![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Well, Obama won.
Which is better than the only practical alternative.
I did not vote for either one; I knew that New York would be going to Obama barring an act of God directly changing the minds of millions, so I took the opportunity to vote for a third party.
However.
In the next four years, we need to *MAKE* a third party, and WIN, and kick BOTH the Democrats AND Republicans out.
Because honestly? There's not really much difference between Obama and Mitt. The news and each groups' boosters like to talk up the differences like they're huge, insuperable gaps, but they're really both much closer to each other than either of them would have been to, say, Ronald Reagan or Richard Nixon, let alone Jimmy Carter or JFK. While Mitt and his party do seem more bound up with the obviously 1% interests, Obama's got plenty of support and interests in those areas as well; he just played the stage somewhat differently.
We need to BREAK the two party system. We need to SHATTER it. It needs to be turned into a system of PEOPLE, not organizations that perpetuate themselves as though the purpose of politics was to perpetuate politics.
I did not vote for either one; I knew that New York would be going to Obama barring an act of God directly changing the minds of millions, so I took the opportunity to vote for a third party.
However.
In the next four years, we need to *MAKE* a third party, and WIN, and kick BOTH the Democrats AND Republicans out.
Because honestly? There's not really much difference between Obama and Mitt. The news and each groups' boosters like to talk up the differences like they're huge, insuperable gaps, but they're really both much closer to each other than either of them would have been to, say, Ronald Reagan or Richard Nixon, let alone Jimmy Carter or JFK. While Mitt and his party do seem more bound up with the obviously 1% interests, Obama's got plenty of support and interests in those areas as well; he just played the stage somewhat differently.
We need to BREAK the two party system. We need to SHATTER it. It needs to be turned into a system of PEOPLE, not organizations that perpetuate themselves as though the purpose of politics was to perpetuate politics.
no subject
I don't expect it to actually HAPPEN, but the potential's there.
As for benevolent dictator? Eh. I'm not benevolent. I'm not malevolent. I want to be left out of it. If elected I will do a job I'm elected to do, but I won't run, and I don't want the job (of President OR Dictator-For-Life).
no subject
You're postulating that everyone who does that voted for one candidate and would want to vote for the same person. There are a lot of people on the far right who held their nose & voted for Romney because he wasn't Obama/a Democrat, and there were as many on the far left who angsted & anguished & voted for Obama because he wasn't Romney/a Republican. Neither of the far ends would consider voting for someone the other far end found acceptable.
no subject
Actually, I'm assuming all of them would want to vote for thousands of other people.
But that maybe, just maybe, you could get them all to vote for some random schmuck not because any of them agreed he or she was a GOOD choice, but because they wanted to send a REAL message to the existing parties, which is: GET OUT, OR GET A CLUE.