Just what does this mean? I think I’m getting quite tired of hearing this ignorance.
In surfing the net, I see many folks remarking that they like/agree with a certain candidate because of that candidate’s principles, apparent integrity, and consistency, however since that candidate isn’t “electable” they can’t vote for them. To the point, this has been said about Dennis Kucinich.
Now I’m trying to more clearly understand this viewpoint. Are some folks actually feeling that they must vote for a candidate that has the best chance of winning despite, perhaps, a feeling of not trusting that candidate or feeling they are not consistent on issues that matter? What kind of vote is that? What then would their vote stand for?
If we vote for who we think has the best chance of winning, then clearly we are allowing the media and Hollywood celebrities to determine our votes. Our we so incapable of thinking for ourselves? If we want things to change, we must vote for that change. I know I’m quite frustrated with the Democrats that have been so out spoken about the current administration, yet have not taken firm steps to makes changes. Are many of them so scared about their popularity so close to the 2008 election?
Is it truly desirable to vote for a candidate with whom you feel less than positive based on perceived popularity. Isn’t that how we got Bush for another round? Didn’t we leave shallow popularity contests back in highschool.