The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month, “A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll indicates one third of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders’ supporters cannot see themselves voting for Hillary Clinton in November.”…. Be absolutely clear: While there are meaningful differences between Clinton and Sanders, either would be a far better choice for president than any of the remaining Republican contenders, especially the demagogic real estate developer. Assisting or allowing his ascendance by electoral abstinence in order to force a “revolution” is heretical. This position is dangerous, shortsighted and self-immolating. If Sanders wins the nomination, liberals should rally round him. Conversely, if Clinton does, they should rally round her.
Once upon a time, a sizable number of Democrats decided that then-Vice President Al Gore wasn’t Liberal enough for them, and so they decided to register their righteous outrage by voting for Ralph Nader. That’s their right in a free and fair election…but in a clear case of actions having consequences, the votes cast for Nader had the indirect effect of handing the Presidency to George W. Bush. We all remember how well that turned out, eh? 5,000 dead American soldiers and more than 100,000 dead Iraqis later, it’s no stretch to argue that Captain Codpiece © left office a war criminal. Having presided over the near collapse of the global economy, an illegal and immoral invasion of a sovereign nation without just cause, and a degree of dishonesty and immorality not seen since the darkest days of Richard Nixon, George W. Bush was an unqualified disaster.
A credible argument could be made for holding those who voted for Nader culpable. Sure, they might have believed they were being true to their principles and voting their conscience, but sometimes a “protest” vote can have broader consequences. Those who chose to register their principled protest in 2000 are without a doubt indirectly responsible for the illegal war in Iraq and the horrific carnage and political instability that followed. That may seem harsh, but history is what it is.
The question we should be asking ourselves is simple: Are we willing to make that same mistake again?
This is not a game. The presidency, particularly the next one, matters, and elections can be decided by relatively small margins. No president has won the popular vote by more than 10 percentage points since Ronald Reagan in 1984.
When Al Gore ran against George W. Bush in 2000, some claimed that a vote for Gore was almost the same as a vote for Bush and encouraged people to cast protest votes for Ralph Nader. Sarandon supported Nader during that election. Bush became president, and what did we get? Two incredibly young, incredibly conservative justices, John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito Jr., who will be on the court for decades, and two wars — in Afghanistan and Iraq — that, together, lasted over a decade.
Elections have consequences; that much is certain. The results of a presidential election can have long-lasting consequences- as we learned in 2000. To those supporters of Bernie Sanders who’ve determined they can’t in good conscience vote for Hillary Clinton if she’s the Democratic nominee, here’s something to ponder: ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FREAKIN’ MINDS??? I’m a committed Sanders supporter, but I can’t in good conscience not vote for the Democratic candidate if it’s not the person I’d prefer. Sometimes there’s a greater good at stake.
Sixteen years ago, a relatively small number of votes for Ralph Nader set this country down a path from which we’re still recovering. More than 5,000 Americans died serving their country in an illegal and immoral war, one that also claimed upwards of 100,000 Iraqi lives. Would the same thing have happened under a President Al Gore? Perhaps, but it seems unlikely. George W. Bush jumped at the opportunity to invade a country he was keen to manufacture an excuse to go to war with. In the uber-patriotic, if-you’re-not-with-us-you’re-against-us reflexive patriotism that existed in the aftermath of 9/11, Bush was given virtually free reign. What he did with that carte blanche should have had him facing war crimes charges in the Hague.
Yes, elections have consequences:
“When Obama took office, Republican appointees controlled ten of the thirteen circuit courts of appeals; Democratic appointees now constitute a majority in nine circuits. Because federal judges have life tenure, nearly all of Obama’s judges will continue serving well after he leaves office.”….
“Sheldon Goldman, a professor at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and a scholar of judicial appointments, said, ‘The majority of Obama’s appointments are women and nonwhite males.’ Forty-two percent of his judgeships have gone to women. Twenty-two percent of George W. Bush’s judges and 29 percent of Bill Clinton’s were women. Thirty-six percent of President Obama’s judges have been minorities, compared with 18 percent for Bush and 24 percent for Clinton.”
To those of my fellow Sanders supporters promising they won’t vote for any Democratic nominee but their guy, ask yourself if you’re willing to be held responsible for handing the keys to the White House to Donald Trump. Are you REALLY willing to run the risk of seeing eight years of progress and cleanup being turned back by a President steeped in racism, misogyny, and disrespect for anyone not White, Conservative, and Christian?
I understand your frustration. Like you, I believe Sec. Clinton to be too close to Wall Street and Big Business to have the interests of everyday Americans at heart. I don’t believe her to be a true Democrat, but rather a Liberal Republican. Consider the alternative, though: President Donald Trump. That possibility should scare the daylights out of you…yet that might well be the outcome of this election if you decide not to vote or to cast your vote for a third-party candidate.
I don’t like this any more than you do. While I’m still holding out hope that Sen. Sanders will prevail, it appears the entrenched Democratic power structure will ultimately achieve their goal of anointing Sec. Clinton as the party’s nominee. That sucks…but sometimes you have to recognize the larger reality at work and understand that your vote contributes to the Greater Good, or conversely, to taking several giant steps backward.
Please don’t make the same mistake so many made in 2000. Those protest votes meant many young people with bright futures came home from Iraq in flag-draped boxes, never again to see their loved ones, raise a family, have a career, and enjoy the good things life has to offer. If you have to hold your nose to vote for Sec. Clinton, then do it; the future of your country may well depend on that decision.
Do the right thing.
