fantastic_jackie (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
fantastic_jackie) wrote2008-02-07 05:42 pm
fantastic_jackie) wrote2008-02-07 05:42 pm
The Last Conservative
Since Mitt Romney dropped out of the race today, I have no candidate I can fall behind. But I'm still going to be actively campaigning, and I'm still going to vote. You'll never believe who I'm voting for this year, let alone for whom I'll be volunteering.
There's also the Congress, and that's where I'll be shifting my focus.
The Presidential election is lost for me, and for the US, too: we're GOING to have a liberal democrat in office. The only question is from which party will they come.
You may count me in the, "Crush McCain" camp. Ali said, "Now you know how we feel about George Bush." No, I don't. The campaign against Bush was just "Anyone but;" I want McCain to stand absolutely no chance of winning. If we're going to have a liberal democrat in the White House, let's get one that's honest about who they are. One that doesn't attack and demonize his - or her - own base. There's more trust in the situation, and frankly, the other candidates deserve it more than he does. - Not that any of them should be POTUS.
As such, I've got a couple different options I'm playing with, and these are my choices. I will choose to vote for one of them:
A) Ron Paul
B) Write In
C) Hillary Clinton/Barak Obama (Also, fundraising/campaign volunteering)
D) The Unknown - AKA, the Third Party Candidate
Option A.
Ron Paul is the last "Conservative" left in this race. He's actually a Libertarian, and voting for him would mean putting aside a lot of my moral principals and love of the military. Because I wouldn't be voting for him for any other reason than choosing him as my candidate. If I choose to vote for him, it will only be during the Primary.
He has a lot to offer domestically. The foreign war is lost, and I don't mean the actual war. The GOP is relying on the "Anyone but Hillary" base within the party, but if Obama is the nominee, then we may as roll out the red carpet because no one can stop him; the man has charisma, vision, and motivation. As for Hillary, she's a Clinton: she's got it.
But back to Paul; assuming he had a chance to get into office (and I know he doesn't, but voting for someone implies you want them there), my purpose in voting for him would be to be as a check on excessive spendetures in the Congress and for him to be a lame duck on everything else because he wouldn't be able to pass anything with either party controlling the Congress.
Option B.
Writing in is what I want to do, but I'll only do it if I'm sure McCain is going to be thoroughly crushed. My write in would be Newt Gingrich, as he's the candidate I picked from day one. I might write in for the Primary, I might not; it depends on if I can stomach a vote for Paul.
Option C.
Yes, you read that correctly. I will be volunteering for the Democratic Party this year. I have given up hope for the next 4 years, and that is to say that I know I'll probably be extremely active politically sending letters and maybe even organizing/attending events like I have in the past. I don't think everything will change, but enough will. I'm putting my cards on a Carter/Reagan election cycle in 2012.
Taxes are going to rise: you can bet on it. Whether McCain, Clinton, or Obama, no matter what. This is going to affect the economy - negatively. Abroad, who knows, and I don't know if we'll be attacked again, either. I like to say that I have faith in the people that protect us, but it's all incumbent upon how tied their hands become. One thing's for sure, though: just because George W. Bush leaves office doesn't mean that suddenly we have no threat on our hands. The WoT doesn't end. - At least until we're forced to retreat.
So voting/campaigning for the dems is a backwards strategy, but I feel it's the only liable one that exists; I will be genuinely happy when the Dems win this year. If we're going to have a liberal in office, it should be on the party that is openly for such policies. I can and do respect Clinton and Obama as politicians; they're brilliant. McCain is a pansy. He's as Rhino as they come, and he has absolutely no respect for the Conservative principles that govern the Conservative Base of "his" party. I tell you this now: if the Republican party doesn't start shifting back to the right, I will be leaving it.
Additionally, if McCain stands the slightest chance of winning (which I doubt he will, but you never know), then I'll also vote Democrat, although living in Texas, I'm not sure how much effect that will have... ;)
Option D.
A lot of talk has popped up about a true Conservative running as a third party candidate. If such a person arises, of course dependent on who they are, I'll vote for them. I'll volunteer for them, instead, as well; spliting the Conservative vote does enough to guarantee McCain's defeat.
The last round in 2006 was about the Republican party "teaching" the GOP that we're tired of our core values being ignored. What I'm doing is not tied to petty party differences: I genuinely believe liberal principles will destroy this nation, and endorsing that destruction takes a lot of gull, especially considering how much I love the US. That being said, America is stonger than one liberal democrat in the White House. One liberal democrat in the White House will (mostly - hopefully) not affect my life too drastically: I'll still depend on myself for things. Hopefully the government's fingers won't pry too far into our lives.
As such, I've got a couple different options I'm playing with, and these are my choices. I will choose to vote for one of them:
A) Ron Paul
B) Write In
C) Hillary Clinton/Barak Obama (Also, fundraising/campaign volunteering)
D) The Unknown - AKA, the Third Party Candidate
Option A.
Ron Paul is the last "Conservative" left in this race. He's actually a Libertarian, and voting for him would mean putting aside a lot of my moral principals and love of the military. Because I wouldn't be voting for him for any other reason than choosing him as my candidate. If I choose to vote for him, it will only be during the Primary.
He has a lot to offer domestically. The foreign war is lost, and I don't mean the actual war. The GOP is relying on the "Anyone but Hillary" base within the party, but if Obama is the nominee, then we may as roll out the red carpet because no one can stop him; the man has charisma, vision, and motivation. As for Hillary, she's a Clinton: she's got it.
But back to Paul; assuming he had a chance to get into office (and I know he doesn't, but voting for someone implies you want them there), my purpose in voting for him would be to be as a check on excessive spendetures in the Congress and for him to be a lame duck on everything else because he wouldn't be able to pass anything with either party controlling the Congress.
Option B.
Writing in is what I want to do, but I'll only do it if I'm sure McCain is going to be thoroughly crushed. My write in would be Newt Gingrich, as he's the candidate I picked from day one. I might write in for the Primary, I might not; it depends on if I can stomach a vote for Paul.
Option C.
Yes, you read that correctly. I will be volunteering for the Democratic Party this year. I have given up hope for the next 4 years, and that is to say that I know I'll probably be extremely active politically sending letters and maybe even organizing/attending events like I have in the past. I don't think everything will change, but enough will. I'm putting my cards on a Carter/Reagan election cycle in 2012.
Taxes are going to rise: you can bet on it. Whether McCain, Clinton, or Obama, no matter what. This is going to affect the economy - negatively. Abroad, who knows, and I don't know if we'll be attacked again, either. I like to say that I have faith in the people that protect us, but it's all incumbent upon how tied their hands become. One thing's for sure, though: just because George W. Bush leaves office doesn't mean that suddenly we have no threat on our hands. The WoT doesn't end. - At least until we're forced to retreat.
So voting/campaigning for the dems is a backwards strategy, but I feel it's the only liable one that exists; I will be genuinely happy when the Dems win this year. If we're going to have a liberal in office, it should be on the party that is openly for such policies. I can and do respect Clinton and Obama as politicians; they're brilliant. McCain is a pansy. He's as Rhino as they come, and he has absolutely no respect for the Conservative principles that govern the Conservative Base of "his" party. I tell you this now: if the Republican party doesn't start shifting back to the right, I will be leaving it.
Additionally, if McCain stands the slightest chance of winning (which I doubt he will, but you never know), then I'll also vote Democrat, although living in Texas, I'm not sure how much effect that will have... ;)
Option D.
A lot of talk has popped up about a true Conservative running as a third party candidate. If such a person arises, of course dependent on who they are, I'll vote for them. I'll volunteer for them, instead, as well; spliting the Conservative vote does enough to guarantee McCain's defeat.
The last round in 2006 was about the Republican party "teaching" the GOP that we're tired of our core values being ignored. What I'm doing is not tied to petty party differences: I genuinely believe liberal principles will destroy this nation, and endorsing that destruction takes a lot of gull, especially considering how much I love the US. That being said, America is stonger than one liberal democrat in the White House. One liberal democrat in the White House will (mostly - hopefully) not affect my life too drastically: I'll still depend on myself for things. Hopefully the government's fingers won't pry too far into our lives.
There's also the Congress, and that's where I'll be shifting my focus.
The Presidential election is lost for me, and for the US, too: we're GOING to have a liberal democrat in office. The only question is from which party will they come.
no subject
I think this is ridiculous and I'm not even going to continue a debate here because it's not even a debate -- it's just name-calling and hyperbole.
What freedoms have you lost in conjunction with the War on Terror and the Bush Administration? This is a line that's always being repeated again, and yet, I've yet to see a single person list even ONE freedom that they've lost, let alone multiple.
I know exactly what you'll say to this, that it's a right I should be willing to give up, but I'm not willing to give up something so basic which has nothing to do with keeping us safe from terrorists: every time I fly on an airplane I have to remove a jacket, a cardigan, my shoes, my belt, every bit of jewelery I'm wearing, and run it through a machine. If I happen to have a bottle of water on me, it will get confiscated. I have seen women and children pulled out of line and frisked. And we won't even go into the racial profiling. Terror aims to make people so scared that they will give up the smallest thing. Everything snowballs from there. And it's freaking stupid.
Because free people aren't subjected to indoctrination without recourse, and freedom from that indoctrination is the only way to eliminate the generational hatred for America in that region.
By subjecting them to our will and indocrinating them with our ideas?
So many Iraqi civilians have died in this war! It's one thing for people to die for their own freedom, but we imposed this on them! They're people. Revolution has to come from within. And when do we know it's done? When they've completely given up their religion and their differences and look just like us? What if that never happens? Or what if it appears to, we leave, and then they degenerate into this same sectarian violence again, and more innocent lives are lost?
We're not allowed to dig for our own oil due to all the environmentalist wacko red tape, and a new refinery hasn't been opened in the US since the 1970s. We have no shortage of oil; we have a shortage of refineries. Thank the liberal hippies for that;
You know, if you want to be taken seriously, you really ought to stop using terms like "environmentalist wacko" and "liberal hippies". You can respectfully disagree with people without resorting to trite name-calling.
The answer to the problem is that we stop using oil. :)
I'm done.