So I threw my vote to aviod the best of two evils . . .

Although I voted for Obama last election, after four years, I'm not impressed. However, Romney seems like a dirt bag so I decided to clear my conscious and throw my vote.

Anyone else feel the same way? Kind of like you picking one of two evils?

 

What does "throw my vote" mean?

 

probably means voting for some third party candidate who has zero chance of winning

 

I can understand disagreeing with Romney's politics (I think that would make you wrong, but I get it), calling the guy a dirt bag goes a little too far for me.

In story of missing teen, Romney shows his human side - The Washington Post

Why can't he, Obama too for that matter, just be a successful guy with whom you disagree?

In the end you wasted your time and accomplished nothing.

 

Casting a third-party candidate vote (e.g., conscience voting (?))…

BTW, the ongoing endeavor to qualify for Presidential Election Campaign Fund-PECF (matching funds) is no joke to third parties. The single thing, be it via a Jill Stein (Green), Gary Johnson (Libertarian), Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party and/or former Virginia Representative Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party, etc. … Keep in mind that third-party impact all comes down to money and name recognition.

Per University of Iowa political science professor Tim Hagle –as of 10/26/12, Obama and Romney have spent about $883.8 million in ad spending to date. However, none of the current collection of third-party candidates has a remotely equivalent cachet. More so, the seemingly somewhat known, yet still virtually unknown, third-party candidate of the group Gary Johnson (L) has categorically NO chance of electability (IMO). Nonetheless, the former NM Governor and LP candidate for President does qualify for federal matching funds in the 2012 US presidential election. Also as of June 30, 2012, GP presidential candidate Jill Stein received enough contributions to qualify for federal matching funds.
Matching funds - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

E.g., follow the money and/or pursuit of (even with third-party hopefuls) ...

Note: “Prominent third-party candidates have tended to receive significantly higher support in polls taken earlier in election years than they wind up getting on Election Day. This is based on a comparison of registered voter preferences in June with the final election vote share in years when higher-profile third-party candidates were included in Gallup's presidential preference questions. In general, the candidates wound up getting a fraction of their June estimated support -- in most cases, less than half. The drop in support during the campaign is likely due to two factors. First, historically, third-party candidates' support typically drops as the campaign approaches Election Day, perhaps because voters realize the candidates have little chance to win. Second, generally speaking, support for third-party candidates tends to be higher in the broader pool of registered voters than in the smaller group of actual voters” (re Gallup Daily tracking). Additionally per Gallup … "...third-party votes likely helps Obama."

Note 2: There are no prominent name (e.g., Ross Perot or Ralph Nader) third-party presidential candidates in 2012.
Little Support for Third-Party Candidates in 2012 Election

:unitedstates:

 

Steve,

I never wrote that I’m personally satisfied with or [sanction], in essence, a 2-Party system. On the other hand, a vote for a third-party candidate nationally is an exercise in futility in itself. And as you have written many times, I understand your commitment to the former Republican NM Governor turned Libertarian (for this election cycle) Gary Johnson. I can respect that; nonetheless, casting a vote for the LP presidential candidate is meaningless assuming that you truly believe he is electable; even Johnson doesn’t vaguely believe such a possibility. Bottom-line as Gallup Daily tracking suggests … your vote will not remotely help elect Johnson as he is unelectable as a LP (third-party) candidate; however, it might help reelect the current incumbent (?).

 

Gary Johnson 2012.

 

Mitt Romney a "dirt bag"?

Seriously?

Do you know the man donated the entire inheritance from his parents to charity? Or that he donated $4 million to charity last year? Or that he refused to take a salary as Chairman of the Salt Lake City Olympics? Or that he refused to take a salary while Governor of Massachusetts? Or that he will either refuse his salary as POTUS or will donate it to charity? Or that he was an unpaid Mormon missionary for years?

Whatever descriptions you want to assign to Romney, "dirt bag" is the furthest thing from the truth.

 

I couldn't have agreed with you more.

Ron Paul 2012.

 

Not my assumption (re Johnson vote helps Obama) … merely was referencing the Gallup Daily tracking suggestion. The LP presidential candidate (Gary Johnson) is essentially just another no-name recognition candidate among a few other no-name third-party candidates presented on assorted 2012 state ballots. And when all the 2012 national election dust settles, I would regard the very few third-parties cast votes as futile and will be objectively viewed as no more than minimally protest votes. All votes cast for any of this election cycle’s unknown third-party candidates, whether for a Gary Johnson, Jill Stein (Green), Rocky Anderson (JP) or the Constitution Party’s Virgil Goode or write-ins … are likely (e.g., outcome) a 2-Party monopolist dissent vote.

With the 2012 election cycle –the only meaningful ‘protest’ votes that will have any public weight will be cast opposed to Obama, his policies and dismal leadership record. And this election cycle’s ONLY legitimate and viable [electable] option, like it or not, is Gov. Mitt Romney … not at all a Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, Virgil Goode or Rocky Anderson. End result Steve, either Romney or Obama will be elected POTUS. All the others are irrelevant me-too candidates IMO.

 

For any of you who don't think a vote for a third party candidate is a wasted vote: When is the last time that a third party candidate actually scored any electoral votes?

 

Romney actually has a chance to win.

 

Let's say polls show one of the two was clearly going to win the state at question.

 

So you provide the LP’s only one-time [single] electoral vote achievement claim to fame requires a 40-year go-back to example (?). BTW a real exaggerated example too Steve in that in that the electoral vote was via a Virginia Republican and faithless elector who btw was nominated the very next national election cycle (1976) as the LP presidential candidate. As I have already mentioned … a third-party vote for ANY of these 2012 nameless candidates is purely an exercise in futility.

 

Just more Obama campaign propaganda and its collateral effects with some (uninformed) as regards Romney’s personal and altruistic history; seemingly there is no need for some as to whether truth be considered into the equation. Furthermore … what is actually known about Obama’s personal background (e.g., the self-avowed transparency candidate)?

 

You missed the fact that he was a Mormon Bishop for years. The Bishop leads a Mormon ward (usually 2 wards to a church house), takes at least 15 hours of time per week and is also unpaid.

Mitt is a Mormon and all "good" Mormons donate at least 10% of their income to charity, specifically the LDS church. He is also so rich that not accepting a salary for his good work for the SL Olympics is not really an amazing thing. Also Mormon missionaries and Bishops are never paid.

I assume what was meant by the "dirt bag" comment was that Gov. Romney will say or do anything to get elected, including contradicting anything that he's said in the past, or misrepresenting anything anyone else has said or done.