tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post115518423498688976..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Lemont v. LiebermanAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1155933398144566222006-08-18T14:36:00.000-06:002006-08-18T14:36:00.000-06:00I actually feel that Lieberman should not have att...I actually feel that Lieberman should not have attempted to run as an independant. By attempting to gain the support of the Democratic party by running in their primary, it is implicit that if you lose you will support the eventual winner. That is the entire purpose of a primary - to choose the best representative of the Democratic party, and to unite as many Democratic votes behind him as possible. If you participate in this process, you must accept the results. You are certainly not required to participate, you can run as an independant from the outset. But running as a Democrat and then going Independant when you lose the primary is breaking the implicit contract.<BR/><BR/>Furthermore, it is counter-productive. You mentioned in a previous post that we are currently a 2 party state. The people that benifit most from any 3rd party entering a race are those that are the most opposed to that 3rd party's views. I can't reference the specific date of the post, but it was within the last 4 weeks I believe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1155235175687693072006-08-10T12:39:00.000-06:002006-08-10T12:39:00.000-06:00I detest the American 2-party system and would wel...I detest the American 2-party system and would welcome a multi-party system that allows voters to support someone who shares their views. I agree that Lieberman should feel no obligation to follow the demands of the Democratic party. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.vjackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05868095335395368227noreply@blogger.com