• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Conservative Journalist Says Vote "None of the Above

A

Anonymous

Guest
McCain, Obama or 'none of the above'?
2008 could be historic election of non-participation


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 17, 2008
9:53 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily




WASHINGTON – What if they held an election and nobody came?

Some political analysts believe the 2008 presidential election could be historic in its levels of non-participation – at least insofar as the two major-party candidates are concerned.

With one of five Hillary Clinton supporters saying they are unlikely to vote for Barack Obama and deep dissatisfaction in Republican ranks for the nominee of their party, third party candidates have the best chance in years of scoring significant vote tallies.

But is it a "waste of a vote" to cast a protest ballot for someone other than a Republican or Democratic presidential candidate?

No, says Joseph Farah, editor of WND, who is leading a budding movement to encourage support for third party candidates or write-ins for the top slot on the ballot.

"I don't deny that either Barack Obama or John McCain will become president in January 2009," he says. "It's just that I can't be a part of supporting either one – not even as the lesser of two evils."

Farah believes whoever wins among the two major-party candidates will lead America in the wrong direction.

"How can any of us be a part of knowingly sending America on the wrong course?" he asks. "I believe there is a better way."

Farah's better way is joining the "none of the above" movement and making a major political statement in 2008 that will reverberate for years to come – helping Americans who believe in the Constitution, limited government, personal responsibility, individual rights and self-government to recapture the White House and the Congress in future elections.

"Many people who believe in these principles – principles most closely associated with the Republican Party – think holding your nose and voting for John McCain is the right thing to do in 2008," he says. "I disagree. If McCain wins, he will have done it his way – with an incoherent platform that promotes global warming hysteria, embryonic stem cell research, unconstitutional restrictions on First Amendment freedoms, more illegal immigration, etc."

He says one of the two major parties needs to be recaptured by freedom-loving Americans who believe in self-government – and that is more likely with low turnout for the major parties and high turnout for third parties and write-ins.

Farah is behind the "none of the above" bumper sticker and has completed a book due out in August also called "None of the Above."

"We need a minimal standard of acceptability for any candidate running for president," says Farah. "That standard for me is support for the Constitution. I don't see that in either of the two major-party standard-bearers. That's why I will be voting for neither of them in 2008."

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67393
 

fff

Well-known member
I find it interesting that it seems to be Republicans and Conservatives who say vote for none of the above. IMO, what they're saying is that they're not happy with THEIR candidates, so I shouldn't support mine.

I think it's a cop out to vote third party. And anyone who can look at the condition this country is in today and vote Republican isn't paying attention.
 

TSR

Well-known member
fff said:
I find it interesting that it seems to be Republicans and Conservatives who say vote for none of the above. IMO, what they're saying is that they're not happy with THEIR candidates, so I shouldn't support mine.

I think it's a cop out to vote third party. And anyone who can look at the condition this country is in today and vote Republican isn't paying attention.

I disagree about voting third party. Hopefully at some point, maybe in the next election a third party candidate will see that they do have a chance to win the White House and Congressional seats as well. You have to start somewhere. I wish Lou Dobbs had ran.
 

fff

Well-known member
TSR said:
fff said:
I find it interesting that it seems to be Republicans and Conservatives who say vote for none of the above. IMO, what they're saying is that they're not happy with THEIR candidates, so I shouldn't support mine.

I think it's a cop out to vote third party. And anyone who can look at the condition this country is in today and vote Republican isn't paying attention.

I disagree about voting third party. Hopefully at some point, maybe in the next election a third party candidate will see that they do have a chance to win the White House and Congressional seats as well. You have to start somewhere. I wish Lou Dobbs had ran.

The rumor is that he'll make a run for Governor of New Jersey.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2008/06/cnns_dobbs_said_to_consider_a.html
 

Goodpasture

Well-known member
TSR said:
.............. maybe in the next election a third party candidate will see that they do have a chance to win the White House and Congressional seats as well. You have to start somewhere.
The biggest problem is that all the third parties want to start at the top, wrapped around a personality, not a platform. Every third party I have seen in this country, starting with Anderson, had NO support at the bottom of the ticket, had they won would have had NO support in Congress, and would have had NO ability to do a thing. But winning 20 seats in the Senate would spell the difference between a genuine third party, and an ego driven wannabe.
 

fff

Well-known member
Winning 20 Senate seats is a tough sell for anyone. But some groups of women are seriously working on getting a 60 seat Democratic majority in the Senate next year.

Powerful Hollywood women may be despondent over Hillary Rodham Clinton’s departure from this year’s presidential race, but they’re not ready to throw in the towel — not by a long shot. Indeed, Clinton and Barack Obama supporters in Hollywood are joining forces for a show of superstar talent that could change the fortunes of Democratic candidates in down-ballot races across the country.

Los Angeles’ top liberal female activists are planning the political fundraiser for Sept. 27 at a private home. It should be an even tougher ticket than next week’s star-studded Obama events at the Los Angeles Music Center. The organizers hope to raise nearly $1 million for Democratic Senate candidates.

One hundred of Hollywood’s most politically savvy women, ranging in age from early 20s to 75 years old, have been quietly gathering over the past few months, planning the event. It should benefit at least seven challengers to GOP incumbents this November — all of them in Senate seats that might make a serious difference in swinging crucial votes over the next two years, no matter who sits in the White House.

There’s no real organization in place yet, not even a rudimentary website. Going by the formal-sounding name Voices for a Senate Majority, the group has already signed agreements with a half-dozen Democratic challengers — Maine’s Tom Allen, Alaska’s Mark Begich, Minnesota’s Al Franken, New Hampshire’s Jeanne Shaheen and cousins Tom and Mark Udall from, respectively, New Mexico and Colorado — and is pledging a minimum of $100,000 to each of their campaigns.

The idea started with alums of the Hollywood Women’s Political Committee, a Reagan-era power PAC that included Jane Fonda, Kate Capshaw, Penny Marshall, Daryl Hannah, Laura Dern, Sarah Jessica Parker and others. The political action committee disbanded shortly after raising $4 million for Bill Clinton’s 1996 reelection campaign. Following some recent informal reunions, former HWPC members brought along friends, and soon the gatherings grew to include dozens of new activists, all concerned about the Senate vetting process that might determine future nominees to the Supreme Court.

“In the middle of the whole Clinton-Obama drama, we realized that if [John] McCain won, we would have a big problem,” says one of the veteran activists. “Everything now is ‘Obama, Obama, Obama,’ but we’re also concerned about the Senate, which is critically important no matter who wins the White House. We need to give the Democrats a majority totaling at least 60 senators.”

Among those involved with the new effort are HWPC veterans such as Oscar-winning songwriter Marilyn Bergman, political consultants Marge Tabankin and Lara Bergthold, and film producers Paula Weinstein and Julie Bergman, as well as their younger counterparts, including former public relations executive Katie McGrath and “The Great Debaters” co-star Jurnee Smollett.

The Sept. 27 benefit promises to be a “conceptual evening of A-list entertainment,” according to an insider, who says only 350 tickets, ranging from $2,500 to $10,000, are available. No talent has been confirmed, but the organizers have ins with stars ranging from Barbra Streisand to Jennifer Lopez, so there should be plenty of soaring high notes as well as scripted repartee from Hollywood’s snappiest script doctors.

Aside from the cash being raised — $500,000 is already committed — our source said the real thrill is watching “these multiple generations of women — the alte kockers and those who weren’t even born in the 1960s or ’70s — banding together to do something critically important.”


http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=99141461-3048-5C12-00B58E8BDA4E5F00
 

Latest posts

Top