October 22, 2008 News+Opinion » Jack Hunter

Don't throw away your vote by going with McCain or Obama 

What a Waste

by Jack Hunter
jackhunter.jpg

Latest in Jack Hunter

I have many Republican friends who are disgusted that I'm voting third party this election year. They believe stopping Barack Obama from becoming president outweighs all else. Meanwhile, I have many Democrat friends who are equally disgusted; for them, seeing John McCain defeated is more important than who wins. They are all wasting their votes.

Imagine a reckless teenager who constantly runs up his parents' credit cards, smashes the family car every Friday night, is failing in school, and has serious drinking and drug problems. Now imagine that no matter how reckless and dangerous that teenager became, his parents believed his behavior was worth tolerating simply because he was "their" kid. No reasonable person would consider this good parenting.

And yet this is exactly how otherwise reasonable people vote.

No matter how bad the Republican or Democrat nominee for president is, the party faithful support their own without fail. The message to politicians? They may lie, ignore their party's platform, and betray every supposed principle, but they will never be held accountable by most voters. Like the reckless teenager, there is simply no reason for them to stop their irresponsible behavior.

The greatest power the people have is their vote, and in supporting the lesser of two evils each election, voters ensure eternal evil.

Voting third party is as practical as it is principled. Sarah Palin was chosen as McCain's running mate for a number of reasons, one of which was to appeal to independent voters in closely-contested swing states who might support Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr.

Reports The Washington Times, "As with every presidential election, the independent and Libertarian voters can make or break a mainstream candidate because they represent 41 percent of the electorate. Right after the Republican convention, John McCain showed a 12 percent jump in support among independent voters, according to a Gallup poll. The increase was due in part to Mrs. Palin."

Conservatives had little good to say about John McCain before he became the GOP nominee, but now they are prepared to vote for a pro-amnesty, liberal Republican, who recently was not only complicit in passing the greatest wealth distribution package in American history, but who also counts liberals Ted Kennedy, Joe Lieberman, and Russ Feingold amongst his greatest political allies. Is it really worth rewarding such a Republican in order to stop Obama?

This year, I will be voting for Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin. "Chuck who?" you ask. Exactly.

There is no perfect candidate, and in fact I only have two litmus tests that any candidate must pass in order to win my vote; he must be committed to a traditional foreign policy, with the first order of business being to bring our troops home from Iraq, and he must be serious about stopping illegal immigration. There are other issues that concern me, but these two promise to do the most damage to the United States, as war and open borders are inextricably linked to America's most pertinent economic, cultural, and security issues.

Chuck Baldwin could be an alcoholic, an atheist, or an asshole, and he would still receive my vote, because he's right on foreign policy and illegal immigration. Luckily, he's a conservative Christian who I agree with on most issues, and was even endorsed by Ron Paul, who I supported for the Republican nomination. If Baldwin was not running, I would be voting for Ralph Nader, who as a liberal, still passes my two litmus tests. So does Bob Barr.

Once you've decided to vote third party, it only makes sense to support the candidate you feel most comfortable with, conservative, liberal, or otherwise.

Neither Obama nor McCain pass either of my litmus tests, and the Republican nominee is arguably even worse than his Democratic opponent. As Libertarian Justin Raimondo aptly put it, the only thing Obama promises to change concerning our current foreign policy is the battlefield. McCain wants to send more troops to both Iraq and Afghanistan, and if he and his neoconservative advisers get their way, possibly Iran and Georgia. And whereas Obama merely supports amnesty, McCain — along with Ted Kennedy — actually sponsored the bill.

It has been said that if you don't vote, you can't complain. If you always vote for the status quo, you really have no business complaining about it. And if politics-as-usual is something you're entirely comfortable with, then by all means vote for Obama or McCain.

However, I know very few people who admit to being comfortable with the status quo. And even fewer willing to do anything about it.

Catch Southern Avenger commentaries every Tuesday and Friday at 7:50 a.m. on the "Morning Buzz with Richard Todd" on 1250 AM WTMA.

Comments (41) RSS

Showing 1-5 of 41

Add a comment | All comments »

JoeMama, to answer you question about "what did that vote do for the country?" you only have one vote and it is too insignificant to do anything for the country...if you saw the movie "Swing Vote" you would understand no politician cares about your vote and he won't come knocking on your door asking for it unless it's a tiebreaker vote that decides the outcome of the election. All your vote will do for the country is become a tiny statistic and raise a candidate's election day totals by one.

Posted by qh4dotcom on October 30, 2008 at 11:00 PM | Report this comment

The problem why a third party cannot be elected is the fact that they don't have the financial backing that the two "dictatorial" parties have! The news media doesn't even follow their campaigns because they realize that they have no chance of winning and they're not even represented in the presidential debates! How can people know what they stand for, if no one hears their platforms?!

I agree, this country desperately needs to have more choices when it comes to choosing who they want to represent them in government, but more importantly so that the Democratic and Republican parties will no longer have the power to abuse the system as they have for the past 150 years!

I, too, have said it from the start that if everyone who is dissatisfied with Obama and McCain voted for a third party, that person would have a good chance of being elected!

I wrote a post on my blog, just about this subject:
http://itsallmaya.com/americans-have-been-living-under-a-dictatorship-longer-than-cubans/

Posted by LynnRodz on October 30, 2008 at 9:53 PM | Report this comment

I loved Mr. Hunter's rants on 96 Wave and I love his current uncompromising take on the hypocrisy of modern politics. However, I think he made a serious mistake when it came to this article.

Though I agree with his thesis, I couldn't help but be offended by his "alcoholic, atheist, or asshole" phrase. Imagine if he wrote "I don't care if Soandso is a churl, choch, or christian." How about "I don't care if he's a jerk, jackass, or jew?" There would be slavering hordes of (ig)noble Charlestownians in the streets calling for poor Jack's blood.

Mr. Hunter is capable of intelligent but passionate discourse on political hypocrisy -- and because of this, it's a terrible shame to see him fall into the exact same logical traps when it comes to religion.

Posted by c-johnson on October 27, 2008 at 5:00 PM | Report this comment

Your points are valid, but it should be remembered that even the Republicans were once a minority party. They may again soon be a third party thanks to the Bush administration.
What about close elections where the third party candidates can mean the difference between a major party winning or losing?
And what about Ross Perot, who took a sizable portion of the vote and is said to have been responsible for Clinton's win?
So with all respect we may have to agree to disagree on this point. I feel people should vote for the candidate who most represents their viewpoints, keeping in mind that that could lead to the election of one who is the worse of two evils to that person.

Posted by FCB on October 27, 2008 at 12:32 PM | Report this comment

FCB, actually that is the opposite of my point. Obama is not ruled out in SC even though he is trailing 55% to 41% (http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/south-carolina.html) That is a big difference between something that is unreachable, such as a third party candidate, and one that has a shot of being elected. Giving up on a candidate just because he is trailing is tantamount to not voting.

Posted by JoeMama on October 27, 2008 at 10:12 AM | Report this comment

Add a comment

Classified Listings
  • Tokyo Bistro Just ate lunch there this week and it was great! They have a trendy, but… -CHS291
  • Il Cortile Del Re We went to Il Cortile after the Mike Moran Furniture show at Rebekah Jacob Gallery… -project_runwayHottie
  • Baked Heaven!!! The service was friendly & suggestive not to mention knowledgable on all the incredible… -alicia66
  • A.C.'s Bar and Grill Love A.C.'s brunch. Chicken and waffles are the best cure for a hangover. If you… -chaslovah
  • Tokyo Bistro The Sushi is AWESOME, their Dancing Dragon Roll is the best sushi I have ever… -Megan
Most Viewed


Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2009, Charleston City Paper   RSS