In case you haven’t seen it yet:
In case you didn’t go through Civics class (or, if you did, you’ve completely forgotten by now), the United States elects Presidents through the Electoral College, a group of 538 people elected by (in most states) a primary process quite similar to that of presidential candidates. In order to become elected President of the United States, a candidate must receive votes from more than half the Electoral College, or at least 270. Remember the 2000 election? George W. Bush won by 5 electoral votes. It would’ve been 4 if but for a faithless elector, but that’s irrelevant. What I’m getting at is you’re a third-party candidate away from gumming up the whole works.
Our electoral system is flawed, ladies and gentlemen, and frankly it would take either an absolute deadlock between candidates (which can theoretically occur) or a third-party candidate (such as Mr. Nader) receiving enough votes to either shift an electorate away from one candidate or, even worse, receiving enough votes to actually win a state. As unlikely as the latter sounds, the former is all too familiar. These two men, Ralph Nader and Ron Paul, are idealists who not only want their written agendas heard but also their spoken ones as well. So many people once thought that a revolution was due in this country and I still read about it today. I am in favor of third-parties becoming politically viable in this country and I am completely for election reform but if it will cause anarchy or corruption to resolve I will not have any part of it. I would not be at all surprised if the words and actions of these two men will bring about that end.
Mr. Nader, I agree with your political agenda but you need to find a more suitable way of getting them to reach fruition. You can’t beat the system, and you refuse to join it, and your efforts to change it have failed and will not only continue to fail but will ruin another election that may continue this country down its currently poor path.
Recent Comments