Khross wrote:
Sam:
The problem is that despite the obvious failures of Obama's presidency, you refuse to accept that the alternative could have been superior. It's an unknown quantity at this point, but it's irrational and unintelligent to suggest that an unchosen alternative must of necessity be inferior to the already flawed choice you made.
Despite the "obvious" failures, I do refuse to believe the McCain/Palin would be better. You can call that irrational and unintelligent if you wish....... The unknown quantity is not that unknown, given McCain has been in politics a long time, and the fact that party lines are what they are. 8 years of Republican leadership won't suddenly change from black to white just because it becomes McCain instead of GWB.
Khross wrote:
In short, you're buying into the false dilemma of America politics. You believe you only have two viable choices; and you believe that the choice you did not make must be worse than one you made. Neither of these things are true or rational in any sense.
Until someone can show me where there has been a 3rd viable, electable alternative to the two major parties.......I do only have two options. While we here may be smarter than the average bear, the game is set up for all to play. And the vast majority of the voters in this country will not change to allow someone outside two parties to be elected POTUS. History does not lie. You either vote for one of the two and see your vote actually count, or you vote for a 3rd option and see it do nothing more than perhaps take a vote away. Either way, a 3rd option vote dies.