The very first time I voted in an election, the Presidential candidates were incumbent Jimmy Carter against California’s Gov. Ronald Reagan. This was only 5 weeks after I turned 18. I have not missed a national election, not even a mid term election, since.
I don’t need to tell you how I voted then, because it does not matter. Ronald Reagan won, and became the commander-in-chief of the military I was serving in at the time. He made us proud to serve him and our country. That is all that needs to be said.
However, in being a voter who tried to be conscientious and informed about the candidates and the issues from one election to the next, I have noticed an upsetting trend. More and more often, I hear of large blocks of voters who are voting against candidates, or to put it another way, they are selecting the least of two evils. I have, myself, felt that way about more than one election. I’ve also heard lots of voters say that if you don’t vote for someone in one of the two major parties, you are wasting your vote or helping the other guy win.
You want to know what over 30 years of voting and observing national politics has taught me? Even the least of 2 evils is still evil. If you want my vote, give me someone worth supporting.
I’m sitting this one out. There are no candidates on my ballot worth voting for, and I’m sick of voting against. What I think we really need is a national referendum on a change to voting laws that would invalidate any election in which at least 65% of the eligible voters do not participate. See how the Washington fat-cats deal with that one.