Now that I have your attention, so do Democrats, Libertarians, and just about every other organized political party out there.
This is not some sort of anarchist rant. None of us actually fit into the sometimes ridiculous molds cast as part of political party ideologies. Very few of us really believe in the things that most politicians of any party actually do. We all hold a variety of views and beliefs that scatter across the political spectrum, depending on the particular subject and, yes, the particular time.
Unfortunately, it seems like too many people are willing to throw in with the party that preaches just enough of the things they believe because it’s easier than figuring out how to vote another way. As a result, most elections are about voting for the lesser of two evils than voting for what someone believes.
But, sometimes, people just get fed up. Sometimes, voting for the party that looks the most like the things people think they believe means voting for something they know they don’t. When that situation arises, voters rebel against the stereotypes and vote, though often infrequently, their consciences.
These realities are, in a way, exactly what caused voters to elect Scott Brown, a self avowed fiscal conservative, the next senator from Massachusetts to replace Ted Kennedy, who was one of the most liberal Senators to ever serve. His election, in a way, had nothing to do with political party or ideology and everything to do with the realization on the part of 52 percent of the voters of Massachusetts that the Democratic majority already in power in Washington does not represent what they believe when it comes to fiscal responsibility.
Ironically, this election means that those voters had one issue on their minds as they went to the polls, an issue that prompted them to vote for a Republican regardless of party affiliation or voting record. Brown’s victory does not mean that Massachusetts is suddenly leaning conservative or that any other conservative candidate has a chance in that state. Instead, his victory means that, right now, voters are mad about something very specific and they want something done about it right now.
The rest of America could benefit from harnessing some of that anger when they go to the polls in May and November this year. Instead of voting for the party that says it represents you, why not vote for the candidate that represents the issues that are important to you? Sure, that candidate might be a Democrat, Libertarian, Republican, or even a Socialist, but if that person represents what’s important to you right now, does it matter?
The real secret to all of this is that none of us have to vote for the same person again in the next election. If circumstances change and different issues are important to you then, vote for someone else.
Of course, all of this means that you have to know what is important to you, but that’s another issue entirely.
DLH
