Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Giving the Benefit of the Doubt and Voting One’s Conscience
I did not vote for Donald Trump in the primaries. Nor did I vote for my preferred choice in the primaries. By the time the primaries reached Michigan, my preferred choice had dropped out. So had my second choice. So had my third. By the time the primaries came to my state, I had to choose who the best remaining viable candidate was. That was Ted Cruz. Unfortunately, he did not win the nomination.
Now, the primaries were a rough fight and many of the candidates came out bruised up, including Cruz. Trump had insulted his wife and made accusations against his father. Slights of that kind can take time to heal. At the convention, Senator Cruz said, “Vote your conscience.” I agreed with that and intended to do so.
Back in late 1992, the numbers looked good for President Bush to win re-election. I didn’t think that my vote would matter much, and there was a party that aligned with my values better than Mr. Read-my-Lips. This third party was hoping to reach the threshold to have permanent ballot status, and to get it they needed at least 5% of the votes at the top of the ticket. No, I certainly did not vote for Perot. I worked for EDS at the time, the company he had founded, and I knew far too much about H. Ross Perot to vote for him, although some of my friends who were similarly employed were going for him. No, I was in the party of the white, male computer professional, the one that has since degenerated into the party of brain damage and fat guys in thongs. I walked out of the polls hopeful that we would get automatic ballot access status, but figuring Bush would get his second term, since it was obvious what Clinton was and what Perot was when he reactivated his campaign. I was surprised and very unhappy at the result.
Now, my one vote in Michigan would not have made a difference to the result had I voted for GHWB. But I still learned a lesson. When there is a choice between the clueless and the venal winning, and all others had no chance of winning, go with the clueless. I have never since voted for a third party (or even a second party, if you know what I mean.) It is a matter of conscience over strict observance, of the spirit of the principles I hold over the letter. The principles say, “I will only vote for freedom.” But sometimes, the spirit of that means I vote for “compassionate conservatism” over “We need to stop global warming!” It’s not that I vote for the lesser of two evils. I vote against the greater of two evils.
In this election season, we have an ugly, ugly choice. We have Trump, who is a populist who will probably be “business-as-usual” in Washington, so a more popular version of GHWB. I doubt he will do half of what he says he will, since a lot of things start in Congress. Sure, he sounds like a tin-pot dictator who has no clue what the Constitution is, but that doesn’t mean he will be one. Also, he does have a very long track record of being pro-America. And then we have Hillary Clinton, who has a very long track record of being an international socialist trying to shove European values and ideas down our throats. Her track record also includes lying and obstruction and corruption, including what looks to any normal person like accepting bribes for favors while Secretary of State. She was fired for lying from the Watergate Investigation, for goodness sake, and she has not improved since. If she gets elected, we have another four to eight years of scandals, including the new ones she and Bill will engender. One of these two individuals will be the next President of the United States, the CEO of the Federal Government. Gary “Duuuude!” Johnson will not be. Jill Stein will not be. As I said, the spirit of my principles is to vote against the greater evil, and I really believe that to be Hillary Clinton. I shall vote my conscience and darken the oval for Trump.
Now, some of you may think you are in a safe state where your vote doesn’t matter. A voter in Maryland votes for Clinton, knowing Maryland will go that way anyway and figures it’s a vote for the apocalypse? Alright. A voter in Texas thinks there is no way Texas will go for Clinton so votes for Johnson or Stein? Alright. But even were I in a safe state, I don’t feel that I could take the chance. Nor do I feel I can take the chance of not marking any oval for President. I have to vote against the greater evil.
Ted Cruz seems to have made the same calculus that I have and come up with similar conclusions. In his statement, Cruz wrote,
These are six vital issues where the candidates’ positions present a clear choice for the American people. If Clinton wins, we know—with 100% certainty—that she would deliver on her left-wing promises, with devastating results for our country. My conscience tells me I must do whatever I can to stop that.
He is not voting for Donald Trump. He is voting against Hillary Clinton. Cruz is facing a choice about his principles, and he has chosen the spirit over the letter, somewhat as William F. Buckley said to choose the most conservative candidate who is viable.
So, those of you who are castigating Senator Cruz for abandoning his principles, I would enjoin you to take another look at that idea and give the man the benefit of the doubt. He has had to overcome a lot of personal animus against Donald Trump to endorse him. He has had to be a bigger man that Trump. He has had to put aside what other people might think of him, such as your own accusations, to adhere to the spirit of his principles. Be as big as Cruz has shown himself to be. Put aside your animosity and try to see through his eyes.
Published in Politics
Exactly. And from my point of view, it takes a pretty big man to forgive those slights and be willing to say publicly that he is voting (against Hillary) for Trump.
I am hardly an ardent supporter, having opposed him throughout the primaries, but I see this kind of position as a retreat from reality. In my mind there is no positive argument for Trump. His most favorable trait is his lack of a political machine. He will be opposed by the bureaucracy, the media, the Democrats, and all the NeverTrumps and ReluctantTrumps. He will cut deals with whomever while posturing and playing to the crowd. That, unfortunately, is as good as it gets this year.
You mischaracterize. I don’t oppose trump because I dislike him, which is what is implied when people say to be the bigger man or to get past the animosity. The question is of short and long term consequences for conservatism.
On another note, I saw a copy of “People” in the grocery check out aisle today. A picture of Hillary, photoshopped and looking 10 years longer, with a quote saying “I sometimes work myself too hard.” Kind if like that old interview line about weaknesses: “I’m just too motivated, loyal, and devoted to my work. The dr. says I need more ‘me’ time.”
So… the media campaign arm is starting to ramp it up another notch.
This is a completely absurd demand, posed as if Trump were running unopposed, and one’s vote is merely an indication of approval. We will have either Trump or Hillary as our next president. All arguments pro- or con- for either do matter.
It’s not about you, Ryan. I didn’t mention you. I did not mention the NeverTrumpers, although some others have. The line you quote was referring to those who were showing animosity towards Cruz for making his announcement as is explicit in the first line of the paragraph. If you are not one of them, do not take it personally.
Also, the bigger man reference is relating Cruz to Trump and also enjoining the same people as the rest of the paragraph is speaking of to be bigger. Again, if you have not been one of those spewing against Cruz for daring to endorse Trump, it’s not about you.
Guys, this thread is not about Trump. Do not make me knock your heads together.
My best case for Trump is Hillary.
And there, my friend, is your reason for voting for Trump.
I appreciate the call for mutual respect. I would, however, add a few points:
I agree with this sentiment. I also agree that this is a binary race. But I truly cannot decide which of the two evils I find to be the greater, so my conscience tells me not to vote for either. I request that others respect that choice as I respect their choices – especially since many are being made with such disappointment.
If we’re going to talk about showing respect toward others’ decisions, I think part of that respect is recognizing that we don’t know what’s in other peoples’ heads.
Did Cruz really endorse Trump because of his principles and conscience, or does he actually despise Trump but made a cold calculation that endorsing Trump would be in his long-term career interest? Nobody knows that except for Cruz and God, and I’d prefer that none of us pretend we can divine what’s really driving him.
And either way it doesn’t particularly interest me at this point what Cruz’ motivation was for endorsing Trump (and I’m not mad at him for it, either).
Nice post. I was surprised at the feelings of betrayal and judgement of Cruz’s decision. The best reason to vote for Trump is to vote against the progressive machine. That was my best reason to vote in the last 6 presidential elections. This one is the most significant vote of my life and I voted for Reagan.
Totally understandable in my mind. I have accepted my choice and that it could well be the wrong one. I can accept it if you leave that race blank or if you vote for Johnson or Stein or even Hillary. I do not see any good choices this year and in this race. And I am not going to condemn anyone for their choices. Too bad I don’t speak for everyone on that.
Ted never struck me as a big liar so I’ll take his letter as his real reasons mixed in with a bit of his own self-interest.
I wrote it the way I did for a reason, and that was to illustrate a very different view from what I was seeing in other threads. I also threw a bit of human nature into my assessment, but it is only an assessment. Again, the point was to give people the benefit of the doubt, not to automatically assume the worst about people, especially those on our side.
Cruz is a lawyer and a politician, so he already has two strikes against him in the honesty department on that basis alone. Certainly this and several other of his past moves are compatible with careerist motives.
But again, I’m not in his head so I don’t know, and neither does anyone else here (on either side of the debate). Of course, this website would quickly go out of business if we weren’t allowed to speculate wildly and pontificate egregiously. But I just wanted to have at least one voice in the conversation pointing out the obvious truth: nobody knows Ted’s (or Donald’s, or Hillary’s or Mendel’s) intentions except for the person themselves.
And even then it’s somewhat questionable.
:D
Here’s more fuel for the fire!!
http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/09/23/professor-whos-predicted-every-presidential-election-30-years-trumps-going-win
This thread is not about Trump.
Ah – then yes, I probably agree with you. I don’t see any reason to be upset with Cruz.
PERFECT!! Because who cares about the “vulgarian” part? What does that even mean? ” Of the people?” OK, great! Anybody got a problem with that? We are a democracy after all, and “demos” means the people.
We are a republic, if we can keep it.
Quoting Percival: “To all his ardent supporters, all I ask is that you make your best case for Donald Trump without mentioning Hillary.”
Mr Trump understands the need to protect American sovereignty, is not a professional politician, has created thousands of jobs and built useful buildings, has no known examples of criminality despite making his living in NYC real estate and in TV, favors business over government and has no interest in making America a third rate euro-weenie socialist state.
My favored Repubs were Walker, Jindal, Rubio, Cruz. Talk about picking the wrong horses! I greatly admire Mr Cruz especially, for his tenacity and integrity, but I am happy to settle forTrump, now that I see he is a real candidate.
When you put it that way, that is a huge…excuse me, that is a yuuuuge deal!
Agreed. And the best case for Hillary is Trump.
So you see the dilemma we have here.
How does that saying go: I’m not angry; I’m just disappointed.
As someone who gained a newfound respect for my Senator after his convention speech, I am disappointed that he ultimately caved to pressure. It is by no means an unpardonable sin, but he’s still let me down.
It would be a great Kickstarter!
There is no best case for Hillary.
How do you know he “caved to pressure?” Couldn’t he have worked it out by himself that this was his decision?
If I had to vote today, I would vote as you have decided to vote. I will certainly not vote for Mrs. Clinton. Whether in November I will vote for Trump will depend on what happens in the next few weeks. It is in his power to dissuade me, but I must say that his recent conduct is more reassuring than what went on earlier.
What an awful choice!
Indeed, and the Michiganders and multiplying on this thread.
I also agree Arahant. Also a Michigander I agree that this election is the most difficult vote I’ve ever had to make. It has required more thought and more soul-searching than any other post-Carter. I understand the arguments for and against each candidate and sympathize with those who cannot vote Trump. But hope is better than cynicism. H represents the cynical choice. I consider myself a conservative. T isn’t one. But a vote for H in the name of political purity or anger with an electorate who didn’t agree with my choice seems like taking my ball and going home when the other team scores.
Perhaps this is just His plan to encourage us to pray more. If so, it’s working.
(btw Andrew427: I’ve argued same thing with myself. I’ll let you know if I find an answer.)
MK