Horrible news: Dobson secretly abandons abortion pledge

Vote for the lesser of two evils, and you are voting for...

Evil.

Is it any wonder that we've been electing the leaders we have?

Is it any wonder corruption is rampant?

I'm not voting for the lesser of two evils anymore.

But oh no! if I do a democrat/republican might win!

How is that different from what's happening now?

 

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."
--John Quincy Adams

"...a Christian's decision should never be based upon the potential outcome of his decision, but upon the rightness of his decision."
--Chuck Baldwin

A Vote for a Third Party is a Vote for _____

This has to be one of the arguments that gets thrown at me more than any other argument. Voters who are used to voting based on blind party loyalty always seem to think that a vote for a third party candidate is a wasted vote. People tell me that by voting for Peroutka, I was actually voting for Kerry. I have come to the conclusion that these people haven't actually thought about their argument at all.

The first problem with this argument is that these voters think that my vote belongs to one of the major party candidates. My vote belongs to me, no candidate is entitled to that vote.

The second problem with their argument is that they automatically assume that if I were not voting for Peroutka, then I would simply "hold my nose" and vote for Bush. Again, they are incorrect in their thinking.

In 1996 I left the Presidential part of my ballot blank, I was not about to vote for Bob Dole simply because he had an (R) beside his name. In 2000 I didn't vote for George W. Bush, and have never had any intentions of voting for him in November. My vote was not taking a vote away from George Bush, because my vote never belonged to George Bush, so my vote was NOT for Kerry, but for Peroutka, the only conservative candidate who was on the ballot in November.

For me, it's not about the "numbers" that count on election day, but how I will answer to God if I compromise my principles by voting for someone who stands for what I don't believe in.

 

My principle would be for saving the lives of a few babies (partial birth abortion ban) instead of voting for every baby being killed whose mother wants to kill it.

I realize that it takes a majority of the electoral college to win a presidency, but each state sets the rules for that. You can have an effect at the state level, and especially at the local level.

Start a grass roots effort to require a majority to win any election. Get the state to quit being all or nothing. (Do it like Nebraska and Maine do it.)

Now, I don't think the EC needs to be abolished. But, that has to be changed at the state level. (I certainly don't want the Fed taking more rights that are specifically granted to the states than they already have.)

Until then, you have the choice of voting to save a few babies or save none.

Is the current system optimum? I don't think so.

But, voting for Perot got Clinton elected. As little as I like Dole, Clinton was complete and total sleaze. The bright side of it is that Clinton getting reelected helped get Bush elected the next time.

 

Closed at 0354 EST