I've been vacillating about my intent to vote for Ralph Nader in the coming election. I'm very conflicted.
• On the one hand, I feel it's my right to vote for the candidate I feel best represents my interests. Vote for Ralph.
† On the other hand, I don't want George Bush making ANY Supreme Court nominations. Vote for John.
• On the one hand, I can't support a political system that is so corrupted by cash and bad for true democracy. Vote for Ralph.
† On the other hand, I don't want to allow The Bush Regime and Assoc. to continue looting OUR treasury. Vote for John.
• On the one hand, I feel it may be necessary to force the Democrats to help progressives reform the election process so there can be no spoiler effect in the next election and true representative democracy can be practiced. Vote for Ralph.
† On the other hand, that's probably hoping for too much from the Democrats and I should just take what I can get. Vote for John.
• On the one hand, do I really want to continue enabling the Democrats when they've become such cowards? Vote for Ralph.
† On the other hand, am I supporting the underdog, who doesn't have a chance in hell of being elected, because of some personality flaw on my part or because I'm some kind of political masochist? Vote for John.
• Is "The lesser of two evils" really the best we can do in America? Vote for Ralph.
† Yes, sadly, that may be the best we can do. Vote for John.
Do I vote with the courage of my convictions, no matter what happens, or with cynical resignation to continue the status quo?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
I like your little question session here, nice blog entry. I have my answer but understand your two hands one vote session:) I think there are a lot of people going through some of the same thought process. Everyone has to make their choice. I've made my choice but it doesn't appear to be the majority. However, I will respect everyone elses choice and go with mine. I may agree to disagree but we all have that right to pick who we want! Good luck with which ever one is your choice. Keep up the great blogging too!
NaderNow
http://nadernow.blogspot.com/
To this entry, I must refer to something my boyfriend said:
"Nader would make a good president, but being that he's independant it just splits the vote. Besides, too many people vote party lines."
Now, I was a solid independant up until just after Ross Perot lost the election twelve years ago (or so). After that it all got fuzzy... now that I am actually old enough to vote for the president, I'm having roughly the same time you are. I want to choose who I think will be best, but I don't want someone with the personality of a log in office. (Seriously, the guy's like Droopy Dog.) I haven't gotten a good look at what Kerry's done in office, nor have I seen what Nader could/might do if he somehow gained enough states/votes to win.
Back to the quote- I think he's right, and there's poco chances of Nader gaining enough votes from Kerry AND Bush to win. That's what it comes down to. Whatever small-ticket votes he can scrounge, undecideds, and the like may not be enough to break an election. And then there's the electoral college. They do have the power to go against the will of the voters. I'm not saying they would, but they might.
I hope that you can make a decision that settles between your heart and mind, and that you won't need alka-seltzer for. (I mean, hard decisions generally make me sick to my stomach...)
Funny how almost everybody I know voted for Ross Perot in '92 (both Democrats and Republicans) and he still lost the election. I think that's further evidence that our electoral process may be seriously flawed.
As for electing Droopy Dawg (LOL!), what Ralph lacks in personality he makes up in character. It's unfortunate we've come to rely so heavily on a candidate's image, it's a symptom of TV culture. We want our president to look presidential. I wonder how differently our nation would have evolved if TV had been invented in the 18th century.
Thank you both for your encouragement.
Post a Comment