It is a ridiculous election strategy. Convince the voting population that your opponent is a horrible choice whose election would bring about the dramatic end of our great nation. Such attacks accomplish two things: They hide the vulnerability of the accuser. They avoid the discussion of specific political goals and objectives.
Suppose you had a candidate who was famous for ad hominem attacks and political statements that need to be clarified or "walked back" later. The personal attacks and the abstractions are logical fallacies. Such things happen when a candidate's knowledge of the topic is incomplete or when the candidate desires to hide his real goals and intentions. These facts alone would give you pause. Would you be willing to vote for that candidate or his or her merit alone?
Suppose you had a candidate who had exhibited real carelessness in managing secure national documents. The candidate chose political cover in a knowing falsehood in a diplomatic tragedy. Political donations come from nations with questionable political goals. These facts alone would give you pause. Would you be willing to vote for that candidate on his or her merit alone?
Your answer is probably no. So, in the current political climate, you are asked to choose between them. You are told you are responsible to use your vote to support a candidate you cannot support, simply on the argument that not voting will result in the election of the other candidate.
The same reasoning is used for not supporting a third party. Your vote would be "wasted." Your lack of support for the lesser of two evils will result in the worst possible election result.
On the other hand, if the candidate I vote for is elected, he may then assume he has a mandate. My vote has encouraged him to continue in his ways and to pursue his own political ideas and selfish ends. I have approved of the decisions that candidate has made in the past and the diplomatic tragedies that had resulted. The candidate has no more need to change his political direction or ethical decision-making. The voice of dissent is gone.
If those two options are my only choices, should I vote? Should I use my sole opportunity to give voice to my political views to support what is unsupportable? This fall, support those candidates who exhibit your political and ethical views. It is time for candidates to repent of their past and begin to speak about what is good to do politically for the welfare of our nation. As a whole. I'll be waiting.
No comments:
Post a Comment