Sunday, September 25, 2016

Politics: Naderism and throwing away your vote in November

It seems that people have a short political memory about third party candidates and why voting for this is like throwing your vote away.

It's called, Naderism.  I coined that term - you like it?

Here is why.  Ralph Nader's egotistical tilting at the White House in 2000 made it possible for George W. Bush to get elected to the Presidency.  But in interview after interview, Nader to this day insists that what he and his voters did in 2000 had positive and lasting impact on the American political scene.  Naderism.  Sure did.  And not in a good way.

And the problem with Naderism.

I don't need to review what happened to this country during the presidency of George W. Bush as the titular head of the government, and Dick Cheney, the soulless, clueless hyper Conservative who launched a war for his person gain.

And the Rule of Dick Cheney is exactly what we got when voters ignored facts and started self righteously tilting towards Quixotic presidential campaign of Ralph Nader who ran under the Green Party banner.

And now, with even more at stake, this is happening again as millions of self delusional hipsters and millennials begin to tilt, once again, toward the mirage of "Nadersim".

These voters 1) Fail to study history, because they know everything, and 2) they also don't know that "those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it."  And if Donald Trump is elected, we've got something worse on our hands for minorities in this nation.

The arguements for not voting from Hillary Clinton to defeat the evil that is Donald Trump go something like this:

"I will not be bullied into voting for Hillary because of my dislike for Trump."

"Jill Stein has very real solutions for creating positive change..."

"Well if William Weld can get behind Gary Johnson and the Libertarians, then so can I..."

Here's the problem with that type of self aggrandizement with your vote.  If you vote for Jill Stein or Gary Johnson, your vote will mean nothing, as in N-O-T-H-I-N-G come  November 9, 2016.  

True dat.  Don't believe me?  What did Green Party candidates get from the 2000 election?

Nothing.  That's what.

Come the day after the election, the only thing you will be credited with is handing the nation over to Donald Trump and his side show of political freaks.

Your votes will never lead to political change.

They will not open the minds of anyone.

They will not send a message to Washington.

They will never result in reform.

Like Don Quixote tilting at Windmills will never vanquish the evil in the world, your votes for a third party presidential candidate will never result in the type of change that you seek, or those little lies that Ralph Nader tells himself that his campaign changed anything. Naderism.

Here's why:

Third Party Candidates and their supporters gain nothing for their efforts in the United States for one very good reason, and that reason is that they only consider a third party candidate in Presidential Election Years, period.

You, as a voter for a third party candidate have done NOTHING to build a strong party network in the off years.  You have done NOTHING to get your third party candidates on any state or local ballots.  You have done NOTHING in the way of fund raising.  You have done NOTHING with grassroots organizations during the three years when there isn't a Presidential election.

In other words, you have done NOTHING.  But you sure are certain of that third party vote in the upcoming presidential election.  Yes you are!  Because you want to send a message to Washington that the system can be changed.

But here is your next problem.  You have done NOTHING to get anyone elected to the House or to the Senate to hear your vote.  And guess what.  Democrats and Republicans in Congress DO HEAR THEIR PARTY VOTERS!  Never thought of that.  Did you, Smugly?

And here is your other problem - you can't change Congress until you change the way seats are redistricted every ten years because you have no voice in your State level politics.  Why?  Because those bodies change every two years and you are only involved every fourth year, and that's only to support the Presidential candidate from said third party was nominated in a Ramada Inn in Boise.

YOU CANNOT EFFECT CHANGE IF YOU DON"T GET INVOLVED IN POLITICS - its that simple.   And if you are not working to get your third party politicians elected on the state and local level, you have no leverage to get them elected to Congress.  And without anyone in Congress to do the heavy lifting, your vote will mean NOTHING in this November's presidential election.  

And that is third party voting this nation has never effected any change.

Except in one way.

With Hillary Clinton the White House you at least have a chance to spend the next four years working - and that's what it is, working - to get your third party candidates funded and ready for local and state elections.  And then you can go for the Congress.  And then you have a shot at getting people elected to the House and Senate in 2022, 2024, 2026, etc.

And then maybe, if you are lucky, you might have a chance at having a viable candidate who can take on the big guys in 2028.

No pain, no gain.  You want change, get off your lazy asses and do the work.

But right now, in November 2016, voting for Jill Stein or Gary Johnson is the lazy choice.  It means that come November 9th, the only thing that you can puff up your chest over is by saying "I didn't vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton."

And then what?

What was your win?

What did you get for that vote?

Who is going to hear your voice?

The answer is nothing.  Because when you vote for a third party candidate that belongs to a party that has no political capital, you get what you put into it: nothing but Naderism.

Change doesn't happen when your candidate gets 2% of all the votes cast.

And Naderism has done anything for this country in sixteen years.

And it sure as hell won't get you anything in the next four.


  1. RAMEN, cookie! don't waste a vote; it's too damn important this year to keep the rump out of the white house!

  2. YES! Longtime lurker, never commenter. I'm not sure how I found your blog, but I'm glad I did and love every minute of it.

    This is what I keep screaming to anyone in my general vicinity. Saying "Bernie or Bust" or opting for a third party candidate is the HEIGHT of self-aggrandizement, as you describe. It's the most self-stroking, vain thing a voter can do. No one gives a shit about their "superior morals" as I observed one B or B'er describing it on Facebook. And it will amount to nothing but a vote against our only rational choice in this election.

    I'd love to see some stats re: who these people are who either refuse to vote because they wanted Bernie or are now grasping onto Stein. Do they vote in local elections? Dan Savage ranted very effectively recently in support of your point that it doesn't work to just suddenly opt for a third party candidate out of the blue to be PRESIDENT. You have to build a foundation, you have to vote for their peers in the local elections, you have to help fund them, you have to let them build a valid candidacy over years to mainstream their views and make them seem viable to the more cautious voters who may be on board with their platform but who don't think they stand a chance in a general election.

    I very strongly believe that many of these emotional and petulant people do not participate actively in their local elections. After the presidential election is over, I think these stubborn babies will go back to their regularly scheduled lives of not doing shit effectively bring about their brand of change and not paying attention to the day to day local politics in their cities and states.

    Just because they suddenly decided to care doesn't mean that they can ruin all of our prospects by not voting for the only candidate who even remotely satisfies their views.

    The voting records of Hillary and Bernie are more than 90% (93%?) the same. That's not good enough? Are we fucking kidding here? I'll sleep very soundly with President Clinton in office and, at this point, I don't give a flying fuck about the minutiae of why she isn't the hand-picked ideal of many liberals. SHE'S PRETTY FUCKIN' CLOSE. Close enough for all of us to confidently cast our vote for her. RAHHHHH

    1. My cousin has a son who absolutly refuses to vote for Hillary Clinton. Why? He can't tell me, other than she's dishonest. How? He doesn't know. If he can't tell anyone why, then why not? Because a third party candidate is "the only thing that a self respecting voter can do." Really, what tangible things will you have on November 9th, the day after the election? And you get silence. And to me, this is symptomatic of these "everybody gets an award" culture we have created. These 18-30 years still function under the understanding that they can show up, vote anyway they want, and people will universally fawn over them and their decision. Not only that, but there are no ramifications for making a decision that will hurt others, or even their own self interests. But Mommy and Daddy can't give back civil rights that President Trump will gleefully try and take away.

  3. Well said, needed to be said. Hopefully those Naderists will learn a bit.