As we approach the November Presidential election, many voters are planning to "hold their nose" and pull the lever in the voting booth. While much has been made of this point among true conservatives and Ron Paul supporters because of having McCain on the Republican side, it is equally true for Hilliary supporters and Blue Dog Democrats as they think about Obama. Obama's lack of anything approaching experience and his ultra-liberal record scares them to death.
What to do?
Use The Electoral College As Your MegaphoneBecause we live in a country with an electoral college, overall popular vote does not count. (Ask Al Gore) If it is clear that either major party candidate is going to win your state, you are free and clear to vote for a third party candidate without risk. Further, you get to send a signal.
Obama Supporters should consider Independent candidate Ralph Nader, Libertarian candidate Bob Barr or Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney.
Republicans should consider Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr or Constitution Party Candidate Chuck Baldwin.
The Party Duopoly
Unfortunately, the parties and the media have conspired to keep 3rd parties from gaining any traction. State legislatures have passed laws making it extremely difficult for 3rd parties to even get on the ballot in some states. Further, the media excludes them from coverage. The Commission on Presidential Debates excludes them from all the Presidential debates. By using this election to send a signal, we can begin to break this duopoly. If the Democrats are really pro-choice, let them prove it by allowing voters a full choice on the election ballot.
This Strategy Can Work In 30+ States !
In most states, elections are not and will not be close. While Obama says that more states are in play and that he will campaign and spend money in traditionally Republican states, that is only true in a handful of states. Over 30 states will easily and clearly go for one candidate. Neither candidate or party will spend significant $$ or even campaign in these 30+ states. For example, if you live in Massachusetts, you can vote for any third party candidate you want. Obama will win the state by 20 points, no matter what.
This is not a good strategy for Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, etc. If you are worried about an Obama presidency, you can just tell yourself that you are voting against Barack (not necessarily for McCain) and pull the McCain lever.
Note: PLEASE read my blog post from July 17...
"The Conservative Gambit: McCain or Not"
We NEED the Libertarian and the Green parties to each receive about 5% of the vote in these safe states. I focus on these two parties because they can receive enough votes to have a meaningful impact on breaking the duopoly. (Unfortunately, the Green Party nominated a crazy candidate that only Rev. Jeremiah Wright could love. Imagine if the Green Party had nominated Al Gore!) Hilliary voters and true conservatives can easily switch to a 3rd party with "no regrets"... their vote will not impact their state's outcome and therefore will not impact the general election.
Locked Out
Ballot access is a big issue in a lot of states. Democrats and Republicans have written legislation to make it hard for fledgling parties to gain any traction by making it difficult to even get on the ballot. Libertarians, Green Party, Ralph Nader and Constitution supporters need to pool resources to get all the candidates on the ballot every election. Citizens need to help by finding out about petition drives and by signing any party's petition to gain ballot access.
The Media... Lap Dog of the Major Parties (mainly the Democrat Party)
Finally, the media needs to get off the laps of the major parties and support ballot reform. If the media and Presidential Primary debate organizers had limited primary coverage and debates to just the big name, big money, high polling candidates... Hillary would be the Democrat nominee, McCain would have been knocked out early and the surprising excitement generated by Ron Paul would have been killed before it ever started.
--- You can use THIS ELECTION to send a signal ---
Hillary voters... are you listening?
Hillary voters... are you listening?
Ron Paul Supporters... are you out there?
True Conservatives... Are you in a "safe state?"
A 3rd Party Vote - No Regrets in 30+ States
7 comments:
Florida 2000 - Bush won by less than 600 votes. Nader got over 95,000 votes. How did that work out for the libs? Your kind of thinking is too cute by half. Don't take chances with Obama; take him out with your vote.
Anonymous,
Thanks for stopping by.
I am very clear that Florida ... and Ohio, Michigan, PA...etc... are not part of this strategy. Only safe states.
Having said that, PLEASE read my "Gambit" post ... July 17.
Byron,
Anonymous again. I read your Gambit entry.
I don't trust McCain anymore than you apparently do. Cap and trade, immigration and ANWR alone are enough to sour me on McCain. But these issues are a wash with Obama as the other choice.
If McCain wins he, like all politicians at this level, is too arrogant to heed any message a strong third party conservative or libertarian showing would suggest. I don't think it would make any difference in how he governs (i.e., I don't think we would gain "a long term positional advantage.")
If we lose the gambit and Obama wins, with a compliant congress, what "material" do we "give up"? Among others, we lose the Supreme Court for two decades at least. We add trillions in spending/debt (Global Poverty Act at $845 billion for starters). We get Obama's version of the Soviet Pioneers with coerced "volunteerism" (liberal indoctrination) for our children. We get at least four years of nauseating, sycophantic praise from the media covering for The One on every issue. We get Michelle!!! Obama is nothing more then a naive, far left, two-bit, dishonest southside of Chicage politician. I don't want him and his leftist cronies in charge of domestic and foreign policy for four seconds, much less four years.
Where I differ with McCain, he is no worse than Obama (e.g., McCain now favors OCS drilling if not ANWR). Some issues that I strongly support just don't have a horse in this race; others have one horse. Either way I lose on issues common to Obama and McCain.
A gambit is a calculated risk. The potential loss and the likelihood of that loss must be weighed against the potential benefit and the likelihood of that benefit. The upside to this gambit is less downside if McCain wins. The downside is too depressing to contemplate. It's not worth it.
Byron,
One other thing. With democrats in congress, McCain might just stick it in their eye for a change when they oppose his favored legislation. OK, small chance of this, but with his temper I think it exists.
Anonymous,
Thank you for your thoughtful discussion on this post and the Conservative Gambit post. If this is an indication of your level of understanding and engagement on the issues, I sincerely hope you visit and comment often.
I agree with you in about 90% of what you say. Let me be clear. I live in TN which should be a "safe state." If it gets close, I think I'll pull the McCain lever for all the well thought out reasons you suggest.
My 10% disagreement lies in the idea that the "message" that would be sent is to the larger Republican party... especially the House... not just McCain. Further, if McCain EVER wavers on Supreme Court nominees... I'm out.
A final request... If you find this blog interesting... please forward it to others. I am new and I am fortunate that my readership is growing rapidly. Having said that, I am still small in the absolute.
Thanks again!
Byron,
It’s me again. Thanks for your replies.
The major parties will receive all electoral votes so long as the states maintain winner take all. Third parties will take none and therefore will be ignored. Winning 6% of the popular vote won't count with a republican or democrat party or president. In fact, winning 6% could cause a backlash against a third party if, in this 50/50 nation, the margin of victory is less than 6%. See Nader with the greens in 2000 and Perot with the reform party in 1992.
I believe third parties have to establish their bona fides by winning municipal, state and down ticket elections thereby building credibility for a shot at the presidency. I agree that if incumbents from the major parties started losing there seats to third parties, the major parties would take note. However, given the fund raising, gerrymandering and power held by the major parties and incumbents, it would be easier to change the character of the republican or democratic party from within. Not that it’s easy. I live in Texas and our primary was in March. McCain had the nomination wrapped up a month earlier so I effectively had no vote in this year’s primary. I don’t know how to get a party to change the ridiculous primary system we have.
I also agree with you that both parties are frustratingly nonresponsive to the desires of their respective bases. But, I'm not so sure additional parties would help. In some European countries 4, 6 or more parties run for office. If no party wins a majority in the primary election then the two candidates with the highest percentage compete in a runoff. So, eleven people run for an office. No one gets a majority in the primary. Candidate A (17%) and candidate B (14%) are the winners and will vie in the runoff. Sixty-nine percent voted for neither and now one of them will be declared the winner. Imagine the shenanigans and backroom power deals that take place as candidates A and B promise the world to build coalitions with the nine losing candidates/parties. Radical, fringe parties of all stripes respectfully receive a seat at the table rather than being relegated to the dust heap.
From what I read about Europe, neither multiple parties nor their governments could care less about the citizens. Take the EU constitution for example. It had to be ratified unanimously by all EU nations. Most just rammed it through their federal government without the citizens’ input. However, France and the Netherlands did vote on it and they voted it down. Undeterred, politicians and bureaucrats changed the title page from “EU Constitution” to “The Lisbon Treaty”. Of all EU voters, only the Irish have a right to vote on treaty ratification. They voted it down. The europols only had to consult their constituents in 3 out of 27 nations, and they went 0 for 3. Reminds me of last summer’s multiple bites at the apple with comprehensive immigration reform.
By the way, I found your blog this morning at:
http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=8974
I’ve poked around your site and I’ll be happy to let others know.
Anonymous,
Thanks once again for the well reasoned comments. I largely agree. You need to give yourself a "nickname" or "screen name" so that people can keep up with your comments!
Post a Comment