Blank Ballots and Radical Freedom
Feb 7th, 2008 by Micah Tillman | 12 Comments |
Now that Romney has dropped out, there’s no alternative to McCain.
This is all a very fascinating situation. I think the GOP is crumbling.
Looks like I’ll be voting for Congress this year and leaving the “President” box blank. Kind of fun, actually. There’s nothing like a good crisis over things you really care about to make the political process interesting.
My conservative friends: You know that feeling you have right now? It’s what Heidegger would call “Angst” or “radical freedom.” This is what freedom feels like.
Scary. But awesome.
Yes, although at the moment it’s more scary than awesome.
I have written about my plan for the election on my blog. It does not include voting for a Democrat or abstaining. I’m saying, at this point, that I will not vote for John McCain. I will either write in my favorite candidate or vote for the Libertarian candidate or the Constitution Pary canddiate.
The GOP already crumbled. That happened in 2005. Bush’s approval rating is somewhere between 27 and 34% and the Republicans already lost Congress in 2006.
McCain is the GOP’s answer to this phenomenon; the only man who might be able to keep the White House for them. Because conservatives were able to deliver Bush a second term in 2004, they’ve decided they’re invincible. However, they couldn’t give a majority to Bush in 2000, they couldn’t stop Republicans from losing Congress in 2006, and they couldn’t win the Presidency from Clinton in 1996. This year, without McCain, things look absolutely hopeless. Saddled with an unpopular President, an unpopular war, and a declining economy, there is virtually no Republican who could possibly beat the Democrats, even Hillary Clinton.
Except John McCain. Bush was elected with 50.7% of the vote in 2004. He has lost at least 16-23 points off of that since then. Why? Perhaps it was McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform, which he signed. Perhaps it was McCain-Kennedy immigration reform, which he supported. However, these don’t really fit the timeline. Bush lost support in between those two based on two issues - the mismanagement of the war in Iraq and his unwillingness to control Republican Congressional spending. On both of those issues, the Republican who anticipated the revolt before it happened was John McCain, who out-conservatived the conservatives. (Okay, there was a third issue which was Hurricane Katrina, which made Bush look feeble and heartless simultaneously.)
I don’t think it is on issues that conservatives really disagree with John McCain. Bush passed the largest expansion in entitlements since the LBJ administration (Medicare prescription drug coverage), and conservatives never made a peep. What I think they disagree with is John McCain’s personality. They view themselves as warriors locked in a death-match with the evil Democrats. McCain irritates them because he’s happy to work with Democrats. This seems to me to be the only explanation for the anger at McCain for the Gang of 14 which was a clear victory for Republicans and a clear loss for Democrats. I will submit that John McCain, who saw real enemies when he was a POW, simply doesn’t see an enemy when he sees a Democrat (or a conservative who attacks him). He sees a fellow citizen who happens to disagree with him on some issues.
As I’ve said before, it is perfectly okay with me if people don’t vote for John McCain because he’s not conservative enough. Just so long as they’re aware that they’ll be helping to elect a President who is not conservative at all.
Here’s a quote from Bill Whittle which I’ll leave people to mull over:
“After seven years of watching and fighting against Americans who wish to see the country suffer so that they can get at George Bush, the last thing I wanted or expected to see was conservatives saying they would rather see the country suffer than support John McCain over Clinton or Obama, so that they can ‘get the blame.’
“A retreat before victory is assured in Iraq cannot be undone in 2012. And mandatory, single-payer, universal health care, once established, will not EVER go away either.
“I am not impugning anyone’s motives. I believe I have a reasonable understanding of principled behavior. But if your goal is to see the country punished because—
“You can stop right there. If your goal is to see America punished, and her people open to attack and/or ruined financially in order to prove a point for any reason, then you do not deserve politial power nor are you likely to achieve it.”
This election will be decided by abstainers: Liberal Sexists and/or Racists versus Far Right Conservatives. Non votes are essentially votes for the opposing side.
As for blank ballots, in my state 25% of mail-in primary voters failed to mark the mandatory party affiliation box. Their votes are disqualified.
By the way, Micah, I’m going to be very unfair here and use your own words against you.
“Since there are always three ways to be on a given subject (two vices with a virtue between them), you can tell whether you’re already at one of the extremes — whether you’re vicious — if you can only see two ways to be: the way to do what you do the way you do it, and the way to do whatever it is you’re doing excessively (or deficiently, depending on what vice you have).
“Vicious people, you see, can’t tell the difference between virtue (the mean) and the other extreme. A reckless person thinks cowardice is the only other option. He can’t distinguish between courage and cowardice. They blend together.”
Sound like any conservative pundits you know on the subject of John McCain? McCain gets an 82.3 lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union. This is, admittedly, a fairly low mark for a Republican Senator, but Hillary Clinton gets a 9 and Barack Obama gets an 8.
Disagree with McCain on campaign finance reform, taxes, global warming, and immigration, if you like, but saying that McCain, a pro-life, free-trading, non-protectionist, pro-Iraq War deficit hawk isn’t a conservative seems a bit much.
Since it’s become clear that McCain is going to get the Republican nod, I’ve been really wrestling with my November decision.
McCain is CLEARLY the lesser of two evils from a conservative point of view, and that’s not really in question in my mind. My problem is my underlying belief that if we continue to willingly cast ballots for the lesser of two evils, then we basically ensure that we keep getting handed two evils as options.
I don’t want to “punish” America, or anything like that. I just want my voice to be appropriately reflected by my vote, and I’m not convinced that a vote for McCain accomplishes that. I remain convinced, despite everything that transpired in President Bush’s 2nd term, that he was a better choice than John Kerry, and yet I still find myself having a hard time internal reconciling my vote for him in ‘04. It’s not like I was caught surprised by much of what went on in term 2.
I do appreciate Whittle’s points, and am keenly aware of what not voting for McCain does , and yet I realize that there’s never a “right” time for such a “defection”. I guess I’m just questioning whether the kind of long term change I’d like to see is possible without a course of action that increases the possibilty of a near-term setback.
Scott–
Love the point about getting the lesser of two evils. Exactly.
Andrew–
*grin* The problem with the comparison of virtues and vices to political positions is that would imply both Conservatism and Progressivism are vices, and only Moderatism (Centrism?) is a virtue.
But the analogy of “not being able to see the differences between the people to whom you find yourself opposed” holds between the vicious and the Conservative pundits you mention. And that’s the real point you’re making, I think :-)
Nice.
Did I see lesser of two evils?
I meant lesser of two weevils.
Apparently I can’t type tonight. See = say.
Well, I’m probably going to be much less vocal from here on out in my support for John McCain. I support McCain because I believe he is literally the best man to be Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America at a time which, I think, is crucial to the survival of Western Civilization as we know it. (Keep in mind that I’m looking a hundred years into the future here. I’m not talking about the U.S. falling in the next four to eight or anything like that.) I believe in McCain generally as well. Most of the time that he took on the conservatives, I think he was right. Immigration, corruption generally (not McCain-Feingold, which I won’t defend, but Jack Abramoff certainly), spending, Bush’s entitlement expansion, the Iraq War and the Rumsfeld strategy, even global warming (so long as the solution offered is a moderate one with small economic consequences and heavily tilted toward research and development of alternative fuels). I don’t think McCain was always right and, personally, I wish he had been more temperate a lot of the time. I know that Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingraham, Dobson, et al. are trying to spin him as if he’s a liar and a panderer, but nobody who has watched the man believes a word of it. On top of that, he has, quite simply, the best biography in politics. The man is a bona fide hero, though not a perfect man, by any means (his first marriage was a travesty and he admits it was entirely his own fault).
Over the last couple of weeks, I’ve been very concerned that he could lose the general election due to defections from conservatives. I always knew they’d get behind him if Hillary Clinton was the candidate. Nobody unites the conservatives like Hillary. However, I was very worried that Barack Obama could fire up a large number of Democrats, moderates, independents, and even some Republicans, and defeat McCain in November.
However, I just listened to a speech that Obama gave in Virginia tonight. He was his usual captivating, charismatic, and compelling self. It was, truly, a great speech. And then he said, “And I look forward to debating John McCain on foreign policy.” And I suddenly realized that no, he doesn’t. Barack Obama is George McGovern in 1972, the peace candidate opposing a hugely unpopular war. McGovern was absolutely crushed by Richard Nixon. Alternately, he’s Walter Mondale facing Reagan in 1984. And I think the same thing will happen this year. Barack Obama is a good man with sound principles, a good heart, and a fine mind. But America isn’t ready for him and the world certainly isn’t. We are the only Western nation entirely committed to fighting radical Islamic jihadists, but I believe that 70% of us really are entirely committed.
Whether we should have gone into Iraq in 2003 is debatable. Reasonable people of good will can disagree. If we hadn’t, Saddam would still be in power in Iraq, but at least Al Qaeda wouldn’t be. But regardless of whether we should have entered then, we can’t afford to leave now without finishing the job and I am reasonably confident that the American electorate will agree come November.
Scott, I see where you’re coming from. In this election, as I explained above, I honestly don’t see this as a lesser-of-two-evils option. I don’t love McCain on economics issues, but the perfect is the enemy of the good. Now if this were 1968 (Nixon vs. Humphrey), then I’d definitely see where you’re coming from. In any event, any one vote doesn’t really matter. Do with yours whatever you like. If I thought that, for example, a libertarian candidate might actually get 5% and this were any other year with any other candidates, then I might even agree that it’s the best thing.
I’ll leave you all with a couple of endorsements:
“When it comes to personal courage and integrity and the courage to do what he thinks is right, regardless of whether or not it’s particularly popular at the moment, John McCain has shown characteristics of leadership like no one else I’ve ever seen.” — Fred Thompson, August 18, 1999
“This is no longer about past preferences or differences. It is about what is best for our country and for me that means that Republican[s] should close ranks behind John McCain.” — Fred Thompson, February 8, 2008
I am more than willing to be swayed on McCain. I haven’t listened to the Limbaughs, Becks, and Hannitys of the world in several years, but I do think that to some degree my perceptions of him were formed by them back when I was. And some of the issues you previously mentioned were ones where I did agree with him rather than the conservative punditry, the judicial nominees being primary among them. I remember a lot of conservative types being all kinds of excited about the “nuclear” option, and wondering why the hell for.
I’ll be giving McCain a good hard look between now and November, that much is for certain.
Scott, can’t say fairer than that. My wife was very anti-McCain at the beginning of the primary process as well (I changed her mind eventually), so I certainly understand the viewpoint.
Withywindle, the nom de plume of a blogger at Athens and Jerusalem, had a great slogan I suggest people put on a bumper sticker:
“McCain. I think I’ll vote for the SOB after all.”