The 2011 Republican Primary
I asked my grandma once why she didn’t like Ron Paul.
She said, “He’s a Republican, and I’ll never vote for a Republican.” At the time, she was a big supporter of Hilary Clinton (and later Obama).
So I made her a chart, listing the important issues of the day. It looked like this:
The War on Iraq For Against
Bank Bailouts For Against
The PATRIOT Act For Against
No Child Left Behind For Against
I said, “Grandma, how do you feel about these issues?” On every single issue, she voted the exact same way Ron Paul did. She was against the war, the bailouts, the Patriot Act, and No Child Left Behind. Hilary Clinton had voted for all of these things. When I told her this, and asked if she would reconsider voting for Ron Paul, what do you think she said?
“I don’t care.” “I like Hilary Clinton.” “I’ll never vote for a Republican.”
Now, my Grandma is one smart lady. But for whatever reason, she chose to ignore her own wishes and vote for a politician who opposes her on the issues!
Maybe it’s a personality thing. People who think of themselves as “Liberal” often think that that label demands care for the poor, for social welfare programs and women’s rights. And often it does. But this is the bare minimum for a liberal politician. What good does it do to vote for a “Liberal” who continues the War on Drugs and No Child Left Behind, ensuring that more people have incentives to sell drugs, get thrown in prison, and end up needing social programs to survive? What sense does it make to vote for a “Liberal” who might spend some public money on social programs while voting trillions towards oil subsidies, bank bailouts, military machinery, and billions that are allowed to go “missing” in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Wouldn’t it be better to vote for a Liberal that wants to spend money on single-payer health care and solar power, on improving schools and lowering college tuition, on better infrastructure and low-cost housing?
And where does Ron Paul fit into this picture?
A libertarian, Ron Paul would probably not spend money on social programs. But at the same time, Ron Paul would also not give trillions to the banks who created the sub-prime mortgage bubble and billions to destructive corporations like ExxonMobil, GE, Monsanto, and General Motors. By allowing these corporations to fail or at least forcing them to succeed without subsidizing them with your money, less people would need social programs to begin with.
I offered people $10 for the best argument against voting for Ron Paul in the primaries, and no one sent in an answer that dealt with the question. Even if you disagree on Ron Paul on social issues, isn’t he worlds better than the rest of the Republican “frontrunners”?
Pawlenty, Bachmann, Romney, all of these people would spend trillions on war, police and prisons that we don’t need. Who out there wants to spend billions subsidizing ExxonMobil as the U.S. currently does and the potential Republican Presidents not named Ron Paul would?
Once you realize that there is no Democratic primary, and the only Presidential primary to vote in is for the Republicans, why on earth wouldn’t you vote for Ron Paul?
Now let’s play out a potential Ron Paul v. Barack Obama presidential race. If I could pick a President, I would probably pick Dennis Kucinich, a liberal who would bring peace and invest money wisely. Since that isn’t a choice in the upcoming Democrat v. Republican battle, let’s look at our options in another chart.
Ron Paul supports: Barack Obama supports:
Peace/Bringing home the troops Wars for private profit
Productive, limited spending Bank bailouts and oil subsidies
Personal liberty/Bill of Rights PATRIOT Act and secret prisons
Neither of these candidates supports building an honest, public solar power grid or single payer health care. Remember, the “ObamaCare” legislation was written by the insurance companies. Obama has never stood for change, or even compromise, he has stood for deception. Obama’s cabinet includes “former” employees of Monsanto and Goldman Sachs, and is little different than George W. Bush’s. Wise up, the Obama you voted for doesn’t exist.
If you want a real liberal President, here are your options:
1) Try to build a 3rd party coalition and promote a real liberal like Cynthia McKinney.
This option would almost certainly fracture the Democrats and result in President Romney, not that he would be much different than President Obama.
2) Pretend that Obama is a real liberal, and not a corporate puppet. Many people have been stuck on this option, and let me tell you guys, when you change your mind, you will change the election.
3) Work towards 2015, when there will be another Democratic primary.
What does this option look like? Well for starters, you might start by voting for the best available option, a President that will bring peace, restore our civil liberties, and protect the value of the dollar. Ron Paul may not be a perfect President, but he is the by far the best option available. Go out and promote progressive Congressman and good state government, please. But at the same time, if you want any type of progressive change in the White House, start telling everyone you know to tell everyone that they know: PROMOTE AND VOTE RON PAUL.