Today on Blogcritics
Home » Make Your Protest Vote Send a Real Message

Make Your Protest Vote Send a Real Message

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

If the media is to be believed, an awful lot of people are pissed off this election, and their rage is particularly focused on the Republican Party. People who might normally vote Republican out of self-interest or as the lesser of two evils are expected to turn against the GOP in protest of their failures in Iraq and assorted scandals. Whether this is a real trend or just the media repeating the wishful thinking of the frustrated and disempowered left is an open question that will be settled tomorrow.

Assuming that there really is this discontented vote out there, there are a lot of moderate Republicans, socially conservative Democrats and irritated independents who aren’t sure how best to express their displeasure. The obvious way to strike out is to vote against Republican incumbents and cast from power the party that many voters feel has let them down in a number of ways in the last few years.

The number of these alienated and unaligned voters has been growing, to the point where today they actually outnumber either of the major political parties. There’s a pretty good chance that you’re one of them.

To many — including pollsters and the media — it seems inevitable that a protest vote means a vote for the Democrat challenger to a Republican incumbent. This is based on the reasoning that voters always choose the lesser of two evils, and that recent events have placed the Republicans at least marginally ahead of the Democrats in the race to be the most evil and destructive political party in America. Wow, that’s some title to lay claim to.

However, consider this. What aspect of the Republican’s slide into disfavor has in any way made the Democrats more attractive than they were in 2004, 2002, and 2000 when you voted against them because they seemed marginally more repellant than the Republicans were? The truth is that they’re still just as bad as they were then; they just seem a bit less slime-covered by comparison.

So, here’s the question. Is your protest vote really a good idea when it does nothing to actually improve your situation? Or to put it another way, is there really a right choice when you’re choosing the lesser of two evils? Are you making a positive and meaningful decision when you choose between being punched in the nose and kicked in the nuts? Is the bully going to say, “I really respect you and take you seriously because you took it in the nose instead of between the legs” or is he just going to kick you in the side as he wanders off laughing.

Based on past polling, a lot of people who have voted Republican have done it while holding their noses, mainly on the reasonable belief that while both parties are corrupt and horrible, the policies of the GOP generally favor the class of hard working, relatively well educated, somewhat affluent people who make up the vast majority of those who actually vote. These mostly independent voters don’t agree with a lot of the social agenda that has junked up the Republican platform in recent years, but they see those issues as relatively trivial in their own lives in comparison to issues like keeping taxes low and defending the nation against terrorists. These are the voters who vote Republican by choice and are essential to augment the core of party loyalists to produce a winning majority.

If you’re one of these voters you’re left in a quandary this year, because you’d like to send the Republicans a message about how dissatisfied you are, but you really don’t want to vote against your own best interests when you know the Democrats have no plan for Iraq, no plan on immigration, no interest in fighting terrorism, and a genuine desire to raise your taxes to pay for things you don’t approve of in the first place. Plus you know that once they get into power their main goal will be to see how they can out spend and out scandal the Republicans.

You know politicians don’t listen to your cranky call to the local talk radio station and the form letter response to your 30 page letter to your congressman told you how much he listens to constituents, so by now you’ve realized that one of the few ways you can get them to take notice is with the power you exercise in the voting booth.

When you get in the voting booth, you’re going to face a dilemma. You want to say something more with your vote than just endorsing business as usual or the unappealing alternative. The problem is that whatever nuances go into your vote don’t get stamped on it and when the candidate wins no one tells him that 50% of the people who voted for him did it reluctantly or on protest, or just because he sucked less than the alternative. He’s a politician, so he’s an egomaniac, and he thinks your vote was a big, warm pat on the back telling him to do the same old stuff that left you frustrated and disenchanted.

There’s an alternative to voting for the greater or lesser of two evils. You can vote for neither of them and send them both a much more unambiguous message. Most races have at least one-third party or independent candidate on the ballot. Most of them are Libertarians, but there are Greens, Reform candidates, Independents, and some others on the ballot as well. These alternative candidates don’t have much of a chance of winning, but every vote they get sends a clear message to the major parties, and if they get enough votes that message can’t be ignored. Plus, they’re generally not politicians. They’re honest, principled people, often running on their own money, just because they’re fed up with the political status quo just as you are.

If you want to send a message with your vote — a sort of wake-up call to politicians of both parties — it doesn’t have to come at the risk of two or more years of chaos and party conflict. If you vote Democrat it’s not just a protest, it’s also a vote for change, and not necessarily for the better. If you vote outside the establishment power structure, for a Libertarian, a Green or an Independent, then you’re sending a message which is crystal clear and which both parties will have to heed.

So in that voting booth, remember that there are more than just two choices, and there is more than one message you can send.

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

Dave Nalle is Executive Director of the Texas Liberty Foundation, Chairman of the Center for Foreign and Defense Policy, South Central Regional Director for the Republican Liberty Caucus and an advisory board member at the Coalition to Reduce Spending. He was Texas State Director for the Gary Johnson Presidential campaign, an adviser to the Ted Cruz senatorial campaign, Communications Director for the Travis County Republican Party and National Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus. He has also consulted on many political campaigns, specializing in messaging. Before focusing on political activism, he owned or was a partner in several businesses in the publishing industry and taught college-level history for 20 years.
  • troll

    good idea…but there was not a single 3rd party/independent candidate running for any position on my ballot here under the bridge

    I had to resort to write in’s guaranteeing the pointlessness of my vote

  • Lumpy

    I face the choice today between the reprehensible george allen and the repulsive jim webb for the senate, so pity me.

  • troll

    any 3rd choice – ?

  • Lumpy

    troll, where on earth do you live that there aren’t at least libertarians on the ballot?

  • troll

    Northern New Mexico…democrat country

  • Lumpy

    as far as I can tell the virginia libertarians are only running candidates in a couple of state government races, but their website keeps crashing my browser, so who knows. I’ll throw a vote their way if I can.

  • http://mrbounce.blogspot.com/ Melita Teale

    That’s a lovely article, Dave.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Thanks Melita. BTW, I voted this morning.

    I voted for Kinky, most of the Libertarians and two Republicans who I have some confidence in.

    Dave

  • http://jetfireone.blogspot.com/ Jet in Columbus

    Dave, I was thinking of writing in Kinky here in Ohio governor’s race when I go to vote today and I wondered, with an e-voting machine, how do you “Write in” a candidate?

  • Nancy

    Excellent article, Dave, and spot-on about the feelings of most of us out here.

    The major problem with 3rd-party voting, of course, is that most of the time all it does is to ensure that the (currently) most corrupt & stenchful party of the 2 big ones ends up winning, by funneling a pitifully small cadre of votes into the lame 3rd party, thereby achieving nothing. The voter might just as well stay home & not vote at all, in that case. The ONLY way this is going to work is if there is a concerted effort by all the disaffecteds to vote for a STRONG & CENTRALIZED 3rd party – such as the one that Ross Perot almost created some years ago. That was the last time there was enough of an organized 3rd party for the groundswell of the disaffecteds to flock to in significant numbers – and of course it was derailed by unspecified threats against Perot’s family which forced him to quit the race. I suspect the 2 national parties – the GOP & the DNC – were behind this, since it was a very real threat to their existance, and still is. In fact, I’m quite sure those who made the threats or were behind them are even now strutting on the national scene, but until & unless Perot ever talks, we’ll never know. In any event, that’s not the issue here just now.

    For those despising either party & all current incumbents to be able to succeed in sending a decent & concerted message to both the GOP & DNC, there needs to be a strong independent candidate to vote for, and that is exactly what is currently lacking, and why at this time voting for 3rd parties is only going to waste precious votes. The libertarians, greens, & whoever else is out there don’t even show up most electoral maps – at least, not in these parts, they don’t. In fact, for the most part these parties are treated with a sort of amused tolerance. I mean, does anyone REALLY want Ralph Nader or the perennial & perpetual Lyndon LaRouche to be president? They just aren’t credible, and they certainly don’t have any kind of organized following; until that happens there isn’t and there can’t be a concerted way for us the voters to strike back at those currently in power who are holding all the cards, in any meaningful way.

    I wish it were different, but that’s the reality of it, I fear. We need an independent Barak Obama or some other charismatic unaffiliate to run – and to be willing to squeal loudly & publicly if & when the GOP & DNC make the slightest move to intimidate, subvert, smear, or otherwise ensure that said 3rd party won’t be viable against them.

  • Clavos

    As always, a good piece, Dave.

    I haven’t voted yet this morning. As you know, Florida does have a third party candidate, Max Linn (Reform) running for governor.

    I’m very much inclined to vote for him, not only for the reasons you mention in your article, but also because I think he actually is the best candidate.

    I probably will vote for Linn, but if the race between Crist (R) and Davis (D) were a little tighter, I’d be afraid to “waste” my vote.

    We really do need a viable third party; now more than ever.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Dave, I was thinking of writing in Kinky here in Ohio governor’s race when I go to vote today and I wondered, with an e-voting machine, how do you “Write in” a candidate?

    Try using a powerful magnet?

    Here in Texas both on the paper and electronic ballots even write in candidates have to register so that you can write them in. There was one spot for a write-in on our electronic ballot. I didn’t use it, but I guess it would have offered me some sort of alpha field to enter the name.

    Dave

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    The major problem with 3rd-party voting, of course, is that most of the time all it does is to ensure that the (currently) most corrupt & stenchful party of the 2 big ones ends up winning, by funneling a pitifully small cadre of votes into the lame 3rd party, thereby achieving nothing.

    Nancy, my argument here would be that as always you’re faced with a choice between two evils. In this case it’s at best the choice between a known evil and an unknown evil. Though I think it’s a choice between two known evils and that the status quo is better than the horrific alternative. Rather than trading bad for worse, I’d argue that you keep the bad we’ve got and vote third party to send them a message that might cause them to reform themselves, or lead to real alternatives sometime down the road. Just being reactive and voting against the incumbents has the effect of handing what they’ll take as a blanket endorsement to the opposition, and there’s every indication that with that presumption of a popular mandate they’ll do more harm than the Republicans have.

    Dave

  • Nancy

    But as I pointed out, it’s not effective unless ENOUGH voters are mobilized to throw their votes CONCERTEDLY at a specific 3rd-party candidate, otherwise they’re just votes wasted, because the 2 major parties will just ignore anything less. We the disaffecteds need to find A Candidate & get behind him or her in LARGE numbers, not on a vote-for-your-local-nutcase-3rd-party platform. We need someone to rock the boat on the scale that Ross Perot did, enough to actally threaten the Big 2 & create a NATIONAL level base; otherwise it’s just pissing into the wind.

  • http://jetfireone.blogspot.com/ Jet in Columbus

    Dave wrote… didn’t use it, but I guess it would have offered me some sort of alpha field to enter the name.

    Seems to me as if that’d be a way to discourage people from writing in a candidate that was designed into the system.

    By the way dave I just updated my diebold article with a really comprehensive list of races to watch. it’s rather lenghty, so I didn’t copy it here, but you might want to check it out.

    Jet

  • troll

    as long as Bush is in office and holds veto powers a vote for dems is a vote against unified government in the hope that we can get some fiscal conservatism through gridlock as occured under Clinton

  • http://jetfireone.blogspot.com/ Jet in Columbus

    Oh…. well then I’ll run right out and vote republican down the boards… Thanks!

    Yeah, I remember the debacle under Clinton, didn’t they almost eliminate the budget deficit?

    talk about irresponsible!

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Troll, Bush has already demonstrated that he lacks the spine to veto bloated budgets – or anything else for that matter – so how can we count on him to not throw in with the democrats as they drag us down to universal destruction?

    And Jet, if you think I have been telling people to vote for Republicans you utterly missed the point of this article.

    Dave

  • http://jetfireone.blogspot.com/ Jet in Columbus

    No no Dave I was reacting to troll

  • troll

    true Dave – but the best hope to reign in spending in the rest of his term is that he grow some balls when confronted with democrat bills

    the republicans in power have shown themselves to be incapable of restraining spending without the cover of a veto wielding pres

    …but perhaps all that it will take to get restraint is for the house and senate to split leadership

    and Jet – as usual you seem to have misinterpreted my meaning

  • RedTard

    Excellent article Dave.

    Voting for third parties helps. It may not get their candidates elected but it does force the big two to cannibalize their ideas. Even a 5% vote for a third party is attractive enough in an area split 50-50 to get candidates attention. The big two will take a few planks from the third parties to siphon the votes back. The third party candidates may never get in but their ideas will.

  • http://mrbounce.blogspot.com/ Melita Teale

    Nancy, the way a multiple party system functions in lots of countries isn’t just about having three or four parties who are strong enough to check each other. While coalition and minority governments aren’t nearly as bad as alot of Americans think, they aren’t the point. The point is coherently communicating to the political class what citizens want.

    For example, running a high national percentage of Green Party votes illustrates to dominant parties that it’s in the dominant party’s interest to incorporate a real environmental action plan into their platform. I understand how you could doubt this when I think about 2000 and how that special sliver of Nader didn’t really produce much in the way of new environmental platforms for your country. But that sliver of Nader, besides being bitterly ironic, was small. If it was bigger, you may have seen more environmental efforts even from the Republican party. Oh, who am I kidding. Pork barrel. I’ll try again: if it was bigger, you might have seen the 2004 Democrats offering a coherent platform.

    It’s a question of people voting for small parties more aggressively, in numbers political strategists realize they’d be fools to not take advantage of. It’s too cynical to not be true . . .

  • Arch Conservative

    Speaking as a Republican who is not happy with the current GOP administration and leadership…

    I voted straight party ballot for the GOP today……

    I mean c’mon……..if my girlfriend pisses me off I’m not gonna go out and start banging guys… it just doesn’t work that way.

  • http://mrbounce.blogspot.com/ Melita Teale

    Oh, so you just take it? How do you type a whiplash sound?

  • troll

    Arch – your political argument has never been nuanced in the slightest so there’s nothing surprising about your vote

  • RedTard

    “I mean c’mon……..if my girlfriend pisses me off I’m not gonna go out and start banging guys… it just doesn’t work that way.”

    It’s more like your republican priest just put his hand down your pants. You can continue to be the altar boy if it makes you happy. Perhaps you secretly enjoy the abuse, me, I’m finding another church.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    It’s interesting that Arch thinks the alternative to his girlfriend is to go gay rather than to find another girl. What does that tell us about him that we all suspected already?

    Dave

  • Arch Conservative

    Damn right I take it because I know the only other alternative is completely reprehensible in every coneivable way and I wouldn’t be able to live with myself if i went that rout.

    It’s like when Luke skywalker was being asked to over to the dark side by Darth Vader. Luke knew his side wasn’t doing to well but he had too much dignity and integrity to join the dark side.

    As for you redtard what other church is a viable option that represents most of my views? There are none.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Arch, you should check out the Constitution Party. They’re right down your alley.

    Dave

  • Haniity Limbaugh

    Oh yes, here we go, a final effort at spin and voter suppression. Just how low will the reprehensible sink?

    About this low. A transparent attempt to appear fair, but spin and frame in such a way as to get people to vote for anyone but a Democrat, just to ensure that the Republicans stay in power.

    I did have some hope for you, Dave. But this bit of low life skullduggery just proves how much you have sold out your integrity.

  • Clavos

    @#30:

    SAY WHAT??

    Did you even read the first three paragraphs, let alone the rest of the article?

  • Haniity Limbaugh

    Yes, Clavos, yes I did. It remains an excercise in sheer sophistry designed to convince people to vote for anybody but a Democrat. Deny it all you want, but that’s how it reads.

  • Les Slater

    Hamiity 30,32

    Maybe in theory, but Dave’s writing is not going to have significant effect.

  • Clavos

    A transparent attempt to appear fair

    Where?

    Try reading them again, this time for comprehension. In particular, note to whom the article is primarily addressed; i.e. DISAFFECTED VOTERS from BOTH parties, as well as independents:

    there are a lot of moderate Republicans, socially conservative Democrats and irritated independents who aren’t sure how best to express their displeasure.

  • troll

    Dave has never made a secret of his opinion of democrats…nothing underhanded here

    of course he would rather that voters express their dissatisfaction in some way other than voting democrat

    what’s ‘low’ about that – ?

  • Nancy

    Lissen, I’m no fan of the GOP & I didn’t see this article as a shill by Dave for everyone to vote GOP-! Or Dem, for that matter. Someone isn’t bothering to READ. Brain not connected. IMO a good article & fair all round. Try again. Dave #27, thanx for the laugh. BTW, what is the constitution party, exactly?

  • Clavos

    Troll,

    what’s ‘low’ about that – ?

    Nothing — good point (better than mine!)

  • Haniity Limbaugh

    The point and the low is the hue and cry to vote for anyone other than a Democrat, thus removing voters who are angry about the current leadership from voting directly against said leaders in any meaningful way.

    An obvious and cynical ploy. Yes he is telling people to vote, but advising them to vote for anyone but a Democrat.

    Now in the case of the Texas governors race, where the independent, Kinky Friedman, is a viable third candidate, that is a solid option.

    But for the vast majority of races, there is no viable alternate option, hence any vote not cast for a Democrat aids the Republicans.

    Dave has shown he is far too smart to not know exactly what he is doing, which is trying to tilt the board towards his Republicans by supressing votes for Democrats.

    As to what is “low about that”, rather than extol the virtues of the candidates he wants to see win, he instead pretends to some friendly advice, while urging readers towards his desired outcome, all indirectly.

  • Taloran

    Very nicely written article, Dave. While I disagree with some of your assertions, I appreciate the overall sentiment.

    To borrow a phrase from the creators of South Park, choosing between candidates in this midterm election is like choosing between a douche and a shit sandwich. Third party candidates provide a relatively pleasant alternative, but in a lot of ways I feel like I’m throwing away a third party vote.

    Can I in good conscience cast a vote for the Republicans, who were undoubtedly closer to my fiscal ideals during the Reagan years, but seem to have wandered away from the small-government, low-taxes, personal responsibility strategy and thrown their lot in with the religious right? They say they’re stronger on terror than the Dems, but haven’t proven it to me. They say they’re for individual rights, but want to force women into slavery by donating their organs to an unwanted child for nine months, create a new second-class caste of people by barring equal rights to a portion of the population, and muzzle dissent by prohibiting flag burning. They also want to inhibit scientific research in the name of Biblical “truth.” They want to enforce morals on me and mine, but are the slimiest bunch of morally and ethically bankrupt stooges I can remember in the political arena, and that’s saying a lot.

    Can I in good conscience cast a vote for the Democrats, who will almost certainly raise my taxes? While I have been against the Iraq war from the start, I believe it is best to finish what one has started, and I get the feeling the Dems will indeed cut and run from the hornet’s nest Bush kicked. While I’m not a gun owner, I believe wholeheartedly in the Second Amendment and find comfort in the fact that I can become a gun owner at any time I choose. Many Dem politicians seem to find that little piece of the Bill of Rights to be an irritating and unnecessary frivolity. Many of them also seem to agree with the Republicans that there are far too many civil liberties in this country and that the citizenry can’t be trusted to behave civilly if it is not forced to do so.

    Do I cast a vote for a third-party candidate whose political philosophy matches both my fiscal conservatism and social libertarianism more closely than the Red or Blue candidate, but who stands absolutely no chance of winning? If I do so, will the two main parties actually hear my protest? I doubt it. Will third parties gain some encouragement from my vote, and make plans for an increased presence in future elections? I doubt it.

    Will it make a damn bit of difference to the future of this country, cleaning up the status quo and making a tiny stride toward a system of government where I can some day cast a vote for someone instead of against his or her opponent, and that someone can actually compete in the race? I hope so, and am therefore going to vote third party where possible.

    And kick myself for the next six years if the Republican shit sandwich named Bob Beauprez wins the Colorado governorship by one vote.

  • Martin Lav

    I agree entirely with Hannity…..Dave is all too transparent and naive too boot!

    I say punish the Republican party!

    “democrats as they drag us down to universal destruction?”

    Dave’s true sentiment towards any democrat is obvious and his “plea” to have the truly disenfranchised “centrists” to vote for an Independant is nothing more than his own method of ensuring the status quo of “lessor of two evils”.

    I say screw that!

    Kick them in the balls and punch them in the nose. VOTE DEMOCRAT AND SEND A REAL SIGNAL NOT A SMOKESCREEN……

  • http://mrbounce.blogspot.com/ Melita Teale

    Martin, Hannity and ArchConservative, no matter what Dave’s agenda is, you three let your political class treat you like dogs. I don’t think any of you grasp how useless the two corrupt, amorphous blobs you call political parties are. American democracy has become a joke because of party-line citizens like you.

    But if you like it, vote Republican or Democrat. Stand by your man. They only hurt you because they love you, baby.

  • Haniity Limbaugh

    Melita, you seem to be a bit confused. My aim is not to advocate for anyone, but rather against the status quo in order to promote the kind of DC gridlock we enjoyed in the 90’s.
    My dirge is for the Republican party as envisioned by Goldwater, and hoping that a sound thrashing this election day will wake up the real Republicans who will then toss out the neocon/theocon pretenders form leadership positions.
    My problem with Dave in this article is that he is once again toeing the line laid out by the leaders

  • Martin Lav

    I hate em all.
    I just hate theirs more than mine.

  • Lumpy

    Bernalillo county, troll? I hear republicans aren’t even allowed to vote there and that a voter intimidation suit was filed before the polls even opened.

  • troll

    even more democrat – third district…up north in the mountains – Udal

    I didn’t get a chance to vote contra Wilson

  • Arch Conservative

    Melita my voting GOP was not motivated by my love or respect for the current GOP leaders but rather for my intense, burning, hatred for everything the Democrats and their far left puppetmasters stand for.

    To pull out a cliche…I voted for the “lesser of two evils.”

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Oh yes, here we go, a final effort at spin and voter suppression. Just how low will the reprehensible sink?

    Odd take on the article. My intention was to give hope to independent voters and encourage them to VOTE independently, rather than be discouraged by the poor choices offered by the main two parties.

    About this low. A transparent attempt to appear fair, but spin and frame in such a way as to get people to vote for anyone but a Democrat, just to ensure that the Republicans stay in power.

    And why is that a problem? Who in their right mind would want to put Democrats in power?

    Or to put it another way, all I did here was lay out the reasons for making a protest vote in one particular way rather than another. You’re being unrealistic if you think that I’d ever encourage people to vote Democrat. What I’m doing here is showing them that they can still protest without having to sink that low.

    I did have some hope for you, Dave. But this bit of low life skullduggery just proves how much you have sold out your integrity.

    Why? Integrity demands that I encourage people to vote in a way which will be good for the country, for our political system and for our people. That never includes voting for Democrats just to prove a point. Why do you want me to encourage people to cut their noses off to spite their face.

    You think there’s something noble about spitting in the wind and having it land in your face?

    The point and the low is the hue and cry to vote for anyone other than a Democrat, thus removing voters who are angry about the current leadership from voting directly against said leaders in any meaningful way.

    The idea was to encourage them to send a message without going to the extreme of voting for a democrat. My honest opinion is that we have more chance of decent government by pressuring republicans to reform than we do by putting vengeful and angry leftists in power. You may hate the Republicans so much that you disagree, but I think my viewpoint is considerably more objective.

    Even if a lot of people heed my suggestion, it’s likely the GOP will still lose the House, and that’s minimally bearable. It’s going to lead to utter chaos and probably a great deal of harm, but it will be at least be entertaining. It will be a lot MORE meaningful and valuable if a huge independent/libertarian vote tells both the republicans AND democrats we’re tired of their shit.

    Now in the case of the Texas governors race, where the independent, Kinky Friedman, is a viable third candidate, that is a solid option.

    And I voted for Kinky, despite his recent drop in the polls.

    But for the vast majority of races, there is no viable alternate option, hence any vote not cast for a Democrat aids the Republicans.

    Which, IMO, is still better than aiding the democrats.

    Dave has shown he is far too smart to not know exactly what he is doing, which is trying to tilt the board towards his Republicans by supressing votes for Democrats.

    I’m trying to do EXACTLY what I said in the article, which is to generate a big independent vote for neither party, and if that means the Republicans do better than they would otherwise, then that’s better than the alternative.

    There’s no ‘pretense’ involved. I think I was absolutely clear about what I intended.

    It’s really very simple. An independent vote is better than a republican vote. A republican vote is better than not voting. Not voting is better than voting for a democrat.

    If you don’t agree with this, then you’re either willfully or ignorantly unaware of what the democrats currently stand for and the agenda they will be pushing if they get into power. Or worse, you embrace that agenda and are an enemy of most of the values the US stands for.

    Dave

  • Arch Conservative

    “It’s really very simple. An independent vote is better than a republican vote. A republican vote is better than not voting. Not voting is better than voting for a democrat.”

    I’d go so far as to say contracting ebola and not being able to make it to the polls to vote is better than voting Democrat Dave.

  • proudproudlibertarianrepbulicanrightwinger

    #30
    Excellent point!
    Now, back to our group therapy. Those liberal bastards…

  • proudproudlibertarianrepbulicanrightwinger

    #33
    Oh what a left-wing, liberal, freedom-hating comment. Dave’s word is taken a gospel near and far, not just in his Texas compound. He’s a beacon of truth in the dark night of liberal lies and machinations. You may just think it’s the same five people in group therapy here, but he touches millions.
    Thanks for reaching out, Dave.
    You’re my hero.
    PPLRRWer

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Given the attitudes of the wife and kids my words of wisdom are taken far more seriously outside the compound than in.

    Dave

  • Martin Lav

    “Make Your Protest Vote Send a Real Message”

    Was the message recieved at the compound/rambling country shack/pimped out duck blind ??????????

  • John Q. Public

    It does appear that the independent voter did indeed send a message, that message being no more of the Republican leadership.
    Many good, solid congressmen got ousted, not for anything they did wrong, but merely because they were in a red seat.
    This indicates that that middle of the road voter had enough, and just wanted a change of direction from the status quo.
    Exit polling indicates that Iraq and corruption topped the list for voters, who decided better to flip control of the House and possibly senate rather than to continue to enable the White House to continue unchecked and unbalanced.

  • Nancy

    I am sorry to see the good ones get tossed with the bad ones just because they’re of the wrong party; we can use all the good people on both sides we can get. Hopefully, some of them will run again, or get back into it as consultants, staff, advisors, etc. I do think the main point of this election was the voting public beginning the process of shedding itself of the elements that have been poisoning US politics for the past 6-12 years or so: the neocons & Rove, i.e. the extemists. I was very glad to see people like Frank Wolf (R) of VA get re-elected. This guy was the only one whose ads I heard, who ran positive ads detailing why people should vote for Wolf. Never said a word about his opponents or called them names or predicted doom & gloom if they were elected instead of him. Good for him! I’m glad he won & by a large margin, too. That’s the type needs to rewarded for virtue.

  • John Q. Public

    Some good points there, Nancy.
    My thinking on why the good ones got tossed with the bad has more to do with the understanding that the Republican leadership has been very good at keeping their troops in lockstep with the leadership’s agenda.
    Thus any red seat was a vote for the administration and their policies. Not accurate or fair, really, but that appears to be the voters perceptions and the trend of how they voted in many of these races.

  • Nancy

    Unfortunately, when you’re dealing with the public, sometimes things have to be made simplistic, not because the public can’t understand, but because it gets too confusing otherwise.

    Here in MD, we didn’t elect Michael Steele (R), candidate for the senate. Steele is a good man, & I’d love to see him in O’Malley’s adminstration. He’s ‘way too smart to keep him out, & if O’Malley (the governor-elect) has any brains, he’ll bury the hatchet & offer Steele a job. I would, especially since (from what I’ve seen of him) he’s fairly honest & upright (for a politician, that is) & I don’t believe had anything to do with the various dirty tricks pulled towards the end of the campaign; that stuff was more up Erlich’s (the current governor’s) alley.

    Hopefully the good ones will come back somehow, and the Dems will have the sense to invite them back or allow them in.

    BTW, a propos of nothing, FYI all, I removed all my “don’t vote GOP” bumper stickers before leaving for work early this morning. Why? Because a) they’d served their purpose, & b) I felt that to keep them on would be unnecessarily rubbing them in the faces of my friends & neighbors who did vote Republican. I will continue to sport anti-Bush stickers, perhaps, because I perceive BushCo to be the source of the current toxic infection of US policies & politics, but that doesn’t mean I’m anti-Republican, because I maintain BushCo was never Republican to begin with, but NeoCon, and there’s a big difference, IMO.

  • Martin Lav

    “perceive BushCo to be the source of the current toxic infection of US policies & politics,”

    I percieve the same thing.

    However, the difference between moderates and wack jobs on the left or right is neither one will remove their stickers. How many Bush 04 stickers do you still see out there? I see a lot.

    I say replace them all with
    IMPEACH BUSH 2007 !!!

  • Nancy

    I see too many, you’re right. I’m trying to come up with something suitable for sparking comment & conversation, like “McCain & Obama 2008″ or some such. Actually, that might be a good combination fer real; alas that the principals probably wouldn’t consider it. I always was fond of the ending of My Fellow Americans, where the two ex-presidents ran on the same ticket. Fun fantasy.

  • Martin Lav

    Yeah you’re right.

    How about Bush and Cheney in 2008 in Iraq?

    Powell and Tenent? :-)

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    I percieve the same thing.

    Wow, two cases of the same bizarre perceptual disorder. Maybe I can start a medical study.

    Dave

  • Martin Lav

    “bizarre perceptual disorder”

    You bring out the best in people Dave.

  • JP

    I DID send a message with my vote. I voted Democrat.

  • http://www.msn.com ola gamal

    My confession
    love inside me mean one person who changed my life and make me fly in the sky of his love i swear that i`ll live all my life for him just . my name is ola gamal esawy and my love name is mohamed nabil mohamed