This
is a myth. In reality, a vote for a non-major party candidate actually does much more than a vote for either of the major-party candidates.
The
truth is, I live in Utah, and as a Utahn, my vote for president was thrown away the day I registered
to vote in this deep red state. I know all my electoral votes are going towards
Mr. Romney. I knew this the day the man became the Republican nominee. If you
vote in Texas, the Dakotas, or Idaho you had similar knowledge. Likewise if you
live in New York, Massachusetts, or Oregon you have known for the past four
years your electoral votes would be under Mr. Obama’s name.
In
which case, why not vote for someone who actually stands up for principles you
agree with, as opposed to someone whose opinions are based entirely on politics
and not principles?
Sure
if you live in Nevada, Ohio, or any other state feasibly close to “swinging” go
ahead and vote for the guy you agree with 50% of the time over the guy you agree
with 30% of the time just because “he’s better.”
But
if not, take a stand for someone you really believe in. Really, what will do
more? If Utah goes Romney 75% to 25%? Or Utah going Romney 55%, 25%, 20% with
20% going to Gary Johnson, the super fiscally conservative anti-war
candidate? No one would say backgammon
or anything else over Utah going strong Romney. Yet if any politician sees a large
portion of the electorate going to a non-major party, they will notice and
start changing to gather that demographic.
Perhaps
you actually believe in Romney/Obama, in which case vote for them. Yet you are
likely kidding yourself. Essentially if you believe in anything strongly you likely do not agree with them. The
major-party candidates’ views are made to appease (appease not please) the
largest segment of the electorate as possible. Almost none of their stances are
based on principles.
You
say “I believe in limited government and reducing the debt so I am voting for
Mitt Romney.” Yet if you really believe in that, do not vote for a guy who says
he will balance the budget in 8 years1, vote for someone like Gary
Johnson or Virgil Goode who actually believe in balancing the budget now. A sizable electorate voting for Gary
Johnson will do more to get Washington to start cutting than any number of
votes for quasi –fiscal conservative Romney.
Maybe
you care about the environment, then vote for someone who will take radical
government action to fix the environment, such as green party candidate Jill
Stein. Or if your concern is getting out of foreign wars, why would you vote
for a man who sponsors clone attacks, involved us in wars in Libya and Syria (in
a limited manner), and still has us in Afghanistan? Send a clear message to
Washington, that you want to get out of Afghanistan now and vote for Gary Johnson or Rocky Anderson.
Basically
your vote in the presidential election can count, even in Utah, if you are
willing to jump outside the box of “mainstream” and vote for someone you
actually agree with.
1.Romney claims he will balance the budget in 8-10 years. The LA times says he will in 28.
"Come on our website. You look at how we get to a balanced budget within eight to 10 years. We do it by getting — by reducing spending in a whole series of programs."
Los Angeles Times http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-nn-romney-balanced-budget-20121016,0,2393874.story
"Come on our website. You look at how we get to a balanced budget within eight to 10 years. We do it by getting — by reducing spending in a whole series of programs."
Los Angeles Times http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-nn-romney-balanced-budget-20121016,0,2393874.story
No comments:
Post a Comment