My Candidate: None Of The Above
May 2nd, 2008 | by Dizzy Dezzi | Published in 08 Elections, Daily Featured, Politics | 7 Comments
A lot of potential voters are feeling the strain of the current primary battle going on between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Of course, Obama’s supporters are up in arms about the Clinton camp’s apparent racial comments, not to mention the apparent “slips of the tongue” that seem to be a regular part of Hillary’s stump speeches.
As well, Clinton’s supporters are up in arms about the apparent misogynistic comments coming from the Obama camp. Many even argue that Clinton deserves the Democratic nomination simply because she’s a woman (their argument is that sex should trump race in this election).
Then, there are those Democrats and Progressives who aren’t keen on either candidate, for whatever reason. Of course, they wouldn’t dream of ever voting for a Republican, particularly not John McCain. Many voters are also not keen on voting for relatively or veritably unknown third-party candidates, either.
Many people believe that voting for either a Democrat or a Republican is a sell-out vote, no matter how you cut it. They call it “voting for the lesser of two evils” and of course, that means, no matter how you vote, you are still voting for “evil”. And, there are a lot of people who are not down for voting for “evil”, but they still want their vote to be heard. Instead of “voting for the lesser of two evils”, they prefer to vote “None of the Above” or “NOTA”.
Why Bother Voting At All?
Voting “NOTA” may seem like a wasted vote to many in the electorate. Why bother voting, if you aren’t going to vote for the candidates presented on the ballot?
There is no law that says you have to vote for the candidates presented to you, but most times, a ballot has more than candidates on it. A lot of times, particularly during a general election, there are also initiatives and/or referendums to vote on (local issues that may affect future taxes or future actions that the government or citizens desire for the government to take). Those kind of ballot issues, because they are local and don’t require an individual voter to support a candidate that displeases them, allows an otherwise disinterested voter to actually vote “Yes” or “No” on a law. Voting “against” a candidate generally means voting “for” another candidate. If you don’t like either candidate, there is no other way to vote against them, except by writing in “NOTA” or voting for “NOTA”, if that is an available candidate slot.
Making “None of the Above” A Regular “Candidate” On Every Ballot
Some people feel so strongly about being able to vote “NO” on every candidate that they have formed an organization called CAMP (the Committee Against Mediocrity in Politics). They started the “Vote None of the Above campaign” to bring awareness to the idea that our electoral process has been “dumbed down” and has become a “serious threat to the ideals of American democracy”.
CAMP is actually calling for an Amendment to the US Constitution to add “None of the Above” to all federal election ballots. This would allow voters to choose NOT to vote for any candidates, if that is their desire. You can find more details at the official CAMP site.
Vote Your Conscience: Vote NOTA
There is nothing that says you must vote for any of the candidates listed on your ballot, if you choose to vote at all.
If voting Democratic, Republican, Independent or even third-party is not something that concerns you in the upcoming election, then more power to you. But, if not voting is not an option and if you want to protest the candidates that are dished out to you by the media, the corporate lobbyists, or voters who you might deem as “obedient sheeple” then it might suit your conscience to vote “None of the Above”.
Vote None of the Above (Richard Pryor - Brewsters Millions)
(Cross-posted at Hypocrisy.com)
Sphere: Related Content
Big Fella, thanks for the link and the smile. There are definitely some upsides to going...
May 2nd, 2008at 6:20 am(#)
i will go to the voting booth- but i don’t know if i will actually cast a vote for president or not. we’ll see. i am beyond disgusted with the opportunities ‘democrats’ have continually thrown away.
betmos last blog post..religion and politics
May 2nd, 2008at 12:46 pm(#)
I write in one of my felines when the candidates don’t suit me
But I might consider Obama…I am sure he will need my vote if he makes it that far.
May 2nd, 2008at 1:18 pm(#)
I don’t like Hillary and can not even see a person wanting to VP for her with Bill at her side. I want Obama but will vote for any Democrat. We can not see another Republican. As I am writing this I am listening to Paul talk against McCain and saying Obama might be the best. I wonder if he would cross over? He did say he is not endorsing Obama!
Jims last blog post..It’s sick but the more McCain distances himself from Bush the more like him he gets!
May 2nd, 2008at 7:14 pm(#)
I’m NOT going to the voting booth. Well that is just because my State is ONLY vote by mail. They did away with the voting booth system a few years ago. You can either pay to put a stamp on it, or you can hand deliver it to a county drop box w a survelience camera on it.
I totally understand what you are saying, if you don’t like a candidate, you don’t want to vote for any candidate. Not for lack of interest, but for lack of a candidate you support.
But I digress. This line of thinking inadvertently winds up helping McSame & the republicans. There is a snarky part of me that feels like if no candidate fits the bill- is not good enough for said voters, then why the f**k don’t they run for office if they think their standards & platform are sooo good? It seems like a cop out to just declare no candidate is good enough.
I’d like to have that open conversation where the heart of the matter is–Do you WANT the party that has tortured, done illegal occupations, prisoner abuse, denied habeus corpus, violated our constitution, and a host of other high crimes & misdeneanors to continue to be at the helm? Are you willing to risk more of the same?
Because for me, I see this as being a critical juncture.
I can answer that question with a F**k NO!
I don;t even have to give it much thought, because
I think about it every time the next atrocity is hurled at us.
Our decider has lead us into a bankruptcy- both financial and moral that will take a very long time to get out of. And even if we have a changing of the regime at the presidential level, the new boss will have one hell of a mess to deal with, as so many things in this country are imploding.
It pisses me off that armchair critics are willing to be under the illusion of holding such high standards, they would not vote for or against a candidate that they actually wind up helping the gawdawful candidate.
WTF kind of standard is that in the long run?
I will season this impassioned rant by saying I hate the 2 party system & I hate the helter skelter way in which our major elections are run- including the psychotic Super delegate crap, as well as the electoral college, and unauditable vote counting machines.
I favor gutting the system & revamping much of it including perhaps having a rotating primary vote schedule, maybe in some kind of geographic order, as well as only allowing real debates, with actual debate formats (at least high school level), that are required to air on public airwaves.
Still that being said, I am a realist.
In the here & now we have X Y X candidates, as well as 3rd party candidates. I’ll have to admit in the past I have wanted to vote for 3rd party candidates, but in major elections, have felt it would only help the worst candidate- which I realize perpetuates the 2 party “system”, but I felt most compelled to vote against the worst candidate who I thought would do the most harm.
On the flip side, I have to also say I loathe the Reich wing crimes, and I feel so strongly about stopping that
criminal behavior, I must step up & try to support a candidate who is intelligent, and has a real chance to beat the opponent.
there is no perfect candidate out there, my friends, (ugh! using that term made me gag!!!) if you wait for the perfect candidate, chances are they are never going to surface. You could spend an entire lifetime waiting. I figure there will never be a politician that totally agrees with all of my key issues & perspectives.
there are goig to be tradeoffs~ always.
So in conclusion- the big picture, as I see it, is that the whole government has had a total system failure.
If our check and balance system was functional, we would have had a successful Impeachment a long time ago.
Since Congress failed us- with a majority in both the House & Senate, and no chance of Impeachment even successfully launched, it is up to us- We the People, to make the change that needs to happen.
I for one can’t stand to have more of the same- the man who proposes another 100 years of war in Iraq should have a snowballs chance in hell of making it to the White House.
It seems so clear to me. Divided we fall.
frans last blog post..Is this the 21st Century?
May 2nd, 2008at 7:21 pm(#)
Damn Fran..thats a blog post woman, not a comment
Dustys last blog post..Guantanamo-Even children are charged and held
May 2nd, 2008at 7:56 pm(#)
LOL Dusty…. I guess I am a little passionate about the topic. I could make it a blog post– I should make it a blog post with spell check this time!
frans last blog post..Is this the 21st Century?
May 2nd, 2008at 8:01 pm(#)
Well, what’s cha waiting for? We need posts on the weekends too!
Dusterellas last blog post..Guantanamo-Even children are charged and held