It's obvious that this Ron Paul forum isn't going to take lightly to my comments. I didn't expect it to. But how one decides to vote is personal, and the reasons one decides to vote is even more so. Calling me uneducated because you don't agree with how I vote is rather, shall we say, childish. I would be happy to place my IQ up against anyone here. Or my education. Or my background. How I see the world doesn't have to be how you see it.
If everyone voted for the best person, without regard to who will or might win, many of our elections would turn out much better, and our country would be better off. Ross Perot garnered 19% of the vote as a 3rd party Candidate in 1988. How many more people would have voted for him had the media not portrayed his chances of winning as a snowball's chance in Hell? I'm not comparing Perot with Paul (I actually did like much of what Perot had to say, though), but I am pointing out that we can't hope to break the cancerous two party headlock that the lame ass Republicans and Democrats have until we're brave enough to vote purely on our convictions.
OK, let's see... RepubliClowns... more deficit spending, more war in Iraq (gotta "stay the course, you know" regardless of the financial cost or number of lives lost... $2.4T worth?)... monitor everyones' emails and put an RFID chip into every citizen's neck in the name of Homeland Security. DemoCraps... more taxes, ($3.5T increase, in fact) more socialism... "let's tax the CRAP out of anyone who has anything and give EVERYTHING to illegal immigrants... 'cause they WANT it and DESERVE(?) it." (Nancy Pelosi... KISS MY ASS!) That's like a choice between "The Devil" and "The Deep Blue Sea". I say, (D) NONE OF THE ABOVE!!
That's like marrying a girl just because she's easy. Nothing wrong with that. But don't complain afterwards to your wife why she's such a slut.
Cliche's are a dime a dozen. I could say it's like choosing the car with the best gas mileage, as I get the best bang for my buck. You can make negative or positive comparisons. Let's just leave it at my vote, my choice. Has nothing to do with bragging about winning or not. Has to do with getting the most for my vote. If I vote for Ron, my vote goes into an endless sea of nothing. If I vote for someone who is close with another candidate, I have done my part towards choosing a candidate who has a real chance of representing my choice. Even if Ron holds more of what I believe in, it makes no difference because none of it will ever come to be. If I have a choice between two or three close runners and one of those runners stands for several things I support, it goes to that one.
I'd rather know my vote was "wasted" than know I voted for someone I really didn't want to be in office.
No, it's not the same thing. Voting for the most popular is an irrational way to choose a president, while choosing the most fuel efficient car is a rational choice. Check Bryan Caplan's book "The Myth of the Rational Voter" he explains the problems of democracy as a popularity contest. Your vote is not only your private choice. Is an individual choice with public effects. Who you vote for affects everyone else.
I'm not going to vote for someone I don't want to be in office. Nor am I going to vote for someone who is the most popular. I'm voting for the person with the best chance who holds as many of my views as possible (in combination). It's obvious that you guys only see your way (as is the case when dealing with Ron Paul supporters, gold bugs, dollar bears, etc.), so there's no need to continue this conversation. As Bill says, "I'll give ya the last word."