![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
From Twitter 10-07-2010
Oct. 8th, 2010 03:02 amTweets copied by twittinesis.com
Oct. 8th, 2010
How I Intend to Vote...
Oct. 8th, 2010 12:07 pmFor those of you who are annoyed with me about my anger at Obama and the Democrats for being liars and/or cowardly tools, this will probably make you a bit more annoyed. Still, I feel you deserve to know what I'm doing when I go to the ballot box, and why.
Since Texas is overwhelmingly Republican-controlled, and my part of Texas especially so, the single biggest factor in my decisions on voting is not Obama. It's the Green Party- or, more specifically, the attempt by the Texas Democratic Party to keep the Greens off the 2010 ballot.
Here's the story. The Republicans footed most of the bill for the Greens to get together an overwhelmingly successful ballot access petition drive- over 100,000 signatures in a state where signing a ballot access petition is legally equivalent to voting in a primary. (That means primary voters can't sign one at all, and if you do sign one, you can ONLY sign one. You aren't allowed to say that you want the extra choice on the ballot just on principles of competition.)
The Democrats sued, claiming that the Republican financing of the ballot access drive was an illegal campaign contribution and therefore the Greens should not be allowed to run candidates for office. The Republican-packed state supreme court, naturally, ruled that the Greens could be on the ballot and that the case itself would be resolved after the elections.
My beef with the Democrats is this: knocking the Green Party off the ballot is unfair and unjust to the tens of thousands of people who chose, of their own free will, to sign that petition. The Democrats seek to punish those people, who want a choice on the ballot, for daring to take their votes away from the parties "entitled" to them. The Dems couldn't give a rat's ass about improper donations: their sole reason for the suit was to ensure a monopoly on the liberal vote in November.
That's undemocratic. That's illiberal. And it's wrong.
So, as a general rule, my voting strategy is this:
First, vote Green.
Second, if there are no Greens in the race, vote Democratic (because, as disgusted as I am with the Democrats and as much as I want to send them a message in the only medium they pay any attention to besides money, the other two choices are generally too odious to consider).
Third, if there are neither Greens nor Democrats, vote Libertarian (both as a protest against Republicans and to keep an option, no matter how odious, available on the ballot).
Never vote Republican. In my county there's only one contested local race, so a lot of those races are going to get blank bubbles on my paper ballot.
But what about Rick Perry? I hear you cry. True, there is no runoff for statewide executive offices- highest vote total wins, period. True, Rick Perry has acted like El-Generalissimo-Presidente-para-vida of Texaragua. But to me Bill White will always be the man who tried to auction off Houston's freeways to the highest-bidding wrecker companies. And in this campaign he's been trying to run to the right of Perry, calling for tax cuts and budget cuts in Austin when things are already cut to the bone.
And there's also the Greens to consider. For 2012 ballot access the Greens need either 2% of the vote in the gubernatorial election or 5% in any other statewide race. Libertarians routinely meet this benchmark by running in statewide judicial contests where no Democrat is running. Greens didn't do that this time. The closest they have is the Comptroller of Public Accounts race, where incumbent Republican Susan Combs is running against perennial Libertarian candidate Mary Ruwart (feh) and Green candidate Edward Lindsay. MAYBE Lindsay will get 5% in that race... maybe not. If not, then it would all depend on the gubernatorial race.
Right now, though, despite my disgust with White, I'm probably voting for him anyway. Rick Perry is a total coward and phony, and he's spent his entire political career funneling tax dollars to his cronies. He deserves defeat. And more to the point, the Libertarians, who are better organized, funded and known than the Greens, have never reached the 2% benchmark in the gubernatorial race- how much less likely is it the Greens will, even with my vote?
One other option: write-in Andy Barron. Er... no. As fond as I am for the concept of write-ins, Andy Barron is an openly theocratic candidate whose signature issue is restoring prayer to public schools. Very much NO.
So, probably I'll vote for Bill White over the Green candidate... but that would be the ONLY exception, and if the polls open wider for Perry I'll eliminate that exception and make my "shape-up-Democrats" vote undiluted.
On the more local level, in the US House race I'll be voting for Kent Hargett (who ran in 2008 for the same race on the claim that LARPing middle-eastern characters/countries qualified him on foreign policy grounds), because the Libertarian is a Glenn Beck follower. The Libertarian candidate for Senate is likewise a 9/12er, but he's the only alternative to the Republican incumbent's re-election. Ditto my state rep slot, where John Otto, who I ran against as a moderate (and thus outcast) Libertarian in 2006, is still in office and still Rick Perry's toady.
One final thing: I AM NOT ENDORSING THE GREENS. The Greens have been, and still are, far too socialist for my taste, despite my hard leftward lean over the past couple years. But right this minute I have more sympathy and trust for Greens than I do for any Democrats. I'm not happy about Greens running things... but I'd rather give them a chance than reward Democrats for crooked dealings.
(And I'd MUCH MUCH MUCH rather vote for Greens than for Republicans and their wholly-owned-subsidiary party the Libertarians.)
Since Texas is overwhelmingly Republican-controlled, and my part of Texas especially so, the single biggest factor in my decisions on voting is not Obama. It's the Green Party- or, more specifically, the attempt by the Texas Democratic Party to keep the Greens off the 2010 ballot.
Here's the story. The Republicans footed most of the bill for the Greens to get together an overwhelmingly successful ballot access petition drive- over 100,000 signatures in a state where signing a ballot access petition is legally equivalent to voting in a primary. (That means primary voters can't sign one at all, and if you do sign one, you can ONLY sign one. You aren't allowed to say that you want the extra choice on the ballot just on principles of competition.)
The Democrats sued, claiming that the Republican financing of the ballot access drive was an illegal campaign contribution and therefore the Greens should not be allowed to run candidates for office. The Republican-packed state supreme court, naturally, ruled that the Greens could be on the ballot and that the case itself would be resolved after the elections.
My beef with the Democrats is this: knocking the Green Party off the ballot is unfair and unjust to the tens of thousands of people who chose, of their own free will, to sign that petition. The Democrats seek to punish those people, who want a choice on the ballot, for daring to take their votes away from the parties "entitled" to them. The Dems couldn't give a rat's ass about improper donations: their sole reason for the suit was to ensure a monopoly on the liberal vote in November.
That's undemocratic. That's illiberal. And it's wrong.
So, as a general rule, my voting strategy is this:
First, vote Green.
Second, if there are no Greens in the race, vote Democratic (because, as disgusted as I am with the Democrats and as much as I want to send them a message in the only medium they pay any attention to besides money, the other two choices are generally too odious to consider).
Third, if there are neither Greens nor Democrats, vote Libertarian (both as a protest against Republicans and to keep an option, no matter how odious, available on the ballot).
Never vote Republican. In my county there's only one contested local race, so a lot of those races are going to get blank bubbles on my paper ballot.
But what about Rick Perry? I hear you cry. True, there is no runoff for statewide executive offices- highest vote total wins, period. True, Rick Perry has acted like El-Generalissimo-Presidente-para-vida of Texaragua. But to me Bill White will always be the man who tried to auction off Houston's freeways to the highest-bidding wrecker companies. And in this campaign he's been trying to run to the right of Perry, calling for tax cuts and budget cuts in Austin when things are already cut to the bone.
And there's also the Greens to consider. For 2012 ballot access the Greens need either 2% of the vote in the gubernatorial election or 5% in any other statewide race. Libertarians routinely meet this benchmark by running in statewide judicial contests where no Democrat is running. Greens didn't do that this time. The closest they have is the Comptroller of Public Accounts race, where incumbent Republican Susan Combs is running against perennial Libertarian candidate Mary Ruwart (feh) and Green candidate Edward Lindsay. MAYBE Lindsay will get 5% in that race... maybe not. If not, then it would all depend on the gubernatorial race.
Right now, though, despite my disgust with White, I'm probably voting for him anyway. Rick Perry is a total coward and phony, and he's spent his entire political career funneling tax dollars to his cronies. He deserves defeat. And more to the point, the Libertarians, who are better organized, funded and known than the Greens, have never reached the 2% benchmark in the gubernatorial race- how much less likely is it the Greens will, even with my vote?
One other option: write-in Andy Barron. Er... no. As fond as I am for the concept of write-ins, Andy Barron is an openly theocratic candidate whose signature issue is restoring prayer to public schools. Very much NO.
So, probably I'll vote for Bill White over the Green candidate... but that would be the ONLY exception, and if the polls open wider for Perry I'll eliminate that exception and make my "shape-up-Democrats" vote undiluted.
On the more local level, in the US House race I'll be voting for Kent Hargett (who ran in 2008 for the same race on the claim that LARPing middle-eastern characters/countries qualified him on foreign policy grounds), because the Libertarian is a Glenn Beck follower. The Libertarian candidate for Senate is likewise a 9/12er, but he's the only alternative to the Republican incumbent's re-election. Ditto my state rep slot, where John Otto, who I ran against as a moderate (and thus outcast) Libertarian in 2006, is still in office and still Rick Perry's toady.
One final thing: I AM NOT ENDORSING THE GREENS. The Greens have been, and still are, far too socialist for my taste, despite my hard leftward lean over the past couple years. But right this minute I have more sympathy and trust for Greens than I do for any Democrats. I'm not happy about Greens running things... but I'd rather give them a chance than reward Democrats for crooked dealings.
(And I'd MUCH MUCH MUCH rather vote for Greens than for Republicans and their wholly-owned-subsidiary party the Libertarians.)
How I Intend to Vote...
Oct. 8th, 2010 12:07 pmFor those of you who are annoyed with me about my anger at Obama and the Democrats for being liars and/or cowardly tools, this will probably make you a bit more annoyed. Still, I feel you deserve to know what I'm doing when I go to the ballot box, and why.
Since Texas is overwhelmingly Republican-controlled, and my part of Texas especially so, the single biggest factor in my decisions on voting is not Obama. It's the Green Party- or, more specifically, the attempt by the Texas Democratic Party to keep the Greens off the 2010 ballot.
Here's the story. The Republicans footed most of the bill for the Greens to get together an overwhelmingly successful ballot access petition drive- over 100,000 signatures in a state where signing a ballot access petition is legally equivalent to voting in a primary. (That means primary voters can't sign one at all, and if you do sign one, you can ONLY sign one. You aren't allowed to say that you want the extra choice on the ballot just on principles of competition.)
The Democrats sued, claiming that the Republican financing of the ballot access drive was an illegal campaign contribution and therefore the Greens should not be allowed to run candidates for office. The Republican-packed state supreme court, naturally, ruled that the Greens could be on the ballot and that the case itself would be resolved after the elections.
My beef with the Democrats is this: knocking the Green Party off the ballot is unfair and unjust to the tens of thousands of people who chose, of their own free will, to sign that petition. The Democrats seek to punish those people, who want a choice on the ballot, for daring to take their votes away from the parties "entitled" to them. The Dems couldn't give a rat's ass about improper donations: their sole reason for the suit was to ensure a monopoly on the liberal vote in November.
That's undemocratic. That's illiberal. And it's wrong.
So, as a general rule, my voting strategy is this:
First, vote Green.
Second, if there are no Greens in the race, vote Democratic (because, as disgusted as I am with the Democrats and as much as I want to send them a message in the only medium they pay any attention to besides money, the other two choices are generally too odious to consider).
Third, if there are neither Greens nor Democrats, vote Libertarian (both as a protest against Republicans and to keep an option, no matter how odious, available on the ballot).
Never vote Republican. In my county there's only one contested local race, so a lot of those races are going to get blank bubbles on my paper ballot.
But what about Rick Perry? I hear you cry. True, there is no runoff for statewide executive offices- highest vote total wins, period. True, Rick Perry has acted like El-Generalissimo-Presidente-para-vida of Texaragua. But to me Bill White will always be the man who tried to auction off Houston's freeways to the highest-bidding wrecker companies. And in this campaign he's been trying to run to the right of Perry, calling for tax cuts and budget cuts in Austin when things are already cut to the bone.
And there's also the Greens to consider. For 2012 ballot access the Greens need either 2% of the vote in the gubernatorial election or 5% in any other statewide race. Libertarians routinely meet this benchmark by running in statewide judicial contests where no Democrat is running. Greens didn't do that this time. The closest they have is the Comptroller of Public Accounts race, where incumbent Republican Susan Combs is running against perennial Libertarian candidate Mary Ruwart (feh) and Green candidate Edward Lindsay. MAYBE Lindsay will get 5% in that race... maybe not. If not, then it would all depend on the gubernatorial race.
Right now, though, despite my disgust with White, I'm probably voting for him anyway. Rick Perry is a total coward and phony, and he's spent his entire political career funneling tax dollars to his cronies. He deserves defeat. And more to the point, the Libertarians, who are better organized, funded and known than the Greens, have never reached the 2% benchmark in the gubernatorial race- how much less likely is it the Greens will, even with my vote?
One other option: write-in Andy Barron. Er... no. As fond as I am for the concept of write-ins, Andy Barron is an openly theocratic candidate whose signature issue is restoring prayer to public schools. Very much NO.
So, probably I'll vote for Bill White over the Green candidate... but that would be the ONLY exception, and if the polls open wider for Perry I'll eliminate that exception and make my "shape-up-Democrats" vote undiluted.
On the more local level, in the US House race I'll be voting for Kent Hargett (who ran in 2008 for the same race on the claim that LARPing middle-eastern characters/countries qualified him on foreign policy grounds), because the Libertarian is a Glenn Beck follower. The Libertarian candidate for Senate is likewise a 9/12er, but he's the only alternative to the Republican incumbent's re-election. Ditto my state rep slot, where John Otto, who I ran against as a moderate (and thus outcast) Libertarian in 2006, is still in office and still Rick Perry's toady.
One final thing: I AM NOT ENDORSING THE GREENS. The Greens have been, and still are, far too socialist for my taste, despite my hard leftward lean over the past couple years. But right this minute I have more sympathy and trust for Greens than I do for any Democrats. I'm not happy about Greens running things... but I'd rather give them a chance than reward Democrats for crooked dealings.
(And I'd MUCH MUCH MUCH rather vote for Greens than for Republicans and their wholly-owned-subsidiary party the Libertarians.)
Since Texas is overwhelmingly Republican-controlled, and my part of Texas especially so, the single biggest factor in my decisions on voting is not Obama. It's the Green Party- or, more specifically, the attempt by the Texas Democratic Party to keep the Greens off the 2010 ballot.
Here's the story. The Republicans footed most of the bill for the Greens to get together an overwhelmingly successful ballot access petition drive- over 100,000 signatures in a state where signing a ballot access petition is legally equivalent to voting in a primary. (That means primary voters can't sign one at all, and if you do sign one, you can ONLY sign one. You aren't allowed to say that you want the extra choice on the ballot just on principles of competition.)
The Democrats sued, claiming that the Republican financing of the ballot access drive was an illegal campaign contribution and therefore the Greens should not be allowed to run candidates for office. The Republican-packed state supreme court, naturally, ruled that the Greens could be on the ballot and that the case itself would be resolved after the elections.
My beef with the Democrats is this: knocking the Green Party off the ballot is unfair and unjust to the tens of thousands of people who chose, of their own free will, to sign that petition. The Democrats seek to punish those people, who want a choice on the ballot, for daring to take their votes away from the parties "entitled" to them. The Dems couldn't give a rat's ass about improper donations: their sole reason for the suit was to ensure a monopoly on the liberal vote in November.
That's undemocratic. That's illiberal. And it's wrong.
So, as a general rule, my voting strategy is this:
First, vote Green.
Second, if there are no Greens in the race, vote Democratic (because, as disgusted as I am with the Democrats and as much as I want to send them a message in the only medium they pay any attention to besides money, the other two choices are generally too odious to consider).
Third, if there are neither Greens nor Democrats, vote Libertarian (both as a protest against Republicans and to keep an option, no matter how odious, available on the ballot).
Never vote Republican. In my county there's only one contested local race, so a lot of those races are going to get blank bubbles on my paper ballot.
But what about Rick Perry? I hear you cry. True, there is no runoff for statewide executive offices- highest vote total wins, period. True, Rick Perry has acted like El-Generalissimo-Presidente-para-vida of Texaragua. But to me Bill White will always be the man who tried to auction off Houston's freeways to the highest-bidding wrecker companies. And in this campaign he's been trying to run to the right of Perry, calling for tax cuts and budget cuts in Austin when things are already cut to the bone.
And there's also the Greens to consider. For 2012 ballot access the Greens need either 2% of the vote in the gubernatorial election or 5% in any other statewide race. Libertarians routinely meet this benchmark by running in statewide judicial contests where no Democrat is running. Greens didn't do that this time. The closest they have is the Comptroller of Public Accounts race, where incumbent Republican Susan Combs is running against perennial Libertarian candidate Mary Ruwart (feh) and Green candidate Edward Lindsay. MAYBE Lindsay will get 5% in that race... maybe not. If not, then it would all depend on the gubernatorial race.
Right now, though, despite my disgust with White, I'm probably voting for him anyway. Rick Perry is a total coward and phony, and he's spent his entire political career funneling tax dollars to his cronies. He deserves defeat. And more to the point, the Libertarians, who are better organized, funded and known than the Greens, have never reached the 2% benchmark in the gubernatorial race- how much less likely is it the Greens will, even with my vote?
One other option: write-in Andy Barron. Er... no. As fond as I am for the concept of write-ins, Andy Barron is an openly theocratic candidate whose signature issue is restoring prayer to public schools. Very much NO.
So, probably I'll vote for Bill White over the Green candidate... but that would be the ONLY exception, and if the polls open wider for Perry I'll eliminate that exception and make my "shape-up-Democrats" vote undiluted.
On the more local level, in the US House race I'll be voting for Kent Hargett (who ran in 2008 for the same race on the claim that LARPing middle-eastern characters/countries qualified him on foreign policy grounds), because the Libertarian is a Glenn Beck follower. The Libertarian candidate for Senate is likewise a 9/12er, but he's the only alternative to the Republican incumbent's re-election. Ditto my state rep slot, where John Otto, who I ran against as a moderate (and thus outcast) Libertarian in 2006, is still in office and still Rick Perry's toady.
One final thing: I AM NOT ENDORSING THE GREENS. The Greens have been, and still are, far too socialist for my taste, despite my hard leftward lean over the past couple years. But right this minute I have more sympathy and trust for Greens than I do for any Democrats. I'm not happy about Greens running things... but I'd rather give them a chance than reward Democrats for crooked dealings.
(And I'd MUCH MUCH MUCH rather vote for Greens than for Republicans and their wholly-owned-subsidiary party the Libertarians.)
From the "Is It Just Me?" Department...
Oct. 8th, 2010 09:00 pmWith me, things taste sweeter the colder they are, and more bitter the warmer they are- especially beverages.
Anybody else get that?
Anybody else get that?