The truly sad thing? I live in MI and will now be voting here, and don't feel informed enough to vote for any candidate. The ones I see TV commercials for are so objectionable it makes me want to kill them.
And I immediately refuse to vote for any candidate who wants to throw more money at GM, so half of them are immediately thrown out.
Find me a Democrat who supports: - truly merket-based pay (i.e. no collective bargaining) - punishment as a deterrent for economic failure (i.e. highly limited welfare programs, no bailouts) - across the board cuts in government spending and power (i.e. military spending as well as welfare programs and unnecessary regulation and federal employment) - across the board cuts in taxation (i.e. remove most taxes for small businesses, remove double-taxation inherent in business taxes, tax consumption instead of income) ...and I'll vote for him or her. But I doubt it's likely.
Put simply, I'm fairly (small 'l') libertarian in my fiscal views. I can't vote for any (big 'L') Libertarians because they want to remove all governmental power, including things that the government actually does very well (police, firefighting). I can't vote neo-con because they want BIGGER government, especially military spending and control over people's personal lives.
Actually, pre-Reagan, lots of Republicans fit that bill. Occasionally we run into a Republican these days who does as well (Steve Forbes comes to mind, MAYBE McCain in 2000). Libertarians usually fit the bill, but they have a lot extra thrown in.
I tend not to like to compromise on principles, but you're right in that I'm going to have to make a choice. Unfortunately, the dems support basically none of these, and the tea party folks only support 1 or 2.
Reply
Reply
If Peter Hoekstra, Mike Cox, or Michael Bouchard win, I'm voting Democrat, even if they put forth a semiliterate rhinoceros as their candidate.
Reply
And I immediately refuse to vote for any candidate who wants to throw more money at GM, so half of them are immediately thrown out.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
- truly merket-based pay (i.e. no collective bargaining)
- punishment as a deterrent for economic failure (i.e. highly limited welfare programs, no bailouts)
- across the board cuts in government spending and power (i.e. military spending as well as welfare programs and unnecessary regulation and federal employment)
- across the board cuts in taxation (i.e. remove most taxes for small businesses, remove double-taxation inherent in business taxes, tax consumption instead of income)
...and I'll vote for him or her. But I doubt it's likely.
Put simply, I'm fairly (small 'l') libertarian in my fiscal views. I can't vote for any (big 'L') Libertarians because they want to remove all governmental power, including things that the government actually does very well (police, firefighting). I can't vote neo-con because they want BIGGER government, especially military spending and control over people's personal lives.
Reply
Which is why you gotta prioritize.
What is the most important issue to you?
Reply
I tend not to like to compromise on principles, but you're right in that I'm going to have to make a choice. Unfortunately, the dems support basically none of these, and the tea party folks only support 1 or 2.
Reply
Leave a comment