I've noticed that most of the diaries I have constructed on dailykos have been either singularly focused on a goal, charged with emotion, or rather lame. I shall do my best to avoid such patterns with this one, but we'll see...
How do I reconcile the two largest factors in my mind on how to vote? On one side is the desire to preserve democracy in the US. This option points towards voting for a democrat automatically. The other factor is the desire to vote for someone and not against someone else. This option keeps evaluation of all candidates, including third parties, open on election day until I find the one whom best I can support, and if none are acceptable, not voting.
Is it better to risk the end of the republic for the chance at a future that is not simply acceptable, but a future that is amazing? Or is it better to cut one's losses and do ones supposed duty at preventing the worst of the worst from gaining power? I'm not meaning voting out of spite if my candidate doesn't get the nomination. Doing such is in my mind horribly ignorant and counter productive to my democratic goals. I have no candidate I'm going head of heals for at this point, but that can change. Last time I had someone I could vote for in the primaries, and in fact caucused for him. But I still voted for a dem in the general despite it not being my choice candidate, and in fact someone whom I felt was generally sleezy but whom met my minimum threshold for not being harmful to democracy.
You see... I tire of the low arguements. Arguements that candidate X is going to doom us or that candidate Y is the realist deal-iest happy fun time person evar! Yes, I watch the issues. And yes I watch the personality. But its incredibly hard to divine what drives someone when most of the debate is about the minusia of the campaign and candidate. How someone gets offended by someone they don't support taking one position they can't stand.
I think though, in the primaires, I can easily vote for the candidate I would vote for. Yes, no need for strategics when the choices are still decent. I don't care if I end up going for Gravel if he's the only one I can fully throw my support behind (fyi, he's probably around 5th in my preference list so no crazy talk about this sentance please!).
The problem is the general. The problem with the democratic party is not all in washington. Part of the problem is that rank and file dems lie down and support the candidate that 'will win!'. I saw that in 2004, and guess what happened there... Can I feel morally justified to still vote dem if my fellow democrats nominate someone who isn't a republican but whom I feel will still do damage to the nation, and prevent future democrats from turning things around by poisoning the democratic brand just as Bush has done for the republicans?
I'm not trying to hit any particular canidate here. I'm intentionally leaving things vague for a reason. So I can get some honest responses here. And no, I'm not looking for 'omg! join t3h gr33ns!' type of responses either. I have voted for a green candidate for governor before out of dislike for the incumbant democrat, but that was certainly a case of wanting to vote for someone and not voting against someone, so I found someone I could vote for. What I'm looking for is insight on what is good and just. I'm looking for insight on the long term. I'm looking for a view of the future from the various corners of the community.
Please, give me your thoughts.