Is the presidential election a referendum or a choice for you?

[Pogues]

That works fine if you don't live in a swing state. You get extra attention and possibly funding for a small party by doing that.

If you live in a swing state then your vote could potentially tilt an election to a candidate you would prefer slightly more than the other one. At that point your vote could impact an election and you need to figure out which major candidate is more appealing.

This will be true until minor candidates start getting a reasonable chance of actually winning by picking up momentum in non-swing states and getting some media attention, debates, etc.

That's all well and good, but how will a "minor" candidate ever get a reasonable chance if I, and others, aren't man enough to vote the way we feel we should instead of the lesser of two evils.

The problem with voting for the lesser of two evils...they are both still evil.

[Lucky]

First you have to get a candidate who is more than marginally legitimate. Perot had good success for a third party candidate, but he was still a punchline...a gimmick. Keep putting up fringe guys like Perot and Paul, and you'll never get anywhere.

I don't think it is manly at all to piss your vote away, instead of putting it somewhere it can do some good. The problem with not voting for the lesser of two evils is that you sometimes wind up making sure the more evil candidate wins.

[Lucky]

But the big question was referendum or choice. I think any thoughtful person must treat each election as a choice. A person doesn't vote in a vacuum. One must consider the effect one's vote has. One may not like the Incumbent, but it may be that the Challenger is marginally competent with a head full of bad ideas. One should cast one's vote pragmatically, in the way it will do the most good for the country.

[onejayhawk]

I'm not sure what you are trying to do. My comparison was same time of year numbers (Sept 2008 to Sept 2012 which is our current month). Comparisons of gas prices vary considerably due to supply/demand issues based on time of year. Comparing Sept 2008 to April 2012 is not the same.

You picked April 2012 which is the highest gas price point this year. Why don't we compare June 2008 to June 2012 if you want to pick dates with the most recent data you have (june 2012)?

Same time of year numbers are not avialable yet. I am comparing highest to highest. June is odd in that there is a rise in 2008 but a decline in 2012. A little cherry picking there.

Here is June to June
05/31/2008 1.3791 4.3924
06/16/2008 1.4312 4.5582

05/30/2012 1.1870 3.7807
06/09/2012 1.1679 3.7196
06/14/2012 1.1928 3.7991

http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/adjusted.txt

The other thing to note is that 2008 saw a huge plunge in gas prices at the end of September. It was a price spike, both going up and coming down.

09/29/2008 1.2992 4.1379
10/19/2008 1.1652 3.7111
11/04/2008 0.7460 2.3758
11/24/2008 0.6267 1.9959
12/16/2008 0.5842 1.8606

J

[Pogues]

First you have to get a candidate who is more than marginally legitimate. Perot had good success for a third party candidate, but he was still a punchline...a gimmick. Keep putting up fringe guys like Perot and Paul, and you'll never get anywhere.

I don't think it is manly at all to piss your vote away, instead of putting it somewhere it can do some good. The problem with not voting for the lesser of two evils is that you sometimes wind up making sure the more evil candidate wins.

Yours is a very popular opinion, and quite understandable. I see America as trapped in a two-party system, and it's quite normal to see voting for a third party as pissing away a vote.

But when a third party is much closer to your philosophical and political views, why would I not want to vote for their candidates? The Republican Party is too religious for me and the Democratic Party...well there is so much I don't agree with when it comes to their platform. If either of those parties represent you well, then by all means you should vote for them. And that, is being man enough to vote for who you feel is the best candidate.

[Lucky]

Yours is a very popular opinion, and quite understandable. I see America as trapped in a two-party system, and it's quite normal to see voting for a third party as pissing away a vote.

But when a third party is much closer to your philosophical and political views, why would I not want to vote for their candidates? The Republican Party is too religious for me and the Democratic Party...well there is so much I don't agree with when it comes to their platform. If either of those parties represent you well, then by all means you should vote for them. And that, is being man enough to vote for who you feel is the best candidate.

I see your point. A vote is too valuable and personal to cast it for someone who you really cannot support. I guess I'm torn between that quite valid idea on the one hand, and the idea of casting a vote pragmatically on the other hand.

For me there has generally been one either from column A or column B that suited me. I remember now that I have voted third party in several elections, but I knew in advance that my third party candidate had virtually no chance of winning. But I just could not pull the lever for one of the other two.