Reflecting Public's Mood Swings

| | Comments (0)

In the Washington Post, the 2006 voter's dilemma is highlighted by David S. Broder entitled, A Pox on Both Parties. He provides an excellent summary of public opinion sentiment toward Democrats and Republicans since the Reagan years to the present, in response to each parties performance in leadership. Broder concludes asking,"When both parties have lost public confidence, where do voters turn?"

It is the quintessential question for voters given their disappointment and disgust with both party's. But, let's review voter's choices.

1) Continue to vote for the two major parties in a revolving door of bad government in the hands of one party to bad government by the other party. In 2006, they can vote to keep the corrupt and horrible mismanagement of the public's resources or turn management over to the Democrats who can't agree amongst themselves on any issue including whether to criticize Republicans.

2) Don't vote at all. This option however, for all intents and purposes, is the same as option one above. For if only loyal voters of the Democratic and Republican party vote, we will just get more of what we are all dismayed and disgusted over.

3) Vote for a third party. Voting for a third party for federal office however, will not put that third party candidate in office. For if voters chose to vote third party, a percentage would vote for one of the two Reform Parties (it has split into two factions), the Green Party, or the Libertarian Party, that is if these parties even put forth a candidate for Senator or Representative in their district. The net result however will be a small percentage of votes for each of these 4 third parties thus splitting the disgruntled electorate's vote into numbers too small to win against a Democrat or Republican.

4) The last option, to vote out incumbents of any stripe, at first appears to make no sense for the same reasons as the 3 options above appear to be futile. But, what if voters who used to vote for Democrats or Republicans, but just can't justify doing so anymore, were to, instead of voting for a Republican or Democrat, vote against whichever one is in office? And what if the third party supporters, instead of not voting because their candidate does not have a chance, voted for any challenger of any party? And what if 1/4 of the eligible voters who have never voted before, showed up to vote against the incumbent and for any challenger. Well, that would constitute more than 25 million votes against incumbents across the land.

Since only 2 million anti-incumbent votes would have unseated the Republicans from the majority party in Congress in 2002, and only 3.5 million anti-incumbent votes would have put Kerry in as President today, instead of Bush, the impact would be stunning. Suddenly, the Democratic and Republican parties would have a whole new voting constituent out there, which they would have to appeal to in order to hope to keep their incumbents in office. And to appeal to these voters, they would have to solve America's problems. Problems like deficits, border security, declining education quality, providing affordable and sustainable safety nets for our elderly, disabled, and unemployed, getting control of inflationary health care costs and lowering the hurdles to health care access.

And wouldn't America be a better nation and her future more secure and hopeful if our government's elected officials had to demonstrate success in these areas in order to insure their party's candidates could remain in office?

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.


Monthly Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.25

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by David R. Remer published on December 1, 2005 12:23 PM.

WSJ Poll: Confidence in Gov't. Drops Further was the previous entry in this blog.

Culture Of Bribery is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Offsite Links