So why shouldn't conservatives vote for Nader as a protest vote, as a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush!
Seriously. I am sick of this "A vote for X is a vote for Y." NO, it's not. If you seriously believe that the two candidates are nearly as bad, you should vote for a better one. I think Bush is sufficiently better than Kerry that you shouldn't vote for him, but if your big issue is a balanced budget, or illegal immigration, or eliminating the IRS you probably should vote for Badnarik or Peroutka.
If your big issue is a balanced budget, or illegal immigration, or eliminating the IRS you probably should vote for Badnarik or Peroutka.
The flaw in this thinking is assuming that this is some opinion poll, and your opinion is actually going to be noiticed. This is simply false. Badnarik and Peroutka have NO IMPACT WHATSOEVER on the policy issues they advocate for. NONE.
None of us believe that Kerry is going to defend this country as strongly as Bush---even though he SAYS so. Likewise, none of us believes that Badnarik and Perotuka will do what they say they want to do, either. Certainly, the reasons are different: with Badnarik and Peroutka, it's because they have no chance of winning; and with Kerry it's because he's a liar. But frankly, the reasons are irrelevant, it's the actual actions that matter.
"but if your big issue is a balanced budget, or illegal immigration, or eliminating the IRS you probably should vote for Badnarik or Peroutka.
Please explain how a vote for Badnarik is a vote against illegal immigration? You have read the libertarian platform? The party official opposes any limitations on immigration.