?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

I am sad that people are having to post to their LJs with comments disabled just so that they can say what they feel, in order that they not be flamed. I have been avoiding LJ and FB quite a lot recently and/or using the scrollbars a lot when it comes to opinions that I do not agree with. I would never flame someone for they opinions but have been flamed in this way in the past, so I do understand why people do it..

Personally I am pleased that Obama is in power for another four years rather than the man/men/party that wanted to legislate a woman's right to have a uterus (yes, I am oversimplifying, but that is how it seems to me, that one of a few policies they mentioned that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan were campaigning on and that I do not agree with). That said, I am also sad that the US only has two parties allowed in election (of, at least, that is how it seems to me) and they they are both very right and centrist and that there is no social/leftist option available - the GOP especially seems to care more about cash than people. Just my 2¢.

I am not disabling comments or disallowing anonymous comments but I will freeze or delete any flame-wars on my journal, as per usual. Please do not flame me for my opinions or try to "educate" me about how your opinion is better than mine or anyone else's.

P.S. The mood-theme mood on this post has nothing to do with the subject-matter and everything to do with - just how I feel at this second in time. Nauseous. My body and its symptoms are more random, sometimes, than a random thing on random day.

Tags:




Comments

( 4 comments — Leave a comment )
sweetmeow
Nov. 9th, 2012 03:46 am (UTC)
I suppose you have read my entry about the election, and - yes - I did leave comments disabled. I did not say who I voted for, and won't, and was basically explaining why I don't talk about religion and politics most times - especially in these divisive times. (I won't say I never talk about it).

I wasn't worried about getting flamed. In my opinion, most people - at least on my friends list - have become a lot more respectful here than in the past, and the angst is now over on Facebook. Sadly, though, I do believe that political disagreement DOES have the potential to change relationships, probably because political belief runs deep - to the core of a person - and particularly now in the climate that is here in the USA.

Two examples of things that bothered me over at Facebook: When I read "You can't fix stupid" in a status message from a Romney supporter talking about Obama supporters, it is a personal attack. There is also a Facebook group that I see called (and I may be paraphrasing) - "Too Intelligent to vote Republican" - that is also a personal attack in my mind. Intelligent people live on all sides of the political spectrum. Comments like that change relationships. Maybe I'm too sensitive, but to me they are hurtful.

another example:

My best friend and I have diametrically opposed political views (at least in some areas - maybe not all). Though our friendship remains strong, she and I struggle more now. I respect her views - - she respects mine, but the issues have to remain out of our conversations. Or - we have to tread very cautiously if we find ourselves there. I do not want to hit any of her "hot buttons" and I suspect she is worried about mine. Both of us agree that our friendship is much more important than all of this, and we want to focus on what brings us together. But - we cannot help but admit that it has changed things between us - and how we "do" our friendship.

I also didn't allow comments because I was dealing with "weather" -- cleaning up after hurricane Sandy, and more nasty bad weather that was coming. I wanted to stay focused on issues I have at hand, and didn't want to discuss the things I'd said.

I will also say that more than two parties *are* allowed in the election and we have had elections where there was a 3rd party candidate. One year it was Ross Perot - - another year John Anderson - - another year Ralph Nadar. But - you're correct that our system is kind of "designed" to work with two parties. Our country has never been able to generate enough interest in a 3rd party candidate to make them truly viable. So - in essence what happens is that if you vote for a 3rd party candidate, you are - in essence - weakening the other party that is most similar to the 3rd party, making both candidates weak, allowing the other to gain power.

Here is a website that explains some of it:

http://www.thisnation.com/question/042.html
artemis_of_isle
Nov. 9th, 2012 02:16 pm (UTC)
I am glad Obama won because a Republican could not be a wise choice intrinsically in my opinion. Having had no doubt about the result I skipped everything in the media about the whole thing. ;)
canyoncat
Nov. 9th, 2012 04:48 pm (UTC)
Neither party really gets people but the GOP is more likely to try and force their party beliefs down your throat. President Obama comes across as being more human and less machine and I think that's a big reason why he won.

We can have any number of parties on the ballot and we did have a couple of tag-alongs this time. I would like to vote for the Green party candidate but I know they can't possibly win and then it's taking a vote away from Obama and making it a little easier for Romney. A lot of people probably feel the same way and that if they don't vote Republican or Democrat that the vote is wasted.
pickleboot
Nov. 9th, 2012 09:50 pm (UTC)
there are many party choices on the ballot for president, most of the time, to be honest, my heart is with the green party. to be honest, last election i voted green. i have personally, as in met him in my parents house, met obama, i think he is doing a great job, but when it comes to brass tacks, both major parties are controlled by wall street. this year, i knew the election was going to maybe be much closer, and i felt it was my duty to forgo voting with my true party ethics(and they got 1% of the vote in minnesota) and go democratic.

the other interesting thing is that some states allow straight party tickets so you can say vote all democrats/republicans/insert party here. i grew up with that and was shocked that minnesota did not offer that. there are so many ways of voting out there that there is not a consistent way. makes no sense, does it?

so- there you have my view. we do need more parties that are out there, working for votes, but the money is not there for them, not in the amounts the gop and the dems get it. i always am fascinated by english politics and the number of options available. that is how it should be here.

( 4 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

puffin
natf
Nat S Ford
If you enjoy this blog and want to help support it, please drop a small tip or donation into my PayPal tip jar.



While completely voluntary, all donations will help me buy yarn, eBooks, etc. and keep this blog (and me) going.

Thank you for reading!

≈^..^≈⠀⠀≈^..^≈⠀⠀≈^..^≈

≈^..^≈⠀⠀≈^..^≈⠀⠀≈^..^≈

≈^..^≈⠀⠀≈^..^≈⠀⠀≈^..^≈

≈^..^≈⠀⠀≈^..^≈⠀⠀≈^..^≈

Latest Month

August 2019
S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner