Skip to main content

Mitt Romney gives everyone not voting for Barack Obama the perfect excuse to vote for Gary Johnson

I read Betsy's page like I read a lot of other aggregator pages:  whether  you accept their political ideology or not, they often give you quick gateways into posts of interest that you would never otherwise have seen.

Betsy is a Republican, obviously, and interested in pro-Romney, anti-Obama sites, and that's why it is so telling to find this comment on the Romney 47% gaffe:
I have to say that my first reaction to reading and hearing this video was the same as Josh Barro, Romney just lost the election. He's already behind and fighting the image that he's too rich to relate to average people. Saying that these people regard themselves as victims and so won't support him just comes off as contemptuous.
First reactions are often exactly right on target.  Although I also subscribe to the point she makes later that these gaffes are rarely as decisive as opponents would like (remember Obama and the "bitter clingers" comment), I think this one is pretty devastating, especially in the battleground states.

Which brings me to my chief point:  if it settles out that this gives Obama a pretty solid 4-5% lead, then that situation pretty much guts the argument that you shouldn't vote for Gary Johnson because you could throw the election to President Obama.

Romney will have already done that for us.

What remains is the opportunity to make a statement of principle that Libertarians and libertarian-minded Americans are rejecting a two-party system that locks us into only two choices and gives us a four-month gotcha orgy that has nothing to do with discussing the issues.

All you moderate Republicans out there, all you independents who are socially tolerant and fiscally prudent, guess what?  If the election has well and truly been thrown to President Obama, then it's time to sent that principled message by voting for Gary Johnson.

Because that will now be the only way you are NOT throwing your vote away.

Comments

Anonymous said…
http://youtu.be/FP69507fTKY
Unknown said…
Given the current make up of the state of Delaware, is it any wonder which candidate will win the electoral votes? That being said, a vote for Romney is a wasted vote anyway. Why waste it? Vote on principle and vote Gary Johnson because, Romney has no chance of winning DE anyway...
anonone said…
Vote Green Party. Johnson is just another sore-loser republican.
JFlee said…
Will you vote for Gary Johnson? http://celebrity-plugs.com/t/
tom said…
No offense intended, JFlee, but your Butt-Plug comments while cute the first time around, and A1's (who probably ought to buy one--offense intended) "sore loser" mantra are becoming really tedious.

Since you are not adding anything new to the conversation, perhaps you could self-censor after the 3rd or 4th repetition so Steve doesn't have to do it for you.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...