Just in case your enthusiasm ...

[Twoller]

Originally Posted by wetibbe

....

Most of you will do the same thing and vote for Meg Whitman. If she follows true to form as soon as she takes office she will renege on campaign promises and flip flop over to the right side. *( Don't they all ? ).

....

As long as people continue to vote for the lesser of two evils, then that is all they are going to get, the lesser of two evils. Until people stand up for the right to reject both candidates, then they are only going to get the product of the "two party system" which is always going to be bad or worse. And it doesn't matter where you find yourself in the bogus "liberal" versus "conservative" debate. All you have to chose from is tweedledum and tweedledee.

[ilbegone]

Originally Posted by Twoller

As long as people continue to vote for the lesser of two evils, then that is all they are going to get, the lesser of two evils. Until people stand up for the right to reject both candidates, then they are only going to get the product of the "two party system" which is always going to be bad or worse. And it doesn't matter where you find yourself in the bogus "liberal" versus "conservative" debate. All you have to chose from is tweedledum and tweedledee.

This is absolutely correct.

Harry Reid of Nevada, with the "none of the above box" option on the ballot, could still be reelected Senator even if "none of the above" votes outnumber "Harry Reid" votes.

It would be much better to have a rejection box which, if receiving the majority vote, would trigger a mandate for a new election with all the previous candidates disqualified and incumbents for a particular office on the ballot immediately removed from office. No lame duck poisoning of the well.