November 2nd is coming around, and I thought it’d be good to write up a little rant about my thoughts on this election, and why I’ve chosen to vote (write-in is more like it) for Ralph Nader.
Four years ago I didn’t give a damn about the election. I wasn’t registered, and to me, Gore and Bush were pretty much identical. None of the issues seemed important to me at the time, and if you asked me, it didn’t really matter who won. They were both full of it, wouldn’t hold to their promises, and four years later none would be the wiser.
This time around, it’s almost the same. I still don’t really care for either Bush or Kerry, because as far as I know they’re both lying to the American public. For most people it seems to be a choice of the “lesser of two evils”, which just seems utterly worthless to me. In the end, nothing will have really changed.
I do really, really, hate Bush though. The reasons are rather obvious; Lied about WMDs, got the whole world hating us, giving tax breaks to the rich. I could really get into this, but I’ll restrain myself. I would just love to see this man taken out of office.
So why then, am I voting for Nader and not Kerry? The Electoral College. According to some experts, Kerry already has California by a good measure. And because of the way our democratic process works, my single vote (and all of the Republican votes) in California won’t mean jack shit. I’m safe to vote for Nader and still know that Kerry has received all the Electoral votes from California.
It should be noted that this is perhaps one of the pros of the electoral college. We’ll pretend that we don’t know about electing a president that doesn’t win the popular vote, or the fact that if Democrats started voting Green then the Republicans would always win. On a side note as well, I’m getting the feeling that this election is going to be very close, and that in the final outcome Bush will be president again. Gotta love America.
When it really comes down to it though, and if this were the year 2000, I would still vote for Nader, simply because I really hate this two-party system. We have to make compromises on values we’ve come to believe in, and end up voting for the candidate that most closely matches our own ideals. Anyone else see something wrong with this?
Kurt Vonnegut put it best:
If you want to take my guns away from me, and you’re all for murdering fetuses, and love it when homosexuals marry each other, and want to give them kitchen appliances at their showers, and you’re for the poor, you’re a liberal.
If you are against those perversions and for the rich, you’re a conservative.
What could be simpler?
It comes down to this: A vote to rid the country of what I’ve come to see as one of the most hated presidents in recent history, or a vote to fight the two-party process.
It’s fairly obvious which choice I’ve taken.
Syndicate this site
comments
I’ll second this. That’s two write in votes in California. Kerry and Bush better watch out.
“We have to make compromises on values we’ve come to believe in, and end up voting for the candidate that most closesly matches our own ideals.”
there is something wrong with that… simply voting for hte candidate that closely matches your ideals could put the candidate that least matches your ideals in office. before we can deal with this problem, we have to deal with the most obvious, most immediate problem - dubya.
about that Vonnegut quote… that’s something i’ve never liked… the labels. by going with hte left/right, liberal/conservative labels.. things become generalized and reduced to something that can be plotted on a single line.. you’re either left or right of someone else… and i think that kind of classification is just useless and inaccurate. where would stalin and gandhi go? left of center? where left of center and how far apart? both are obviously very different. the liberal/conservative line just falls apart when given this kind of question. i think that’s the point mr. vonnegut was trying to make…. we’re simplifying things to the point where all meaning, significance, and detail is washed away. for example, you might hear.. “i’m pro-life, so i’m against abortion all the way! but i support the needless war. all life is sacred… unless you’re not american.” this kind of position is not uncommon… you probably you won’t hear the “needless” part, but that’s just what it is.
now for kerry/bush… i think its important to not blur the difference and details of kerry/bush, even if they are small. that small difference matters… we’ve felt that difference these past 4 years and its undeniable. the small differences with the administrative powers of the world’s sole superpower could mean big differences around the globe.
a link to some info on bush/kerry differences….
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1027-35.htm (some great details)
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5993610/ (a wider, but watered-down review of differences)
and for those who are voting for Nader…
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1026-34.htm (what i think is a pretty wise strategy for Nader… especially with anti-war democrats becoming a dominant majority.. and dems like Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean refusing to be “republican-lites” and being quite vocal about it)
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1028-34.htm (why getting bush out is more important than “third-party symbolism” at this moment)
in case you’re not convinced bush must go… however that might be…
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110104Y.shtml
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1029-26.htm
this bush admin has proven to be too incompetent, arrogant, deceitful to lead… for someone to say they two are teh same, i think, is oversimplifying the problem. there ARE differences… small.. but there are real, significant differences worth voting to keep bigger “evil” out.
i know calif is pretty much going democrat, so it may be safe to give nader a vote, but given arnold’s influence on calif., i wouldn’t take chances. the republicans know how valuable arnold is because of his name.. and they have used him because of that (most recently in ohio)… calif is a long shot for republicans, but “never underestimate the predictability of stupidity”. this attempt to influence must be shut down absolutely. once dubya is out of office, we could deal with teh two-party system, the electoral college problem, etc. for now, the important thing is to make sure bush does not get re-elected.
okay.. i’ve said all i have to say….