On Sept. 26, the Technician ran an opinion article urging anyone who may vote third party to reconsider because, in their opinion, it is a waste of a vote. Or at least that’s how the article begins. However, after reading the article, it’s clear that the author doesn’t actually care about someone wasting their vote, rather, the author just tries to convince you to vote for Hillary Clinton and every other Democrat running in the state elections. The title of the article is “Don’t vote third party,” but “Vote Democrat” would have been a much more appropriate title.
The author states in the first paragraph that “The politics of fear is damaging to the soul and I have no desire to circulate the currency of this fear.” If only the rest of the article supported that claim. The author describes Clinton as a lifelong public servant who fights the good fight while describing Donald Trump as a racist and child rapist. While the author claims he will not use fear to try to persuade you, he promptly brings up some absurd claim about Trump being a serial rapist and a child rapist. That sounds exactly like the politics of fear to me.
However, what bothered me most about this article and this entire campaign season is the fact that a career in politics is seen as “public service” while a career in the private sector makes you disqualified for the Oval Office. Somehow, Clinton becoming filthy rich while “serving the public” is better than Trump becoming filthy rich building skyscrapers, hotels and golf courses. At least Trump helped the economy and created jobs while making his money. Clinton’s money has come from our tax dollars or from speaking fees. She’s never created a single private industry job. Her policies will supposedly create jobs but only if you believe the government taking money from productive individuals and businesses and wastefully spending it is an effective way to create jobs.
America was never meant to be a country where individuals make a career out of politics and rake in millions of dollars. Rather, our politicians were supposed to be individuals with successful careers who have expertise in their industry. Once they become politicians, they can use that expertise to make laws in areas only they could truly understand. This is rarely the case anymore. Many in D.C., including Clinton, have made lucrative careers in politics at the expense of the American people.
In the very last paragraph the author claims, “We need a break away from policies designed by moneyed interests.” I would agree. What I don’t agree with, however, is that a vote for Clinton represents a break from moneyed interests. In fact, she represents special interests, lobbying and crony capitalism better than any of the remaining candidates. If you think I’m being unfairly critical of Clinton, I would urge you to read the book or watch the documentary “Clinton Cash.” It explains the pay to play relationship between the Clinton Foundation and Clinton’s State Department and how the Clintons made millions awarding large contracts to donors or affiliates.
However, all this being said would like to add that I am not trying to urge anybody to vote for Trump. I believe he would be an embarrassment to the country and I think he has done great damage to conservatism and the Republican Party. In my eyes, both candidates are liars who have no principles that guide them. They will both say anything or change their policies to get elected. This is why I believe that there is no lesser evil this year, and I will gladly vote for a candidate who will not win.
However, voting for a candidate who won’t win is hardly the same as wasting a vote. According to the Federal Election Commission, a minor party is eligible for general election funding in the next election if it receives 5 percent of the vote. It is very likely that Gary Johnson will break this threshold, and it’s possible that Jill Stein will as well. This money would be huge for the Libertarian and Green Parties as it will help them get their message to more people. Also, say the Libertarian Party gets 10 percent of the vote in November, an amount that could easily swing the election. Such a large share of the vote would force both parties to try and adopt some positions from the Libertarian platform to try and win over some of those voters in 2020. I wouldn’t call that a waste.
