Ranting on ignorance.

[Mutescream]

Bipartisanship is not a consensus, it's a situation. The Dems and Repubs have NEVER sat down and agreed to a two part system, and our Federal Republic is not an official two party system - we have more than two parties, but the smaller ones don't get their candidates elected to the more prominent offices, like the Tea Party, or the Green Party, or the Libertarian Party.

Here I might disagree with you. The way things are, it pretty much has to be by design. When we have election debates, it's a bit odd that the two major parties are the only ones you see in a debate, aren't they? It's just too tidy that with each party, they force us to choose which freedoms we will cherish, and which ones that we will allow to be stripped away. They both use fear/uncertainty/doubt to lead the masses by the nose, and neither one really tries to enact viable solutions to any of the problems they profess to be trying to resolve.

Yes, we have more that two parties...But, the two major ones have managed to marginalize the others into irrelevance.

 

[LDS714]

At this point I think he is just trying to argue for the sake of arguing. There really is no point to anything he has said and none of it is at all relevant to this thread.

Or is it relevant?

 

[etherealink]

See that is a fantastic point for anywhere except Utah. Because here, they actually do ban or over-regulate anything they don't want kids to get their hands on. Case in point: so-called "alco-pops" like wine coolers - those used to be sold in supermarkets but some legislator's kid got a hold of some, and the next thing we knew, you could not longer get them anywhere but the state liquor stores.

They are doing the same thing with ecigs. While I am in favor of severe and prohibitive penalties for anyone supplying tobacco, e-cigs, or alcohol to under age people, this idea that adults can't have something because "kids might get it" is really out of control here.

I am not here to be a role model to others' kids... although I do make one hell of a cautionary tale

*Steps on soapbox*

Yep, the government is thinking for us again. And my wife wonders why there is never a mention of my time in the military at home and my ribbons/medals (for all decorations) are locked in a fire safe and the key destroyed.

This goverment problem isn't party-based though, and all politicians are to blame at one point or another and for one thing or another. They would rather babysit the populace instead of listen to them and do what they were elected (and swore they would do if elected) to do.

2 simple cases in point:

1. Coal is a fossil fuel and has an enormous carbon footprint, hell, carbon comes FROM coal mines! Yet, instead of diving into alternate energy sources they would rather just close coal mines and everything linked to them.

Consider that even a small mine provides nearly 100 jobs; jobs that put food on families tables, pay bills and taxes and literally (sp) keep people alive. This is not even considering the impact of coal in the world on power and manufacturing. Now factor in a small trucking company, say 50 employees (required to transport coal from the mine to another bulk transport location) and those that run that transport location and you have now cut over 150 jobs over a small scale.

Extrapolate that to reality (within 50 miles of my house) and you have 4 local mines (5 if you count the currently closed u/g mine; only considering coal and no other mineable product) and the 9 trucking companies (not including owner operators and private companies) 3 or more railroad companies and all of the support staff (EMS, security, scale certification people, mechanics, office personnel etc.) that move a critical product to people who need it and people we have outstanding contracts with. Unemployment bad now? Just cancel jobs for a few thousand people in small rural areas and see how broke the government is overnight. And remember, there is a mine in nearly every (if not every) state in the country.

2. On the same vein, we have about 4 local state police who actually babysit the drivers and will pull over every 4th or 5th truck for a "walk-around" inspection. Meaning "do your lights work, do you have all your safety eqip etc" and do this for days on end. As commercial drivers we are subject to and expect to be inspected at any time, but when a single driver is pulled over 5 times in a 10 day stretch in the exact same place, by the exact same officer and in the exact same truck and is not even given the legal paperwork (DOT required stating that the vehicle passed inspection) we have crossed into the realm of people earning money for simply looking busy instead of doing their jobs.

**********
Consider for a moment, would you pay your mechanic for cleaning his tools AFTER he fixed your car... you probably already do.
*************

The police are actually known for sitting in the exact same spot and blocking one of the few places a loaded truck is allowed to pull into in case of emergency! Yet, when there was a vehicle crash (motorcycle hit a loaded semi head-on) the police had nothing, not even a blanket to cover the victim who's leg was removed in the crash (side note, it was 16 degrees at the time of the crash)!! Who saved the bikers' life, the truck drivers! What did the police do you ask, sit there for 8 hours with their strobe lights on burning fuel that tax payers bought and took about 3 statements while making things incredibly dangerous for the drivers who had coal freezing in their trailers!! The drivers had enough clearance to get past and had cleared the road for the ambulance to get in and should have been allowed to go dump their loads. And to add insult to injury a local paper was trying to credit a 911 operator for the use of a tournequit (sp) when it had been applied before the 911 call was even made! Just fyi, the biker survived and is awaiting a prosthetic leg so he can walk his 5 daughters down the aisle; and yes, I was the first on scene.

So, if government has shown anything in their history as of late, it is that they will screw up anything they are allowed to hear rumors of. If prior procedure is any indication of upcoming precedent we can expect them to uproot the few freedom we have left and raise taxes simply to fatten their own pockets.

Yet the IL government has decided to approve illegal immigrants to have legal drivers' licenses! But they can't be used as ID.. drat, like I care. Making it legal for illegal immigrants to have a drivers license is like banning guns and expecting criminals not to have guns. While I am all for someone to.try to improve their lives and those of their family, when they are already breaking the law why are we extending privledges that they didn't use or need before. (Honestly, do you need a valid drivers license to operate a motor vehicle? Does having one mean that you are capable or competant in doing so? Ask a truck driver about "4-wheelers" if you're unsure.)

While I don't condone revolution in the common sense of the word, a complete house cleaning of liars and those who promise and never deliver but still make millions a year for decades is most likely the only way to truly make a change in anything. In short, you get 2 terms, must be elected in an open, popular election (with the Electoral College this will never exist) and after such can never hold public office again.

*Steps off soapbox*

I'll probably be banned or suspended for being honest so I hope this gets a chance to be read by at least someone. Thanks for the fun and info, happy vaping; I think I'll go plant some tobacco.

*****************
Fogging out my bulldog with a 1.2ohm igo-w on a k101 and an I30 when I don't have time to drip.

Bring on the fog machines!

P.s. I love elipses and parenthesis...

 

[etherealink]

See, I really do think this is part of it. I have quit before (over and over) and spent a lot of time in support forums etc and one of the things that always comes up is this sense of something missing in your life when you no longer smoke. A sense of loss, and what do you do with the time you used to spend smoking. Vaping satisfies that because it gives you a new toy, a new interest, a new hobby in place of the tobacco. Face it, the gadgets ARE cool, my sister and I decided it's way cooler than smoking ever was. That really is part of its appeal and something that even adequate nicotine replacement doesn't give you.

I think a lot about this and I have come to conclude that the vaping community (as a grassroots community) - has beaten both the smoking cessation industry AND big tobacco at its own game. Look at all the fantastic support you get when you switch to vaping Notably it does not generate any dollars for government or pharma.

We just had an article in the local new that the county I live in has the highest national rate for people taking up ecigs. We also have a very high rate of vilifying actual smoking so it's not a wonder people are seeking alternatives. But rather than being happy about the switch, they are freaking out about "the kids" and "the toxic vapors" and other non-starters. I always tell people, "Where you see people vaping... you see people not smoking. Which do you prefer?"

I am exactly with you here, I "quit several times and went back to the habit for many reasons.

If there is one thing that I unabashedly throw in the face of people who claim that vaping equates to smoking it's something I found linked to on this forum, a chemical analysis of tobacco smoke vs the vapor exhaled from vaping. True, the example here is from Korea, but I'm sure there is something comparable from a US source. I'll let the study speak for itself.

http://www.janty.com/en/news/item/vapor-test-results-by-keca

I keep this handy on my phone and would suggest all able to do the same.

*****************
Fogging out my bulldog with a 1.2ohm igo-w on a k101 and an I30 when I don't have time to drip.

Bring on the fog machines!

P.s. I love elipses and parenthesis...

 

[tonyorion]

The happy days of unregulated sale/use of ecigs are numbered!

This is but one example of the mood of the general anti-smoking rapidly becoming anti-vaping MAJORITY.

If ANY of the other smoking cessation therapies would have worked to break a 4 decade 1.5 pack/day addiction to an unhealthy and filthy habit, I would be laughing at you all for spending all this time, money, and effort on vaping. Vapers actually pay money to put up with all the frustration, leaks, and failures. It's worse than golf.

Really, sucking in flavored compounds that look like smoke through cumbersome and expensive devices just because I lack the willpower to do what is good for my health!!!!

As far as my own personal health is concerned, the jury is still out on vaping safety. All I know is I feel much better, and women don't avoid me because I smell like an ash tray full of butts. It will be 4 years in April.

The anti-vaping argument up to a year or so ago were about what vapers put into their own bodies. We could have won that one.

Now, it is the ever growing perception of the MAJORITY that vaping is not only dangerous for individual use, but to everyone around them. That perception is not totally unjustified.

We vapers have dug our own graves by standing idly by and smiling at the proliferation of vaping with minors and introducing sub ohm vaping.

Any time you push the technical limits you are asking for trouble. Any time you push the limits and add the folly of youth, limited budgets, poor technical skills, and questionable equipment, your disasters are only a question of time.

Please spare us your platitudes and rants about freedom of choice and anti-administration bigotry. This is not about you, but about the PERCEPTION that vaping represents new form of addiction for minors and a threat to public health. We still live in a democracy (OK, republic, not that many would know the difference), and majority rules. That is not quite true in the USA, but it is in actuality.

Vapers are a minority.

The tide of public opinion will turn against us when stories of big brother (like 16) blowing his face off and hurting little sister (like 10) in the process hit the press. Lord, you have teens posting YouTube videos on how to build tri-coils! Kids blowing Bay Area fogs in front of mothers pushing baby strollers only exacerbates the problem.

So right now I am hoarding. My juice supply is pretty safe, They cannot stop the supply of flavorings, PG, and VG. Nic, I can extract. I have plenty of mods, can even build my own (bought a DNA chipset). I only use RBA's.

What are you going to do when the hammer of regulation falls? And fall it will.

A few nasty accidents and kids being kids (that is annoying-so what is different with this generation compared to mine: nothing!) will be used to justify legislation to control vaping. Of course the tobacco and drug lobbies will be more than willing to fund the propaganda because they will have "safe" replacements waiting.

I really hate to see what those will look like and what they will cost.

 

[etherealink]

TOUCHE. some very good points,,,,,,not all of which I agree with,,,,,,but I will say that's my problem with thinking we have a RIGHT to vape ANYWHERE except our own homes, cars, etc,,,,,,,

It's also the bit of uncomfortable I feel when I think about stealth vaping inside in public places (Walmart, the movies, etc),,,,,,it feels SNEAKY to me,,,,,like I don't care what I may be throwing out into the air others have to breathe.

again, I don't necessarily agree with everything you said,,,,,,,I do think it's HEALTHIER,,,,,,,,if it's a choice between smoking or vaping,,,,I'll vape forever if it comes to that,,,,,I have no plans to quit,,,,

but I admire you for saying it.

Very well said, and I agree, touche.

<flamesuit>

I wonder how many in here got offended when laws were passed telling smokers to get outside and away from the collective public lung.
One of the benefits of quitting smoking is that we educated ourselves on what smoking has done to us – and done to those around us. An interesting poll would be to ask how many people have quit smoking cigarettes through vaping – then quit vaping?

I've been vaping for only 3 weeks but I still worry if i'll be vaping for the next 26 years - i've traded one bad habit for another. I haven't quit smoking – i've quit cigarettes. I'm still addicted to the nicotine, the hand in mouth, the throat hit – i'm still a smoker for all intents and purposes.

Vaping is being sold as a cheaper, and much safer alternative but we're still inhaling a combusted mix of PG/VG, flavor and nicotine. As everyone else admits, there have been no real studies on the long term effects. Combusted? Yes, combusted – it's a liquid being vaporized by a red hot coil. Touch a bit of tobacco to a red hot coil, and it's going to combust.

I read postings in here about people chain vaping 36 mg juice like it's a good thing. Is it really?
Is that a good trade off? Going from a pack a day of the real thing to what? I'm not even sure of the math – are you? How many packs a day does that equate to in nicotine? Is anyone here going to tell me that 36 mg vapor exhaled from your lungs is “nicotine free”? And don't give me the crap about tomato's and other veggies containing nic. I've already felt the OD effects of nicotine and only vape 18 mg max.


The problem with having an open mind is that there's always someone trying to put something in there. There is nothing more ignorant than the average smoker – we smoked in bars, in restaurants, choked out the public. As vapers, we can now smell a smoker from 20 feet away – and it offends my nose to smell it – it offends me even more to know that I was smelling like that in public. I'm still trying to get the smell out of my car - but we were offended when the public collective stood up and said enough, get outdoors and away from the rest of us. Now here we are trying to put forward this safer alternative and we expect what from Joe Public?

Both of my parents smoked in the house, in the car, everywhere – did it hurt me? Hell if I know, I started smoking when I was 14. Was it their fault? No. I see kids today walking out of the local supermarket with a case of red bull under their arm.

I don't get this ideal that we “vapers” should be pushing our “safer alternative” on anyone when we're not totally sure it's a safe alternative in the long run? Do you vape in front of your kids? Do you blow it in your friends faces? Vape with your kids in the car or other enclosed spaces? I'd be curious to know the answer even tho it's none of my flipping business.


You see, I wasn't upset when laws were passed banning smoking in bars and other public places. I never smoked in my own home, nor did I ever smoke in anyone elses – be they smokers or not. Never felt comfortable with it, always took it outside. I've tried vaping around others, just doesn't feel right cause I don't know if it is causing any issues. My friends don't say anything when I do sneak a vape around them. I have been vaping in my condo – and I do smell the residue when I come home from work – that bothers me.

If vaping were sold as a means to an end, and not a hobby like it is on this board - just maybe more people would get on board and listen.

</flamesuit>

Now to be honest, I tried to break apart this post to what I wanted to.comment on and couldn't bring myself to do it. So I will simply answer the questions as best I can.

1. Was I upset that I had to smoke outside; yes, I didn't want to be ostracized and miss anything - much like a child not wanting to go to sleep for fear of missing something.

2. I have to correct something (according to my understanding) vaping does not combust e-liquid, it more boils it before you inhale it. As a rule it clearly does burn, take a drop or two on a toothpick and a match for proof.

3. Chain vaping 36mg a good thing? With what we know of nicotine no, by comparison to the equivalent 36 chain-smoked cigarettes, the lesser of 2 evils. When googled, the average cigarette has about 1mg of nicotine (full flavor, filtered) and 9 mg with no filter.

That number is how I suggest to hopeful quitters/vapers on where to start. Also, the reference to chain vaping you *seem* to suggest is saying that those individuals are vaping the full millileter that the 3,6%/ml or 36mg/ml is based on, I invite anyone to clarify as I'm sure that was not your intention.

Also, here is a link with scientific data on exhaled substance from both traditional cigarettes as opposed to ecigs:

http://www.janty.com/en/news/item/vapor-test-results-by-keca

Even citing this, I agree that is neither a right nor a privledge for vapers to pollute the air of those around them with chemicals that they do not want and are not aware of being exposed to, and I'm glad that someone was thinking that way to get our attention to that side of the argument.

4. Yes, I vape in front of my kids. I did not smoke in the home or car with them and as a heart patient I try to explain to them why although it is safer, it is not harm-free.

Do I vape in an enclosed space, yes, I recently had a very proud moment when sharing a new juice blend I'd made with a fellow vaping friwnd while giving him a coil I'd been toying with; he asked if the great smell in my truck (heavy haul, slip-seat coal hauler) was from my juice and I said yes.

Do I vape with my kids in the car, yes. I do so marginally and almost stealth vaping with the window open. My ten yr old tells me it smells good and he likes that my truck doesn't smell like an ashtray anymore (he likes to help detail my "bulldog" or semi on weekends). And as a heart patient, that with or without ever using nicotine in any for may have been passed genetically to my children I inform them every chance I get about the dangers of smoking and even vaping.

5. About vaping being a means to an end, I assume that you mean an end to nicotine in all forms. For those who have that ability I applaud you, for those who don't I recommend vaping or other NRT products.

What we, pro and against vaping have to remember is that like any chemical addiction this is a multi-component addiction. The chemical, physical, mental, social and other parts to the base addiction of smoking have to be replaced, ignored or otherwise dealt with for a successful transition to being a former user. If someone can overcome all but one of those components they stand a high chance of returning to the addictive behavior.

For those that choose, it is a means to an end and for those that substitute one habit for another, I refer you to the above link as the lesser of two evils.

*****************
Fogging out my bulldog with a 1.2ohm igo-w on a k101 and an I30 when I don't have time to drip.

Bring on the fog machines!

P.s. I love elipses and parenthesis...

 

[etherealink]

TOUCHE. some very good points,,,,,,not all of which I agree with,,,,,,but I will say that's my problem with thinking we have a RIGHT to vape ANYWHERE except our own homes, cars, etc,,,,,,,

It's also the bit of uncomfortable I feel when I think about stealth vaping inside in public places (Walmart, the movies, etc),,,,,,it feels SNEAKY to me,,,,,like I don't care what I may be throwing out into the air others have to breathe.

again, I don't necessarily agree with everything you said,,,,,,,I do think it's HEALTHIER,,,,,,,,if it's a choice between smoking or vaping,,,,I'll vape forever if it comes to that,,,,,I have no plans to quit,,,,

but I admire you for saying it.

*****************
Fogging out my bulldog with a 1.2ohm igo-w on a k101 and an I30 when I don't have time to drip.

Bring on the fog machines!

P.s. I love elipses and parenthesis...

 

[Rocketpunk]

Nicotine is not a carcinogen. It is not what kills you. That would be everything else. Granted, if you have heart disease, then yes, stay away from nicotine.

But everyone demonizes nicotine. I understand, no one wants to be addicted to anything, but I don't see coffee aficionado forums where everyone is talking about quitting caffeine.

If your goal is to ween off nicotine, more power to you, good on ya, and good luck. I wish you the best. But to demonize nicotine... I enjoy it. I enjoy my nicotine. Do I feel like a junky if I'm cut off from my vape for more than a few hours? No. But I do enjoy my nicotine.

To each their own, live and let live.

 

[EddardinWinter]

Other posters, please forgive me for this diversion.

I think if you watch some news, your mind may get blown with terminologies, that you have to use wiki to find out what it means, and yet still be confused..

FYI: bipartisanship is not just a situation. And Bipartisan and Bipartisanship is different, just as partisan and partisanship is.

Well, you have certainly blown my mind...I grant you that. But this post IS revealing. Now I see the issue clearly!

if you watch some news

You are getting your knowledge from the television. This simultaneously explains 1)your poor command of the language, 2) your insistence on being correct, regardless of facts presented, 3) your inability to source any back-up for the ideas in your head, and 4) the abominable grammar you have shown in this thread.


Let me parse this FYI for you. I will not pick apart the first blundering, run-on sentence in the interest of brevity.

"FYI: (1)bipartisanship is not just a situation. And Bipartisan and Bipartisanship (2)is different, just as partisan and partisanship (3)is."

(1) This is a sentence that follows a colon...bad form, perhaps, but I will give you a pass, it is not a technical error. But you start the sentence without capitalizing. Tsk-Tsk. Meh, a minor error. It happens all the time.

(2) This is incorrect subject-verb agreement. You are plagued by this issue throughout the thread. You are comparing two things here. So correct would be, "Bipartisan and Bipartisanship are different". Do you see that? Two things require a plural verb, not the singular "is".

(3) You repeat the same error. Correct would be "partisan and partisanship are" for the same reasons as in (2).


"So what?" you say..."You are just picking on my grammar!" I am, in fact, guilty as charged. The thing is, when you go around pretending to know something about government and talking down to people, you have to be able to articulate it if you wish to keep up the facade. When you cannot match subject and verb, or make use of the correct terms (like when you use nouns for adjectives and adjectives for nouns), not every reader will identify it as precisely as I do, but they do notice. Your words are matched badly and it is felt, even if the reader isn't sure why. They don't have to...they feel the wrongness of your delivery. It looks awkward and ill-formed...because it is! It is actually hard to read, it's hard to even look at.

I will now attempt to bow out of the thread.

 

[Rocketpunk]

Hah! I learned all this in public speaking. If you're not able to articulate to your audience, or if your credibility is in doubt, it all goes out the window. Something as trivial as proper writing/speaking is a nail in the coffin, if you're not capable of it. Someone else has a great big hammer ready to drive it home...

 

[DC2]

Yes, we have more that two parties...But, the two major ones have managed to marginalize the others into irrelevance.

I'm not sure that "they" have done it, I think maybe "we" have done it.

I'm not going to tell you how many years I voted for a certain party because I didn't want to waste my vote on one of those "other" guys.
It's only been a fairly recent development that I have decided that just ain't helping.

From now on, I vote for who I want to be President.
No matter which party they may or may not belong to.

 

[ScottP]

I'm not sure that "they" have done it, I think maybe "we" have done it.

I'm not going to tell you how many years I voted for a certain party because I didn't want to waste my vote on one of those "other" guys.

This is exactly what has happened. Usually when a third party is on the ballot, that candidate usually appeals more to followers of one of the major parties more than the other one. So the third party candidate ends up splitting the vote of one of the major parties while taking very few from the other one, resulting in an easy victory for the major party candidate that did not have their vote split.

After seeing this happen a few times, people have basically stopped voting for a third party. They are instead choosing "the lesser of two evils" out of the major parties.

 

[JustB'nMe]

Yes we are adults that can make our own choices, but is that a good thing? Vaping is an industry that is reliant on your dollars.

This part pretty much sums it up for me. Yes, we are ADULTS and can make our own CHOICES. That being said, whether or not it's a good thing is subjective. What many of us in the vaping community want is the right TO choose without judgment. Vaping may not be 100% healthy but then again, neither is anything else. Hey, we're all going to die someday.....might as well be happy while we're living. What makes me happy may not do the same for you and that's ok.


Sent from my KFHD on Tapatalk

 

[evolvewithme]

I've read plenty of people's ranting on here, my turn.

I was at the grocery store (one I use to work at) and an old coworker noticed my PV (which I was not using). I tried explaining what it was and she as a close-minded non smoker didn't hear a word. She genuinely believes nicotine is the carcinogen in cigarettes and likewise my vape is just as bad. The cherry on top of my headache is when I mentioned the different flavors she responded "that just tells you they are targeting kids"


I have no words to express my annoyance at this ignorance... At least no words the moderators will let me post.

People who have quit cold turkey or never smoked will immediately say that cold turkey is the best way to quit...well duh... obviously some people don't want to quit. Some people develop a caffeine habit and addiction and the entertain the idea with full knowledge of the addictive properties. This also happens with nicotine. So buying an addictive product (mostly because of the idea of substituting nicotine with 3999 other chemicals for just nicotine should be a pretty straight forward argument). But cigarettes have been around for a long time and people won't have a society that can rant on that topic forever, so they target the new thing (even though it's SIGNIFICANTLY better). They think Ecigs should band until we study the 4 chemicals inside, but cigarettes have literally 1000 x that many chemicals.
The advertising to children argument is ridiculous and I usually just tell people that.... Children solely are not apt to buy something chocolate flavored or strawberry flavored or bubblegum flavored. Humans are apt to buying these things except when your a child your preffered diet consists of only sugary things. Adults were children at one point too and should understand that the craving is within all of us. Aswell people will say that it will lead children to start smoking. The AWESOME flavors can only make it that much harder for someone to smoke after this, because after vaping Poppa Smurf or Boy Wonder your standards of taste far exceed what a cigarette could possibly give you. So it's not marketed to children, its marketed to humans, and even if a kid gets their hands on one (which tends to happen with anything they are not allowd to have, they are actually more likely to not smoke.

 

[FearTX]

People parroting main stream media cliches are not ignorant, they are just lazy sensationalists who want desperately to be accepted by the other lazy sensationalist sheeple.

 

[BillyWJ]

Here I might disagree with you. The way things are, it pretty much has to be by design. When we have election debates, it's a bit odd that the two major parties are the only ones you see in a debate, aren't they? It's just too tidy that with each party, they force us to choose which freedoms we will cherish, and which ones that we will allow to be stripped away. They both use fear/uncertainty/doubt to lead the masses by the nose, and neither one really tries to enact viable solutions to any of the problems they profess to be trying to resolve.

Yes, we have more that two parties...But, the two major ones have managed to marginalize the others into irrelevance.

The debates are not an official part of the election process, they're not spelled out in the Constitution, and are generally run by the media, who lock out the third parties, as we saw when Ron Paul wanted to debate, but was marginalized by the media.

There may be "design" behind it, as a collusion of the media and politicians, but there is no legal controlling authority over the party system.

I see it as more the politicians failing to address the issue that has grown over the centuries, as opposed to purposeful design - why rock the boat, when leaving it alone is in their favor?

 

[BillyWJ]

I'm not sure that "they" have done it, I think maybe "we" have done it.

I'm not going to tell you how many years I voted for a certain party because I didn't want to waste my vote on one of those "other" guys.
It's only been a fairly recent development that I have decided that just ain't helping.

From now on, I vote for who I want to be President.
No matter which party they may or may not belong to.

I became politically agnostic during the Clinton Administration, and haven't voted nor supported a D or R candidate in any election since. My political view is "Skeptical", and would join a "Skepticism" party in a heartbeat.

Neither party is capable of doing what really needs to be done, all they do is kick the can down the road so the next guy or party can kick it down the road more.

 

[DC2]

This is exactly what has happened. Usually when a third party is on the ballot, that candidate usually appeals more to followers of one of the major parties more than the other one. So the third party candidate ends up splitting the vote of one of the major parties while taking very few from the other one, resulting in an easy victory for the major party candidate that did not have their vote split.

After seeing this happen a few times, people have basically stopped voting for a third party. They are instead choosing "the lesser of two evils" out of the major parties.

And that's exactly what I was doing.
And as long as we all keep doing that, nothing will change.

 

[Mutescream]

The debates are not an official part of the election process, they're not spelled out in the Constitution, and are generally run by the media, who lock out the third parties, as we saw when Ron Paul wanted to debate, but was marginalized by the media.

There may be "design" behind it, as a collusion of the media and politicians, but there is no legal controlling authority over the party system.

I see it as more the politicians failing to address the issue that has grown over the centuries, as opposed to purposeful design - why rock the boat, when leaving it alone is in their favor?

Through the privately run Commission on Presidential Debates, leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties set rules that require any candidate to reach 15 percent support across five national polls. This effectively excludes any other candidate, since the only way to poll so high prior to the debates would be to have already taken out tens of millions of dollars in campaign ads. Capitalist democracy comes down to money once again.

How the presidential debates exclude third-party challengers​

The CPD was launched in 1987 by the then-national chairs of the Republican and Democratic parties, Frank Fahrenkopf and Paul Kirk, to promote the interests of the two major parties and to ward off third-party interlopers. Mr. Fahrenkopf and Mr. Kirk head the CPD today.

"Mr. Fahrenkopf indicated that the new Commission on Presidential Debates was not likely to look with favor on including third-party candidates in the debates," the New York Times reported. "Mr. Kirk was less equivocal, saying he personally believed the panel should exclude third-party candidates from the debates." Mr. Kirk explained: "As a party chairman, it's my responsibility to strengthen the two-party system."
The Third-Party Lock Out​

While it may not be a issue of actual law, they certainly have interfered in the process... I must strongly disagree in this not being a product of deliberate design. The problem is, there is no law in place to prevent something that is blatantly interfering with a productive electoral process. The lack of true competition is why we have such a severe problem of mediocrity, and why partisan politics have been able to be used so effectively to divide and conquer us as a people.