I voted for two third-party candidates.
I have considered doing this in the past, but have felt so conflicted about the implications. Am I throwing away my vote? Is my vote for the libertarian essentially a vote for the democrat? Do I vote for the lesser of two evils, or do I attempt to change the system? How many others are asking themselves the same question? If we all voted our consciences, would we make a difference?In the past few years, I've come to see that we do not have a two-party system, but a ONE party system of Republicrats. Both parties are for big government in different ways. What really changed since Obama took office? We are still in an undeclared war. (As Randolph Bourne said, "War is the health of the state.") We still have prisoners at GITMO. Obama continued and increased the bailouts. Spending continues to go up, along with the deficit. Republicans like corporate welfare (oil, farming, banks...) and Democrats like social welfare. Yes, the Republican platform boasts of limited government and cutting spending, but Bush expanded both the government size and spending.
In this sense, I am not "throwing my vote away" if I vote for a third-party candidate. I'm "throwing my vote away" if I vote for a Republicrat!
EXCEPT for LIFE ISSUES. Here we can see a big, big difference between the two parties. THIS is where my struggle lies. A friend once told me he felt "hijacked" by the Republican party due to life issue. It baffled me at the time. Now I completely understand. The Republicans and Democrats are the same big-government party who have fixed the system to remain in power, and yet, the Republicans promote a culture of life. I believe this is due to careful calculation on the part of the party bosses. The professional Republicans understand their party base is focused on family values. With that in mind, the puppeteers run the show.
Third parties are able to draw attention to otherwise ignored topics, such as the ending the Federal Reserve, the importance of sound money, eminent domain, the tenth amendment and more. Even if the third party doesn't win, enough votes will attract the attention of one of the two main parties who will quickly adopt their platform. We saw this happened with Ross Perot and the national debt crisis. Furthermore, it IS possible for a third-party candidate to win. Abe Lincoln was a third party candidate!
This election, I found a candidate for Governor and United States Representative that are Libertarian, pro-life and pro-marriage. I decided to cast my vote for them.
This year I am voting my conscience.
This year I am approaching the ballot with a positive outlook.
This year I am voting for who I WANT, not the lesser of two evils.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this complex topic!
29 comments:
Considering how things are going these days (and not in Lincoln's time), and how imperative it is that we get the Obama/Pelosi/Reid "unholy trinity" out... well, I have to admit that I do think you threw away your vote, or at least helped the Dems (which to me is not an option).
This is not in any way to say that what you did was wrong! Of course you were morally right to vote as you did. I am choosing a different route, but still morally permissible.
Does that make sense?
Love you, sweets!
PS: I think the Tea Party (which is not and hopefully never will be a third party) is helping to bring the Republican Party back to its conservative roots. For me, that is even more effective than an (ineffective) third party.
Just my humble opinion.
I could see myself doing the same thing with more local elections-Governors, US Senators, House of Reps and State Senators/House of Reps for example. But it would make me uneasy to do so for a Presidential election. The stakes are so high and I'm just don't have any confidence that on that scale, a third party could win . Therefore, I think I would use my vote to try to best limit the evil. Though 2012 could be the year a third party rises up, since no one seems happy with the Democrats or Republicans.
I have been away from the computer for so long...I just saw your questions on my blog about Distributism....sorry I haven't responded yet!
I guess it is no surprise that I completely agree with your decision to vote third party. I think continuing to vote Republican just to bring down the Democrats is really going about it the wrong way. I think it is our responsibility to follow and vote for a political philosophy that is the most TRUE...not the most powerful, or the most likely to "win" or have influence.
Just like all aspects of life, our goal should be to follow truth...not to be successful. I find it best to stop worrying about the "results" and start following our hearts and intellects to wherever they may lead.
You did the exact opposite of throwing away your vote...you didn't allow yourself to bullied into voting for a what you saw as a lesser candidate. Good for you.
You did the right thing. I applaud your caring enough to research the lesser-known candidates, as the majority of the population doesn't. I hope you teach your daughter (and hopefully, someday her siblings!) to do the same.
Leila- I hope you're right regarding the Tea Party! But I have my doubts! I definitely have my doubts that 3rd party candidates can/will win, but I think that's mostly due to the unholy alliance with the media and unequal time/lack of attention given to them.
I went to DC last fall and met with my congressman- a republican. http://psalm34-3.blogspot.com/2009/11/my-trip-to-dc.html It was such a disappointment. There was NO WAY I could vote for that man again.
I agree with Leila. Unless the Republican candidate is pro-choice (assuming, of course the Dem is too), I wouldn't vote third party. I am a one-issue voter and I'd rather have the pro-life Republican who isn't perfect in there over a pro-choice Dem any day.
Thanks Lowly and Paradox.
Lowly- that's exactly how I felt before- like I was being bullied into my choice.
Paradox- your name and description intrigue me. :) Where's your blog?
AYWH- I guess that's the difference. I'm not a one-issue voter. That ONE issue you speak of, however, is a NON-NEGOTIABLE for me. Someone can be the perfect candidate in every other way, but if they are not 100% pro-life, than I cannot vote for them. This recently happened to us and was VERY upsetting. There are many issues that I feel very strongly about and that's why I'm reaching over to a third party.
The problem with voting the lesser of two evils is that you're still stuck with evil.
I can see both sides. I agree with Leila, but I can also understand the problem with feeling "bullied."
And here win FL we have the ridiculous Charlie Crist running as an independent when he knew he couldn't defeat Rubio as a Republican. And he says he'll caucus with the Dems. If that man wins, I will have lost faith in the public. What a turncoat.
Lauren,
GREAT topic. I really do not feel you threw your vote away. NOT voting is throwing your vote away. Voting based on a party instead of reading up on what they stand for is throwing your vote away.
I think you made a wise vote. I can only hope that others will do the same when it is their turn to vote.
That being said...I like the Libertarian party usually :)......as long as they are pro-life/pro-marriage (a couple others but those are the main two!)!
I guess I have a question: If I vote for someone who has zero chance of winning vs. voting for someone who can win but is not perfect (assuming it's not sinful to vote for him), then how is it not throwing away one's vote? Especially if the person who will benefit is someone who will vote against those non-negotiables we Catholics hold dear?
The Church doesn't say we cannot vote for imperfect candidates, after all.
If we can only vote for those who hold to all our moral principles, then I would just put in a write-in vote for Prof. Robert George, or Mary Ann Glendon, or even my husband. But again, that is a throw away vote, because they have zero chance to win.
Will I have made a personal statement? Yes. Will it make any difference regarding the policies of my government? No. In fact, it may help keep the policies of the Culture of Death in place. Not to mention judges who are appointed for life.
I am a very practical voter, it's true. :)
I do have to agree with Leila. Like I said, I would consider voting for a third party candidate more on a local level, if it appeared that that candidate had a shot at competing (and living in Montana, I could see it happening; in many states, it would be very unlikely).
As much as I would love to vote for a candidate who is even more in line with my values, I am happy to settle for one that agrees solely with the non-negotiables so that we have a chance at limiting the evil that could be done by those who don't agree with the non-negotiables.
No matter the candidate, choosing will always be a compromise. We live in a fallen world.
Just for some fun reading, here's an article by one of my favorite professors. I think you'll find it witty and insightful. It addresses the question of voting, but not so much who to vote for as getting out to the poles itself.
http://www.discovery.org/a/2250
I'm with you Lauren - voting for a third-party candidate because unfortunately, both of the other candidates are pro-choice. Here's hoping that Obama will get a strong message from the voters that change is coming and it ain't him.
I'm with Leila too.....don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.....the vote for someone with zero chance of winning that will ultimately give more votes to those who will negate the principle of the Catholic faith is a concern....
thanks for bringing this topic up, and we LOVE your Catholic faith and your new family :)
Such a tough topic! I have always gone back and forth on this, but ultimately vote for the lesser of 2 evils because they have a chance of winning. I think voting your Catholic conscience can go either to 3rd party or Republican, so it is a tough decision. I think for these elections, I will stick with Republicans and take every election as a separate decision.
It's frequently a tough choice. We have two candidates for county commisioner. One is a pro-choice republican the other is a pro-life democrat. I generally don't vote democrat due to their party platform but we're likely to vote for the more pro-life candidate.
I applaud you for sticking to your guns, but I too am more inclined to vote Republican based on life issues. However, I don't think I get to vote this year. :( ugh. I'm going to post about it this week sometime.
On this one, although I can understand some of your frustrations, I have to say that it just doesn't seem to make much sense to vote 3rd party. While the Republicans are not perfect (not by any stretch) at least their platform is explicitly pro-life and the right to life movement can work with them to move the ball in the right direction. Congress and the President have the power to funnel MILLIONS of dollars to entities like Planned Parenthood, which of course they have promptly done, as well as exporting abortion to other countries at our expense.
In light of the gravity of the situation, and the sheer number of innocent unborn lives at stake, I cannot see how voting 3rd party helps in any practical way. We absolutely cannot let these death mongers control our country for one more minute. I do believe a vote 3rd party is a vote for the dems.
Lifehopes wrote, "In light of the gravity of the situation..." and that is EXACTLY why I'm voting outside of the establishment.
I see our country's situation as VERY VERY GRAVE. We are in a severe financial crisis that few will acknowledge the true roots of and we are rapidly losing our freedoms. Rather than continue to slowly boil to death, I'm attempting to change the system with my vote. I see my vote as more of a long-term approach, rather than just muddling through the next four years. I see our country on the verge of collapse, and what will happen to unborn and the rest of Americans if that happens? With my vote, I attempt to prevent that and restore sanity to the government.
I see another post on this topic in my future... :) I'm enjoying everyone's input!
What a great topic! (and great respectful conversation!)
I'm more on the side of thinking that you threw away your vote. I don't judge you, blame you, think less of you, etc. I just don't thnk I would have done it.
I think that as long as the reality of a third party candidate helping the pro-choice candidate win is in effect-then I won't be able to vote for that candidate if they have no chance at winning. Too many babies will die due to lack of abortion regulation, money to PP, etc that will happen during the pro-choice candidate's time in office.
I like Complicated Life's idea of doing so on a more local level though.
And I completely understand the other side of this arguement and respect that conclusion.
Megan-I can't vote this time either! I've been meaning to post about it too. :(
I'm with you Lauren, as I'm sure you know! I feel like we have so many "lukewarm" pro-life Republicans. It doesn't seem to matter what their platform says once they're in power. Many of them go where the wind blows. Of course I vote Republican if I feel that they are the best candidate but I would TOTALLY vote for a third party candidate and was very upset that I wasn't allowed to in the last presidential election because of the way my state does it. :(
As I was reading through the comments, I too had the thought that voting 3rd party may not change today but hopefully will change tomorrow. Once a large enough number of us are making a statement, hopefully they'll listen. And it seems there are more and more getting fed up and voting in this direction. All we can do is pray and vote from our hearts!
(Do I happen to know the person who said they felt "hijacked" by the Republicans? You're sounding more like TB everyday!)
I have to back up Lauren on this one (and not just because I live with her).
Mama Bear hit the nail on the head...
It was a tough choice we had to make, whether to vote for third party candidates, but ultimately we figured that we can't try to "game" our vote based on polling and how we think other voters are going to vote. With the obvious pro-life requirement met, we then have to select the candidate that best aligns with our values.
The big value for us (after pro-life) was the necessity of restoring sound money and slashing government spending. Without those two, which many career "Republicrats"--including our own Repub congressman--are either ignorant of or are not willing to risk the political fallout of cutting programs that so many are dependent on. However, if they do not, the out-of-control debt and deficit spending (>$13 trillion as we speak; that's over $43,000 for every man, woman, and child) will drive our nation into a very bad place. I've seen the inside of the machine, and it an ugly leviathan on many levels. There are a lot of Republican candidates out there who are pro-life but are just as willing to continue to drive our nation toward financial insolvency.
The bottom line is, I think that more Americans are waking up to the possibility of getting career politicians out of office and embracing (pro-life) third-party candidates who, although underdogs, have a real vision for taking America back to its founding principles. It will take courage to buck the party line, but ultimately--if the Tea Party does not force the Republican Party back to its platform principles--they will be the only hope to get America back on track.
I'd just like to add - charitably of course - that the perfect is the enemy of the good.
But also wanted you guys to know that if it were up to ME, well, we'd slash government down BIG time to only the basics. And I mean BASIC!!! Roads and military and not much more ha ha!! I am not a big fan of government anything.
I agree with LifeHopes.
If the Tea Party becomes a third party (instead of being a powerful influence in the Republican Party), then we are sunk. Third parties will not win in this nation. They only play the spoiler.
Lauren,
My husband and I always take elections on a candidate by candidate basis. Sometimes that means we vote 3rd party, sometimes for one of the other two, sometimes not at all. I think that's part of using your formed conscience to cast a vote. You took it very seriously. A principled vote is never wasted. :)
I think you should always vote your heart, and leave parties out of it. It is almost impossible these days to find a candidate who is truly 100% pro-life (how can you argue against abortion, and for the death penalty is beyond me), which makes it so important to look at each candidate carefully.
I lived in MN when a third party candidate was elected governor. Now, he was a bit of a colorful character himself, but we can't ignore a third party just because it doesn't lead to elections often.
I believe that we work to carefully form our consciences, and we listen to and vote what we believe is right.
Most importantly, you voted! I believe in voting for whoever fits my beliefs irregardless of party. Thanks for the post and fodder for a great discussion.
Great reading on election day! Thanks for the very good food for thought. I always vote pro-life. And I aim to always vote conservative. But as you mention, conflict arises so easily. In the 2008 primary, I wrote in Alan Keyes... (He wasn't on our ballot, although he was in some states.) I couldn't stomach the alternatives.
I think you did the right thing! That's what did what you're supposed to do: vote your beliefs and tell everyone why.
Post a Comment