So, I don't actually know how to make a title

If anyone can help me with that, that would be great. I haven't posted in like 4 months, and I am willing to bet no one even looks to see if I post anymore.
The election was last week. Everyone has said almost everything there is to say, however, there is one thing people seem to be overlooking. The media would like you to think that the Senate is split 51-49 Democrats. In actuality, it is 49-49 with two independents. The first independent is Joe Lieberman--now I know what you are thinking: "Well, Joe Lieberman is a Democrat, he just lost that primary so he had to run as an Independent." That is all fine, but was Joseph Lieberman really ever a Democrat? We are talking about a guy who agreed to "Stay the Course"--we aren't talking about merely supporting the troops, we are talking about a DEMOCRAT going around and saying Bush was completely right. Secondly, Lieberman is against abortion, and against free speech. Alright, that second one may be an exaggeration, but he does want to limit free speech. After all, he led a commision to get violent video games and gansta rap banned, or at the very least illegal for minors to own. Now this doesn't make the man out of his mind or radical or anything like that, but democrat? No, this man is a Republican and he always has been.
But none of that is important. This is the real story of the election. The socialist workers party may want to be pessimistic because they didn't support him, but the reality is that Vermont elected the first Socialist Senator in United States history. Now I am happy of this for two reasons, but most of you will only be happy about the second. First of all, its a socialist. This is a step away from the blind Anti-Communism of 25 years ago--if any students today ever read the Communist Manifesto, they would see that Lenin and Stalin got it all wrong. Criticize communism all you want, but I am sick of hearing "It never works", because there are only about two examples you can come up with. After all, democracy failed in Greece, but I certainly wouldn't give it up (aside from maybe some sort of Philosopher-King system). The second reason this socialist election is good is that it is a HUGE step in the right direction for Third Parties.
Am I the only person that thinks the two party system is terrible? There are more than two types of people in the country, yet everyone seems forced into choosing Republican or Democrat. They don't want to 'throw their vote away'. Well, I've got news for you: Your vote, by itself, doesn't count. So vote for third parties. Now is the time--they won't win right away, but once they get a bigger percentage, people will start taking them seriously and voting for them.
I read somewhere once, and I forget the source, so don't quote me I guess, that exit polls showed that if people thought he had a chance, Perot would have won the election in 1996. Isn't it ridiculous that he didn't because people didn't want to "throw their vote away"?
Now, I certainly put some blame on the third parties themselves. They have too much pride, for the most part, to start small with local elections and work their way up. For example, in this election, the Libertarians, Green Party, and Socialist Worker's party all only ran for one office: Governor. Well they knew they wouldn't win. But if they ran in a small race, like state house or something, they may have been able to go door-to-door and do it. But they didn't.
Anyway, the point is this: If you dislike the two party system, and you are sick of voting for the "lesser evil", vote for third parties. If we all do this, eventually they will be getting enough votes to be taken seriously, and even winning some races. Hell, Bernie Sanders did it. He started as a mayor, and now he is an openly Socialist Senator. How about that?
Too bad there aren't any real elections for a couple years...we will all forget this rant by then.