Forums

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
So, Nader announces his candidacy based on his deep desire to unseat Bush.

Which just reinforces my perception that Nader is an idiot. He's got the right of the argument for third-party candidates in principle, but from a pragmatic p.o.v. he's an idiot.

Nevermind. I'm voting for him (again), simply and purely because, idiot or no, he is the only candidate in this mess who has stood up and unequivocally stated (the possibly very unpopular belief) that denial of the right of gays to marry is unacceptable discrimination and that all citizens should have equal access to fundamental social and legal institutions and protection for their basic human rights and human dignity. What a novel and radical fucking idea.

I have to say I am relieved to have a candidate I can vote for with a clear conscience. Even if he is, otherwise, apparently an idiot. Very few other issues in US politics, to my mind, rise to a level of pernicious, unadulterated evil sufficient to turn me into a single-issue voter. This is one of them.

BR(last time I voted for nader because I believe third-parties like the Greens, who espouse almost no policies I agree with, should get fed matching funds just like the Dems and the Repubs. This is a much better reason)C

OK, I admit it, if the Libertarian candidate overtly and publicly espouses equal protection and equal rights for gays I may vote for him/her instead. But so far all the vaguely mainline candidates have been whimpering, appeasing scum on this issue, and I am confident that they will burn in hell for failing to speak out for what they must know is right and moral. (Not that I'm a raving partisan on this point or anything.)

It's easy for one to sound principled when there is absolutely no chance of winning the election. You just have to appeal to an electorate of one. Whatever you may do or say, your outcome is the same.