SP: What is your occupation and are you currently employed?
AP: I'm currently running for State Senate, but I am an artist, musician, pundit, and political blogger http://punkpatriot.blogspot.com).

SP: You plan to vote for a third party candidate, is that correct?
AP: Yes.

SP: Why?
AP: I cannot in good conscience vote for either corporate-owned party, as a vote for a candidate is an endorsement of their policies, both of which call for austerity for the poor, bailouts for the wealthy, "free trade" agreements for the corporations, and war for everybody. They both are under the control of wall street- the only difference is one is openly brazen about their support for Wall Street-- they other is more subtle about it, and explains to their base why they can't do the things the base wants to do-- or blames the other party and uses them as a scapegoat .I do not accept the argument of voting for the lesser evil, because again, a vote is an endorsement of policy. I cannot endorse Obama's assassination of US citizens abroad, his policy of indefinite detention of prisoners in violation of the constitution and magna carta, or his drone wars around the world. I cannot support that. The Obama administration has decided that the Bush administration, who is so obviously guilty of war crimes, and other crimes -- illegal spying on US citizens-- but Obama's administration has just made all the things that Bush did that were illegal, legal. I cannot support that. The Green Party is a party that is on the ballot this year in 85% of states, don't take corporate money, and their platform is exactly what I personally support myself. I will be voting for Jill Stein, Green Party candidate for president.

SP: What makes a good president?
AP: I think Jill Stein would make an amazing president. Obama had the opportunity to follow through on his rhetoric of "hope and change" in his first 100 days, by going back to the people who got him elected, and ask them to organize around a platform of change. That could have included Medicare for All, an end to the wars, a Green New Deal with anew Works Progress Administration style program, a reversal of the Bush policies of domestic spying, indefinite detention, and war crimes, and accountability for those war crimes. But no. Jill Stein has said that if she were to get elected, she would use the Presidential Office as an organizing position-- to use her post, and her independence from any entrenched party structure, to inform the public about what the content of bills are, and to rally the American people around them. That is what Obama should have done. Instead he focused on making backroom deals with Wall Street.

SP: What criteria do you use to determine who to vote for?
AP: There are a few rubrics I use. First, I don't look for a candidate to support, and then figure out how my ideas mesh with theirs-- I look for a candidate who agrees with what I already think is right. To vote for a candidate who disagrees with you, is a wasted vote. Second, as far as policy, there are a few general rules that I use, like "Are their policies going to help save people's lives, or kill people?" or "Are their policies going to make the distribution of wealth more equal, or will their policies lead to greater inequality?" or "Are their policies going to lead to GREATER accountability in government, or LESS accountability in government?" For me, the only person on the ballot in my State who passes even these simply rubrics, is Jill Stein.

SP: Do you think a third party president could effect change?
AP: Do I think? I KNOW that third parties effect change. Look at the faces on Mt Rushmore. Every single one of the presidents we honor on that mountain face, were Third Party candidates when they ran for office. Abraham Lincoln was a third party candidate, and the Republicans were built up by the citizen's movement to abolish slavery. The Democratic Party we know today was once a third party. Theodore Roosevelt ran with the Bullmoose party and came in 2nd place, defeating incumbent Republican president Howard Taft. And even when third party presidential candidates don't win electoral victories, they can win policy victories in other ways. Eugene V Debbs running with the Socialist Party never got higher than 15% in the polls. But he helped to spark people's imaginations, and those people went on to run for local and state offices under the Socialist Party banner, and after getting into power went on to carry out Socialist Party policies, in places like Wisconsin, Indiana, Minnesota, and North Dakota. That was such a huge threat to the establishment, that FDR was forced to adopt many of Debbs ideas, like Social Security, like Food Stamps, etc

SP: What kind of change, if any, has Obama effected?
AP: When it comes to domestic policy, not much. When it comes to civil liberties, it's been change for the worse. Everything that Bush did illegally, Obama's administration, with congress backing him, have made it legal. Obama has gone far further with violations of civil liberties than Bush and Cheney could have dreamed. In many ways, in the lesser of two evils argument, Democrats are often actually the greater evil, because they suppress the sort of civic immune response we had under Bush. People were so outraged at the violations of civil liberties and the total impunity, that they were out in the streets protesting. Many of those same folks don't have the same sort of emotional reaction when the Democrats are implementing the exact same- or worse, policies.

SP: Does the president have to be a Democrat or Republican in order to be effective for the American people?
AP: I think that they would have to be neither in order to be effective for the American people. Both parties are so entrenched with Wall Street, and so dependent on the existing economic power structure, they are powerless to fight against it in any meaningful way. I mean, just look at the healthcare reform debate. The people wanted Medicare for All. The Democrats went to the table with a Public Option, and what we ended up with was a bailout to the insurance industry-- that everybody is going to be forced to buy a financial product from the private sector.

SP: Are there actions Obama has taken or concepts he has supported that you disagree with, and if so which ones?
AP: I disagree with the healthcare reform bill. It should have been Medicare for All. He didn't even bother trying for that.
I disagree with his allowing the Bush tax cuts to be extended.
With his vote as Senator to pass the FISA bill, which made the domestic spying for the NSA by our cell phone carriers, without warrant, totally legal.
With his use of drones in "signature strikes" which is just anotherway to say, "assassinations."
With his redefining innocent bystanders as "enemy combatants."
With his refusal to hold the Bush administration accountable for War Crimes.
With his support for indefinite detention of US citizens under the NDAA.
I mean, I could go on all day about this. You can find a list of things Obama and his administration have done that I disagree with at http://whatinthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/

SP: Are the elections rigged?
AP: No. However, the debates are. The media arm of the corporate oligarchy controls our access to the candidates. Despite being on the ballot for 85% of voters, Jill Stein has received very little coverage in the corporate owned news. That's not surprising, since they are owned by conglomerates that own companies in the weapons sector, the energy sector, etc -- all of which stand to benefit from excluding voices like the Green Party, and maintaining a false debate between Corporate Rule candidate A and Corporate Rule candidate B. If you cannot get into the debates, it makes it really hard to get your ideas out there. This is why I'm involved in building the Green Party at the State Level though. We cannot win national level victories unless we start building up lots of local victories, and get people organized, educated, and past their fear-based "lesser evil" voting.

SP: Is voting for a third party candidate an act of resistance?
AP: Yes. It saddens me that most people think, "Well I voted Republican, and they fucked us all, and then I voted Democrat, and they fucked us all, so I guess I should try NOT VOTING." As if there are no other options out there-- and as if that is somehow an effective strategy. I have a video in which I explain the mathematics behind how voting third party counts equally against both Wall Street parties which you can view here: http://youtu.be/ERwzF81oXfg?t=7m14s

SP: Do you think different considerations need to be taken by people in "swing states"? (i.e. should liberals/progressives/leftists in swing states vote for Obama so Romney doesn't win)
AP: I really don't think it matters. If Romney wins, the people's civic immune response will be activated, and all the Democratic Party apologists will get off their couches and start organizing to stop his agenda-- despite that his agenda is largely the same as Obama's. If Obama wins, most of the Apologists will remain on the couch, telling others how we just need to give Obama more time, blah blah blah. But in reality, that 60% of people who don't normally vote, and the principled members of the Democrat Party who aren't apologists, will realize that simply voting for Democrats just isn't enough, and then we can start seriously building an independent third party political movement to kick the bums out, and get real systemic changes.