“So-called “Tea Party” candidates in various districts will siphon off enough votes to ensure a Democrat win in them.”
“Could be... BUT, it seems a lousy choice for the avid Constitutionalists among the electorate, if all they have from which to choose is the Pubbies and the Rats; neither of them fully represent the tea party view.”
Certainly re-electing Pelosi speaker by splitting conservative votes is a lousy choice indeed.
Smart Tea Partiers are not going third party, but are selectively supporting good individual GOP challengers.
“I’ve heard the BS about the ‘damage’ done by having a third party in the mix. And, I don’t buy it.” It’s not BS. People rationalize their decisions as not having the consequences they have, because they dont want to live up to them. LP 3rd party candidates have caused numerous liberal Democrats to win by narrow sub50% vote totals; in Texas there were about 5 state rep races decided that way, and the result was a more liberal lege. 3rd party voting will cost the GOP many seats across the nation in 2010.
“But, it doesn’t mean one or the other group should compromise their beliefs, IMO.” You dont compromise your beliefs when you vote for the best major candidate, you merely ensure that the person who IS elected IS the best of the viable options.
If your vote for a 3rd party candidate would get Obama re-elected, would you make that vote? ... then why make it in 2010, when the “obama mandate” has a chance to get repudiated.
Great response! You wrote: “If your vote for a 3rd party candidate would get Obama re-elected, would you make that vote? ... then why make it in 2010, when the “obama mandate” has a chance to get repudiated.”
I firmly believe that my vote is best cast for that candidate who most closely represents (or, at least appears to represent) my beliefs and principles. If that means I cast a vote for a candidate other than a ‘viable’ (ie, major party) candidate, then so be it.
If that same voting process is carried forward by enough people, then it’s likely to have some impact, yes. And, it’s clear that it may be sufficient to keep a lib in office. However, that only reveals that at least one of the two major parties champions a platform that cannot attract enough votes to win... Maybe they should start to rethink their platform? As long as people keep voting for the lesser of two evils, we will continue to be faced with evil in public office.
There is nothing to be gained by choosing between two tribes of cannibals...you are still going to be eaten.
And, that Pelosi comment is pretty weak. The only person who could beat Pelousy is Stalin, but he’s still dead. That whole district is a socialist enclave.