ICYMI: Virginia isn’t for governors

McAuliffe and Cuccinelli | AP Photos via Politico
McAuliffe and Cuccinelli | AP Photos via Politico

My op-ed, title above, appeared in USA Today Monday.

There is a seemingly growing dissatisfaction with the two major candidates for governor. It seems everywhere I go, that’s what I’m hearing. The more people learn about the two candidates, the more they wish there was another choice. (Of course, there is a third choice, Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis. But like all third-party candidates, I doubt he has much of a chance, especially with few resources.)

It’s going to be a long, difficult fall campaign season.

8 thoughts on “ICYMI: Virginia isn’t for governors

  1. It would appear that if a candidate is capable of appearing on the ballot that candidate, and the public, should be afforded the resource opportunity to participate in public debates. Mr. Sarvis may have significant aspects to add to or formulate dialog and change other than being considered a, “None of the above” challenger.

  2. Only if a majority is needed to win would I vote for a third-party candidate.

    If voting for my FIRST choice means my LAST choice will win, I’ll vote for my SECOND choice instead.

    If, instead, there were a run-off between the top two candidates, then I might cast a vote for a third-party.

    (BTW, that is why the two parties keep the plurality-is-enough system — so that a third party cannot crash their parties.)

    1. Well Warren, in most cases, I am forced to accept the fact that my one vote will not be the decisive numeric that will result in the prevailing tally; hence my methodology is quite plain. I list all the areas and issues, in priority order, that spark my interest for my representation. Then I research the individuals and their stated positions. I discount political consultant fabricated media and brochures, political party, friendships, and endorsements. I guess I am naive in the belief that my personal view, without the outside influence of other opinions and polls, is prima facie in one’s individualistic voting process.

      1. Which is exactly why I voice that opinion here and on other fora. If many people choose as you do — assuming their one vote is just one vote — then the candidate the majority wants LEAST will win. (That’s how we got Lincoln and Clinton, BTW.)

        It is better to continue to vote for one of the two parties, work within the party most closely aligned to your point of view to pull it more to your point of view, and at the same time work to eliminate the plurality-is-enough / winner-take-all system that is the root of the problem.

  3. I will not be voting for any Democrats the next election…………I don’t think I can vote for a Republican either………Damn.

Comments are closed.