Why Third Party Voters Should Not Be Blamed For McCain's Upcoming Defeat

self | 5/10/08 | levotb

[levotb]

I've heard from a number of freepers in recent threads telling me, "A vote for a third party candidate is a vote for Obama". In an attempt to FINALLY put that idiocy to rest, I'm devoting this thread solely to that subject.

"Let logic prevail!", I always say. Well, there IS no logic to the above statement IF the voter in question (who has decided to vote third party in '08)

1) is not a registered Republican and

2) was never going to vote for McCain in the first place

Remember 1992, when Republicans (as many of them still do) blamed Ross Perot for GHW Bush's defeat by Bill Clinton? The Republican crybabies got it wrong then and apparently many of them are getting it wrong now, well before the election. They blamed a lot of folks (who were never going to vote for GHW Bush UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES and who weren't registered Republicans) for handing the Presidency to Clinton. How can you in all honesty blame people for your aging candidate's poorly run campaign on those who wanted somebody else? Remember that video of the President fainting at the dinner table of the Japanese Prime Minister prior to the election? Remember his ominous "New World Order" comment in Bush's speeches in 1990 and 1991? Remember his "Read my lips!" lie? Remember how it was being said that Bush "didn't have his heart in running again and it showed"? If you run a lousy campaign and lie to the American people, you deserve to lose! But (Republicans) blaming Perot and those who voted for him is a lot like liberals always blaming crime on anyone BUT the criminal!

Remember how they blamed Pat Buchanan instead of Bob Dole in 1996 for handing Clinton another 4 years? Newt Gingrich and other supposed "conservatives" who pushed NAFTA through for Clinton in 1994 and had betrayed real conservatives in other areas--along with being blamed by the MNM in 1994 for "shutting down the Government"--all of these plus the continued good economy in 1996 AND YET ANOTHER OLD BILLIONAIRE RINO (this one, with one arm) and his liberal idiot sidekick Jack Kemp were the REAL reasons why Clinton won re-election, NOT Pat Buchanan's "pulling Republican voters away from Bush"!

I haven't been a Republican since 1996. Does that mean that 12 years after leaving that party, I'm to blame a McCain loss to Obama in November even though I would never have voted for McCain under ANY circumstances? Of course not!

A case could be made for REGISTERED REPUBLICANS who vote third party in this election having betrayed McCain, but no one else. And even some of them--the more conservative registered Republicans--shouldn't be blamed for voting for a third party candidate as McCain is very simply a pro-war liberal, someone who is diametrically opposed to everything they stand for.

But, don't let "logic" get in the way of any preconceived notions!

[TomGuy]

Considering the 3 potential probables, it is too late to cry.

We can only hope that Congress can block many of policies of whichever one wins. However, Congress is wrought with its own problems, self interest, pork barrelling, corruption.

[MrEdd]

I am a conservative not a Republican. I will vote for Republicans IF they are conservative. If Bush's opponent had not been Hanoi John Kerry, I would not have voted in the last election.

Islam's war against the west will inevitably bring the US a nuclear strike. The persistent open borders are a hot potato that will utterly destroy the party in power when it happens. I prefer that the borders be closed - but barring that, let it be the liberals who are destroyed if we're not going to move to prevent it.

This is as obvious and foreseeable as the earlier attacks on September eleventh. Aside from the loss we all will have of family and friends WHEN not if this happens, I recognize that the party who emerges in power will be able to radically reshape government the United States. Many on the left foresee this as well, and are actively working to keep our defenses weak.

I therefore am willing to sacrifice important pieces to win the game. Winning the white house or congress are less important than closing the borders. A candidate who could win an office, at the cost of placing someone in office that the left could justifiably claim failed to aggressively defend America costs conservatism control of the board.

By the same token I will not move to save a socially liberal republican candidate merely to defeat the democrat. Sometimes control of the board is more important than saving every pawn.

If I get a liberal in office who votes liberal while claiming (unchallenged) to represent the party with a conservative platform, then my voice is even more unheard than if a liberal democrat is in office. It means that conservatives will vote for anyone who claims conservatism, even if they are to the left of Hillary Clinton. It also means that the Republican party did this eyes wide open, believing that I (and other conservatives) would vote for a yellow dog if it was a republican. Sorry RNC that only works with democrats.

Semper Fidelis

[johnthebaptistmoore]

McCain has already truly betrayed conservatives and conservatism for decades on a variety of issues. Repeatedly stabbing conservatives in the back is truly not going to help McCain with either conservative support or votes from conservatives in the general election. Many in the Republican Party as well as many of the general public have been tracking McCain’s political moves and personal life for a long time, and they truly are very disappointed with what they see from McCain.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Newt Gingrich and other supposed "conservatives"

You for real? If Newt Gingrich wasn't a conservative then, well what's your standard for a conservative?

Tell me who you're going to vote for, and why. Stop your bellyaching about why you don't support one candidate or the other, how about telling us who you support and why we should support them, too!

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

FReepers and conservatives voted for Hillary to keep her sorry butt in the Rat primaries. Why would they be upset if others vote 3rd party in the general?

I have no intention of voting for McCain; this may be the first election I'm sitting out since 1990.

[mysterio]

I agree. I vote for the candidate that stands behind restoring the Bill of Rights’ role in federal government and actively promotes smaller, less intrusive government. Any candidate that doesn’t stand for those issues is a candidate that doesn’t want my vote.

[devere]

“If Bush’s opponent had not been Hanoi John Kerry, I would not have voted in the last election.”

In 2008 the folks who nominated John Kerry have come up with Barry the Red Obama. Have fun deciding what to do now.

[VRWC For Truth]

Neither choice is better for America ... which is what you fail to grasp.

[bcsco]

Has it occurred to you that if you do vote for a third party candidiate, and should McCain win, both you and your third party will have been reduced to political insignificance?

Has it occurred to you that a McCain Presidency would spell doom for Conservativism? And that the outcome would be insignificantly different than voting third party? Has it?

Ponder the likelihood of McCain having a sufficient majority of Republicans in Congress (not to mention Conservatives) to further his agenda. Then consider The likelihood of him working with Democrats (has he's shown the willingness to do in the past) to build his Presidential legacy.

After due consideration, tell me there's a difference...

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Yup. Reminds me of a story Groucho Marx used to tell, about a dinner party conversation he'd once had:

****************

Groucho Marx (to pretty lady at dinner): Would you sleep with tonight me for $52 million?

Pretty Lady (laughing): Of course!

Groucho (leering wildly): How about for $10?

Lady: Mr. Marx! What sort of girl do you think I am, anyway?!?

Groucho: We've already established what sort of girl you are. Now we're just haggling over the price.

*****************

In precisely the same fashion: Team Juan's shills have just as plainly established what they are, as well.

Not something I'd ever likely feel proud of, myself.

[stockpirate]

Our country will survive Obama and McCain.

McCains base are RINO’s or as I like to refer to them, Socialist Republicans.

Conservatives, even those who are republicans owe McCain nothing.

McCain has stated that he doesn’t need our votes. I have no problem with that, but I get the feeling that his fellow travelers know better.

If McCain wants the conservative vote, he knows to find it and how to secure it.

We all need to stand firm and no longer allow the RNC to assume we have no where else to go.

There is no reason any conservative should at this point vote for him.

SCOTUS- He will have to reach across the ailse.

His allowing 15 million illegals in will add to the voting rolls of the DNC.

While Obama and Clinton say they will remove the troops they can’t and have admitted as much.

McCains amnesty plan will cost trillions, so he will have increase spending.

All in all I will at this time vote McCain.

He he wants my vote he knows how to find me.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Conservatives, even those who are republicans owe McCain nothing.

McCain has stated that he doesn’t need our votes. I have no problem with that, but I get the feeling that his fellow travelers know better.

Yup. See my tagline. ;)

[Hugin]

Voting third party is political masturbation. It feels good, but accomplishes nothing.

[saminfl]

****But, don’t let “logic” get in the way of any preconceived notions!***** I admire a person who follows his/her own advice. Well done sir/madam.

Darn it! I must be really slow. I can't count the number of times I have been beaten to the punch by someone who says the exact same thing I wanted to say.

Bravo to you for an accurate observation.

[stockpirate]

McCain said he doesn’t need my vote, thereby releasing me from voting for him.

[Man50D]

I couldn't agree more with the essential point that Republicans have abandon conservatism while using conservatives as a scapegoat to deflect attention from the GOP's deliberate move towards increasing socialism within the party. The motivation for this misguided notion is the expansion of the voter base that can only be accomplished by appealing to socialists. The desire to garner the maximum votes possible is interpreted as a victory but at what cost? It can hardly be considered a victory when the compensation for more votes is acquiescing power to the very group of people who seek the destruction of our Democratic Republic.

I do respectfully disagree with your premise there will be third party voters. The leader of the GOP, George Bush and the presumptive GOP nominee both favor granting amnesty to illegal aliens. This position is inherently dangerous on on more than one level. Most importantly it gives terrorists easier access into the country and destroy us from within our own borders. Second, Failing to strictly enforce our existing immigration laws only invites chaos. A nation that fails to abide by it's own laws soon ceases to be a nation. Third, it encourages foreigners not to assimilate to the American culture while making it incumbent upon Americans to assimilate to a multitude of cultures all in the name of diversity. Fourth, the economic cost of allowing illegal aliens into the country is an unbearable drain on the nation's economy.

McCain and Bush both have bought into the myth of human induced global warming. McCain has gone to the extreme of sponsoring a bill(McCain-Lieberman Stewardship Climate Act) based on this fallacy. This will only bring more regulation taking more power and freedom away from the people and into the relatively small few who run the government. This is not what our founding fathers intended when they wrote the Constitution. Such abrogation of the people's power is anathema to the Constitution. Additionally McCain endorses further usurpation of the people's power by limiting free speech as a sponsor of the McCain-Feingold bill. Additionally McCain in 2001 actively sought out the Democrats to become a member of their party and was considered by John Kerry as a potential running mate

The positions and histories of these men clearly show they support ideals in alignment with the socialist Democrats. This makes it increasingly difficult to see a distinct difference between the two party. It is evident the Republican leadership are in the process of merging the party with the socialist Democrats. It is clear considering all these facts the are essentially one party. Supporting another party will restore the two party system.

[stylin19a]

write-in Daffy Duck or even Ron Paul.

tough choice..

[mo]

“....which is what you fail to grasp.”

BS.

I’m not understanding how any of these super conservatives can claim McCain is not a conservative. All you have to do is look at the numbers. The American Conservative Union, for example, rates the candidates with a score from 0 to 100 with 100 being the most conservative. Look:

McCain: 82.3
Paul: 82.26
Thompson: 86
Clinton: 9
Edwards: 10
Obama: 8

http://www.crosstabs.org/blogs/mschuyler/2008/jan/16/mccain_is_a_better_conservative_than_most

Take your self interest elsewhere.

[svcw]

1. GHWB did not faint on the prime minister of Japan - he threw up on him.
2. GHWB did not say “no new taxes” he said “no nude Texans”.

[ZGuy]

Actually 30 million or so republicans could vote for a third party candidate and still not be blamed for McCain's loss (should that happen). The reason is that they live in blue states that the democrat candidate is guaranteed to win. For these republican voters whose votes for McCain are a total waste, I would suggest that they would be better off voting for a third party candidate, should one arise, who is a solid conservative.

While the vote for McCain would be worthless, a large number of people voting for a solid conservative candidate could help conservatism by not only making a "statement" (PR), but by possibly helping that party to be in a stronger financial position in the 2010 or 2012 elections.

Therefore, a vote for a third party is, in at least 30 million cases, not a vote for Obama, while a vote for McCain may in fact be a vote to intentioanlly not help the conservative cause.