The Presidential election of 1912 was an interesting one. When, in 1908, Theodore Roosevelt honored his 1904 pledge not to seek another term, he threw his support to his Vice President, William Howard Taft. Taft won the election but, in Roosevelt’s eyes, betrayed the progressive program Roosevelt had instituted. Roosevelt sought the 1912 Republican Party nomination but, when the GOP gave it to Taft, Roosevelt and his supporters left the GOP to form the Progressive Party (also known as the Bull Moose Party).
The Democrats took 46 ballots to select their candidate. The favored Champ Clark of Missouri, current Speaker of the House, could not gain the necessary votes on the first ballot and the battle was on. When influential Democrat William Jennings Bryan threw his support to New Jersey Governor Woodrow Wilson, the tide began to turn and Wilson was ultimately selected.
President Taft was never very enthused about the Presidency. He aspired to a position on the Supreme Court (which he later received) and did not exert much effort in the 1912 campaign. The fireworks were primarily between Wilson and Roosevelt, both known reformers.
The GOP split resulted in a landslide Electoral College win for Wilson. The final tally for the 1912 race was:
Wilson: 435 electoral votes; 6,293,152 popular votes
Roosevelt: 88 electoral votes; 4,119,207 popular votes
Taft: 8 electoral votes; 3,486,333 popular votes
Debs: 0 electoral votes; 900,369 popular votes (Socialist Party)
Chafin: 0 electoral votes; 207,972 popular votes (Prohibition Party)
Theodore Roosevelt was a 3rd party candidate who beat a major party candidate though failing to win the election.
My point of all this: NONE of the 3rd party candidates running in 2008 is Theodore Roosevelt. They CAN NOT win the election.
One of my son-in-laws has noted that they can win if folks vote for them on Election Day. That is absolutely true assuming they are on the ballot in all 50 states. But this is theory. Most Americans can’t even name one of the 3rd party candidates this year. If we are pragmatic about the matter, we will admit, despite the theory, Senator Obama or Senator McCain will be the President-elect on November 5.
Does this mean voting for a 3rd party candidate is “wasting your vote”? I guess it depends on what you mean by wasting. If you are voting your conscience when you select one of these individuals then your vote is right and not wasted.
There are, at least, four candidates running for the Presidency other than the “big two”. I am listing them with some brief personal remarks based on information I have from their campaigns. For more information, check their web sites.
Charles O. “Chuck” Baldwin: Baptist minister. Solidly pro-life. Eliminate or greatly reduce several government agencies (including education, FEMA). Eliminate all family income taxes (he says they are unconstitutional). Eliminate or greatly reduce other taxes. Strong on crime. Get government out of business. Support traditional energy resources as well as research on alternatives. Gun advocate. No federal government health care. Against illegal immigration. Scale back foreign aid. Withdraw from Iraq. Essentially get out of international military matters. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Robert L. “Bob” Barr Jr.: Pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest). Reduce funding of some government agencies but greatly increase defense funding. Greatly reduce personal income tax across the board. Decrease or eliminate other taxes. Strong law enforcement. Strong drug enforcement. Parental choice in education. No government health care. Against illegal immigration. Withdraw from the United Nations. Take action if Iraq does not comply. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Ralph Nader: Says pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest) but also says “supports the principles articulated in Roe v Wade and its progeny). Eliminate funding of national missile defense. Increase alcohol taxes, capital gains taxes, cigarette taxes. Eliminate the death penalty. Decriminize marijuana use. Allow vouchers for education choice. Strengthen regulation and enforcement of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts. Strengthen emission controls. Support the Kyoto treaty to limit global warming. Immigration reform but supports illegal immigrants having all the rights and privileges of United States citizens. Government oversight of business especially in terms of pensions and health care.
Cynthia Ann McKinney: Sorry, but after reading her Green Party’s platform, I have no further comment.
I believe it is safe to say Baldwin and Barr are the more conservative while Nader and McKinney are more liberal. Therefore, my opinion is IF YOU COULD ONLY CHOOSE BETWEEN Obama and McCain, those voting for Baldwin or Barr would vote McCain and those voting for McKinney or Nader would choose Obama. So, if you vote for Baldwin or Barr you are, essentially, taking a vote away from McCain. And, if you vote for McKinney or Nader, you are taking a vote away from Obama.
Like it or not, none of these 3rd party candidates are going to win. Personally, I like the positions of Chuck Baldwin even more than I do those of John McCain (more on McCain later). But if I cast a vote for Baldwin (who can not win) then McCain (who can win) loses a vote.
In 1996 President Clinton ran against Senator Bob Dole. I have never been and never will be a Bill Clinton fan. I also didn’t care much for Bob Dole but held my breath and voted for him in hopes of defeating Clinton. Of course, that hope was not realized. While I do not like President Clinton, I would have easily voted my conscience in 1996 by voting for Chuck Baldwin, if he had run. Yes, Baldwin would not win. Yes, I would be taking a vote from Dole. Yes, I would be helping Clinton win. Oh, well…
So, you might ask, why aren’t you going to vote your conscience in 2008 and choose Chuck Baldwin instead of John McCain? I can answer that question in 3 words: Barack Hussein Obama. Obama is far worse than a Bill Clinton. At least Clinton wasn’t an outright socialist.
While I like the policies of Chuck Baldwin, my conscience says I must vote for a candidate who can keep Obama out of the White House. I must do whatever I can, in good conscience, to beat Obama. The only candidate who can do that is John McCain.
The Democrats took 46 ballots to select their candidate. The favored Champ Clark of Missouri, current Speaker of the House, could not gain the necessary votes on the first ballot and the battle was on. When influential Democrat William Jennings Bryan threw his support to New Jersey Governor Woodrow Wilson, the tide began to turn and Wilson was ultimately selected.
President Taft was never very enthused about the Presidency. He aspired to a position on the Supreme Court (which he later received) and did not exert much effort in the 1912 campaign. The fireworks were primarily between Wilson and Roosevelt, both known reformers.
The GOP split resulted in a landslide Electoral College win for Wilson. The final tally for the 1912 race was:
Wilson: 435 electoral votes; 6,293,152 popular votes
Roosevelt: 88 electoral votes; 4,119,207 popular votes
Taft: 8 electoral votes; 3,486,333 popular votes
Debs: 0 electoral votes; 900,369 popular votes (Socialist Party)
Chafin: 0 electoral votes; 207,972 popular votes (Prohibition Party)
Theodore Roosevelt was a 3rd party candidate who beat a major party candidate though failing to win the election.
My point of all this: NONE of the 3rd party candidates running in 2008 is Theodore Roosevelt. They CAN NOT win the election.
One of my son-in-laws has noted that they can win if folks vote for them on Election Day. That is absolutely true assuming they are on the ballot in all 50 states. But this is theory. Most Americans can’t even name one of the 3rd party candidates this year. If we are pragmatic about the matter, we will admit, despite the theory, Senator Obama or Senator McCain will be the President-elect on November 5.
Does this mean voting for a 3rd party candidate is “wasting your vote”? I guess it depends on what you mean by wasting. If you are voting your conscience when you select one of these individuals then your vote is right and not wasted.
There are, at least, four candidates running for the Presidency other than the “big two”. I am listing them with some brief personal remarks based on information I have from their campaigns. For more information, check their web sites.
Charles O. “Chuck” Baldwin: Baptist minister. Solidly pro-life. Eliminate or greatly reduce several government agencies (including education, FEMA). Eliminate all family income taxes (he says they are unconstitutional). Eliminate or greatly reduce other taxes. Strong on crime. Get government out of business. Support traditional energy resources as well as research on alternatives. Gun advocate. No federal government health care. Against illegal immigration. Scale back foreign aid. Withdraw from Iraq. Essentially get out of international military matters. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Robert L. “Bob” Barr Jr.: Pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest). Reduce funding of some government agencies but greatly increase defense funding. Greatly reduce personal income tax across the board. Decrease or eliminate other taxes. Strong law enforcement. Strong drug enforcement. Parental choice in education. No government health care. Against illegal immigration. Withdraw from the United Nations. Take action if Iraq does not comply. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Ralph Nader: Says pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest) but also says “supports the principles articulated in Roe v Wade and its progeny). Eliminate funding of national missile defense. Increase alcohol taxes, capital gains taxes, cigarette taxes. Eliminate the death penalty. Decriminize marijuana use. Allow vouchers for education choice. Strengthen regulation and enforcement of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts. Strengthen emission controls. Support the Kyoto treaty to limit global warming. Immigration reform but supports illegal immigrants having all the rights and privileges of United States citizens. Government oversight of business especially in terms of pensions and health care.
Cynthia Ann McKinney: Sorry, but after reading her Green Party’s platform, I have no further comment.
I believe it is safe to say Baldwin and Barr are the more conservative while Nader and McKinney are more liberal. Therefore, my opinion is IF YOU COULD ONLY CHOOSE BETWEEN Obama and McCain, those voting for Baldwin or Barr would vote McCain and those voting for McKinney or Nader would choose Obama. So, if you vote for Baldwin or Barr you are, essentially, taking a vote away from McCain. And, if you vote for McKinney or Nader, you are taking a vote away from Obama.
Like it or not, none of these 3rd party candidates are going to win. Personally, I like the positions of Chuck Baldwin even more than I do those of John McCain (more on McCain later). But if I cast a vote for Baldwin (who can not win) then McCain (who can win) loses a vote.
In 1996 President Clinton ran against Senator Bob Dole. I have never been and never will be a Bill Clinton fan. I also didn’t care much for Bob Dole but held my breath and voted for him in hopes of defeating Clinton. Of course, that hope was not realized. While I do not like President Clinton, I would have easily voted my conscience in 1996 by voting for Chuck Baldwin, if he had run. Yes, Baldwin would not win. Yes, I would be taking a vote from Dole. Yes, I would be helping Clinton win. Oh, well…
So, you might ask, why aren’t you going to vote your conscience in 2008 and choose Chuck Baldwin instead of John McCain? I can answer that question in 3 words: Barack Hussein Obama. Obama is far worse than a Bill Clinton. At least Clinton wasn’t an outright socialist.
While I like the policies of Chuck Baldwin, my conscience says I must vote for a candidate who can keep Obama out of the White House. I must do whatever I can, in good conscience, to beat Obama. The only candidate who can do that is John McCain.
No comments:
Post a Comment