The Problem with Voting “Other” Whether Libertarian or 3rd Party

Caffeinated Thoughts ^ | October 20, 2012 | Prof. Anita Morrill, Des Moines Area Comm College

[2ndDivisionVet]

I have a lot of respect for my Libertarian friends, and they are frequently the first people I’d like to have a discussion with about a new policy or political controversy. I find most of them to be intelligent, thoughtful, well-read people. I also find that in large part Independents (including the Tea Party) often have much in common with the right when it comes to the issues of this particular election–economics and the over-reach of the Federal government.

But I do think that to actually vote for a 3rd party candidate in a tight general election (as this one) is to actually harm the chances of someone whose views are probably most similar to your own. A vote for a 3rd party actually makes a TWO point difference in terms of real numbers, from +1 to a -1 vote that could have been received by one of the main candidates. Let’s get practical—in a close election, a few thousand votes can make or break the entire Electoral College contribution of a state, which in turn can determine the winner of the election.

A recent Des Moines Register poll showed only a 1-point difference between Romney and Obama here in Iowa. And in both 2004 and 2008, “other” votes in Iowa made up…. 1 percent.

So by all means, make your case to anyone who will listen in the off-years and primary season! In fact, the last 2 election cycles, I’ve supported someone other than the eventual candidate at caucus time. But once the primaries are over, I think we do need to figure out which of the remaining candidates is closest in ideology to our own views.

As to Gary Johnson himself, I find myself agreeing with many–if not most–of his positions. I want education back at the local level. I absolutely believe that the 2nd Amendment has implications for the rest of the Bill of Rights. And he was right on when he reportedly said, “My next door neighbor’s two dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than this current administration.”

My main personal concerns about any Libertarian candidate are the tendencies for fast change and the hesitancy to deploy the military. I frequently wonder if the drastic “fix-it-now” approaches of the Libertarian movement are the best approach. There are so many entrenched government programs and expenditures in place today that practically speaking, it’s going to take some time for states and individuals to adjust. My second concern is that a Libertarian president may put ideology ahead of national defense. In my opinion, there ARE times when we need to engage in combat, and I want a President who won’t hesitate to do that if it becomes necessary.

Even so, I can certainly respect the 3rd party vote—or even abstention—of someone who has deeply considered the issues and clearly done their homework.

But this election is not an apples-to-apples choice, but truly an apples-to-oranges choice between two very different ideologies. So I think those who chose to actually vote for Gary Johnson this particular election will actually be harming the chances of another candidate who isn’t as far off from their views as they might think.

[Maurice Tift]

  Military Strength; minimal capabilities.
  Gary Johnson:

   Maintaining a strong national defense is the most basic of the federal government’s responsibilities. However, building schools, roads, and hospitals in other countries are not among those basic obligations. Yet that is exactly what we have been doing for much of the past 10 years.

Given trillion-dollar deficits, America simply cannot afford to be engaged in foreign policy programs that are not clearly protecting U.S. interests. There is nation-building and rebuilding to be done right here at home.

Our military should remain the most potent force for good on Earth. To do this, we should resort to military action as the last option and only as provided in the Constitution.

[Maurice Tift]

Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science can come up with, zero restrictions.

  I've never heard any Libertarian say "zero restrictions." I'm against the dog shooting drug raids and Gary Johnson simply believes that abuse of hard drugs is a health problem. It is and jail just isn't an effective treatment program.

[ansel12]

You don’t ask people for their opinions, you read the party platform.

“We favor the repeal of ALL laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.”

Want to see the details on immigration?

[Maurice Tift]

  “We favor the repeal of ALL laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.”

  I do agree with the above. Recreational purposes doesn't include operating heavy machinery. I favor a world where heroin addicts can seek professional help without fear of imprisonment.

[ansel12]

LOL, that’s what I have been saying.

These are the two related elements of your party platform (in plain language), want to see the portion on open borders?

Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science can come up with, zero restrictions.

Advertising those drugs, prostitution, and pornography; zero restrictions.

[morphing libertarian]

If the election goes the wrong way or Romney turns into a moderate-liberal, I’ll be ready to put time and money into a third party.

The goal is to make the third party the second party and let the repubs ride off into the sunset as the moderate republican party.

I believe many conservatives would get behind that. It would be 3 years of hard work.

[Maurice Tift]

  Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science can come up with, zero restrictions.

  There is no solution to the problem, but the current drug laws make it far worse. Johnson has only gone as far as saying marijuana should be legalized. He also says that it will never be legal to drive under the influence of marijuana. That's a restriction. He also doesn't believe in under-age marijuana smoking (implied on his web site). That's another restriction.