MEANINGS ARE IN THE EARS OF THE BEHOLDER

Apparently I deeply offended someone today for telling him: "Don't forget, that to vote for other than these two is a statement made that no one will hear...save yourself a trip to the voting booth...." He misinterpreted my message into suggesting that he HAS to vote for the status quo when what I truly meant is that the vote, effort and statement he wanted to make would fall flat. I suggested that, after profuse apologies for seeming to disrespect him, that he is correct that politics are terrible.

My message was: "I am saddened that you clearly misunderstood my intent. You DO get heard on the Forum and your views are respected by me here. However, I truly believe that efforts should be made to change the two-party system, but it isn't going to happen by a few independent votes that the media will dismiss.

In this world, if you want to be heard, don't shout into the wind or preach to the choir. Yell where you will be heard.

I do not disrespect you. If I did, I wouldn't read your long posts. The truth is, you CAN vote for whomever you choose...you can even be proud of it. What I have to say is my own disappointed opinion of our system. Few people need agree with me nor share the disappointment. I'm sorry that you disrespect me for MY opinion. I don't disrespect you for yours...I simply believe it is a vote wasted and I am entitled to that belief as you are entitled to vote as you please. I believe the way of choosing a President for this country is crap...you can chide me for that opinion too, but it hasn't been changed by this election at all."

We have talked of making the candidates start and play on a level playing field. I do not admire the two-party system in the least. I believe it should be changed but I believe it can be changed more easily with more active attempts than passive voting as we are currently doing. Maybe because I have watched people making the same lost statement for as long as I can remember, I am less patient with that method. We need to change the way money is funneled into campaigns which prohibits third parties from reaching any sort of significant goal. If we can succeed at that, so candidates will start with a level playing field, it might work to rid us of the two party gridlock we have now. When campaigns disallow funding from corporations, special interests, lobbyists and unions, we will be better off. I would rather have money added to my taxes so that each candidate has the same amount of money to spend on the campaign, then we might have other worthy candidates able to run.