OT - Gas to hit 4.00 - Vote for Ron Paul - dropping out?

Chris plug.org at 2nerds.com
Thu Jun 19 11:27:22 MDT 2008

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 9:04 AM, Levi Pearson <levi at cold.org> wrote:
> Campaigning for sure losers and educating people
> about their platforms (hopefully in a less obnoxious manner than you
> do) is helpful, but actually voting for sure losers is not.

That may be true if your timeline is one election cycle.  But people
often change their minds more slowly than that, in which case voting
your conscience, cycle after cycle, regardless of the "sure loser"
status of any given candidate, is a rational choice.  Movements are
birthed more slowly than two, four, or six year election cycles, and
sometimes people won't open their minds to all the campaigning in the
world until they see that enough others are putting their votes where
their mouths are.

> Voting for the viable candidate that you agree with most is what makes
> the most sense, whether you agree with them very much or not.

Viability may make sense if you believe elections are *only* about
resolving the current election cycle's popularity contest.  Otherwise,
limiting your options to only the present cycle's most "viable"
alternatives is nonsensical.


More information about the PLUG mailing list