Tomorrow is Super Tuesday, and I live in Ohio. Ohio is a major battleground state, and it has open primaries.
A few months ago I described my moral dilemma over who to nominate for the GOP in this year's presidential race. I won't rehash all of my motivations but it basically boils down to supporting someone that I sincerely like (Ron Paul), or supporting someone I think the GOP base identifies with (and consider a "true conservative"). Right now that would be Rick Santorum, who I despise.
I still grudgingly admit that ethically speaking, I should play this straight, but I don't know if that's what I'll do.
I've been watching the race closely for the last several weeks. The pattern that I've noticed is this. Up to a week before most close contests, people latch onto a non-Romney candidate. Mostly Santorum. The polls start off with a strong lead for that candidate. Then the Romney campaign begins carpet-bombing the state in question with ads attacking that candidate. Within the span of a few days, the gap narrows and Romney manages to squeak by. I've seen it happen in Florida, Michigan and now Ohio. It's neck-and-neck here.
I feel that my vote matters. Which would I regret more: being stuck with an ideologue because of my cynicism, or being stuck with someone who most Americans don't actually want, and whose defeat (or victory) means nothing, all because of my own naivety?
I guess I'd rather be cynical than naive. I doubt that comes as a surprise to anyone reading this.
I've wavered on this too. A lot.
ReplyDeleteI get the idea behind both, and I think I'm leaning towards saying it's best to vote for the candidate you want.
Let's say Santorum wins big today across the states. And later gets the nomination.
He can't be Obama as it stands now. But if between now and November we find out Obama's been nailing Pelosi (gross, I know) when Michelle's out working with America's fat kids, well then all bets are off.
Santorum could win then, and if that happens.....as a conservative, Catholic, even I'm saying...uh-oh.
Yeah, I know but that scenario is so unlikely (not just pelosi sex).
ReplyDeleteIt's way, way more likely to see Romney coast to nomination and then lose. It's a choice between avoiding a mild but probably evil, or an awful but very unlikely evil.
I'm starting to reconsider voting Santorum now that I've heard word that Gingrich is evening the polls 3 ways in Tennessee. This race is in such as state of flux I just want to say "screw it", vote Paul and go home.
I voted Paul.
ReplyDeleteIf I thought there was a really good chance of teaching the GOP "a lesson", I would have voted insincerely, but today that feels unlikely. Even if an extremist could be propped up in order to lose, I doubt that most voters would even connect the dots to draw the correlation. They're ignorant of the candidates policies before the election, and they'll likely be ignorant after.
If, by some miracle, Not-Romney manages to secure a nomination, I'll rejoice. But I won't set my hopes too high on any revelations.
And after it's all said and done, and Romney loses a general election, what's the worst thing that will happen? Republicans become more extreme and marginalized. Democrats gain a bigger share of moderate voters. So what? I'll just vote for moderate Dems, what difference does it make?
Honestly, I grow tired of the Republican primary. It's like having to watch some poor old guy suffer a slow, excruciating death. It seems quite clear Romney is going to receive the nomination, albeit begrudgingly. He'll go up against Obama and, despite the latter's low approval rate, will probably lose. Let's just get it over with already.
ReplyDelete