Do you ever just vote for Dramatic effect

Archbob

Ancient CFC Guardian
Joined
Oct 25, 2000
Messages
11,776
Location
Corporate USA
Now, most of the time, I vote for candidate I like more or the one I resent less. But sometimes, when I think both candidates are morons, I like to vote for dramatic effect.

Lets face it, politics is like a soap drama and sometimes I just want to vote for the the person that will make the drama the most interesting.

Like for instance Harry Reid vs Sharon Angle. I dislike both, however, Reid is boring, I think inserting Angle would make for much for excitement in the drama, so If I was in that state, I'd opt for Angle.

I wanted the witch-woman to win just so we could have a witch in congress and when she got caught with correction, we could weight her against a duck.

Does anyone else here vote for dramatic effect?
 
Nah. Preference voting. Plus I have a party I actually support and am a member of. Maybe it would create teh dramas if we got more power, but that's not really what you're asking.
 
I mostly vote a party line, except that I always vote for a woman for judge, regardless of affiliation.

I did vote for Barrack Obama in 2008, since McCain was a Rino and the nuns back in Catholic school indoctrinated us to do so.
 

We had Civil Rights nuns - the Sisters of Saint Joseph. They were in on the Freedom Rides, the marches, voter registration drives, lunch counter protests and so on. If you ever see pictures of the marchers, you may notice Catholic priests accompanied by two or three white women - those were our nuns/teachers. The told us stories about Rosa Parks, Ralph Abernathy, Roy Wilkins, Martin Luther King Jr., and others. And they taught us that someday there would be a Black man as President. That was back in the 60's and it was difficult to believe then.

When I was at the touch-screen (we don't have voting booths any more), I was about to vote reluctantly for Senator McCain, but it all came back to me, and I tapped Obama/Biden instead.
 
Now, most of the time, I vote for candidate I like more or the one I resent less. But sometimes, when I think both candidates are morons, I like to vote for dramatic effect.

Lets face it, politics is like a soap drama and sometimes I just want to vote for the the person that will make the drama the most interesting.

Like for instance Harry Reid vs Sharon Angle. I dislike both, however, Reid is boring, I think inserting Angle would make for much for excitement in the drama, so If I was in that state, I'd opt for Angle.

I wanted the witch-woman to win just so we could have a witch in congress and when she got caught with correction, we could weight her against a duck.

Does anyone else here vote for dramatic effect?

As a long time voter, I am not sure I see the dramatic effect in casting ones vote. I go in, fill out the ballot, put it in the machine and as long as I didnt make and strike-overs it accepts the ballot. Its only slightly more involved than breathing, so....?

But to more directly answer your question, no, I dont. I vote for people who I think are going to most directly pursue my views of how our nation should be run.
 
If I don't know about the initiative or the candidates I tend to not vote on those particular items.
 
I am proud to say that I voted for Jimmy McMillan of the Rent Is Too Damn High Party for Governor of New York.

He got a surprisingly large amount of votes, too - 1%, ~40k votes or so.
 
I am proud to say that I voted for Jimmy McMillan of the Rent Is Too Damn High Party for Governor of New York.

He got a surprisingly large amount of votes, too - 1%, ~40k votes or so.

Why would you be proud of that?
 
Because the rent is too damn high? How are you supposed to live?

Uhm. I recall seeing a news story after the debate that said Jimmy McMillian didnt even pay his own damn rent......

So how could it be too high?

But my point was why would you feel proud about voting for a crazy person that hasnt a snoballs chance in hell of being a factor at all?
 
Uhm. I recall seeing a news story after the debate that said Jimmy McMillian didnt even pay his own damn rent......

Usually when something, like rent, is way too damn high, people don't/can't pay it. I don't see the confusion.

But my point was why would you feel proud about voting for a crazy person that hasnt a snoballs chance in hell of being a factor at all?

It is an abstain vote that still sends a message.
 
Usually when something, like rent, is way too damn high, people don't/can't pay it. I don't see the confusion.

Rofl, no, you dont get the irony I guess. He wasnt paying, not because it was too high, but because he didnt have to.

It is an abstain vote that still sends a message.

Rofl, how is voting for a loser candidate that is absolutely crazy sending anyone a message?

Well, yeah, I think it does send a message...just not the one you think is being sent. :lol:
 
Rofl, no, you dont get the irony I guess. He wasnt paying, not because it was too high, but because he didnt have to.

I'm not familiar with the story. Why didn't he have to? Was he living with his parents? Or some other thing such that he was stuck there, unable to move out because the rent is too damn high? Or did he find some magical place in New York that is rentless?

Rofl, how is voting for a loser candidate that is absolutely crazy sending anyone a message?

Depends on the candidate. In this case, the message is:

- I do not like any of the other candidates
- Property values are too high
- Provide better subsidies to the poor who can barely scrape the rent money up
and so on...
 
I am proud to say I have never wasted my vote. When I didn't know who two candidates were I always voted Democrats, party line baby.

If both candidates were Democrat and no Republicans or any other party and I didn't know who they were I left it blank.

In the recent midterms I am pleased to say all my candidates were elected to office.
 
I live in Manhattan. The rent is too damn high here. I'm moving to Queens next year and even there, the rent is pretty damn high.
 
Back
Top Bottom