Like many conservatives these days, I'm disappointed. Topics like judicial nominees, pork, illegal immigration, government spending, taxes ... many of the issues which I, personally, think are key to core conservative principles seem to be less of a priority than they should be.
I've looked at the candidates and their positions and I find that I disagree with the stance that many have taken on the issues I think are most important. And I don't believe that I'm alone in this thinking, which leads to a dilemma...whom to vote for?
I know that it's not realistic to expect to agree with a candidate on everything - I don't even agree with my husband on everything - so I have to determine who I agree with the most. And that continues to be, for the most part, the Republicans who are on the ballot this year.
I think that a lot of people are going to make their ballot choices on the same basis. My father always told me never to vote for a person based solely upon their political party - but to know their positions, their votes and their stance on issues that were important to me.
So while many of the Republicans don't get a 100% score on my issues test, they get much better scores than their Democrat opponents. If I want my perspectives represented by elected officials, I'm better off voting for someone I agree with 75% of the time rather than someone I agree with only 15% of the time.
And because I don't think that I'm alone in this perspective, I don't believe what many are saying: that Republicans are going to 'sit out' this year's elections. I think most Republicans - and conservatives - realize that if they want their core philosophies reflected in government, their best hope is in the Republicans on the ballot - even if they are sometimes disappointed in certain votes those individuals make.
UPDATE: I wanted to add this quote from the Patriot Post:
“The people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities... If the next centennial does not find us a great nation... it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.” —James A. Garfield
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Maggie,
That’s exactly what I’m doing this year, and from now on, for that matter.
I’m trying as best as I can, to ignore the candidate’s party affiliation and look solely at his/her positions on the issues and how faithfully to his/her positions that his prior/her votes, if any, have reflected his or her previously stated positions.
With all of the mud/filth/dirt that has been thrown this year though, it is going to be particularly difficult to choose wisely.
Try as I might though, I see this year's election as a choosing of the lesser of the two weasels. . .
Rusty, I understand people taking the same position you have.
I agree that a win by the GOP could make them think that they've got a mandate - but I don't think that every GOPer will win - especially on the national level. I think we'll lose seats and it will be a 'scare' if they hang on to a majority by a thin margin.
While some of the GOP candidates deserve to lose and the party needs to be sent a message about its failure to follow conservative principles, the American public does not, IMHO, deserve to be subjected to the socialistic policies many of the Democrat leaders are promoting.
I also think that the nation cannot risk having the Democrats in charge of directing our foreign policy. I'm not saying I agree with EVERY decision made so far, but they're much better decisions than the path the Democratic Party is promoting.
My questions to Rusty - and those like him - are: have you given up on conservative principles that you want the Democratic Party principles promoted instead - or are you just mad that the Republicans in office aren't acting like you think they should? If you're afraid of the Republicans thinking they have a mandate to continue, imagine the mandate the Dems will think THEY have if a bunch of Republicans vote for them instead.
This is a link to a cartoon at BrainShavings (a State of Ohio Blogger) which illustrates the point...(not that I'm calling anyone a 'cut-and-run' conservative)
http://www.brainshavings.com/2006/
10/cutandrun_conservatives_illust.html
I think the problem lies when either party has a large majority and is in power for too long. Sometimes it's hard for me to hear candidates talk about how we need to end the years of the Republican rule when here locally we have had years of Democratic rule. It seems hypocritical to want to end one yet keep the other, but I guess that's just human nature.
If we placed more emphasis on individual characteristics of a candidate rather than the R or the D behind their name I think we'd be better off. If we made sure that we tried to obtain what our government was designed for which is a balance, we'd be better off. If compromise was more of an option rather than one party having a majority to be able to force thru what they want the minority be damned, we'd be better off.
Yet in the end it is said we get the government we deserve, which is true since it is our vote that allows these elected officials into office and frankly some of us don't take enough care or caution with that decision. I can no more vote for a person just because they are a Democrat than I could vote against someone just because they are a Republican or vice versa.
Until we demand quality candidates from the political parties or scrap them, most times we aren't even given the choice of who we want, backroom deals or power plays select the candidates not "we the people" especially in primary races where time after time candidates feel they should drop out or fall for the promises offered to them if they drop out.
In other words, until "we the people" take back some of the power we've allowed political parties to have and select who is the best candidate for that position rather than who is endorsed or who is which party, we are never going to see real progress. The Republicans didn't cause this mess alone, nor can merely replacing them with Democrats fix all of it either. It's going to take selecting candidates that are willing to work to do their best for "we the people" and not party first.
Personally a nice balance of Democrats and Republicans in office rather than all of one or the other would force them to work together. I think that would be true for not only the City, the County or the State but the Federal Government as well. I'd also wish for a few independents, greens and libertarians as well but then I'd really be in fantasy land.
:-)
As usual, Lisa, your common sense shows - thank goodness!
I agree with you - I don't vote for (or against) a person because of their party affiliation.
Something a wise public servant told me once...If you, as an elected official, focus on the 'business' of government, your party affiliation won't matter. If you look at your position as a way to advance your politics, the public loses.
We need people in government who are more interested in governing than in politics. I just don't know if that's possible any more...
Wasn't it Ben Franklin who said we had a republic - if we could keep it?
Vote Libertarian! They're Republicans without the snobishness and Democrats without the socialism. A good mix of freedom AND responsibility.
I just sick of the self-rightous Republicans who preach one thing and do another and, the soviet democrats who think the only answer is to have the state control every aspect of our lives.
Both of those parties can take a flying ...leap as far as I'll ever be concerned again.
I could vote Republican if it were not for the dominance of the extreme social conservatives.
Far too much GOP energy is being spent appeasing the anti-gay and anti-abortion extremists.
Plus, the GOP cannot claim the mantle of fiscal conservatism any more, what with the record-setting deficits GWB has been accruing.
Stay out of my wallet, my bedroom, and my computer, and you have my vote.
Unfortunately, all we get from the Dems these days is: "Hey - at least we are not the Republicans."
I agree with Lisa that entrenched parties need to be regularly thrown out. A thorough housecleaning every 8 years or so keeps 'em honest, IMHO.
Good points, Brian. But I don't believe in throwing out the baby with the bathwater - which, if I understand correctly, is what you're advocating when you say that party problems outweigh the individual. I think we'd all be better off voting for the individual (rather than the party) in all cases.
I think I like today's column by Dennis Prager on Townhall.com. I don't agree with everything he says, but people who are conservative will find many logical points that are not related to emotion.
Are you happy with Republican spending? If not, do you really think spending will decrease if the Democrats are in control? It never has and there's no reason to expect anything different if they gain control this election season.
Are you happy with the lack of enforcement in our immigration laws? If not, do you think open borders and blanket amnesty, as promoted by the Democrat leadership will be better?
Are you happy with judicial appointments? Do you think Democrats will be more likely to confirm constitutionalist or activist judges?
Do you like the tax cuts? Do you think Democrats will make them permanent or repeal them?
Do you think there should be tort reform? Do you think the Democrats, who get more money from trial lawyers than Republicans, will do anything in this regard?
As Prager says to conservatives:
"Finally, please remember that it was disaffected Republicans who voted for Ross Perot who helped elect Bill Clinton president, and it was disaffected Democrats who voted for Ralph Nader who helped elect George W. Bush president. Unless you run yourself, dear annoyed Republican, you will never find an ideal candidate. Compared to you and your conservative principles, real-life Republicans are indeed a failure. But compared to real-life Democrats, they are almost giants.
Vote out of anger, and you'll either vote Democrat or stay home. Vote out of reason, and you'll vote Republican. Please choose reason. If you don't like the Republican candidate, the place to get rid of him is in the primary, not the general election. The general election is not between good Republicans and irresponsible Republicans; it's between Republicans and Democrats.
I think the last point is the most logical. Of course, you shouldn't vote just for party - you should vote for the individual who is the best qualified - regardless of what you think of the parties.
Post a Comment