My tribe is not your tribe

Six months ago, Bob left a comment to this post:

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.