I am not talking to very many conservatives who like their choices in 2008. For that matter, I'm not talking to very many moderates who like their choices in 2008. The liberals, well to be honest, I haven't talked to that many, but I would think they're in hog-heaven with both Clinton and Obama in the ballgame.
I've always had people tell me that you can't vote third party because it's a waste of your vote. To which I say BS. The Democrats and the Republicans have managed to take such a handle on the political machine that it would be hard for a third party to muscle its way in and buy some elbow room, there's no doubt about that, but this notion that a vote for a third party is just a waste of a vote is nothing but a scam that we're fed by the two major parties so they can stay in power.
The Republicans nor the Democrats seem to care very much about our nation right now. And, speaking as a conservative, I know that the Republican party darn sure doesn't seem to care too much about the things I care about these days. If they did, why would the two front-runners for the presidential nomination be just about the two least conservative choices available?
That post that CalHunter started the other day, about what your political reference is. How many referred to themselves as Republicans? Few, if I remember correctly. I think most referred to themselves as independents. But if you feel beholden to vote for one party or the other to avoid "throwing away" your vote, how are you independent? You may not be a card-carrying member of either party, but you're hardly independent.
If I vote for Peroutka or Keyes or some other candidate other than Republican or Democrat, my candidate obviously stands a snowball's chance of winning. But if everyone who has voiced their complaints about the choices in '08 decided to likewise thumb their nose at the Republicans and Democrats, our candidate might not win, but we'd make one hell of a powerful statement. We'd make the Republicans (or the Democrats, if you lean to the left) take notice. Perot didn't win in '92, but he made the Republicans take notice. It's funny how quickly they forgot the lesson they were taught back then.
As for those who will quickly say that a vote for a third-party candidate is a vote for the opposition (Clinton), I say: What's the difference? Can you show me a major difference between McCain or Guliani as opposed to Clinton or Obama? Six of one and half a dozen of the other is the addage that quickly comes to mind.
If you're happy with voting for one of those folks, by all means, go for it. But from the threads I've viewed on here the past few months, not many are happy with voting for them. Grassroots efforts are called grassroots efforts for a reason. They have to start somewhere. And change doesn't happen overnight. And all the other overused cliches that you can think of to throw in here. The bottom line is this: You want to make a difference? Stop voting for "the lesser of two evils" and vote for a candidate you feel comfortable with. If every American voter voted for a candidate they truly felt comfortable with, I guarantee you that we wouldn't have two major parties controlling everything and be stuck in the political quagmire that we're in.
Why not?
