Stop Me Before I Vote Again

Just vote for whoever has the funniest name.

ethan writes on 10.21.10 at 10:48:

Just vote for whoever has the funniest name.

Actually, I think a bunch of people followed that suggestion in '08; that's how we wound up with Barack Obama.

(smirk, spurtle) Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Maybe it explains Millard Fillmore, too.

Curiosity got the better of me, and I broke down and went to read the Robert Parry column, and jeeeezus, I could almost smell the shit in his pants from here.

Speaking of which, I could also tell he was full of shit early on, when he blames Nixon's win in '68 on Lefties who "sat on the sidelines". Wotta dumbass. I suppose the Left did sit on the sidelines in terms of not participating in a corporate-backed, rigged "election", but otherwise, they certainly were not sitting on the sidelines in '68 -- they were out in the streets, disrupting business as usual, fighting the cops, being shot at by the National Guard, torching draft boards, basically making the country ungovernable. Then, of course, the stench from Parry's drawers became overpowering when he rolled out that tired old Nader Hate.

As far as the rest of Parry's pants-crapping goes -- I love how, in the course of trying to make a case for voting Democratic, he ends up making a case for staying home, or voting third-party (if you absolutely must participate in the latest round of corporate kabuki theater). I mean, c'mon, man:

If the pundits are correct and the Democrats go down to a crushing defeat on Nov. 2, the result will not be more progressive legislation but even less...

What, y'mean, like, we're getting progressive legislation now? No national healthcare, no repeal of the Patriot Act, no "green jobs", no moratorium on offshore oil drilling, no nothing under the Donkeycrats? Jeezus, wotta tool this guy is.

Y'know, about eight or ten years ago, blather like Parry's would've made me livid; now I'm just amused. Actually, scratch that; now, I'm delighted -- absolutely euphoric -- to see a crackpot realist DP mouthpiece like Parry crapping his drawers in panic at the prospect of The Party That Sucks More winning an "election" against The Party That Sucks Slightly Less because all the Lefties and anyone else with real progressive values (as opposed to "pwogwessive") are finally realizing that there really isn't a dime's worth of difference and are tired of Parties That Suck.

.

"You idiots! I told you we should've paid more attention to our left wing!"
--last words transmitted from Space Shuttle Columbia, 2003.

There is, however, something to be said for a "third party" vote that gives Robert Parry a full blown conniption. A bit silly? Sure, but I'm not so morally vain that I'd pass. There's also a tiny chance a genuinely decent person will sneak into some office or another and, once there, do a few, small, genuinely decent things...

D'ahh, c'mon, Schumann. Don't pussy out on us now, man.

(;^>

Mike, I'd sit it out and none the worse for doing so, but a gang of third party meliorists have done the politically unthinkable: they've been kind to me. I could stand on principle, refuse to go the polls and they'd still be kind to me, but it wouldn't feel right. I'm just that sentimental.

Local elections are a different ball game. We once had great fun running hippie and environmentalist candidates unafraid to name names and provide documentation in exposing local party and government fraud. Some even got elected! But more importantly, we burned the careers of some evildoers.

The DNC and RNC can keep everyone else off TV, but they can't keep us out of candidate forums at City Hall. Dig up some dirty facts, print some juicy flyers, hand them out at the courthouse.

It's loads of fun, and you're guaranteed to meet some interesting people.

jay has it

sport !!!!

We have some third parties in my neck of the woods. The Peace Party (aka the Greenies), and the Working Families Party. I'll vote for their local and state candidates where possible. In a few of the major national level elections I'm going to vote for republicans. Why not? What are they going to do? Carry on two wars, threaten more wars, bomb the hell out of innocent civilians in Pakistan, carry out secret assassination plots? I don't see the downside and the look on the democrats faces when they get tossed from office will be worth it. Yes yes, it's schadenfreude. So be it.

Schadenfreude is joy in another's misery. Will the misery be limited to the losing Democratic candidates or will the Drunk Pundit get some of it for himself? Nose cutting->face spiting. Lack of enlightened self interest. For the transitory joy of seeing a disappointed Donkey.

Things can be worse sooner if the Congress doesn't resist the evisceration of SS benefits, just as an example. Will Republicans resist?

Dems stink. But Republicans stink worse and are irrational to boot.

Hey No Comment: When Bush tried to gut SS he was stopped, even with a Republican majority.

When Obama tried to gut SS his Speaker of the House scheduled a lame duck vote so they can pass it without having to face the voters wrath.

What's that again about how much worse the Republicans are????

I believe that Bush wanted to privatize SS. A different matter. Privatization was repeatedly embarrassed by recurring stock market sell offs, unrelated to Bush's project, but quite attention-getting, even for Republican office holders. The positive selling points for that project would seem to have been buried in late 2008.

The D's created the SS system. The R's have opposed it from the first. Obama is willing to abandon the working and middle class and the only allies around are frightened D office seekers who are begging for our votes. So elect Republican majorities for the pleasure of sticking it to Democrats and see how much faster things can get ugly. It's a free choice.

Organize alternative parties? For most parts of the USA it is rather late. Better start AFTER election day, if you can pull yourself away from the SMBIVA wiseacre/commenter habit long enough to meet, and talk politics with, your neighbors.

I think it's pretty much moot. Solipsists take their comeuppances as vindication. If the Democrats do lose a lot of seats, they won't be miserable. They have sinecures lined up. They will be just fine. Unfortunately, the rest of us won't regardless of the outcome.

No Comment, your admonition regarding talks with the neighbors is a good one. The conviviality to be gained is welcome, and worth having for itself.

While I agree with you all, and Jerry is no great shakes (California is basically fucked no matter what) I just cannot imagine having to listen to that smug insider trader/middle manager eMeg for four years. I gotta vote just to vote against HER.

And, I despise Carly as well. It's a matter of "personal" antipathy. So...they will see me at the polls this year, probably. never claim to be totally rational.

Brian, the odds are your vote won't make a bit of difference one way or the other. I really do believe voting is a mistake, for that and other reasons. There are times when I'd go so far as to claim that NOT voting is good for you.

I suppose I should get fired up about your reasons and choices, but I don't have it in me to get riled today.

i'm anti formalist as many here now
in the end
close to current " dead " center policy
gets extruded from parliamentary systems

if you could register your preference
and still get to vote for a lesser evil in a econd round
what would be left to discuss ??

real preference voting
makes perfect sense all round
................ in run off systems

where stable multi party systems exist
this silly business
every election year
about "don't waste a vote
don't elect a black hat "
is thankfully un necessary

i take noam's line here
as worth a hard look each election
"how hard is it to vote for a lesser evil "

How hard is it indeed. It's no harder than the morning rush across a picket line that's manned by one half-crippled striker.

This is the best column ever.

And no, I won't vote GOP despite my ability to get the rationale on this blog for doing so. Since there's little organized Green presence here, I suppose that leaves the option of either blank spots on the ballot or fictional characters.

I still have some time to decide for sure, though.

I wish I knew the name of some neighbor or local merchant that had pissed off Parry at some point. Or just some rock band that he hates. I could totally write them in.

My cat ran unopposed for mine inspector. When it came time to swear in, she was mousing and I had completely forgotten. Oh well.

"If the Democrats do lose a lot of seats, they won't be miserable."
i'd contend the party's corporate core
needs a loss of at least one chamber
look
the DP C-core wants an 8 year ohbummer reign
but they need a bit more stag now
and some long run transfer system cuts
better to drag in the gop as ci culprits
we'll get
lots of "but for ohbummer.." shit in 11-12

"no harder than the morning rush across a picket line that's manned by one half-crippled striker"
mr Al
i feel fairly chastened by that
at least about using this bull shit line
to gimmick myself into the booth ...this year

u know i'd love the idea
of a voters strike

" we will no longer be your rubber stamps "

Owen, you're right, a loss would be bliss for them where stag partying is concerned. I don't know how much intent precedes the outcome, but I'm sure it plays a part.

I don't often bother with deconstruction but let's give it a go...

"Schadenfreude is joy in another's misery."

Why yes, it is. I see you've read your dictionary and understand the meaning of the word.

"Will the misery be limited to the losing Democratic candidates or will the Drunk Pundit get some of it for himself?"

Is this a rhetorical question?

"Nose cutting->face spiting. Lack of enlightened self interest."

It ain't my nose that's cut when donkey's lose. My nose was cut when they won. My nose will be cut again when the republicans win. Democrats win, Republicans win... my nose is damn near cut off already.

"For the transitory joy of seeing a disappointed Donkey."

Alas that all joy is transitory... sigh. Are you 10 years old or is that just your emotional IQ?

"Things can be worse sooner if the Congress doesn't resist the evisceration of SS benefits, just as an example."

You're a fool. Look at who Obama appointed to the Cat Food commission. He's as dedicated to cutting your benefits as any Republican. Indeed, Nobama is the best Republican the democrats ever elected.

"Will Republicans resist?"

The better question has been and will be why don't the democrats resist?

Perhaps they're bought and paid for whores to the banking and financial industry? Something you should look into.

"Dems stink. But Republicans stink worse and are irrational to boot."

You're joking right? You're telling me that democrats are rational? Are these the democrats that think by bombing children into dust in pakistan we'll cure the terrorist itch over there? I mean really, you must be joking. Or trolling. In any case the democrats are evil. People who vote for them are voting for evil people.

In any case here's a toon for you to look at. I doubt it would penetrate a mind so rock hard sure as yours, but FWIW.

http://sinkers.org/stage/?p=666

Oh man... I used "in any case" twice within far too close a proximity to each other in my last post.

I'm a horrible writer and I am suitably ashamed.

"Better start AFTER election day, if you can pull yourself away from the SMBIVA wiseacre/commenter habit long enough to meet, and talk politics with, your neighbors."

You don't know me. You don't know who I talk to. And when making comments about wiseacre commenters be sure not to look in the mirror, you might see yourself.

Blind drunk.

You argue like Cluster.

Cartoon is good. It encapsulates what I detest most about the Democratic administration. The Senate and House D-caucuses are far too much 'in sync' with those vicious bastards. Witness, for example, the vote on the Goldstone report resolution of condemnation. The House member from my district said on the House floor:

"Finally, bringing this resolution up at this time and in this manner could have implications for the possibility of internal investigations into the conflict by the parties themselves. That is a central recommendation of the Goldstone Report as well as the Obama administration, prominent Israeli officials and Israeli human rights organizations.

Israel is a strong and resilient democracy, and successfully investigating this episode could only make it stronger. We shouldn't pass a resolution now which could slow or stop the wheels of justice before they have even begun to turn.”

Not really a ringing rebuke to Israel, but still he did not vote for the resolution that passed by 344 - 36.

Not much of a difference, but 33 of the 36 votes against the resolution were cast by Democrats. As I wrote elsewhere the D's deserve to be replaced but not by Republicans.

I get the idea of punishing the Democrats. I don't get the idea of punishing the Dems by voting for the Republicans. Aren't they worthy of a little "punishment" too? This seems as fine an example of cutting off your nose to spite your face as any I can conjure.

The bottom line for me is if you screw the people, you and your party can go fuck yourselves. I don't care if you're the "lesser evil." The other guy will now have the opportunity to screw the country over but with any luck you never will again. Voting for a Dem or Rep only rewards them for their misbehavior, and puts them on notice that they can walk all over us an we'll still come back begging for more. As they say in the South, fuck that noise.

If you want an alternative to the current duopoly, you have to vote outside it. It's as simple as that. Every vote for a third party strengthens that party and lets you show your appreciation for the effort to give the people an alternative. I’ll do my thanksRalphing by voting for Ralph, or anybody else who cares to run.

If there's no third party, vote for Anyone But X, Attila the Hun, or Paris Hilton. But don't bloody vote for a Republican as a "protest" in the vague hope the Dems will get the message you're annoyed and somehow change their evil ways. We should be working to destroy the Dems and Reps, not reason with them.

I would vote for Attila, no prob... Paris is a stretch, though.

I agree with Sean. I don't see how a vote for an R is a protest vote at all. I've been a non-voter for a very long time now, after being a "spite" voter from my first chance, and I've found that I can conjure up the hate out of my D friends just fine by doing either one (voting third-party or not voting at all). I didn't vote in 2000 and was held responsible for Bush's victory anyway. There's no "rent is too damn high" candidate in my state, so I guess I'm going to keep my non-voting streak going this year.

I, too, agree with Sean. However gluelicker is wrong about Paris. I think she'd make a fine senator. Her presence would raise the tone of their trap considerably.

People fought and died for our right to vote. That right includes the right to withhold one's vote.

Personally, I simply refuse to vote for a nominally liberal/left party that fields a Congressional candidate who says this in the autumn of 2010:

“I’m David Wu, and I’m working in Congress so people with good ideas can grow and expand [interesting contrast here!] their businesses. That’s why the tax breaks I passed help entrepreneurs create high tech jobs.”

I also think we are still in the earliest days of the Citizens United stage of the politics by tv-ad era, in which concentrated power speaks money, and impossibly confused and dis-informed voters listen to the dollars being spoken, then "vote."

I agree with Noam's premise. But there has to be a lesser evil in order to vote for a lesser evil. There is not one, so far as I can tell.

Ms. X, if it interests you, I have already voted here in Stumpstate, but only and exclusively on ballot measures. No personage on the bubble sheet struck me as worth a microgram of Sharpie ink. Not even close.

I, for one, am on strike against the Business Party and its two brands.

Al:

...My cat ran unopposed for mine inspector. When it came time to swear in, she was mousing and I had completely forgotten. Oh well...

Presumably in her re-election campaign she promises to catch a woodchuck, though. Or at least help put one through college, right?

Michael Dawson:

...Ms. X, if it interests you, I have already voted here in Stumpstate, but only and exclusively on ballot measures. No personage on the bubble sheet struck me as worth a microgram of Sharpie ink. Not even close...

Yeah. That's what I did in the last mid-term. But I always wonder if Bill "Angel Face" Bradbury's henchfolk are encouraged to use blank spaces as an excuse to invalidate one's entire ballot, though. Any idea?

Ms. X, she was never keen on politics, as far as I know. I believe she indulged me out of noblesse oblige. The woodchucks are a little too big for her, whether the project is merciful dispatch or college. And some of them already have MFAs (as one might expect).

I think Bradbury's out of the SoS office, but it's a good question, Ms. X. I wouldn't put it past him or his successorbot(s).