A Question

[Chieppa1]

I know that about 99% of us (including) me vote on their principles. However, in New Jersey we have a governor race that is going like this:

Corzine. Goldman Sach insider. Wall Street big timer and corrupt Democratic that works for the very people we all hate. He is leading.

Now, we have an "independent" that is running with 14% of the vote right now. He was Corzine's EPA official, so he's pushing the global warming agenda. However, people on both sides are voting for him because he's not Corzine or Christie (GOP) canidate.

Then we have Christie, pathetic loser who lost a 10 point lead on Corzine already who is backed by GOP Neo-Cons.

My question. Is it better to do as most Libertarians/ true Conservatives I've talked to do are doing and vote for the smaller candidates and divide the vote, making it easier for Corzine to win? Or do we just suck it up and vote in Christie just to get this banking insider, globalist out? Then focus on scaring Christie into being not totally crap as governor.

I leave the question to you. But letting Corzine win by dividing the vote for principles this time is like letting Obama get re-elected....

 

[Revolution0918]

its easy......move away from that hell hole of a state

 

[Chieppa1]

its easy......move away from that hell hole of a state

Its on my list of things to do

 

[Reason]

A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

 

[Chieppa1]

A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

Yea, I know. But when the lesser evil is a weak loser who would have to deal with the angry grassroots Conservative movement in this state, and the Corzine hasn't listened to the voter for years.

 

[dannno]

Sounds like a no win situation.

 

[Chieppa1]

Sounds like a no win situation.

Its between a known Gloablist, and not. :o

 

[davesxj]

Its between a known Gloablist, and not. :o

Sounds like you have your answer already.

 

[dannno]

Sounds like you have your answer already.

Neocons are just as bad as globalists. The ones that aren't warmongers are in fact globalists... and some of the warmongers pretend to be globalists..

 

[Chieppa1]

Neocons are just as bad as globalists. The ones that aren't warmongers are in fact globalists... and some of the warmongers pretend to be globalists..

Yea. I don't believe a word he says however he won't take stimulus money and lower property taxes (which are the highest in the country). That alone is better then a Federal Reserve, Bilderberg lackey.

 

[justinc.1089]

Vote for a good candidate if there is one. If there is only a really bad one, a bad one, and one thats only a little bad I might not even bother to vote.

However, when you vote it is my philosophical belief that you give your support to the person you vote for and endorse their actions by your vote, at least as far as your knowledge about them goes. (In other words Obama voters that sincerely believed that O was going to end the war aren't philosophically accountable for supporting Obama continuing wars in my opinion, well at least not morally, but in other ways they are, but that doesn't relate to my voting philophy.)

So if you know any of these candidates are going to do something wrong, and you still help put them in power to do that, you are helping to do that wrong.

That is my opinion and it is how I usually base my vote.


For example, its my opinion McCain was probably a skinny hair less bad than Obama, but I could not vote for McCain because I know all the crap he would have done. I could not help him or Obama do any of that, so I voted for Baldwin because to my knowledge Baldwin would do the best he could.

I wasn't thrilled about voting third party though. I don't worry about hurting other people's votes though. If they were going to do what is right I could support them, but I cannot support an immoral person, or a person that is going to unintentionally do something wrong that I know is wrong and then sleep at night once it happens.

 

[Paulitical Correctness]

It's pretty easy, any of the decisions that have the potential to keep you up at night are best avoided.

 

[Chieftain1776]

I'd vote for Christie, he can't launch wars from New Jersey. That said I wouldn't waste much time and energy over it. And definitely wouldn't donate.

In general I only worry about pro liberty candidates as I believe the rest of the GOP is hopeless. They don't merit the attention and effort. If it comes between a neocon republican and typical democrat I cast the vote for the less war-mongering rhetorically (at the federal level) but otherwise drop out and focus on other things.

Maybe if Lonegan had won...

 

[Chieppa1]

I'd vote for Christie, he can't launch wars from New Jersey. That said I wouldn't waste much time and energy over it. And definitely wouldn't donate.

In general I only worry about pro liberty candidates as I believe the rest of the GOP is hopeless. They don't merit the attention and effort. If it comes between a neocon republican and typical democrat I cast the vote for the less war-mongering rhetorically (at the federal level) but otherwise drop out and focus on other things.

Maybe if Lonegan had won...

Lonegan was my choice of course. I'm not wasting any energy or money don't you worry. Its more about the huge amount of Libertarians and Republicans that are voting for the Independent (who is from Corzine's staff) and the small Libertarian candidates. I know they mean well, but this is one of the most liberal states around, Corzine is going to win if Conservatives are divided just a little bit.