Both Parties Suck?!

Found at City of Ann Arbor's government page

The Two Party system is a joke...

...perpetuated by the two major parties and third parties are bullied out of debates?  I personally am not as down on the two party system as is William Hamby, writing at the Examiner, but I really do agree with much that he says:  

"Let's talk for a moment about third party voting and abstaining. To begin with, I get it. The Two Party System of voting is a joke. It's perpetuated by the two major parties, and third parties are bullied out of debates. The two parties collude to keep it this way. They cheat if necessary. This is all true, and pardon my colloquialism, but it sucks. But a lot of things suck, and realists deal with it.

...Next, let's address the “both parties suck” argument. Both parties are corrupt. Both parties are sucking at Wall Street's teat. Both parties are following the Truman Doctrine. Both parties are neglecting the middle and lower classes. Again, this is all true, and again it all sucks. But it's a terrifyingly naïve and idealistic perspective. Both parties suck in the same way that being kicked in the head and being shot in the head suck. Ask me if I'd like either, and I'll say, “No, thank you.” Tell me I have to choose one and I'll take the kick in the head every time."

Unhappy with both parties?
Mr. Hamby writes as an atheist, and his comments are aimed at those who are "skeptics, atheists, and other non-believers", but he is also addressing those who are unhappy with both parties: 

If you're not in one of the 8 or 10 swing states which will decide this election, you could be thinking it's pointless to vote, or that casting a third party protest vote is a reasonable thing to do. In the next few paragraphs, I hope to convince you otherwise.

The consequences of voting for a third party: 
He goes on to say:

There are real consequences to choosing one of these candidates over the other, and by extension, one party over the other.

Among the "consequences" he mentions:

• Vote for limited drone strikes, or vote for war with Iran. 

• Vote for the Affordable Care Act, or vote for private vouchers. 

• Vote for gay rights and woman's rights, or vote for Theocratic Biblical values in law (enacted by a Mormon).

(There are several others; you will have to check out the article to read the rest.) 

What's in President Obama's Second Term for Libertarians
In the rest of the article, he addresses libertarians:

If you vote for President Obama, you're not going to get a lot of what you want on an economic front. ... What will happen if Romney wins the election? You will lose a startling number of civil liberties. America will become more Theocratic.

Don't Forget the Supreme Court!
 

He mentions the impact of this Presidential election on the Supreme Court, one of the best and most important reasons for voting for President Obama.  Definitely check out Mr. Hamby's "Bottom line".  It ends with this appeal to "secularists" (and just about anybody who is concerned about the religious right):

Today, we must be pragmatists and vote for the candidate who will give us the best chance of even being able to talk about secular politics in both the near and distant future. We must prevent the Theocratic Republicans from using their last grasp at power to sabotage our ability to create a realistic secular America across party lines in the next twenty years.

Emphasis mine... Though I don't consider myself an atheist, Mr. Hamby makes many good arguments for those who are cynical, skeptical, or libertarians to vote for the President.  Again, HERE's the link.