None Of The Above.

[candycorn]

Which is done before the election, rendering ‘none of the above’ irrelevant and unnecessary.

Everyone gets it: voters feel ignored and excluded by the ‘political establishment’ – where party hacks and insiders are foisted upon the voters absent the consent of voters.

But top down ‘solutions’ such as balance budget amendments, term limits, and ‘none of the above’ aren’t the answer – there is no quick fix.

The fact is that the only viable solution is one the people are too lazy and apathetic to pursue: get out from behind the computer screen, put away the smart phone, get off your ass, and get involved – otherwise, no one is in any position to complain about candidates, and ‘none of the above’ is not an option.

As previously mentioned, the party leaders.decide who's running before the primaries. To me those choices are unacceptable most of the time.

You’re wrong. Did the party leaders pick Trump and Bloomberg?

Bloomberg will go nowhere without party support.

The party clearly picked Clinton.

tRump, probably not to start with, but eventually they came around.

Which is done before the election, rendering ‘none of the above’ irrelevant and unnecessary.

Everyone gets it: voters feel ignored and excluded by the ‘political establishment’ – where party hacks and insiders are foisted upon the voters absent the consent of voters.

But top down ‘solutions’ such as balance budget amendments, term limits, and ‘none of the above’ aren’t the answer – there is no quick fix.

The fact is that the only viable solution is one the people are too lazy and apathetic to pursue: get out from behind the computer screen, put away the smart phone, get off your ass, and get involved – otherwise, no one is in any position to complain about candidates, and ‘none of the above’ is not an option.

As previously mentioned, the party leaders.decide who's running before the primaries. To me those choices are unacceptable most of the time.

And yet again: get involved to compel party leaders to select primary candidates you approve of; become a party leader yourself, or join with others to end party leadership and have candidates selected by a more comprehensive consensus.

But ‘none of the above’ remains anti-democratic, not viable, and in no manner a ‘solution.’

I disagree. The party leadership of either party is not open to change.

If picking candidates results in two consecutive conventions where no candidate has a winning margin, one has to wonder what the DNC leaders are picking. Voters pick the candidates

Not really, no.

The eventual nominees were not the ones who got the most votes?

 

[progressive hunter]

what was so shitty about daryl castle of the constitution party???

other than the fact he was only on 24 state ballots, my state was not one of them.

thats shitty for you,,,and doesnt prove he was shitty ,,,

do you guys have write in ballots??

I was speaking of the two major party candidates...sorry that was too confusing for you.

I will try to make my jokes simpler for you little mind so you can grasp them.

I didnt know it was joking time,,I thought we were having a serious debate,,

Even serious debates have room for a little levity.

Pull the stick out of your ass, it is Thanksgiving after all.

whens the levity start???

 

[Harpy Eagle]

other than the fact he was only on 24 state ballots, my state was not one of them.

thats shitty for you,,,and doesnt prove he was shitty ,,,

do you guys have write in ballots??

I was speaking of the two major party candidates...sorry that was too confusing for you.

I will try to make my jokes simpler for you little mind so you can grasp them.

I didnt know it was joking time,,I thought we were having a serious debate,,

Even serious debates have room for a little levity.

Pull the stick out of your ass, it is Thanksgiving after all.

whens the levity start???

When you pull the stick out of your ass...duh

 

[progressive hunter]

thats shitty for you,,,and doesnt prove he was shitty ,,,

do you guys have write in ballots??

I was speaking of the two major party candidates...sorry that was too confusing for you.

I will try to make my jokes simpler for you little mind so you can grasp them.

I didnt know it was joking time,,I thought we were having a serious debate,,

Even serious debates have room for a little levity.

Pull the stick out of your ass, it is Thanksgiving after all.

whens the levity start???

When you pull the stick out of your ass...duh

just checked,,,no stick there

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I was speaking of the two major party candidates...sorry that was too confusing for you.

I will try to make my jokes simpler for you little mind so you can grasp them.

I didnt know it was joking time,,I thought we were having a serious debate,,

Even serious debates have room for a little levity.

Pull the stick out of your ass, it is Thanksgiving after all.

whens the levity start???

When you pull the stick out of your ass...duh

just checked,,,no stick there

look a little deeper

 

[progressive hunter]

I didnt know it was joking time,,I thought we were having a serious debate,,

Even serious debates have room for a little levity.

Pull the stick out of your ass, it is Thanksgiving after all.

whens the levity start???

When you pull the stick out of your ass...duh

just checked,,,no stick there

look a little deeper

I think your just mad that you ended up looking like a dumbass,,,AGAIN

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Even serious debates have room for a little levity.

Pull the stick out of your ass, it is Thanksgiving after all.

whens the levity start???

When you pull the stick out of your ass...duh

just checked,,,no stick there

look a little deeper

I think your just mad that you ended up looking like a dumbass,,,AGAIN

oh yeah...you really made me look like a dumbass!

Still cannot find the stick can you....keep looking I am sure you will

 

[bripat9643]

Why do we not have this on every election?

Why are we so often asked to choose between a douchebag and a turd sandwich?

I think every election should have a binding "NOTA" option , and if NOTA wins the most votes all candidates are disqualified and disallowed from running for that office again.

All teams must select new captains and start over.

We don't have it because politicians don't want. They don't want you to have that option.

 

[progressive hunter]

whens the levity start???

When you pull the stick out of your ass...duh

just checked,,,no stick there

look a little deeper

I think your just mad that you ended up looking like a dumbass,,,AGAIN

oh yeah...you really made me look like a dumbass!

Still cannot find the stick can you....keep looking I am sure you will

YOU DID THAT ALL ON YOUR OWN,,,

 

[Crepitus]

As previously mentioned, the party leaders.decide who's running before the primaries. To me those choices are unacceptable most of the time.

You’re wrong. Did the party leaders pick Trump and Bloomberg?

Bloomberg will go nowhere without party support.

The party clearly picked Clinton.

tRump, probably not to start with, but eventually they came around.

As previously mentioned, the party leaders.decide who's running before the primaries. To me those choices are unacceptable most of the time.

And yet again: get involved to compel party leaders to select primary candidates you approve of; become a party leader yourself, or join with others to end party leadership and have candidates selected by a more comprehensive consensus.

But ‘none of the above’ remains anti-democratic, not viable, and in no manner a ‘solution.’

I disagree. The party leadership of either party is not open to change.

If picking candidates results in two consecutive conventions where no candidate has a winning margin, one has to wonder what the DNC leaders are picking. Voters pick the candidates

Not really, no.

The eventual nominees were not the ones who got the most votes?

BOth parties pick their own winners.

 

[candycorn]

You’re wrong. Did the party leaders pick Trump and Bloomberg?

Bloomberg will go nowhere without party support.

The party clearly picked Clinton.

tRump, probably not to start with, but eventually they came around.

And yet again: get involved to compel party leaders to select primary candidates you approve of; become a party leader yourself, or join with others to end party leadership and have candidates selected by a more comprehensive consensus.

But ‘none of the above’ remains anti-democratic, not viable, and in no manner a ‘solution.’

I disagree. The party leadership of either party is not open to change.

If picking candidates results in two consecutive conventions where no candidate has a winning margin, one has to wonder what the DNC leaders are picking. Voters pick the candidates

Not really, no.

The eventual nominees were not the ones who got the most votes?

BOth parties pick their own winners.

Incorrect. Delegates pick who is their party nominee.

you never answered what happens if you have 2 or 3 consecutive elections with NOTA being the winner.

 

[Crepitus]

Bloomberg will go nowhere without party support.

The party clearly picked Clinton.

tRump, probably not to start with, but eventually they came around.
I disagree. The party leadership of either party is not open to change.

If picking candidates results in two consecutive conventions where no candidate has a winning margin, one has to wonder what the DNC leaders are picking. Voters pick the candidates

Not really, no.

The eventual nominees were not the ones who got the most votes?

BOth parties pick their own winners.

Incorrect. Delegates pick who is their party nominee.

you never answered what happens if you have 2 or 3 consecutive elections with NOTA being the winner.

Sure I did. I said "pick better candidates".

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The expected media colonoscopy performed on political candidates - more so on the right than the left, of course, but still - pretty much guarantees that no candidates of the highest quality and intellect will present themselves for the procedure.

Citizens in this time vote "none of the above" by simply not voting.

That's not the same thing. A binding NOTA would give more people a voice, and if more people participated maybe we would get some real candidates.

What could be louder than not voting, whether for protest or disinterest?

 

[candycorn]

If picking candidates results in two consecutive conventions where no candidate has a winning margin, one has to wonder what the DNC leaders are picking. Voters pick the candidates

Not really, no.

The eventual nominees were not the ones who got the most votes?

BOth parties pick their own winners.

Incorrect. Delegates pick who is their party nominee.

you never answered what happens if you have 2 or 3 consecutive elections with NOTA being the winner.

Sure I did. I said "pick better candidates".

The best candidate already got their part’s plurality of votes. They were disqualified by the NOTA option.

are you actually thinking that the hard right and hard left will support a compromise candidate?

 

[initforme]

Take all money out of politics.

 

[Crepitus]

Not really, no.

The eventual nominees were not the ones who got the most votes?

BOth parties pick their own winners.

Incorrect. Delegates pick who is their party nominee.

you never answered what happens if you have 2 or 3 consecutive elections with NOTA being the winner.

Sure I did. I said "pick better candidates".

The best candidate already got their part’s plurality of votes. They were disqualified by the NOTA option.

are you actually thinking that the hard right and hard left will support a compromise candidate?

I'm thinking we need to force them to.

 

[candycorn]

The eventual nominees were not the ones who got the most votes?

BOth parties pick their own winners.

Incorrect. Delegates pick who is their party nominee.

you never answered what happens if you have 2 or 3 consecutive elections with NOTA being the winner.

Sure I did. I said "pick better candidates".

The best candidate already got their part’s plurality of votes. They were disqualified by the NOTA option.

are you actually thinking that the hard right and hard left will support a compromise candidate?

I'm thinking we need to force them to.

And if NOTA doesn’t win…we get the status quo….

If NOTA does win, we get months of stalemate where NOTA wins a 1, 2, 3 or however many elections followed by a compromise candidate that couldn’t even win her/his party’s nominee for 4 elections in a row?

Hard pass.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The eventual nominees were not the ones who got the most votes?

BOth parties pick their own winners.

Incorrect. Delegates pick who is their party nominee.

you never answered what happens if you have 2 or 3 consecutive elections with NOTA being the winner.

Sure I did. I said "pick better candidates".

The best candidate already got their part’s plurality of votes. They were disqualified by the NOTA option.

are you actually thinking that the hard right and hard left will support a compromise candidate?

I'm thinking we need to force them to.

"So you wanna play rough? Hokay!"

 

[Crepitus]

BOth parties pick their own winners.

Incorrect. Delegates pick who is their party nominee.

you never answered what happens if you have 2 or 3 consecutive elections with NOTA being the winner.

Sure I did. I said "pick better candidates".

The best candidate already got their part’s plurality of votes. They were disqualified by the NOTA option.

are you actually thinking that the hard right and hard left will support a compromise candidate?

I'm thinking we need to force them to.

And if NOTA doesn’t win…we get the status quo….

If NOTA does win, we get months of stalemate where NOTA wins a 1, 2, 3 or however many elections followed by a compromise candidate that couldn’t even win her/his party’s nominee for 4 elections in a row?

Hard pass.

NOTA doesn't "win", in fact any time that happens I have to count it as a straight up loss.

What NOTA does is force the "big two" parties to out up more appealing candidates.

 

[Crepitus]

BOth parties pick their own winners.

Incorrect. Delegates pick who is their party nominee.

you never answered what happens if you have 2 or 3 consecutive elections with NOTA being the winner.

Sure I did. I said "pick better candidates".

The best candidate already got their part’s plurality of votes. They were disqualified by the NOTA option.

are you actually thinking that the hard right and hard left will support a compromise candidate?

I'm thinking we need to force them to.

"So you wanna play rough? Hokay!"

Not sure where you're going with that.....