Whyever not? If the choice issue is important to you, wouldn’t you vote for the one candidate who is pro-choice, as against radically antichoice?
Please vote anyways. I think, based on what you’ve said, you’ll be putting more thought into your vote than many die-hard voters will be, so… I’d rather see your vote thrown into the mix than many others.
Just my opinion, worth what you paid for it.
No, not intrinsecally, but the meta-message,* if you want power, you do what it takes to advance your political career,* is a close enough predictor of results so far that someone playing by that rule should not be discounted.
For an election that might make some real history, there sure seem to be a lot of people trying to mess it up. God, I can’t wait until it’s all over. I think we’ll be fine with either of the 3 remaining candidates, even if my first choice is Obama. I’m just glad Romney and Edwards dropped out.
It doesn’t predict any result at all except the result of getting power and using it for self-serving ends, which comes back full circle to my original objection.
As voters we ought to be punishing this behavior. Some would say that it’s good enough if we hold powermongers accountable for positive civic change, to which I say fat fucking chance. Look at the past 8 years and ask yourself how that went.