In 1980, I voted for John Anderson for President. The vote was a protest against the major party candidates. Those casting votes for Anderson had no impact on the race. For those of us voting for Anderson, it was, in a sense, an exercise of civic self-gratification behind the closed curtain of the voting booths.
Twenty years later, it was postulated that votes for a third party candidate negatively impacted the Democratic candidate and cost him the Oval Office. The protest vote had electoral college consequences. It gave the nation a president who invented a weapons of mass destruction excuse to invade another sovereign nation.
Today, both major party candidates have sizeable number of voters within their party who will not support their party’s nominee. And, the major party opponent is deemed too odious to support. Prior to insulting Mormons, third party candidates were polling between 7%-8%. Voters dissatisfied with the major party candidates have three choices. Sit out the presidential election, vote for the least objectionable major party nominee or vote for a third party candidate.
In 1980, I shirked my civic responsibility by voting for Anderson. I expect our elected officials to make tough decisions about the direction they are taking the city, state and country. The United States is a political entity with a Siamese twin identity. For better or worse, Republicans and Democrats are the only parties capable of gathering enough votes to govern at the national level.
In 1980, I should have bit my tongue, identified the issues that mattered the most to me and then voted for the major party candidate whose stances coincided with my interests. I should have made the tough decision I expect from our elected officials.
Once upon a time, the United States supported more parties. Lincoln was elected president with less than 40% of the popular vote. Three other candidates received electoral college votes.
Actually, today there are at least four easily identifiable factions with widely divergent ideological viewpoints. It remains to be seen whether the Democratic Party will act on its promise to the Sanders’ supporters. If it does, then one faction becomes subsumed by the major party. That has been the history of splinter parties in our country.
The schism within the Republican Party borders on fratricidal roller derby. They keep going around and around, dealing with the antics of a red-headed child who has taken the position at the head of the table. The elders of the party avert their eyes and hold their tongues as the red-headed child flings excrement in their direction. You know they are whispering to each other “do you have red-heads in your family tree?”
So, while voters may be disgusted with the tone and quality of the major party presidential candidates, they will be shirking their civic duty by sitting out the presidential election or wasting a vote on a third party candidate. The stakes are too high for such civic indulgences.
20 million Americans have health insurance that was not previously available. A vote for a third party candidate means you are willing to let others decide whether those 20 million Americans lose or retain their health safety net.
Is Roe v. Wade important to you? Vote for a third party candidate and you will forfeit all credibility if the result is a new Supreme Court justice who is willing to act contrary to your desires.
No matter which side of the #BlackLivesMatter divide you position yourself, a vote for a third party presidential candidate is an abdication of your ability to explicitly impact the discussion and policies going forward regarding this movement.
One consequence of civic self-gratification in 2000 was listed above. How about the totally inept response to Hurricane Katrina? How about the rampant greed that imploded the housing industry? If there was a time machine, would you go back and change your vote? Would you still punish Al Gore for being Bill Clinton’s vice-president?
An unfunny comment framed the question as voting for the first woman president or the last president. The observation is not comical because in an hour long briefing, one candidate asked three times why nuclear arms could not be used. Self-indulge your civic responsibility and prepare to live in fear for at least four years.