Throwing away your vote

Nah, I'm not going to talk about Trump, even though I hate the guy's guts.  I'm not one for political discussion, and I know most people are sick of these journals, anyway, let alone interested in my own opinions.  Believe me, I have plenty, but if I share them, I believe it won't make a damn bit of difference.  In this climate of unitellectualism and denialists, where people brandish their homely stupidity with pride like it's a fucking badge of honor, it's pretty clear that facts, let alone opinions, are worth a damn.

However, I'm sure most of you know that's I'm sparse with my journals and I like to talk about things I don't hear about very often.  Given how much I've heard about how Trump will destroy the nation or how we all need to set aside our differences and just get along... well... here's an alternate point of view.

I really hate it when people say that voting for a 3rd party is "throwing away your vote." It's even worse when paired with the depressing reality of any voting system in which most people don't really seem to like their choice candidate.  They're just "voting for the person they hate the least," and trying to make sure the other guy loses.

Both phrases are total rubbish.

When you vote for a 3rd party, you're voting for something.  Whether it's realistic or not, it's progressive.  It means something.  You stand for an issue, or perhaps even several.  You're telling it like it is, and that you're fed up with both parties and their shenanigans.  Even though it's guaranteed that a 3rd party candidate will lose at this point in time, just a few more percentage points every year will send a clear message.  It's difficult, I know, but it's a long-term solution.  It raises the bar, and that task can take decades.  Imagine the panic if a 3rd party had gotten even 10% of the vote.  You'd see some changes in Washington real fast.

This year, the turnout for 3rd parties was pathetic.  It's pretty clear we want that bar pretty low.

I'm certain that when most people say they're voting for the person "they hate the least," they don't mean it.  I sure as hell didn't hate the Democrats the least.  Their showing this election was shit.  I mean, seriously... even a stalk of celery could have defeated Trump.  You'd think they would have learned their lesson 16 years ago facing a twisted-legged buffoon, but... no.

Yeah, the 3rd party candidates this year weren't that great, but at least you had some people out there with the balls to join an alternative party, knowing they would lose.  There were alternative ideas, and certainly more than two bad choices -- even if they didn't appear directly on the ballot.  Between four choices, neither the Dems or the Reps were the ones I hated the least.  Not by a long shot.

There is no such thing as throwing away a vote, unless you don't show up at all.  If you think the Green and Libertarian parties are off their rocker, then show up and write a name in.  At the very least, vote for your local government and questions for heaven's sake.  Tell them what you want, not that you don't care or want the other side to burn in hell.

No good ever came from turning any nation into a war of Us vs Them.  Right now, we don't have a major war going on with an organized military -- nothing large enough to unify the people.  In times like these, it's tempting to seek out enemies we don't need and just fight with ourselves, trying to turn everything into a stark, black-and-white issue.  The world is more complex than that, and we always have more than just two choices.  (Well, unless you consider the local government vote, where almost all of my state's seats were unopposed and the only alternate vote I could make was to not vote for the incumbent.  One step at a time, I suppose).

We don't need to cluster tightly into our urban and rural areas, masking white tape across county lines.  We need more ideas at the table.  You can't get that when the ultimate goal of two parties is to have exact polar opposite positions.  Kind of like those so-called "moderated debates" where the moderator is powerless (or unwilling for the sake of ratings) to stop opposing participants from yelling at the same time.  Who needs intelligent discussion?  We can have way more fun just letting those two old dogs trade nearly identical scandal accusations.  That'll show 'em.

I think it's obvious that we can't depend on our politicians to fix everything by voting them in office and sitting back to watch.  Ultimately, it's the people's job to decide how our government works.  If we have a 2-party system, that's our own damn fault.  I'd like to think it's possible that in future elections, Americans will come to realize that we do have a means to fix that, and they shouldn't be afraid to exercise some choice because, "that other guy could win!"

For half the people, that other guy did win.  Are we a nation of sore losers or sore winners?  Both, apparently.