We’ve had this problem ever since the 2000 elections when a vote for Pat Buchanan was really a vote for Al Gore. But apparently putting in high-tech voting machines doesn’t seem to be helping. We need someone to put out voter guides telling us how to get our votes to register for the right person, for Newt Gingrich is now saying that
“a vote for Santorum or Perry is a vote for Romney”
Back in 2008, I was told by the Romney supporters that
“a vote for Huckabee was a vote for McCain”
This whole thing is leaving me with lots of questions about the 2012 presidential race.
If I get off my couch and vote for you, Newt, who gets that vote, Nancy Pelosi?
So to get my vote to register for Santorum, do I really have to vote for Romney, the guy he endorsed in 2008?
What if I desire to vote for Rick Perry, must I vote for Rudy Giuliani, even
though he never got in this time (and barely got in last time)?
Who do I vote for if I want to vote for you Speaker Gingrich, Jon Huntsman?
Finally, if I am so foolish as to want Romney to be president, who
do I vote for again? Mike Huckabee? I get so confused.
It will get worse this fall, if we have any third-party candidates.
I can hear it now: A vote for Ron Paul is a vote for Barack Obama.
I’ve got a great idea. Let’s let our votes count for the people we voted for. This ain’t Chicago, people.
Oh…. never mind.
Thanks for subscribing!
3 comments
Right David, it’s Iowa, where the counting of the caucus results is still being questioned. Aside: Does the Chicago snipe get even funnier with constant repeating?
There actually are some pretty good ‘rank voting’ systems that capture preference order and thus reduce the problem of ‘a vote for X is actually a vote for Y even though your second choice is Z’. Until then voters have to use their own judgement about whether they prefer to vote strategically/ pragmatically (a glass half-full philosophy) or use their vote in a protest/ pyrrhic statement (glass half-empty). YMMV. We can see the Evangelical leaders at the recent pow-wow in Texas pushed the former in trying to annoint someone as The Not-Romney.
In any case, be certain that in the SC primary a vote for Cain is a vote for Colbert.
I almost put the line about Iowa in there between the Chicago line and the phrase “Oh…. never mind.” but wasn’t sure it would the right thing to do now that national voters might be tired of hearing about Iowa and our own voting woes.
I gave up on the whole voting for the lesser of two evils in ’04. Republicans sometimes talk a good game (not lately) but when they are in office, they spend and regulate more than any liberal that came before them. Their brand of conservatism is complete BS, and I’ve been voting for third party and Ds for almost a decade.
Head to head polls have shown two Republican candidates are competitive against Obama. These candidates are Romney and Paul. Republicans are looking for an “anti-Romney” ~ but they refuse to consider Paul, as he demands that wars be declared, and we are fiscally responsible. The “establishment” is ready to settle on Romney, and Romney is another loser, like McCain.
Imagine if the Republican party could come to grips with the fact that we do not have the resourses to be both fiscally responsible, and police the world. Imangine if they could just get on board with the idea that wars must be declared, and then waged vigorously. Imagine if we could go back to the day when Republicans demanded that judges be Constitutional constructionists, rather than servants of “stare decisis.” Imagine what it would be like if the Republican party’s actions matched their rhetoric.
If Republicans were to do something “crazy” like standing behind what they claim to believe, and nominate Paul, I’d enthusiastically show up to give him my vote this November. You guys give me a Mitt Romney, or the like ~ you have to go it alone.
Comments are closed.