Victimizing Protest Voters

Video Links: [TikTok] [YouTube]

During the next couple of months, you will undoubtedly (and very often) hear one specific sentence: "You should not vote for a third-party candidate because this election is too important for a 'protest' vote!" And I know that they are going to say this because the statement has given them a lot of traction since the turn of the century, and because the Old Party strategists who keep resurrecting this statement are old and senile and don't remember a lot of words.

"Because he was human, because he had goodness, because he was moral, they called him 'insane'."

To be clear, a 'protest vote' is defined as "a vote cast in an election to demonstrate the voter's dissatisfaction with the choice of candidates or refusal of the current political system." Quite obviously, anyone making the statement "... too important for a protest vote" wants you to vote for the candidate that they are supporting, but they are more afraid that the candidate they are not supporting will get elected.

Now I don't want to get off on a rant here, but choosing to vote in protest of the Old Party candidates is the political equivalent of going to a fancy restaurant and ordering a sandwich just to make the kitchen staff question their career choices. I mean, if the choices are between bland and blander, why not opt for a little excitement?

But here are some insights that they don't want you to know, and some questions that they don't want you to answer: "Is voting for an alternate party candidate a 'protest vote'? What exactly are we protesting with our 'protest vote'?"

"Eyes wide open, heart undefended, innocence untarnished."

Well, I cannot speak for everyone, but I will tell you some of the reasons why I am not voting for one of the "establishment" candidates.

I am protesting the idea that either of the "establishment" platforms actually represents the whole of "We, the People" because I don't think they do.

Both Republicans and Democrats claim to represent the interests of "We the People," but their interpretations of what that means and how they achieve it differ significantly.

Republicans generally emphasize principles like limited government, individual liberties, and traditional values. They often argue that their policies best uphold the Constitution and foster economic freedom, which they believe benefits the broader population.

Democrats, on the other hand, typically focus on social justice, equality, and expanding government programs to provide a safety net for various groups. They argue that their policies address systemic inequalities and provide opportunities for those who might otherwise be marginalized.

Each party believes its approach best serves the common good and represents the diverse needs and values of the American people. However, the effectiveness of these approaches and the extent to which they genuinely reflect the entire population's interests can be points of significant debate.

I am protesting the idea that our choice of candidates - especially presidential candidates - MUST be limited to two people who, let's face it, are both like those classic rock bands whose songs everyone knows, and each has a loyal following, but don't really bring anything fresh or unconventional to the party.

I am protesting that I must cast my vote for one of two uninspiring candidates whose values and opinions on the issues that matter most to me are ones with which I do not agree or, more to the point, that I am too stupid (and therefore not allowed) to vote for a candidate whose values and opinions I do agree with. ["Those candidates have no chance at winning, so you MUST choose between the two candidates that DO have a chance at winning."]

I am protesting the idea that, because I have made a different choice, that my ideas and opinions do not matter. ["Your opinions are stupid and don't matter because they don't agree with mine."]

I am protesting the dystopian horror scenarios, the social engineering, and to be honest, the bully tactics used by the Old Parties to vote for their candidate (even if I don't agree with them) because "the other guy is far worse". ["You MUST vote for my candidate, otherwise their candidate will win, and we will all go to hell in a handbasket."]

"Cinderella Man, doing what you can. They can't understand what it means."

They are also going to tell you that by not voting for one of their "establishment" candidates that you are "wasting" your vote. You're not. But I will tell you what IS a wasted vote: voting for a candidate whose vision or ideals you don't support is a wasted vote; voting for one candidate to win just so that the other candidates will lose is a wasted vote. No vote is wasted if you are voting for something you believe in.

But here's where it gets tricky: not voting is also a wasted vote. By not voting you are not allowing your voice to be heard or your opinion to be counted. That's not a protest because you aren't protesting, you're capitulating (much like France during World War 2). You're essentially saying that you cannot be bothered to share your opinion and that your opinion does not matter.

So, yes, voting for an alternative party or independent candidate is a protest vote because those votes represent dissent with the requirement to vote for Coke OR Pepsi, for Statler OR Waldorf. Those protest votes let Congress, the media, and the Old Party stuffed shirts (a smug, conceited, and usually pompous person often with an inflexibly conservative or reactionary attitude) know that there are people out there who WILL vote, who don't approve of the candidates being force-fed to us by private entities (the DNC and GOP are private entities, not public ones) whose only real motives, cycle after political cycle, appear to be

to stick it to the other guys, and
to bone the American people up the ass with a red-hot poker.

"Cinderella Man, hang on to your plans. Try as they might, they cannot steal your dreams."

When someone tells you that you are "wasting your vote" by choosing to support an alternative party or independent candidate, you need to recognize that they don't really care about you, your values, your opinion, OR your right to choose for yourself. They are essentially saying that your beliefs are not worthy of being represented in the state houses, in Congress, in the Executive Branch because your beliefs aren't their beliefs. They are saying that you should silence your voice so that other voices can be louder, and THAT is a very selfish statement.

You see, I think that they SHOULD be afraid because we disagree with the assessment that this is not the time for a protest vote. This is EXACTLY time for a protest vote because there ARE candidates out there who represent the ideals and views that we think are important, not just for ourselves, but for our families, our children, and our grandchildren. Vote for the candidate that YOU want. THAT is what representative government is supposed to be about.