

It was that race that finalized the decision to go with electronic voting machines. So now the system is configured in such a way that there cannot really be a recount, the best that can happen is the votes are downloaded from the machine a second time.

” ……. I don’t think there are many people left INSIDE the national Green Party. They have done what they wanted – created some big, fat fish in an incredibly small pond.” [Lake: so true on the West Coast .....] “You might want to start collaborating ….. ex-patriots”

[Lake: I am confused! When does a person whom sincerely wants good things for an other person, organization, nation - state become an 'ex-patriot' ?????]

….I favor voting as a symbolic gesture!”

As a patriotic citizen of the Global Imperial Fascist American Empire, you are honor bound to [like Samuel Longhorn Clemens/ Mark Twain] to at least leave a paper trail of the abuses by the Duopoly Establishment!

Sadly, the most appropriate cartoon might be the bedraggled tree denizen giving the final one finger salute to the swooping bird of prey ……

dl, not sure of your source, although those very few instances all appear non-US. Odds are still infinitesimally small that one vote is the deciding factor.

To be clear, I favor voting as a symbolic gesture.

Champlain; Quebec general election, 2003 0% 0 PQ candidate Noëlla Champagne tied with Liberal Pierre Brouillette. Consequently, a by-election was held 36 days later, which Champagne narrowly won.[2]

Pontiac—Témiscamingue; Canadian federal election, 1963 0% 0 Progressive Conservative incumbent Paul Martineau defeated Liberal Paul-Oliva Goulet. A deciding vote was cast by the returning officer after the two candidates tied.[3]

Ashton-under-Lyne; UK general election, 1886 0% 0 &0000000000006099.0000006,099 The vote was tied, so under the law of the day, the returning officer was given a casting vote.[4]
Shelburne;

Nova Scotia general election, 1999 0% 0 Progressive Conservative Cecil O’Donnell defeated Liberal Clifford Huskilson. The deciding vote was cast by the returning officer after the two candidates tied.
Joliette;

Canadian federal election, 1887 0% Conservative Édouard Guilbault defeated Liberal F. Neveu. The deciding vote was cast by the returning officer after the two candidates tied.[5]

Assiniboia West; Canadian federal election, 1896 0% 0 Conservative Nicholas Flood Davin defeated independent John K. McInnes. The deciding vote was cast by the returning officer after the two candidates tied.[6]

Did you forget that one vote elected G.W. Bush President after the 200 election, 5-4?

I’m unaware of any cases where ONE vote made a difference unto itself.

Votes really do count.

Votes can begin to have meaning through endorsements and organized campaigns. But even there, one vote’s a drop in the ocean.

Robert, I’m still unclear on what “experiment” you’re talking about. My position remains: libertarian-leaning voters should only vote for a non-LP candidate if 1) their votes are likely to be the difference in electing the lesser of two evils, or 2) that non-LP candidate specifically runs on a set of positions that largely exclude the un-libertarian parts of her party’s platform. Otherwise, I don’t see how voting for a non-LP candidate wouldn’t do more harm than good.

I found contact info for the GP PlatCom at http://www.gp.org/committees/platform/. I’ll drop them an email.