Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This will probably cause a little ruckus, but here goes:
In the past, I have often voted for the "lesser of two evils"...whoever I thought would actually have a chance at winning...not who I neccessarily agreed with in ideology. Recently, I have been thinking this over, and have decided I really need to stand up for who I agree with, not who I think might have a chance at winning. From now on, I won't support the "lesser of two evils"...unless they are really the BEST choice. I, for one, am pretty much completely fed up with BOTH the Democrats and the Republicans. I don't feel either has done the country much good (and they have had DECADES of time to prove themselves...), so I have joined one of the independent 3rd parties. (I won't use the forum to "plug" them, so if you just "really hafta know" which one, PM me).
The purpose of this post is to pose the question: do you think it is morally right for Christians (or anyone else, for that matter) to vote for someone they don't really support in their heart, because of the rational of voting for "the lesser of two evils"...one who they feel will actually have a good shot at winning...thereby preventing an even worse person from taking over?
Location: Ohio, but moving to El Paso, TX August/September
434 posts, read 1,653,219 times
Reputation: 310
It depends. If you voted for Nader and are happy about how things turned out for Bush, go ahead and vote your conscience again.
My honest opinion is if you are in state that "matters" so to speak, a swing state. If you say, live in California and Newt were to come up as a 3rd party candidate, and boy oh boy, you love him, go for it. Your vote is in California where it wouldn't matter who you voted for because you know your state will go Democratic.
However, if your vote can cause the loss of an electoral state to the more competent of the two evils, then you have to really decide if it's worth getting in the worst possible choice to not vote for the one that is not your favorite, but is still more competent than the worst case scenerio.
When I do vote (which is seldom) I will vote for the person who I feel is the best candidate, who will be honest, can uphold the constitution and is respected around the world..Doesn't matter what party he belongs too. As far as his morals? They will be known from his past history, not necessarily what his campaigners want us to know.
This will probably cause a little ruckus, but here goes:
In the past, I have often voted for the "lesser of two evils"...whoever I thought would actually have a chance at winning...not who I neccessarily agreed with in ideology. Recently, I have been thinking this over, and have decided I really need to stand up for who I agree with, not who I think might have a chance at winning. From now on, I won't support the "lesser of two evils"...unless they are really the BEST choice. I, for one, am pretty much completely fed up with BOTH the Democrats and the Republicans. I don't feel either has done the country much good (and they have had DECADES of time to prove themselves...), so I have joined one of the independent 3rd parties. (I won't use the forum to "plug" them, so if you just "really hafta know" which one, PM me).
The purpose of this post is to pose the question: do you think it is morally right for Christians (or anyone else, for that matter) to vote for someone they don't really support in their heart, because of the rational of voting for "the lesser of two evils"...one who they feel will actually have a good shot at winning...thereby preventing an even worse person from taking over?
Bud
Have not read any of these posts, in order not to cloud what I want to reply.
I take my time and study the character and background of the people running for office. On a local level, it is much easier since I can talk with people who have known these candidates a long time.
On a national level, it is much harder, and all I have to go on is what I can find in my research. I try to make the judgement on what type of morality they have, how they can affectively lead our country, what experience they have, and if they are honest and sincere. Just because someone plugs they are a christian does not cut it in my book. Yes, I vote based on how I view life and morals, but then again, don't we all to a degree?
Then again, if I find that no one fits the criteria that I have set up, I go back and try to find the most important facts and adjust my criteria accordingly to what I absolutely refuse to compromise on. IT does narrow the candadites down considerably.
I hope I don't get to the point where I feel I cannot vote for ANY of them, but I do see that happening in the near future. Too many scandles going on, and by the time someone is running for a national office, they owe too many people.
I bet this gets moved to politics and controversies soon.
I think that's a great question and many of us have had to make a decision that was difficult. I agree with your reasoning. I'm also not thrilled with either of the major political parties. If enough people did what you're suggesting it would shift the political landscape dramatically.
I certainly have to agree with both Bud and MG. I am really disappointed in the Democratically controlled Congress that was going to bail us out of Iraq. I won't even talk about Dubya, I think most people are on the same page in regards to him
We do need a third party in this country. The Reps. and Dems. have really just turned this country into a mess. I think it is time for a change across the board.
Also, just as a little side note. I have mentioned this more than enough times on this board, but you guys HAVE to vote in your local, state, AND federal elections to make a difference. If you're just voting for the president every four years you're not going to accomplish much in terms of what you want to see done for your country.
If you're just voting for the president every four years you're not going to accomplish much in terms of what you want to see done for your country.
Absolutely right. The local issues are often very important to your community and might impact them in a major way. I'm kind of a political junkie anyway. I like to argue about politics just like I do about religion.
This will probably cause a little ruckus, but here goes:
In the past, I have often voted for the "lesser of two evils"...whoever I thought would actually have a chance at winning...not who I neccessarily agreed with in ideology. Recently, I have been thinking this over, and have decided I really need to stand up for who I agree with, not who I think might have a chance at winning. From now on, I won't support the "lesser of two evils"...unless they are really the BEST choice. I, for one, am pretty much completely fed up with BOTH the Democrats and the Republicans. I don't feel either has done the country much good (and they have had DECADES of time to prove themselves...), so I have joined one of the independent 3rd parties. (I won't use the forum to "plug" them, so if you just "really hafta know" which one, PM me).
The purpose of this post is to pose the question: do you think it is morally right for Christians (or anyone else, for that matter) to vote for someone they don't really support in their heart, because of the rational of voting for "the lesser of two evils"...one who they feel will actually have a good shot at winning...thereby preventing an even worse person from taking over?
Bud
I think u should prayerfully vote your conscience no matter who u are. Then "let the chips fall where they may"
I certainly have to agree with both Bud and MG. I am really disappointed in the Democratically controlled Congress that was going to bail us out of Iraq.
Let's talk about that. The Dems did bring up an issue that had at least some chance of passing. It was a compromise, but it did pass both the House and the Senate, went to the President , who vetoed it.
The Dems might have a slim majority, but they do not have enough votes to override a veto. What did you expect them to do? Pass measure after measure that was going to be vetoed? Delay the funding to the troops so the troops have no support at all? You know that Bush was never going to cave in and actually bring the troops home; he cares nothing for the troops, and would let them starve in Iraq with no protection than get them out.
The Dems did the only thing they could -- support the troops now, and work on additional Congressmen to see the light. I'd say they have been doing a dang good job, considering the recent announcements by such key Republicans as Dick Lugar and Pete Domenici.
I'd say your judgment is too fast and too harsh; you wanted a miracle, and the Bush folks just aren't going to let a miracle happen. They'd sacrifice every American soldier before they would admit they ever made a mistake.
If what I'm saying was not the truth, then Bush would have signed the bill presented to him as a reasonable solution. But, he will never admit to a reasonable solution. All of the deaths are on his hands, first for making the mistakes, and then for not admitting them and doing something about it.
If there is a fault in the Democratic side of this, it is that you and I did not do a good enough job in electing enough Dems to override a veto, or we are not doing a good enough job in convincing our Republican representatives to see the light.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Politicians and Christian Morals
