More choices

Monday, October 22, 2012

Dear Editor,

As November approaches, Americans once again turn their thoughts toward whether we will elect a Republican, or a Democrat, to represent us in the White House, in the Congress and in the Senate. We have performed this very same exercise for decades.

Strangely, though, when you have the actual ballot before you, you'll notice that there are often more than two choices, especially for the office of President. There may be names you've never even heard before, candidates you haven't seen on live national TV in debates. They are the candidates of the "third parties" in our "two-party" system. The most prominent of these are the Libertarian, Green, and Constitution parties, all of whom have candidates running for President in this election, as does the new Justice Party.

Nebraska has consistently gone to every Republican Presidential candidate since 1968, and mostly for Republicans even before that. In 2008, McCain won Nebraska by a razor-thin margin of about 15 percent.

This year, the Republicans are running Mitt Romney - the guy who lost to the guy who lost to the guy they're trying to beat this time around. It is my belief that every Presidential candidate in the last three decades, from both major political parties, has been groomed and supported for candidacy and sold to the electorate, not on the basis of his political record or loyalty to party principles, but on the basis that he is deemed "most likely to succeed" by the kingmakers within his Party. Republicans in particular have seen many such candidates. You come across the term "RINO" rather frequently. The GOP keeps running RINO candidates because Republicans keep rewarding that choice with their vote, instead of punishing it by voting for another candidate.

I encourage Nebraskans to explore the political positions and philosophies of the various "third party" candidates, and to vote for one if his/her views more closely mirror your own than those of Romney or Obama. Very few will have the courage to do this. Few enough, in fact, that it is extremely unlikely to alter the course of the election, especially in Nebraska.

But it may be enough to alter the course of the Parties' candidate selection process.

Owen J. McPhillips

McCook, Nebraska

View 3 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Obama and Romney are very much the same. Both are for big government,both will raise taxes, both will keep national healthcare, each will be sure to intermingle in a myriad of overseas conflicts while ignoring the problems of the United States. Third parties need to be looked at more closely. Gary Johnson would be a fine president. I'm not familiar with all the 3rd parties. But look at them. And, more importantly, romney and obama are the same on almost every fundamental issue you can think of.

    -- Posted by bob s on Mon, Oct 22, 2012, at 6:48 PM
  • A vote for a third party person will however not amount to much as either O or R will be the next president. If you do not like either O or R your best bet is to pick the one you most like and vote for that one or the one you least like and vote for the other. I like Johnson and his more libertarian positions so I think R is much closer to those positions than O. So I am voting for Romney.

    -- Posted by dennis on Tue, Oct 23, 2012, at 8:30 AM
  • Dennis, I know what you're saying and unfortunatly, its right on the money, but what Owen is saying is that if every American Citizen had the courage to vote for who they actually wanted, the result would certainly be altered.

    I heard a political commentator say today, "Most Americans that are on the fence are in that position because there is no good option". I agree, this election, not unlike the one of four years past, has thrown us, the American Citizen, the curve of selecting a lesser of two evils. Is this what we as a Great Nation have come to?, setteling?

    As I see it, we are being given the oportunity to choose the electric chair or leathal injection. The choice is all ours but the result is the same.

    Not that the electoral college would allow it, but if the real people that didn't have millions of dollars to spend to get elected, did in fact get elected, some of this country's foundations may become visable again. For my money, the man for the job is a down to Earth, been there done that individual that knows what the less than rich folk of this nation are actually seeing from their kitchen windows.

    How can a presedent represent the people if their bigest longing was for a Corvett rather than this Buick that their parents bought for them at age 16.

    The way I see it, we know what the last 4 years have done for us, we either face a certain bankrupcy or gamble for something different.

    Looking at the third party candidates isn't a bad idea really, but like Dennis is saying, its not truely going to matter if everyone is still jumping on the bandwagon.

    Good thought Owen.

    -- Posted by Nick Mercy on Wed, Oct 24, 2012, at 6:14 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: