=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
VP debates
Log In to post a reply
41 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
medisin
medisin
31 posts

Edited Oct 04, 2008, 15:37
Re: VP debates
Oct 04, 2008, 15:34
A lot of the nature of this debate about strategic versus 'honest' voting strikes me as an 'either-or' one. How I see it, voting for Obama in a national election doesn't prohibit that voter from having 'radical' or 'fringe' views as well. It's possible to vote for the better of two evils and STILL campaign for those issues not being addressed on the national level.

In the next UK election I'll be voting New Labour, not because I agree with a great deal of their policies but because the alternative of a Conservative government scares the hell out of me. My ACTUAL politics are far further to the left than the policies of Brown (or whoever replaces him) but I understand that if I were to give my vote to a more marginal party that better reflected my politics I'd effectively be handing a vote over to the Tories.

While I'm prepared to do that, I'm also prepared to support and campaign for issues that I really DO hold dear, in the hope that eventually those ideas will be strong enough to actually compete on a national level. How people vote during a two-party style national election is inevitably going to be more strategic than idealistic. Thankfully, a person's political life doesn't have to be reduced to a single vote, delivered every four years.
In reply to:
VP debates (handofdave)		 Replies:
Re: VP debates (handofdave)
Topic Outline:
U-Know! Forum Index