Ted, have you even mentioned any men or women that you would be willing to support for President? All I've read at the blogs I visit is variations on I won't vote for Romney, he's too like Obama, I won't vote for Ron Paul, he's too crazy. Damnit, then, who is this paragon of conservative virtue who has been eliminated/sat out the race? Name him/her.Fair question. We don't, after all, get the luxury of voting for Philosopher Kings. I've been pretty negative about the candidates. I haven't squared my shoulders and stepped up to square the circle as to who to vote for. All right, then, here are the candidates and the reasons to vote for them.
Mitt Romney. He's not Barack Obama. I've said (at length, as is my wont) that this is an exceptionally poor reason to vote for him, but it's what he has. He's a big government policy wonk, and a wonk must needs wonk. Please no what about the SCOTUS comments, since he'll appoint nothing but David Souters. Al Fin puts it well (although he entirely leaves out the fact that Romney will do precisely nothing about any of the problems he describes:
In other words, Obama cannot be given the total blame for America's ongoing decline. Without the huge and bloated government bureaucracies, government employee unions, a thoroughly corrupted media and academia, and a dumbed down electorate, Obama would have never been given the power to enact his program of indoctrination, so thoroughly ingrained into his young mind in childhood and adolescence.
Barack Obama. He's not Mitt Romney. This is as stupid as it sounds, but you should stop and ask yourself why the mirror image argument isn't equally stupid. Please no what about the SCOTUS comments, since the if the GOP is too supine to filibuster his obnoxious nominees (*cough* Eric Holder *cough*) then they deserve to join the Passenger Pigeon and Dodo birds in the museum of Wait, what?
Gary Johnson. This is the most interesting candidate for a whole hearted "for him, not agin him" vote. Aretae pointed out that if the Libertarian Party gets 5% of the vote, they get matching Federal election funds in the next cycle. Since we will have either a disastrous Obama Administration or a disastrous Romney Administration, a (funded) Libertarian alternative may actually help nudge the GOP down that sylvan path to join the Whigs in the graveyard of failed political parties. Please no what sort of Libertarian are you to want Government funding comments; I'm a libertarian, not a Libertarian. Given that Romney is looking to walk away from Obama across most of this fair Republic, most readers will find themselves in a precinct where their vote will not count against Romney but will count for a more viable alternative next time around. As to Gary Johnson qua Gary Johnson, all I can say is who?
Roseanne Barr. Crotch grabbin' at the National Anthem is indeed compelling, but not enough to beat out Johnson. Sorry honey*.
CPUSA candidate. There's got to be one. I mean, Gus Hall is gone, but some Comrade must have filled those shoes. Actually it wouldn't make much difference if you voted for this dude since we're all dirty commies anyway. Yeah, even you.
So Bob, I think I'll probably vote for Gary Johnson to speed the crackup of the Dinosaur parties. Not that it is likely to help much. But you did ask.
* I only say "honey" to cause the vapors among the brassiere burning crowd.
8 comments:
You forgot one viable candidate, albeit none one for whom I expect any of your readership to break: Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate. The Greens are in the same boat as the Libertarians this election. Both candidates are on the ballot in enough states that they could--if people actually acted on their oft-stated belief that our two party system is broken--conceivably win the Presidency.
Of course, Dr. Stein is handicapped much further than Mr. Johnson by a fright of "throwing away" a vote and letting the Big Evil win. Leftists love them some collectivism. However, the Federal matching funds issue is also significant here; 2016 could be an interesting year indeed.
Wait Roseanne Barr gets a mention but no love for Virgil Goode ?
http://www.goodeforpresident2012.com/the-issues.html
With Johnson those matching funds are being used to run a political campaign rather than used to spy on us or kill brown people in oil rich countries.
Also with Johnson, I've heard (but haven't verified) that the 5% mark also grants automatic ballot access in all states, so the LP won't have to waste time/money gathering signatures just to qualify.
Automatic ballot access nationwide is probably worth more than the money for a 3rd party.
Pat Paulsen is looking better all the time. The fact that he has been dead for years doesn't change that.
I'm going to vote for Mitt. That being said I see the possibilities of the Libertarian Party. The Tea Party must evolve or die and the only real way to do that is a party of our very own. That may be the Republican Party but I could easily see many of us throwing our hands in the air and banding together under the big L. The next 4 years will tell the tale. If we get enough big C conservatives in the House and Senate the big R party will essentially be libertarian.
I do believe that the CPUSA is not fielding a candidate as the current Marxist infesting the
White House pretty much meets there stated agenda....thus the CPUSA has endorsed Obama.
Can't say I was impressed with Johnson when he was the governor of my fair state, but he would be a damn sight better than Obumbles.
Not thrilled with Romney, but I'm more concerned with keeping the choice of our next Supreme Court justices out of Obama's hands than voting for a perfect candidate.
Post a Comment