If you mean the actual conservative/liberal dichotomy, then yes the two sides are quite different. If you mean the politicians in the two main American parties then no, they are on the same level of moral bankruptcy.

I'm voting in my local elections and props. However, I haven't found a congressperson who isn't scum so I'll pass on that particular oligarchical farce, thanks.

I pretty much don't even know what we're voting for in the first place

^ HaHa! Those questions were terrible, though I thought the question, "How far is up?" was even less fair; tricky enough to answer if you're sitting around with a bunch of friends, but to have them fired at you out of the blue in an official context is disgraceful.

^ Thanks! That article is a really powerful argument in favour of voting. If I may, I'll quote just one bit which might strike a chord with some members here:-

EDIT: @ Mondo Bungle: one place to start would be to read eric generic's article. Another might be to look at the OP where I put some beginner's guide info.

And the GOP supports freedom. How can you hate freedom and even more liberty?

Sales pamphlets are worthless.

So if the person you agree with doesn't have a reasonable shot at victory, you shouldn't vote for them? It's that time of thinking that perpetuates the sh*tty system that we have.

I've heard that Democratic PAC's [political action committees] have been giving money to Libertarians, in an effort to siphon votes away from Republicans and allow Democrats to win.

Smart on the part of the Democrats.

Why don't all election with more than 2 candidates implement INSTANT RUNOFF / RANKED voting?

Instead of voting for a single candidate, you rank all candidates on the card in order of your preference for them. The lowest rated candidate is eliminated, then people vote again on the remaining candidates. This is done until there is a winner.

This would be an ideal method of voting, but logistically, I can see problems. People would make their initial vote, then we would have to count all of the ballots, then ask people to come back and vote again, and again, until a winner was declared. This would cost time and money that people just aren't willing to allot to an election, unfortunately.

Any thoughts on what would constitute a "perfect" voting system?

By this edict, only Democrats and Republicans deserve votes, regardless of how sh*tty they are. Do you see the problem with this? You're perpetuating that "lesser of two evils" bullsh*t.

That type of thinking is toxic to any form of democracy! I always vote for some obscure party in the primary, just to ensure that they make it on the ballot. The last time, it was the Constitution Party, and I was the first person all day to do so, according to the guy at the polls.

VIA: https://dailycaller.com/2018/11/01/n...ook-ad-hunters

Elph paints himself as a revolutionary but he's really a pragmatist who will compromise because he can't stand losing.