When Your Candidate Fails To Deliver

I’m a partisan Libertarian, as you know. Although I frequently state my ‘glass half empty’ case, fact is, whenever a major change takes place affecting an executive or legislative branches of government, there are things I can be hopeful of, depending on the offices affected, and the party of those taking power.

When Obama was sworn in, there were many things I was hopeful for, especially because he was campaigning about them. These included:

• Withdrawl from Iraq
• End to borrow-and-spend
• Closing of Gitmo
• End to policy of ‘indefinite detention’

There were others, but these were the big ones. On all counts, I have been disappointed with the President.

This has been the way of modern politics for me, regardless of the party in charge. There are things I can be hopeful for, especially in light of the rhetoric that got people elected, but promises aren’t kept, or impressions aren’t matched with actions.

Prior to the election of Obama, I spent several years blogging about the failure of the Republicans to deliver on the things I was hopeful for on the domestic front. Smaller government is the rhetoric of the Republican Party, but when Bush was President and his party controlled Congress, borrow-and-spend became a way of life. Bush didn’t veto a single bill coming from the Republican Congress. Departments were added, not cut.

So, what to do? Well, I am a partisan Libertarian. I’m not going to go voting for Republicans, hoping for smaller government. I have a recent track record that tells me I’m not going to get what I want. I’m not going to vote for Democrats, hoping for expanded civil liberties or an end to war. I have a recent track record there too that tells me I’m not going to get what I want. I’m going to vote Libertarian.

Sure, Libertarians haven’t been winning elections. So what? What kind of fool gives his vote to someone he can reliably determine won’t deliver? Not this one. Voting is about selecting candidates that best represent your views, not about picking winners. After all, winning is pretty hollow if you don't get the policy you wanted.

So, what about those who aren’t partisan Libertarians? What about those who are disaffected Democrats or Republicans- people who love their party, or hate the other party, and aren’t willing to go 3^rd party? I think the best thing they can do is make a statement at the Primary Elections. Vote for the candidate who best represents your views, regardless of their ‘electability’. If you continue to vote for a candidate that doesn’t deliver what you want, you have told them they never will have to. After all, they have what they want- your vote!

What if nobody challenges Obama in the Primary? Well, Democrats who want an end to wars and restoration of civil liberties are going to be out of luck, in the same way Republican fiscal conservatives were when nobody challenged Bush. They better start bending Dennis Kucinich’s ear now, and start funding him.

Failing that, vote for the Libertarian or Green Party candidate, or some other that represents your views. The only truly wasted vote is for the candidate who has given you good evidence that he won’t deliver what you want on the issues that matter most to you.

Primary Voting For Libertarians

I've been asked about voting at Indiana's Primary Elections May 4 as a Libertarian, so I thought to post some pointers.

Most Libertarians will want to ask for a 'School Board Ballot'. This ballot will not have any partisan 'R' or 'D' voting attached to it, only the non-partisan school board candidates, and any local issues. This is what I will do.

Some Libertarians may be tempted to vote on the Republican or Democratic ballot, for a variety of reasons. Be advised of this: If you pull a partisan ballot, you are making a legal statement. Pulling a partisan ballot legally commits you to vote for a majority of that same party's candidates in the General Election in November.

So, if you take a Republican Primary Ballot in May, and you vote straight ticket Libertarian in November, you will be guilty of perjury, by law.

Also, if someone at the polling place recognizes you as a Libertarian, and you are asking for a partisan 'R' or 'D' ballot, and they challenge your affiliation, you may be barred from taking that partisan ballot, or reduced to casting a provisional vote. Only a member of that party can challenge you, but they can in the interest of protecting their party's private business.

See: Indiana Code 3-10-1-9.

Why is the challenge possible? Why can't people just vote however they like? Some think it is merely rhetorical when Libertarians declare the Primaries to be largely private, partisan political party business. This law is the proof that it is not mere rhetoric. Republicans and Democrats see fit to foist the cost of their business onto all of the taxpayers. They wrote it into the law as a bi-partisan effort.

There is no Libertarian ballot. We conducted our business at our county convention, at our expense. The law also dictates that, but as a matter of principle, that's the way we think it should be done.

So, look into your school board candidates. See if there are local issues. Please vote in the May 4 Primary Election.

Oh, So Indiana Matters?

(Fishers, IN)- Some are getting all excited about the Democratic primary, because with it being a close contest, Indiana now matters enough to have Obama and Clinton campaign here.

Call me cynical, but I'm not impressed that the horse race situation makes our state at long last worthy of visitation, begging, and bombardment with campaign ads. Great that you're here now, but who could doubt that you wouldn't be here if it were wrapped up.

My personal taste came on Saturday, when a telemarketer called. Her question: Who will I vote for in the Democratic primary?

Well, now that's one hell of a leading question. I took on a woe-is-me voice and said, "My good lady, I wouldn't vote for either of them if my other option was a sharp stick in the eye".

She took that fairly well, and then asked if I would be voting in the primaries. I said that I would. That was the end of the call, and I'm sure she assumed I would vote Republican. No, I go to the voting place, sign the book, and then walk out. Until they have a place for None Of The Above, or make primaries something other than a public function on behalf of the private organizations the Republican and Democratic Parties are, then that's my only real 'choice' when voting in primaries.

On another note, I thought political push-poll calls were illegal. Moreover, I'm on the No-Call List. I thought it was illegal for pollsters to call those on the list. Do the rules not apply now?

Old Poll Results

I had a long running poll: Who would you vote against. Here are the final results:

Who would you vote against?

Selection ........Votes
Hillary Clinton 53% 121
John McCain 7% 16
Mitt Romney 9% 21
Ron Paul 4% 9
Dennis Kucinich 3% 6
All of 'em - I'll vote Libertarian 25% 57

230 votes total

Clinton and McCain have long been on top of my 'vote against' list. I'm happier to have a possible 'vote for' candidate, in Ron Paul. I remain highly doubtful Paul can win the Republican nomination, so after that event, I will probably be searching for a new 'vote for' candidate.

I "Voted". So What?

I walked in to Fishers Town Hall, went to the table for Delaware Precinct 3, observed the poll workers playing, and showed my ID. I signed the book and walked out.

Voting, in 30 seconds or less.

I guess I'm just stubborn. Most others seem to get the futility of this kind of "voting", but that whole notion of civic duty just nags at me. I mean, can you really run for Secretary of State, the chief elections official in Indiana, one year and then not vote in the very next election? I thought not.

But the vast majority of those who get the pointlessness of yesterday's exercise ruled the day. Turnout seems to have averaged around 10%.

In Hamilton County, there should not be a primary election at all. The three parties should stage their own county conventions at their expense. In most counties, the Ds & Rs already stage slating conventions. Why then the farce of a primary? To throw crumbs to the voters to make them think they've done something that sets them apart from the Iraqis or the Cubans?

Farce. Sham. Waste. Dollars, get into the shredder!

The candidate backed by the Republican Party in the one contested primary won handily. That business should be handled away from taxpayer dollars. Republicans should insist on that, if they in fact believe in cutting out the waste of taxpayer dollars.

I Don't Care About Today's Primary

Why should I? Only one of the seven Fishers Town Council seats is challenged... but I would have to take a Republican primary ballot in order to cast a vote. There is only one Democrat running for any of the seven seats, so provided he casts a vote, he wins his primary.

I don't care to take either a Republican or Democratic primary ballot. Why? Besides disagreeing with the kind of policy both of these parties write into law, I have also read and understood Indiana's election laws, which state in IC 3-10-1-2:

Political parties required to hold primary election
Sec. 2. Each political party whose nominee received at least ten percent (10%) of the votes cast in the state for secretary of state at the last election shall hold a primary election under this chapter to select nominees to be voted for at the general election.

I am not interested in voting for the candidates of either of the two parties that qualify. None other will appear on any ballot. So, by law, I am disenfranchised. Beyond that, I believe that if the elections law interprets so plainly the primary election to be political party business, then it should be paid for by the political parties, not the taxpayers. Even had I won 10.01% in my run for Secretary of State, and had thereby obligated my party to participate in the primary election, I would have objected to the requirement on the same grounds.

Also consider IC 3-5-1-2:

(3) Primary election, which is conducted for the purpose of choosing by ballot the
following:
(A) The candidates who will be the nominees of a political party for elected offices in a general or municipal election.
(B) The precinct committeemen of a political party.
(C) The delegates to a political party's state convention.
(4) School district election, in which the electorate of a school district chooses by ballot members of the school board.
(5) Special election, which is conducted for a special purpose as provided by law.

Except that there aren't any school board seats up for grabs here, there isn't a special election of any kind, and my party has been excluded, by IC 3-6-2-1:

Political parties entitled to precinct committee members
Sec. 1. Each political party whose nominee received at least ten percent (10%) of the votes cast in the state for secretary of state at the last election may have precinct committeemen elected at the same time as a primary election in accordance with IC 3-10-1-4.5 if provided by the rules of the political party.

So, what's the point? Fortunately, turnout for this non-event will be so sparse that I won't have to wait in any sort of line. Turnout in Hamilton County in 2003 (the same cycle) was 20%.

I'll go, ask for an independent ballot, which will confuse everyone in the building. Then, after they don't know what to do because there would be nothing to hand to me, I'll have them enter me as voted without having cast a ballot of any kind.

Tell me how this differs from, say, Cuba, in the pointlessness of the 'event'.