Collective logic of voting for various candidates

Post Reply New Topic

I'm going to talk about the logic of various movements or block of voters organizing to support various candidates, as I quite agree with Orwell's argument for how individual (as opposed to collective) votes make little difference. I'm going to be particularly interested in the logic of progressive voting coalitions.

Obama's been a disaster and is worse than Bush on civil liberties. One could argue that the "elite" centre has shifted since Bush normalized civil liberties abuses and that a GOP executive would have swung the US more to the Right on civil liberties. I'd like to see some evidence of that, though, as it looks like Obama's been as bad as one could hope for.

On issues of War, he's massively escalated the one in Afghanistan (moving it into Pakistan with drone strikes that've killed civilians) and has withdrawn from Iraq at a lethargic pace (while there were already some exit plans).

On the economy, he passed some (way too weak) stimulus measures before caving into GOP austerity demands and planed to cut social security before the Occupy Movement made it politically unfeasible. He passed Healthcare Reform who's centrepiece with the Heritage Foundation "individual mandate" plan - which basically forces people to buy from the private insurers that are wrecking healthcare in America.

All in all, it looks like there's very little inspiration for voting for Obama from his actions. The Republican candidates seem worse, but how much of that is raw rhetoric and how much of that is truly believed lunacy remains to be seen. Thus far, it looks like supporting a primary challenger like Darcy Richardson or voting third party is the only sensible thing to do, as it sends a message to the party. It might make some sense to vote Ron Paul in States with open primaries, just to create a huge frickin schism in the Republican Party over foreign policy (if Ron Paul quells foreign policy fears and focuses on assaulting the residential remains of the social safety net, it would backfire tremendously).

I'd vote Paul if he got the nomination just to force the GOP to take libertarian concerns seriously, but will likely vote Gary Johnson as I don't expect Paul to get the nomination. Considering how bad Obama's been on just about every front, I'd roll the dice on Paul even though I do have my own reservations about some of his positions. I'd also expect him to be somewhat shackled by Congress in pursuing aspects of his agenda, while I wouldn't be quite so worried about him pulling the sort of Jekyll and Hyde act that Obama has. That's my thoughts on the matter anyway, Paul is just about the best I can hope for from the current GOP and I'm willing to live with his shortcomings in light of how much of a shock to the system he could be, assuming he manages to get the nom.

I don't expect any candidate to wave a magic wand and fix the economy and let the economy miraculously create jobs o'plenty that aren't McJobs. I like Paul because of his stance on social issues and personal liberties. If he can get through some of his social reform, at least it won't feel so claustrophobic. Considering what looks to be ahead for us, I think a lot of people could benefit from him.

And now you see that under our current system, not only are individuals powerless, but even voting blocs can do nothing. Environmentalists are pissed that Obama backed nuclear power, caved on offshore drilling, and has done nothing on climate change. What are they going to do, vote for a Republican who chants "drill baby drill?" Name any bloc that wants a liberal candidate. What can they actually do to punish Obama for being too conservative? Nothing, because that only hands power over to people even farther right, and it will be spun as a rejection of "left-wing" beliefs on the part of the electorate.

Some environmentalists back nuclear power calling it the power of the stars.

the day we decide how to live based on the lowest denominators of society is the day we grind to a halt as humanity,

the problem is that what is happening isn't some sort of aberration. it is the system working as it is intended. reformist ideas will lead nowhere.