[m3talsmith]

Originally posted by Leopard, that has never been my position. I say vote the candidate which most accurately represents your views for two reasons: (1) first and foremost, then the candidates views will be taken by others as more 'valid', at least worth a look and perhaps debateable on the national scene. For instance, if Nader pulled in 20% of the vote, Kerry 30%, and Bush 40% then the democrats who were screaming 'Nader is stealing votes' would be forced to find a candidate/platform that encompassed at least some if not a majority of Nader positions in the next election to hope to win the seat. I do not say that Nader has any chance of winning, but if enough people vote for him then the things he is running for have increased chance of becoming part of the next election cycle... (2) just like the free market, a democratic election depends on the 'consumer' to make their own value judgements. If these judgements are distorted, then the market/election can result in less than 'optimal' results as far as its goal is concerned (producing and distributing goods and services in the case of the market, having a truely representative government in the case of elections). interesting poll! michael

Good post and good valid points. Thanks for the post.