Posts Tagged ‘Indecision 2012’
Sleep > Voting
Posted on April 9, 2012 at 8.45 pm
Q. I’ve been having some issues lately. In the coming election, it is becoming more and more obvious that Ron Paul will likely not receive the Republican nomination for the presidency, and this has led me to be indecisive. I am not a fan of Mitt Romney, or of Rick Santorum, but I’m not a fan of Barack Obama either. I tend to side more with the Democratic sides of issues, with the exception of the things that I dislike in both parties. I’d like to vote, obviously, but I don’t know what to think. ??? – shakeandjake2010, from tumblr.
A. Well, that’s a question for you to weigh thoughtfully, but ultimately not to lose sleep over.
Sleep is really important.
Here are some questions I suggest asking yourself:
- Do you think your vote matters?
- If so, does it matter to you, or does it matter to the election?
- If not, why?
- Are some issues more important to you than others?
- Do you trust Barack Obama to do what the campaign rhetoric you like says he will do?
- How much evil are you willing to accept because it’s less evil than the alternative?
- Regardless of your answer to that first question, are you committed to voting?
- Does a write-in vote “count”?
- Does a third party vote “count”?
- Which is more important: Voting, or voting on principle?
- Which is more important: Voting, or not voting on principle?
- More bluntly, which is more important: Voting or principle, plain and simple? If they conflict — and from what you’re saying, they will for you — do you want the “I voted” sticker, or do you want to stick to your guns?
Personally, I will do what I did in 2008: Voted for Ron Paul in the primaries; researched the candidates for lower offices in the general; voted for the local, state, and congressional candidates worth supporting based on that research; and in the cases (like the presidential race) where there is no one I could vote for in good conscience, left it blank.
So that’s me. What you do will probably depend on how you answer a bunch of those questions above.
2 Hours to Go
Posted on January 3, 2012 at 6.37 pm
In less than two hours, Iowa caucusgoers will begin their complicated process of selecting their preferred candidate for the Republican nomination for the presidency. So here’s an update of some stuff which has been happening in the final days of the Iowa campaign:
- Attacks, attacks, and more attacks. Even from Gingrich, who had vowed not to go negative but ultimately found that strategy unsuccessful.
- Ron Paul is in competition only with Mitt Romney for viral support on Facebook, but even Romney willingly conceded that Paul’s ads against Newt Gingrich were the best of the campaign season — and an Iowa State prof agrees. On Twitter, WaPo finds Paul is king uncontested, beating out even the President for mentions.
- In terms of last ditch efforts, Santorum is relying on lots of personal appearances; Perry is spending big on TV ad buys; and Bachmann appears to seriously expect divine intervention.
- Many Iowa voters are heading to the caucuses still undecided — a remarkable feat after no less than 18 debates. Interestingly, Romney’s“ignore Iowa” strategy has pulled him basically the exact same percentage of support he had after a huge campaign in the state in ‘08. Newt, meanwhile, has essentially admitted defeat in Iowa after voters got to know him a little too well.
- Finally, Buzzfeed has found a strong similarity between the campaign plans of Ron Paul 2012 and Barack Obama 2008 in an article titled “Ron Paul’s Secret Plan to Actually Win.” I’m not sure this plan is supposed to be a secret, but here’s hoping he does indeed win.
One of These Things Is Not Like the Others
Posted on October 5, 2011 at 8.44 am
Q. Hello Bonnie. Regarding the likelihood of Ron Paul gaining the GOP nomination, you have said ” it’s almost certain he will not be the nominee” (2/25/10), “the Republican Party would never give him the nomination” (1/8/11) & most recently, “he isn’t too likely to get the nomination” (10/2/11) — why is this? Thanks in advance! — Trevor, from tumblr.
A.Well, have you noticed the sorts of people the GOP has selected to run for president in the past few cycles? Or have you taken a look at the rest of the Republican field both this time, and in 2008 — or heck, in 2000? McCain, Guiliani, Thompson, Santorum, Brownback, Pawlenty, Romney, Huckabee.
Though we do have Gary Johnson giving a similar message to Ron Paul this time (and being completely ignored as a result), by and large Dr. Paul sticks out like a sore thumb. The message he’s offering really is different from the current mainstream of the Republican Party. I mean, there’s a reason why he’s probably the only top tier candidate who would put Dennis Kucinich in his cabinet — let alone hold a civil conversation with him.
On foreign policy (especially in a moral and legal sense), on civil liberties, and on a number of significant social issues, Ron Paul simply does not toe the party line. On fiscal and monetary policy, he toes it way too much, and I suspect other Republicans resent him for making them look much less conservative by comparison.
That’s not to say, however, that Ron Paul and his ideas aren’t making strong inroads into the GOP. Though I’d suggest that most of the changes are more in rhetoric than action at this point, and that some of it can be attributed to simple partisanship — i.e. what was ok with Bush is anathema under Obama, his message of a humble foreign policy (if only for fiscal reasons) and the importance of civil liberties (if only in regards to the TSA) and the indivisibility of freedom (if only among young Republicans who’d like to try pot) is slowly getting through. Depending on the outcome of this election, I am optimistic that it could continue to make progress, albeit probably with a different messenger. I think there’s still a long way to go, however — too far to go between now and February 2012, by which point most primaries will be decided.
The other major factor is that Ron Paul does not have huge corporate interests backing him. He’s legitimately a grassroots candidate, funding his campaign on many small donations from individual citizens. But the reason he doesn’t have backing is also a big reason I don’t think the GOP will nominate him: He’s a threat.
Have you heard the kind of cuts he’d make to the military-industrial complex, for instance? Statements like that don’t make the wealthy owners and shareholders of that complex terrifically happy. I can assure you that they, and other powerful corporate and political interests who would lose in the event of a Ron Paul victory, are not sitting this election out.
