For those who aren't sure if Obama "deserves" their vote

[victoryparty]

Greetings. I saw a very good column in a political writing contest I am helping with, and I thought DU readers would appreciate this excerpt:

Obama’s actions since he has been in the White House are consistent with what he campaigned on. Obama has not changed his vision, nor has he given up on taking steps to get there. And although you may believe that Obama has not done enough to further his agenda, you can count on the fact that his opponents will do even less.

What we really should be asking ourselves this year is, “What do I want?” And then vote accordingly. We should not be asking ourselves, “How can I show Obama how disappointed I am?” Forget what Obama deserves or doesn’t deserve. Decide what you want for America, and then vote for the person who you think will best get us there. We really have to stop voting against people and start voting for people. After all, a vote against one candidate is really a vote for another.

Here's the full column link for those who are interested:
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11508099-should-america-reelect-barack-obama

I think a large portion of the 52.9 percent who voted for Obama in 2008 are starting to come around to the thinking expressed in that column. And for what it's worth, the Republican nominating process doesn't seem to be helping the GOP's cause.

If anyone is interested in learning more about the writing contest (four $250 prizes per month, $5K grand prize after election) please see:
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11342892-american-pundit-political-writing-contest-on-campaign-2012-brings-paid-punditry-to-the-people

[Denninmi]

1. Two words for anyone who is possibly considering NOT voting for President Obama this fall.

Supreme Court.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

2. Seven words: Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 79 years old!

[Inuca]

12. And unfortunaetly sick n/t

[Cal33]

16. Yes, the average age of the 5 Repub.-appointed supreme court justices is considerably

younger than that of the 4 Dem.-appointed ones. Even Scalia has quite a few more
years to go.

By the way, whatever happened to the Clarence Thomas investigations? Are they still
going on?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

18. I don't understand why Bill Clinton did this. I know that he wanted to appoint judges

with brilliance and experience. However, he chose older and/or sickly judges.

As for the Clarence Thomas investigations, I haven't heard a peep.

[victoryparty]

3. Along those lines...

... one name: Sonia Sotomayor. Quite possibly the best Supreme Court pick since Thurgood Marshall.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

13. Fitting, since she apparently idolized him.

[One of the 99]

4. Well said! nt

[zipplewrath]

5. And if that's neither?

Decide what you want for America, and then vote for the person who you think will best get us there.

There are many reasons beyond your false dichotomy to vote all manner of ways. Within the narrow confines of your question, what if you see both candidates as "moving in the wrong, albeit, different, directions"?

[victoryparty]

6. More than two candidates

In that case, there's always former N.M. Gov. Gary Johnson, the probable Libertarian nominee. Americans Elect is probably going to have candidate on the ballot in at least 40 of the 50 states. Obama and the eventual GOP nominee are not the only alternatives.

[tfrey1225]

7. This is true

but politics is the art of the possible. Gary Johnson may be on 50 states ballots but how many votes will he get? What happens when a bunch of disgruntled Democrats and liberals vote for the Green party, Gary Johnson, or Americans Elect? That opens the door for Romney or Santorum to win the Presidency. Then they get to stack the Supreme Court with regressives. We live in a time when women's health and rights are under siege, unions are under attack, and a GOP President may take us into Iran or god knows where else. Obama's not perfect but he's a sane rational man who won't take us back to the 1950's. At least he'll protect the basic protections and foundations of American society.

[zipplewrath]

9. It's fairly well "knowable"

depending upon which state one hails, it can be knowable how the state will go. That can free up small minorities to confidently express their positions by voting for third party candidates. There are those that study these votes in detail. Believe you me, people are focus group testing the heck out of Ron Paul themes to see which ones can be encorporated. And on both sides of the aisle by the way. Not because they believe he will win anything, but because those themes can be co-opted.

[Arneoker]

29. Even Ron Paul (dingbat that he is) is running in the primaries, NOT third party.

[zipplewrath]

31. We are no longer allowed to discuss this idea

Skinner has declared the general election season to have begun and we are not allowed to discuss this idea until after the general election.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

14. I just don't think we should be suggesting voting for a non-Democratic Party candidate

I like Gary Johnson, though. I just don't support non-Democrats.

[jenmito]

40. That poster has been what used to be known as "TSed" last night for doing that. n/t

[TBF]

20. If we could change system so that we had multiple parties

I would probably be on another website advocating for whoever the Communist Party USA came up with ... but we're not. Reality is that we have Obama and he has his (good) moments. For all practical purposes he is our candidate.

Did you read the TOS (http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice) for this site? I know you've been here awhile but not sure how active you've been. As a fellow leftist I sympathize on the legalization of drugs issue and I'm sure we'd have much more in common as well. But we do have to deal with reality.

[Tarheel_Dem]

21. What is this Gary Johnson mania about? For now, this is still "Democratic" Underground.

Republican/Libertarian/Third Party Underground is over there -------------->>>>>>

"I really like Gary Johnson's positions on social issues..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125134343

[cliffordu]

25. False dichotomy

[Arneoker]

27. And there has ever been such a candidate who hasn't been "wrong" in one way or another?

I don't think so, that is if you really look.

You really don't touch the proposition you try to rebut.

[dickthegrouch]

8. It's not only Obama who deserves the vote

We need a landslide of Dem Senators and Representatives.
Stop the filibusters.

[Bake]

32. You are correct, sir!!

We need an overwhelming majority in both houses of Congress, and a Dem in the White House!



Bake

[Eliz1377]

35. We need a progressive Congress

Right on, Dickthegrouch. And then we need to stay in their faces. Voting is only one step in the process of responsible governance of, for, and by the people.

[Jester Messiah]

10. We don't deserve the alternative. [nt]

[Cal33]

15. Well put. We certainly don't.

[Iggo]

11. Nobody "deserves" my vote.

He gets my vote because he's the (presumptive) Democratic nominee.

[Craigtee3030]

17. I don't know if ANYONE "DESERVES" a vote...but,

Our Party will likely ALWAYS remain the lesser of two, three or twenty-seven "evils"...in ANY election.
Caucus Interruptus - Part Douche! Thoughts at 3 A.M. http://thoughtsatthreeam.blogspot.com/?spref=tw

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

19. I don't think the Democratic Party as a whole is "evil." There are some great

statesmen and women in the party. Yes, there are some bad apples, but it's not fair to demonize the entire party for what the few do. The Progressive Caucus, in other words, is the largest caucus in the party. Though they outnumber the Blue Dogs and Corporatists, the latter group is able to wield power because they are in the pockets of monied interests.

We need to get money out of politics! That's the problem!!!

[Eliz1377]

36. Money is not the only energy

It is important to get to one person one vote instead of dollars being the end all and be all. But it is up to us to get active and speak out and often with good sense and attention to facts and feelings all around us.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

39. When money is out of politics, it'll be easier to achieve "one person one vote." It the monied

Last edited Sat May 5, 2012, 01:26 AM - Edit history (1)

interests that pay to suppress the vote.

[Iggo]

22. Why do you care if I think he deserves my vote...

as long as he gets my vote?

[WI_DEM]

23. So are you voting for Gary Johnson since you just had a post advocating his positions?

[JTFrog]

30. Don't expect an answer. OP has left the building. n/t

[yortsed snacilbuper]

24. The alternatives,

are unacceptable!

[coalition_unwilling]

26. Why do we have to stop voting against people? I was flirting with voting

third party until I watched one of those Repuke debates. Then I decided it was my CIVIC DUTY to vote against the Repukes by voting for Obama. Fuck taking the country where I want it to go, all I want to do is to prevent 25% unemployment and mass suffering.

[Arneoker]

28. I've seen lots of people argue against "voting for the lesser evil."

But they never show why voting for the greater evil is better. And throwing your vote away by not voting or voting for a dingbat third party candidate is the greater evil in my mind. The reason for doing so seems to usually has to do with indulging in some warm fuzzy for oneself.

[treestar]

33. Agreed, I've always seen that as stupid

There is no way to "punish" Obama - he can go on to write books and do ex-president stuff. We're the ones that would suffer. Forget reward or punishment here.

[Eliz1377]

37. Good point

Move to Amend is a start.

[MrSlayer]

34. This is why things never change.

Voting for Obama is the ONLY viable option we have because the alternative is far worse. But it doesn't make it a good choice. It's an ogre's choice, die fast or die slow. Where is the choice for life and true progress? It isn't there and that is by design. One party is wholly owned and operated by the corpofascists and "our" party is only mostly owned by them.

We need to get the money out of politics but that's never going to happen. So where does that leave us? Fucked.

I'm voting against Romney in November.

[Eliz1377]

38. Because we don't

We tend to be too passive is the reason we seem to be stuck. It is good to remember we are the 99% and support that idea. The occupy is a movement that has possibilities that the corporate media fights at every turn. The violence in some cities is mostly caused by the homeland driven cops and agent provocateurs. But you see in all the headlines about Occupy violence even though the main body of Occupiers are nonviolent.