Daily Archives: November 2, 2008

Why I’m voting for Ralph Nader

Consumer activist and independent presidential candidate Ralph ...

Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader speaks at a rally ...

Reuters and AFP photos

Progressive independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader speaks at a rally on Wall Street last month. If you live in a state that Barack Obama undoubtedly will win on Tuesday, you strongly should consider casting your vote for Nader.

The latest Field Poll has Barack Obama at 55 percent in California, 22 percent over Repugnican John Fossil Fool McCain, who polls at only 33 percent in my great blue home state.

Notes the Associated Press of the California poll:

If the poll accurately reflects the outcome on Election Day, it would be the most lopsided presidential election in California since Democrat Franklin Roosevelt beat Republican Alfred Landon by 35 percentage points in 1936.

The [Field Poll] results are similar to a Public Policy Institute of California Poll released last week, which had Obama leading McCain by 23 points.

So it seems pretty safe to vote for Ralph Nader on Tuesday, since, as way too many Americans don’t know, 48 of the 50 states are winner-takes-all states, which means that in such a state as California, which Obama undoubtedly is going to win by more than 50 percent, if you vote for anyone for president other than Obama, your vote kind of does and kind of doesn’t really count (but mostly, it appears, doesn’t).

Since Obama’s victory in California is a foregone conclusion, I might as well vote for the candidate whose philosophy most closely matches mine.

I’ve given Obama hundreds of dollars, mostly to knock DINO (Democrat in name only) Billary Cunton out of the race during the overlong primary season.

I’d vote for Obama, but again, his victory in California is a done deal, so casting my vote for him would be redundant, to put it mildly, and as a gay man I still can’t get over Obama’s assertion that the legality of same-sex marriage should be determined by each state.* We don’t allow each state to determine other civil rights or voting rights, for fuck’s sake.

I have Obama’s back where it comes to racial equality; where it comes to equality related to sexual orientation, I don’t see that he has my back.

Nader does — he is a full supporter of legalized same-sex marriage in all of the states — and lest you think that I’m a one-issue voter, a President Nader would do at least two very important things that neither a President Obama or a President McCainosaurus would do, and that is to check the bloated military industrial complex, which is stealing billions and billions of our tax dollars while our nation rots from within, and to put the corporations, whose crimes and abuses are tantamount to treason, in check, something that the Democratic Party, which is still too beholden to corporate money, is only half-heartedly and half-assedly willing to do.

My vote for Nader on Tuesday will be a tiny little message to the Democratic Party that it has a considerable way to go to fully distinguish itself from the Repugnican Party.

If you live in a battleground state, though, I recommend voting for Barack Obama.

However, the pundits don’t expect any of the third-party presidential candidates to have anything but a negligible effect on the race between Obama and the McCainosaurus.

*White supremacist Strom Thurmond was a third-party candidate and the name of his party was States’ Rights Democrats. So it’s rather unsettlingly surreal that Barack Obama would argue “states’ rights” where it comes to gay rights. I’ve written about black homophobes before and Salon.com also recently ran an article on that topic

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized