Who Will You Vote For?

You nailed it..again. I’m a democrat who was caught up early in the “change Washington” Obama message. Funny how once they get the vote, they stop talking about getting the “corporatism” out of politics. What the hell was obama doing addressing 200,000 people in Germany,
when people are starving here. I’ll vote for the candidate that says they will restore the Constitution.
If neither promises this, I’ll be writing in Ron Paul.
America is headed down the wrong road, and the bad economy is a symptom not the problem.

Actually, I’d like to throw all the bastards out and start fresh. The last thing I want is socialism, nor do I want a capitolistic system built on greed alone. I was always taught the real aim of any business was to provide a superior product which satisfys the needs of the customer. The profits are secondary; the public would decide. Do I believe the gov’t should support those less fortunate? No! The gov’t should provide the means for those who are either making every attempt to climb the ladder, or those truly unable to function. Gov’t should not be the sole provider for those who feel they are “owed” a living. So, stop the handouts to companies and to people who view the rest of us a suckers. Pull social security off the General Fund. Tighten up the borders. Explore to the max our resourses and get us off the middle east merry-go-round.
And finally, elect people with common sense..a rareity.

Dear Will,

I agree with you 100% - both parties are mirror images of each other trapped by their outdated liberal and conservative rhetoric of a bygone era. Liberals see everyone who is poor as a ‘victim’ who needs government handouts to survive. Conservatives believe that in order to have a stable society, a small ruling class of the super-rich must be in control of government. Neither party really believes in a free constitutional republic any longer, but they will act as though they do with their patriotic rhetoric. They are perfectly happy to share power and divide up the spoils by keeping other 3rd party wannabees out of the political process entirely.

What we are left with is a crony capitalist militant state which enriches the few through continued warfare at the cost of the many. I refer to this a socialism for the wealthy. Jefferson and the rest of the founders must to rolling in their collective graves to see that we have become what we revolted against - an imperialist power that serves the rich and powerful at the expense of the people. Its a very old game that the founders were all too familiar with.

Don’t expect any solutions or leaders to be coming out of DC - they are the problem not the solution. We must all work together in our local communities in order to rebuild the country from the ground up. And it is happening. Check out organizations like Bicycle City, www.bicyclecity.com, Eco-city Builders (www.ecocitybuilders.com), and Ecovillages (www.ecovillagenews.org) which are leading the sustainable cities movement around the world. The creative intelligence of the people is our best hope for change! Here is too a sustainable and peaceful future.

Will,
You’re a better man than me if you’ve been able to discover many ideas from either of the candidates. They and their analysts, advisors, and strategists (got to have lots of each)seem to think campaigning for President is a spearthrowing and insult contest and someplace where never shall real issues be discussed. We are in deep you know what already and it is floating on top of quicksand and all they do is take personal shots at the other guy.

Hey Presidential candidates,when are you going to figure it out . . . it’s not about you and business as usual. It’s about the future of a once great country and our planet. This isn’t political change it’s a smokescreen. The lobbyists and their money have inundated Denver and they’ll do the same in Minneaplolis and all the politicians just bellied up to the multiple troughs as usual.

And no damn President is the answer, we are the answer and we have to let our voices be heard and demand and initiate real transformational change and fast.

And now the poor Big Three automakers are getting in line for their handout without even considering their current financial condition is due to inept management and a go along to get along, rubber stamp board of directors. They’ll not get a cent if I have anything to do about it and they can declare bankruptcy if that ’s what it takes to get their attention. The bums in management should have been fired long before it got to this state of affairs. It’s not as if no one could have seen it coming.

Speaking of bankruptcy, has anyone looked at our national debt figures lately? General Motors is mere pocket change.

Let’s make any and all candidates dance to our tune and demand solutions and accountability and ACTION!!

First of all, there is absolutely nothing wrong with “old liberal solutions”, which you (unintentionally, I hope) sadly misrepresented. I am, and will always remain, a firm believer in the liberal principles of equality, social justice and economic justice. “Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite”, to coin a phrase.

One of the functions of a liberal government is to protect ordinary citizens from economic predators, which these predators see as “excessive regulation and government interference”. Unfortunately, the spinmeisters of the Right have gotten their code terms (e.g. “tort reform” for the elimination of any legal requirement of corporate responsibility) accepted into mainstream dialog, aided by a complicit corporate media.

“Big government” is code for social programs which are anathema to rightwingers/corporatists/Republicans because these programs don’t fit their social philosophy: “Every man for himself and the devil take the hindmost”.

Bureaucracy can become burdensome, but it certainly isn’t necessarily so; Medicare is run very efficiently, I hear, and my local DMV office was pleasantly efficient the last time I dealt with them.

I think you would be pleasantly surprised if, by some miracle, it were possible to get a real liberal government installed in this country. As it is, a real liberal candidate such as Dennis Kucinich will always be trivialized or ignored by the corporate media, and, unfortunately, also by the corporate political parties. Or should I say: the Democratic and Republican branches of the Corporate Party.

I’ll grant you, things certainly don’t look good for us right now; about the best we can hope for is that the generally uninformed and uninspired populace will finally feel abused enough to throw the rascals out and try something new. Cheers.

Obama was my 3rd choice, but he does seem to balance opportunity with responsibility.

Jefferson pointed out there is always a party seeking to centralize power and one trying to expand it to more people. Generally the ones who wish to centralize it either have power or have an authoritarian mindset.

In the book Don’t Think Like an Elephant the author points out Democrats are like loving mothers and Republicans like strict fathers. The key, as you implied is to have both.

For example John Edwards had proposed a plan to work your way through college, guaranteed as long as you contributed. Of course we wont have that because then we can’t manipulate our young men and women into the military. Opportunity and Responsibility.

National Health Care. Opportunity. I believe we as a nation have earned it. If you cannot pay for your employees to be healthy enough to show up, then you don’t deserve to be wealthy. I paid $50K in health insurance premiums through myself and my employers. I used less than $5K, as I had no major problems. Now I have no insurance as I am self-employed and have to cut where I can. Workers show up, but their health is irrelevant to the employer. They will simply find an employee who wasn’t hit by an uninsured drunk driver or hurt on the job.

We have earned the right to a living wage and health care. We play by the rules. The rich said, 100,000 times, that they deserve the tax breaks and exclusive access to natural resources because it “trickles down.” But then, when we ask for it to trickle down, they bemoan the lazy slobs who want something for nothing. Even though, THEY were the ones who got something for nothing. Read Warren Buffet or Donald Trumps words on how the wealthy also feel just as entitled to welfare as the poor, but justify it. Fact is, we ALL built America, and 1% is taking the credit for it.

What we need is a nation which in a Libertarian sense takes away no freedom unless necessary. In a democratic sense we provide a foundation to all people: Living wage, health care, educational guarantees. In a republican sense we don’t reward irresponsible behavior. In a green sense we value sustainability and promote responsible capitalism.

The key is not to give fish, but fishing poles and lessons. The LAST thing the right wants is for everyone to have opportunity. Then they might actually have to compete.

We did not form society for Survival of the Fittest. We formed it for the well-being of all people. And much of the people are buying into it but not seeing their lives improve, even though they and their parents are paying the salary and golden parachutes of the CEO.

I also found Obama to be shallow on details and it upsets me he is the nominee on words alone. However, if we just let him do what he wants to do, I believe we would be moving toward the society you desire. There is nothing about him and Biden that seems to encourage giving people without expecting. Isn’t his mantra about demanding you do your part?

Basically there are the two parents, one to govern by strength and one by love. They need to govern together, so as much as possible the people come to rely very little on the parent.

Most importantly the people of this nation need to take the reins and RENEGOTIATE the terms of the game. Someone already has Boardwalk and Park Place.

Have you ever played Monopoly where the game drags on and on? The reason it does is because someone already won. They just keep the other parties in the game by deals just enough to keep them interested and generating more wealth to pass upwards.

BUT, we are in charge. We can rewrite the rules, and we can refuse to play. ALL we need to solve it is to treat ourselves as businesspeople do and renegotiate better terms if we are going to continue offering our services. And if we don’t, it is ultimately our own fault.

I think that I’m going to echo what some others have already said. For me, and for a lot of other Democrats, the contrast is clear. We are the party of social responsibility, with the idea that we are all in this together. I don’t want everyone to be equal, but I do want everyone to have an equal shot. What the Republicans represent to me is every man for himself, and devil take the hindmost. It makes a great slogan, but it is a lousy way to run a society.

I don’t want to take from the rich to give to the poor, but I sure would like the country to stop taking from the poor and giving to the rich.

Hope you saw Obama’s speech tonight

Will,

Like I said from day one: you have so much more common sense as you approach political topics from such a well-grounded position; 10 fold better than any politician I have seen in the news lately. Your blog is slowly growing. Hopefully you will continue to grow exponentially in popularity and the average American can start to look to a source that actually takes a fresh, common-sense based stand on the real issues we are facing. Ron Paul is my guy, despite the fact that he is a bit controversial..but seeing as that he won’t make it, I am hoping that McCain picks up Mitt Romney for his strength with creating new solutions.

So, wht are our choices if not to vote for one or the other? How do we “throw the bastards out”? What can we as individuals do that will make any difference? Actually, I do not see that it matters which one is elected…the outcome will be essentially the same because the Machine is in place regardless of who is in the White House. It is easy to express opinions and positions, negative or otherwise. What we need are directions that we can actually pursue that will make a difference.

I agree with M Mc. The most frustrating thing to deal with about our current Congress and political system is how to initiate the deep and massive changes necessary to get it back to where it needs to be. For instance, when the Democrats got a majority in Congress I really believed they would do what they said they were going to do. Until they not only didn’t do those things they didn’t do anything. And then they brought in some new twists: passing less legislation than any other Congress and passing 90% of the legislation that did get passed on a stealth basis with no debate (the old smoke filled room approach). Will, we need a process of change that the unrepresented majority can use to overcome the power of lobbyists and corporate interests and become the truly feared majority with the power to make and demand change that has been lost. I think such a process is the biggest single need in this country right now. How can we organize the power of the true majority?

All major institutions have purposely insulated themselves from those they are supposedly serving . . . us. You can’t begin to get past the army of gatekeepers to actually speak to the person who could make the needed changes if they so chose to do so. We need a process to break through the walls and gatekeepers and get the attention of the decision makers to let them know we are not going to stand for business as usual or they will be gone.

And I would like to know if anyone out there knows what it would take to get a national vote on term limits for Congress, which to me would be a giant step towards major change. And then we really start to enforce strict lobbying rules with penalties for both the lobbyist and the Congress person if they don’t comply properly.

Two things jump out at me while reading peoples reactions and views.

Number one, change can only happen when it begins on a localized basis. Who are we fooling if we think a current Presidential candidate can actually change the system? Ourselves. By the time these current candidates are before us asking for our votes they have already paid their dues and sold their souls to the special interests that helped them to this point. The vast majority of our representation in DC has its roots in local or state politics. By demanding change first on the local and state level we are creating a base of change that will move up the ladder. These new breed of candidates will find the way to DC from the local ranks if we choose to put enough into place as our representatives. This of course isn’t the “quick fix” we like here in America, but unfortunately it is realistic. The nice side effect to looking locally is that our day to day lives are much more influenced by the decisions made in local politics than by the legislation (or lack of) we see in DC. In a way though we would actually see a quicker change by electing local officials that can put change in motion faster and more efficiently.

The second item that comes up for me ties into the first and is not any sort of new thought, we must break the strangle-hold the two major parties have on our system. I doubt the majority of Americans can align themselves comfortably with ALL the views of either one of the parties, but so many “vote the party”. If we can’t agree with all the views of the parties on whole how can we justify so closely aligning ourselves with one or the other? We need to look at the ACTUAL PERSON that is asking for your vote, the office and the paycheck and perks they will receive. The parties are completely self serving and obviously tell us whatever we want to hear to get the vote, just don’t ever expect to see any results from those empty promises. I don’t really blame the parties for this, their number one priority is to stay in existence and this two party system is really working well for them. We need to place blame on the people we see when we look in the mirror, collectively we allow this to continue. I am sick of hearing the “wasted vote” theory of voting outside of the two major parties. The only wasted vote is the one cast without thought or research. The good old straight party vote is a waste putting many unqualified, unmotivated and undeserving people into office on the coat-tales of a party.

Will, thanks for the great avenue provided here for ideas and discussion! When are you looking into politics? I promise to give you a fair shot and I have a feeling I’ll like what you have to offer!

Although I do wish a strong third party would come on the scene to get rid of the status quo, until them I a will vote Democratic. It’s the old “lesser of two evils” I suppose, but I am so sick of the so-called “conservatives” who don’t give a rat’s behind about the people, the environment, our children and grandchildren’s future. For the Republicans, it’s all about the rich getting richer and screw the poor and middle class, while raping the earth.

Obama has been very inspiring. Just hearing him speak is such a wonderful change from what we have endured over the last 8 years. He reminds me of JFK and MLK.
At the very least, he is a diplomat, someone who is willing to shift course when necessary. I do think he has the best interests of the PEOPLE at heart.

Besides, I don’t think he is all that liberal. Like Bill Clinton, I see him as quite centrist.

Will,
I think most Americans agree with your frustrations…trouble is few can agree on solutions. Remember, “compromise” is another way of saying “you don’t get everything you want.” But modern American culture does not encourage any kind of giving, does it? Most Americans have developed some personal stance on the issues that matter most to them, and that’s it. Few will even acknowledge the possibility that an opposing viewpoint might hold some truth. The real truth is that “the issues” we base our vote on are so complex that no one except a full-time political science student (or perhaps a full-time politician) has enough time and energy to thoroughly examine all the history, implications, costs, and pitfalls of any one idea. The average American’s “stance” is therefore based more on general perception than on real factual knowledge or true understanding. We’re busy enough just trying to make our lives work…who has time to thoroughly examine the huge number of things the Federal Government is now involved in? Because of this, “We the people” are now so far removed from the process of government that we can be easily manipulated by whichever media outlet we happen to tune into. Our country is in trouble because it was not designed to be so complex. It is in trouble because decades of career politicians have crafted complex mechanisms designed to both shield themselves from direct accountability and virtually shut-out average Americans lost in a sticky web of confusion. You need an organization (a.k.a. lobbyist) to navigate these waters. Every year we expect more and more from our President, and every year the power of the presidency (and executive branch) grows to meet the demand. Wake up, America! The president is not supposed to solve all your problems! Your local leaders are infinitely more accessible to you and can solve most of your problems, but only in an America that returns to it’s constitutional design where the states have more power than the Fed. Your governor, mayor, or town council members have a much smaller plate to manage, and they can make the positive changes you want as long as Washington has not tied their hands through excessive regulation. The first person to post here, William, had it right on the money. I’m a lifelong Republican voter, but the recent history of the party and the current message is wrong. I can’t see how I could do anything but write in Ron Paul. He’s the only one who seems to want to limit power of the federal government and let us be Americans again with real opportunity. The media seems to hate him, as does the political establishment, so I guess that’s a good start! I hope his Rally for the Republic gets some attention.

My fellow Americans, some fantastic comments. We all, regardless of party allegiance have one helluva uphill battle. Yes local grass roots is a place to start but we must also serve notice to the Federal level representatives that change(the verb) is a required given going forward. They can’t just talk the talk, they must WALK THE TALK by taking action.

And the first step to taking meaningful action is to establish a list of CRITICAL PRIORITIES. Part of the ongoing problem with Washington is they start every year with no priorities based on the overall needs of the people but focused only on the needs of special interests. Look at both candidates right now, how long is their list of priorities? My personal list of concerns is about two pages long and growing and most items on it have reached a stage of criticality. The candidates list may have three or four items and they change from week to week with whatever will get the most publicity and media play. And they never have a detailed plan to reach the goal line and actually deliver the solution needed.

We all have to become empowered Warrior’s of sorts and fight for what is our rights and our country and the future of our planet and our children’s future. What we are all talking about here is a huge WAKE UP CALL to personal action. Republican, Democrat, Independent, whatever, when the ship is sinking we are all facing the same demise and political party means nothing regarding who survives. We are all in this together as fellow human beings and must assist and help each other every way we can. It is called Servant Leadership and boy do we need it badly.

When I consider the assortment of disasters that the executive branch has led us into over the past eight years–economic, military, environmental, social–I cannot agree with assertions that who occupies the White House doesn’t matter. My local school board matters, and so does my president. (As for Congress–I don’t know what to say…)

Will, your question focuses on policies–and policies are critically important, as is the ability to negotiate their implementation–but that’s not the full equation. I mean, the Monica L mess had nothing to do with policies. The other element involves integrity and character and pragmatic, empowering optimism. This quality is almost akin to soul: it is what lifts us, it is what transcends, it is what inspires. And when we are inspired, we have access to greater vision and greater energy and are thereby able to work effectively at the grass-roots level. Also, what inspires Americans can inspire others.

As has been pointed out, a number of current challenges have reached crisis point: from Darfur to polar ice. Warmed-over versions of what we’ve been ‘trying’ won’t do. We have to be different from that, we have to be at our best, and that includes electing the best leaders we can elect. As a white daughter of the privileged South, I believe that, in this election, that’s Barack Obama. He has worked against the Machine and won. He can inspire people across America to inspire people around the world, and together we can begin to solve the crises we now lament.

Although I am a registered Republican, I always try to vote for the candidate that has the character to stand up and do what is right. I personally believe that the lower long term capital gains tax is good for business and leads to investments and more jobs, but I am willing to sacrifice this viewpoint to vote for a candidate that I think embodies the spirit of who the president of the United States should be.

The biggest difference I see between the two candidates is Obama’s diplomatic skills and perceived character. He has shown that he has the character to analyze a situation, such as the price of fuel, and not try to placate the Americans with a political “quick fix” that only further feeds our ignorance. He has shown that he is willing to think the situation through, looking for a long term solution even if it costs him some votes.

I feel that he has the humility to know what he doesn’t know, seek guidance when necessary and I am hopeful he has the honesty to be forthright in his actions. We have shown to the rest of the world that the United States cannot be trusted. The most recent example has just recently come to light and has perhaps set our foreign relations back 30 years. We reneged on a promise by President Clinton not to add the satellite countries of the former Soviet Union to NATO. We told the people of Georgia that we fully support them, and in my mind, the actions they took in attacking South Ossentia were partially based on what they thought the United States would or would not do. Our foreign policy is childish in the way that we send warships to deliver “humanitarian aid” and refuse to talk or negotiate with Russia. We are also placing missiles in Poland that easily reach centers in Russia. I believe we had a similar discussion with Russia when we almost went to war when Khrushchev was placing missiles in Cuba. It is unreasonable to assume the Russians like it any more than we did. I think it would be refreshing for the world and the American people to once again be able to place some trust in our government. I think of the two candidates Mr. Obama has best shown that he has the skills and character to move our country forward rather than backward, and has the ability to see the big picture and long term effects.

Unfortunately our political system is far from perfect. A large part of the blame lies with our ignorance and unwillingness to learn the facts about the world and our candidates. Furthermore, the great sums of money that are necessary to elect a candidate mandate participation of large number of special interests. Still as Winston Churchill once said: “No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” All we can do is try to be as best informed as possible.

Thank you for your provocative narrative.

The point you are missing,for me anyway, is one of the two will be elected, so we had better decide which will be the least destructive to the Nation and economy.

We all have to make a decision (even if it is to - not vote, but I do not think that ia a good decision ) I have looked at the records of both and I will choose the one based on results that they have shown so far.

I am yet undecided also feeling that either candidate is
less than adequate, but my concern is that if I write in someone other than the two major candidates, my vote is wasted. What do you think?

What a GREAT question!

Tell me, what does it mean “wasted” vote? Does it just mean that the candidate you vote for was not elected? Because in my estimation, that outcome will happen to 49% of the people who vote this election, as close as it is. Be very careful of how much you just want to have the candidate you vote for win so you can cheer later and say you were on the winning team. I think it would be better to sleep well at night knowing you have done all you can to make this country the best place on earth. I believe the best use of a vote is a vote for whoever you think will best fulfill the requirements and demands of the office for which they are running. Any compromise to this principle severely waters-down the fundamental power of democracy. I would say simply that voting your conscience is a civic duty, while voting against your conscience for convenience is just plain lazy.

If the only choice we have is to choose between one of two candidates put forward by the two leading parties, what does that say about our country? The power to elect representatives no longer lies in the hands of the common people, but has been transferred to a select few powerful people; those with the ability to promote a certain candidate. In other words, we are stuck with whoever the established power brokers choose, not who the people choose.

I’ve heard many people already deciding NOT to vote at all this election. These people believe their no-show will be seen as a “protest” vote. This is evidence of how deeply ingrained this notion of two-party government has become. When people who are completely against both candidates see no other choice than to abandon the one instrument of political power that they possess, I am certain that they have been brainwashed about what a democracy means. A vote is a personal treasure, a single, thoughtful expression about the future of society. When people don’t exercise their right to vote, it is not seen as protest but as indifference. That indifference serves to embolden the political establishment to serve itself more than the people, since the people don’t seem to care.

I can understand and even excuse the evolution of the political system in the United States to only two parties. Having too many choices could cripple the election process and make a mockery of the Presidency. I cannot imagine how a person in 1850 or even 1950 could be asked to make a choice between more than two or three candidates. But today with every piece of information available on every candidate at the push of a button via the internet or through television, I believe we can handle more choices. Actually I think we are demanding more choices, but have not realized our power to effect that change. The current process must be reformed to support this, such as regulating the amount of television airtime for each candidate and guaranteeing all have the same amount of time regardless of personal wealth. Of course there are other changes needed.

Ron Paul is an unlikely candidate that does not fit the mold of the political establishment. Perhaps he does not even fit the character expectations the American people have for their vision of a President. But he is a long time member of the political establishment who knows firsthand how far our government has moved away from the people. Ron Paul represents constitutional government, and at this critical time, the people need their constitution revived and their sense of power and control over their country restored. Believe me, if those people who don’t vote out of protest combine with those who will reluctantly vote because they feel like they only have two choices, a very real and very powerful message will be sent. A message that the American people know their own power and are not afraid to claim it. Then, everyone will know that voting your conscience is never a wasted vote.

Hello, I have really enjoyed reading the thoughtful comments based on this article, which itself is very well written. I have just one thought to share and that is, people with thick resumes have had their chance and failed. I am willing to gamble and vote for the candidate with a thin resume for a change and see what happens. Experience can be gained by anyone who is quick to learn, has the right attitude and leadership qualities and has the innate wisdom to balance all issues. Obama displays all of this for me. Yes, despite a thin resume. Fat resumes don’t necessarily make a good Leader. No one person can solve everything. It will require all of us to work together to make something good happen. I am willing to give Obama a chance. We only have two candidates for President of our beautiful country. Between the two, it only feels right for me to vote for Obama. Besides, Obama is not against the Constitution and I doubt he will abuse it, like it has been abused by our current President. I’d like to keep an open mind and not jump to conclusions just yet.