Every time I hear something from Romney or about Romney, I get more and more sure that I cannot vote for the man. Others feel differently - I get that. You want someone who can win. You want someone with a chance. And you would take Sauron over Obama. (I've been rereading LotR.)
I really do get it. However. . . Is Romney the ONLY person with a CHANCE?
Believe it or not, I'm not actually talking about Ron Paul or anyone in particular. I'm talking about someone that maybe you and I haven't heard of - but others have!
I'm not sure how I got there, but I found the Libertarian candidate - Gary Johnson. I haven't done much research on the guy (yet), but I was wondering how many people I know have done any looking outside of the two main candidates At All. I'm pretty sure most of my conservative friends and family are in the same boat as me about two things - we don't want Obama; we don't want Romney. Maybe we wanted Santorum or Paul or even Bachmann before, but we didn't want Romney and we didn't want Obama.
The only difference is that some of them are willing to go with someone we don't want over someone we REALLY don't want; and I'm not. (Mostly because I REALLY don't want either of them. . . .)
But what if we're all overlooking something? What if we really don't need to choose between two evils in order to win? What if there IS someone out there who DOES have a chance of winning that we just don't know about because we're too lazy to look and see (and because the media isn't going to give them the time of day)? What if we can have a GOOD candidate AND a winning candidate?
My point is this - I don't need the best. If I'm convinced that the best can't beat the bad, but the good CAN? I'd say, "Let's all vote for the Good!" If Ron Paul IS the best (I'm not saying he is; just IF), but Gary Johnson has a better chance of winning and is good enough, I'll vote Libertarian.
I'm going to vote. I want to vote. I cannot vote for the two main candidates; my conscience would seriously smite me. But I'm not terribly politically savvy, and I really have no idea how to know who amongst the few good people we have has the best chance of winning. So if you have any ideas or insights, do share. And please, please - don't just throw in the towel and join the Romney camp because you like him better than Obama. We have two months yet. Please, let's make sure we're not missing something.
I really do get it. However. . . Is Romney the ONLY person with a CHANCE?
Believe it or not, I'm not actually talking about Ron Paul or anyone in particular. I'm talking about someone that maybe you and I haven't heard of - but others have!
I'm not sure how I got there, but I found the Libertarian candidate - Gary Johnson. I haven't done much research on the guy (yet), but I was wondering how many people I know have done any looking outside of the two main candidates At All. I'm pretty sure most of my conservative friends and family are in the same boat as me about two things - we don't want Obama; we don't want Romney. Maybe we wanted Santorum or Paul or even Bachmann before, but we didn't want Romney and we didn't want Obama.
The only difference is that some of them are willing to go with someone we don't want over someone we REALLY don't want; and I'm not. (Mostly because I REALLY don't want either of them. . . .)
But what if we're all overlooking something? What if we really don't need to choose between two evils in order to win? What if there IS someone out there who DOES have a chance of winning that we just don't know about because we're too lazy to look and see (and because the media isn't going to give them the time of day)? What if we can have a GOOD candidate AND a winning candidate?
My point is this - I don't need the best. If I'm convinced that the best can't beat the bad, but the good CAN? I'd say, "Let's all vote for the Good!" If Ron Paul IS the best (I'm not saying he is; just IF), but Gary Johnson has a better chance of winning and is good enough, I'll vote Libertarian.
I'm going to vote. I want to vote. I cannot vote for the two main candidates; my conscience would seriously smite me. But I'm not terribly politically savvy, and I really have no idea how to know who amongst the few good people we have has the best chance of winning. So if you have any ideas or insights, do share. And please, please - don't just throw in the towel and join the Romney camp because you like him better than Obama. We have two months yet. Please, let's make sure we're not missing something.
3 comments:
Gary Johnson was running in the very beginning. He even was in several of the debates last year. He was excluded later on because they started requiring you to get some votes or something.
I don't think he has a chance, either. I think that most Paul people will vote for Paul if they vote. There are some that will vote for Johnson, but I doubt it is anywhere near close enough - even if all the Paul people switched over. But maybe it is.
Our system is not really set up to allow a third party candidate to do well. It just isn't.
You could still vote for him though; that settles your conscience not being upset about either of the other guys and it also exercises your right and responsibility as a citizen.
I appreciated the thoughts. I was pretty sure I was going to end up voting for Romney, but I've been wavering more recently. So, I don't know what I'm doing.
I have a little bit of a problem with the last part about how you would take the good over the best. If you're going from the spiritual (what you think you should do, morally) point of it, it seems like you have to vote for the best, even if the guy has absolutly no chance.
If you're going from the point where you cannot let somebody win (Pres. Obama), then, why not vote for the bad (Romney)? I guess I can see where you're coming from, but the middle of the aisle just doesn't seem to me like the place to be. It seems like you either go to the BEST, or the guy with the best chance. Going to the middle kind of feels like you're wasteing your vote.
On the rest of it, I agree. It seems like, if all the Christains would stop settling for who they think can win, and start voting for the best guy, God might end up giving us the best guy. We pray (or at least people I know) for God to give us a good leader, and bless our country, and yet we keep voting for the lesser of two evils. Why don't pray and then vote for the best guy, and see if God will work a miricle?
Also, I don't know how we can ask God to bless our country at this point. Seems like we have a lot more to pray to get right before we can justly ask God to bless an utterly wicked nation. We should pray for us to get things straightened out, then ask for the blessings. That was a little off topic, but it's been on my mind.
Anyway, nice to see you're still blogging. =)
Dave: Thanks for the info. After looking into him a little more, he doesn't seem to be a better or more likely choice, so I'll probably be sticking with Paul.
Kate: I see you what you mean, but I see a large distinction. The reason I can't vote for "the lesser of two evils" is because then I would be voting FOR evil. If there were two good candidates, a vote for either one is not a vote for evil. In that case, it makes sense to me to start considering other qualifications, such as electability. Basically, in my thinking, there's a list of priorities. Being a morally upright person (not necessarily a Christian, but someone with a large amount of boundaries and ethics that line up with the Bible) is the first and highest priority. But somewhere, electability must come into it, otherwise, you're probably going to always be voting for someone who isn't even running - because you believe they would be BEST.
Post a Comment