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.
Evan McMullin – For Many Of Us, Why in the World Not?
@dickfrombrooklyn (oh, dear…or was it @ctlaw? I had already had a few beers) and I were talking with Rob Long last night at the meetup, and I was lamenting that there isn’t more discussion on the site about Evan McMullin. Today, I actually used the Ricochet search function (something I don’t usually do, though I am a champion Googler) and found that, in fact, there have been a couple of posts. Anyway, last night, Rob’s response to my lamentation was: “Write something!”
OK.
If you are a committed NeverHillary conservative and you are (i) NeverTrump (not voting for Rodham or Trump), or (ii) ReluctantlyTrump (holding your nose and voting for him) even though you think he has no chance of winning, or (iii) ReluctantlyTrump but live in a blue state where your vote doesn’t make a difference anyway, why not vote for McMullin – the only true conservative in the race?
Rather than refraining from voting, or voting for someone you don’t like and think can’t win, or voting for someone you don’t like in a state where your vote “doesn’t matter,” why not vote for the one who expresses to the world, “This is who we are?”
If every single person that met the descriptions (i), (ii), or (iii) voted for McMullin, wouldn’t that be a wonderful thing?*
I’ve heard that there’s a possibility McMullin will win Utah. Wouldn’t that be a wonderful thing?*
If McMullin won non-trivial numbers of voters in other states, making him more than a just a forgotten footnote in this election, wouldn’t that be a wonderful thing?*
The only problem I see (I am NeverHillary/NeverTrump) in voting for McMullin as a write-in is a minor, procedural one. It’s ridiculous, but apparently, even though McMullin has named the delightfully-named Mindy Finn as his running mate, his legal running mate is another person — a friend of McMullin’s who acted as a placeholder in the paperwork. I can’t even remember the guy’s name. But I believe you can’t write in Finn’s name as Vice President — you have to write in this other guy’s name. Sheesh! Fortunately, this is an issue that some quick Googling could resolve. It’s easy enough to go to McMullin’s website and figure out how to vote for him in your state.
I do wish there was a groundswell of like-minded people willing to turn out and make a declaration, via their vote, that’s collectively less of a whimper and more of a shout.
It’s probably naïve, but I like to think that McMullin’s candidacy could be, as he suggests, the beginning of a new conservative (“Conservative?”) party in the US. I’m beginning to think this is something that needs to occur.
* When I say “wonderful thing,” I am obviously describing the perspective of someone who falls into categories (i), (ii), or (iii) above. I don’t need to hear from folks in the comments saying, “Of course it’s not a wonderful thing, because only Trump can fix!”
Published in General
No. I’m actually from Georgia. My great something-a-rather fought at the first battle of Manassas. I certainly get different contexts, history, and competing interpretations of various symbols. I very much dislike how the cry of “racist” is used as a weapon in 2016.
None of that precludes an examination of what is real as well as what is constructed by one’s hostile neighbors when discussing problems in one’s own house.
Regardless, the comment at #141 is the best per all the energy that has been focused here on this point about race and Republicans.
In the broader context, Evan McMullin made an observation that warrants some thought. It is not a disqualifying observation on his part. The outrage at this is especially weird, I think, in the Age of Trump. The Donald has said way stranger things. It’s a curious backlash against a minor 3rd party candidate around whom some of us wish to rally.
The more Trump’s campaign goes on, the more I believe the conspiracy theories about Trump being a stalking horse for Clinton Inc.
I would hope that the message received would be, “Don’t chose unprincipled buffoons like Trump for the nomination!”
Pathetic,
We can have Hillary or we can not have Hillary. The only way to not have Hillary is to coalesce behind Trump.
Please don’t waste your vote to make yourself feel good. Elections have consequences.
People have valid, single-issue reasons for rejecting a candidate. I have no problem with anyone who says “I don’t care about McMullin’s remarks.” But I do care. And I’ve never suggested that they were the “primary focus” of his campaign. However, that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t either own them or disown them.
Hopefully, we’re giving his observation some thought here, but your opinion that it’s not disqualifying is just that. I’m not “outraged,” but I’m also not inclined to endorse attempts to use Trump to deflect attention from what McMullin himself actually said. When a presidential candidate says that racism is a deep problem in the Party, and goes on record as agreeing with the Democratic/liberal take on that issue, I find it more “curious” that there’s a desire to avoid his actual words in favor of playing the Trump card.
I’m not sending a message to other voters. Rather, I want other politicians to see that anti-Constitutionalist nationalist populism is a losing proposition, and that there are voters like me who will support them if they reject that in favor of a more classically liberal agenda. Other voters can vote as they please, and I will do the same.
Or we can coalesce behind Johnson and not have Hillary. Or we can coalesce behind McMullin. Why exactly do I need to change my vote? You change yours. That way, we can both be satisfied with the alternative.
@hoyacon I understand your point and fair enough. There are a hundred or so comments Trump has said that disqualify him for me. I get it if this disqualifies McMullin for you.
But let’s be clear.
I’m not running away from Evan’s comments. In context, I agree with them at this point, as I think I’ve said already.
I still feel for many people, that is a side issue.
Interesting. I would have thought that voting for down-ballot candidates is a good enough reason to leave the house to vote for down-ballot candidates.
But if a vote to McMullin is the price for supporting conservative down-ballot candidates, I would concede that as a worthwhile trade-off.
I will take my broken record off the turntable, other than to say that if I personally agreed with McMullin’s plain words, I would not be able to support those with an (R) after their names.
“But it’s not just about [Trump], it’s about the whole party.”
I don’t understand this. Is he saying that not wanting people to cross our borders legally means we don’t think all are created equal?
What?
A year ago I would have been offended by his statements, but no more. Trump has drawn from the woodwork the worst kind of racist, antisemitic nuts that are not on the left side of the political spectrum. Following Twitter, I am appalled at the comments that Goldberg and Kristol receive, as well as Dana Loesch, Mona, and others. I am just hoping that a large number of these people are Russian bots and not real US citizens. We have enough racist and antisemitic citizens on the left without our side having to endure them.
I must one of the great unwashed too, E because I didn’t know what it meant either. Social Justice Warrior? That’s what I got when I googled it.
Perhaps they’re just employees of the Clinton campaign.
That is correct. “SJW” is short for “Social Justice Warrior.” It describes the sort of leftist totalitarian that insists on halting a conversation they aren’t a part of if they detect that someone hasn’t appropriately “checked their privilege” or has said something “problematic” in order to demand an immediate, grovelling apology under threat of thermonuclear twitter avalanche that will destroy their career and psyche. A good selection of real sample and parody thereof can be found here: http://everythingsaproblem.tumblr.com/
I truly appreciate the sentiment behind your suggestion. I’m a resident of Utah and will be voting for McMullin. I have the good fortune of knowing that I’ll be voting for a person I can be proud to support and that my vote might actually make a difference because he has a really good chance of winning here. Almost everyone I’ve been talking to is considering or has decided to vote for him. The ONLY chance (albeit minuscule) we have for someone other than Trump or Hillary to become president is to have the election decided in the house. The ONLY way that can happen is for a 3rd party candidate to win some electoral votes and, it appears, the only chance of that happening is with McMullin in Utah. That means that everyone else, despite the bad taste it might leave in your mouth, should vote for Trump. Without Utah he won’t get to 270 and if he wins enough other states neither will Hillary. Even if you are a Trump supporter, assuming the polls are accurate, this is the only possibility even for Trump to become president.
So my advice: if you are in Utah, vote McMullin; if you live anywhere else, vote Trump.
I agree. I don’t think anyone that votes for Trump or Clinton can ever use the word “disqualifying” to describe a political candidate. The word disqualifying apparently now just means “From a different political party than me.” because there is nothing a candidate from your own party could do that about 90% of the voting electorate would consider disqualifying. If people actually cared about characteristics that disqualified candidates, Clinton and Trump combined would get no more than 10% of the vote.
It is a categorical mistake to say the only way to stop Hillary is to get behind Trump. By all accounts even if Trump got everyone of the NeverTrumpers he would still lose to Hillary decisively. The question of Stopping Hillary has been made irrelevant thanks to Trumps poor prosecution of his campaign. Coalescing around him does nothing now but guarantee that he and his merry band of fools will stick around even longer. Nuts to that, and nuts to them.
A reference to his convention speech:
Many (including me) interpreted that last ad-libbed line as Trump expressing surprise that a roomful of Republican delegates would actually cheer at the idea the government should protect LGBTQ citizens from terrorist attacks.
I respectfully suggest you are missing the point. It is not impossible for Trump to win. It is impossible for any of the others to win and stop Hillary. If there is still hope for Trump then why destroy it in any measure, unless you are comfortable with the most corrupt politician alive becoming president?
Not to play my broken record, but I believe that this is about the whole party. I am not a racist, and I will not tolerate racism. I didn’t recognize it existing in the GOP at all. I was mistaken. There are elements of racism. If one does not deal with those elements, one is complicit with that racism. That’s a “whole party” thing. We have to agree to be honest about issues. That’s all.
Finally, at the top of the ticket, I am taking your approach. I’m voting 3rd party.
Elsewhere, I am judging individuals per what they say and do. That is only fair.
I can’t speak for everyone, but I have concluded that Hillary and Trump are pretty much equally corrupt. How do you compare two bags of vomit?
This just came across my Facebook timeline. Seems timely given the current discussion/denial of racism existing in the Republican party:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441319/donald-trump-alt-right-internet-abuse-never-trump-movement?utm_source=nr&utm_medium=facebook&utm_content=french%3Futm_campaign%3Dalt
How horrifying.
How amusing it would be if all this were being done by Hillary’s gang.
This is exactly what I was talking about — thanks, @johnnydubya for getting this conversation started.
And — ahem — more please! This site is at its best when the members are in charge!
I couldn’t “like” your post because I am also horrified, but yeah. That.
No that’s not what he means. Nice to see that straw man argument pop back up again and before you ask he isn’t for “open borders” either. :)
If you are seriously asking he is probably referring to the so called “alt-right” influences in the Trump camp and Trump himself when he refers to a judge on his case as “the Mexican”.
McMullin can’t be a spoiler candidate, because Trump isn’t close to Clinton. Heck, he’s not even in the running (h/t @sonofspengler ). There’s no organization or effort. When Trump loses, it’ll be a loss of his own making and not because of McMullin or any other 3rd party candidate.
Republicans and conservatives tend to minimize the role of race, cultural identity, sexism, victimhhood et al. We do not factor into our overall vision for societal order these elements. Unfortunately, they are a part of the overall body politic. We don’t get to exclude them from discussion. Wanting them to go away or go our way will not happen by ignoring them and getting insulted that they are brought up. Battle the ideas out in the open.