OT: PRAGER: To All Those Who ‘Vote For The Man, Not The Party’

Papi_Chulo
Miami, FL (or the nearest big-booty club)
“I vote for the man (or woman), not the party” is what millions of Americans say and what, in fact, many do. It is intended as a noble sentiment: “I am not one of those Americans who votes blindly by party; I measure each candidate and then decide which one to vote for.”

If there were ever a time when this was a noble sentiment, it would have been when Republicans and Democrats shared basic moral and American values and differed only on what policies would lead to the two parties’ shared goals.

For example, though they never ran against each other, one might argue that the differences between the Democrat John Kennedy and his Republican predecessor, Dwight Eisenhower, were not particularly great. But that was very rare. The fact is that, since the inception of the Republican Party, which was founded to counter the Democratic Party’s defense of slavery, there has almost never been a time when the philosophical differences between the parties were not great.

And since slavery, there has never been a time when the two major parties differed as much as they do today. Therefore, the notion that one should vote “for the individual, not the party” has never made less sense. It would be as if someone in the mid-1800s had said, “I strongly oppose slavery, but the Democratic candidate is a much finer and more likeable individual than the Republican candidate.”

Fine Democrats who defended slavery did as much harm to blacks and to America as disreputable Democrats. And elected officials vote with their party more often than in principled opposition to it, however fine they may be as individuals.

Nevertheless, a great number of Americans still vote for “the individual.”

The most obvious examples are Republican “Never Trumpers.” They say that they would vote for any Republican except Donald Trump because they find his character so objectionable.

My friend, New York Times columnist Bret Stephens, is one prominent example. He believes in a strong American defense, supported Trump’s withdrawal of the United States from Barack Obama’s agreement with Iran, credits Trump with the Israeli peace agreements with Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, saluted Trump’s moving of the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and presumably supports other Trump policies, such as the president’s extraordinary success with regard to the American economy prior to the lockdowns that crushed the economy.

Yet, he so loathes the president that he will vote for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

He and many other Americans (we will soon know how many) who support the president’s Republican policies will vote for the party that stands for almost everything they oppose because they will “vote for the man, not the party.”

I find nothing admirable in this position—morally or rationally. At this time in American history, to care more about an individual candidate than the party is to support the unraveling of America. It is so irrational as to be incredible.

Voting for any Democrat—whether for mayor, district attorney, state legislature, state governor, the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate or president—is to vote for someone who will enable the Left to destroy America as we know it. (That is their wording, not only mine.) The Democratic Party was once largely liberal. But today, it is Left, and the Left readily acknowledges it wishes to “transform” America, which means to destroy America as we have known it.

To vote for any Democrat is to vote for the party that believes America is “systemically racist,” that it is rotten to the core, vile from its inception (in 1619, they claim, not 1776).

To vote for any Democrat is to vote for the party that will renew the Obama agreement with one of America’s and the civilized world’s greatest enemies, the Islamic Republic of Iran.

It is to vote for undoing every economic policy that led America to its greatest economic boom in memory.

It is to vote for Kamala Harris, the most left-wing member of the U.S. Senate, for vice president (and, given Biden’s age and health, perhaps soon president).

It is to vote for the party that wants to allow millions more illegal immigrants into America and grant them benefits heretofore reserved for Americans. Democrats don’t use the words “open borders,” but they support this country-wrecking policy.

It is to vote for the party that supports the Green New Deal, or something very close to it, which will further ruin an economy already in ruins from Democrat-supported lockdowns.

It is to vote for the party that seeks to nationalize American health care (“Medicare for All”).

It is to vote for the party whose mayors, governors, and district attorneys allow violent riots and seek to “defund” police, a policy even most blacks oppose.

It is to vote for the party that supports the unprecedented suppression of free speech by Big Tech and universities.

It is to vote for the party that insists that men menstruate and that biological men must be allowed to compete against biological women in sports, no matter how often the biological men defeat them.

It is to vote for the party with the only anti-Semites, not to mention Israel-haters, in Congress.

It is to vote for the party that, for the first time in American history, openly identifies with socialism more than with capitalism.

It is to vote for the party that Big Pharma, big corporations, and radical teachers unions support.

All because many Americans like their Democratic candidate for a Senate seat (as in Arizona) or the Democratic candidate for president more than the Republican candidate. They do not appreciate a likeable Democrat will do as much harm to our country as any other Democrat.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/prager-to…

5 comments

Latest

gSteph
4 years ago
Perhaps some disagree with these presumptions, and find the alternative too dangerous for the future.
gammanu95
4 years ago
I am tired of voting straight ticket Republican. I am tired of voting for shits like McCain, Romney, and Trump (although Trump has been a surprisingly successful POTUS). But the democrat party alternative is always unacceptably bad.

I was thinking earlier how Kommiela had no executive experience, nor did Obama, but neither had Trump really. Then I realized that Trump's success stemmed from two things: 1) Obama was so incompetent and so blindly narcissistic, that even a fifth grader could have used the same resources to better govern the country, and 2) Trump doesn't care about international norms and diplomatic "rules". If your predecessor signs some of the worst treaties and accords ever written, there's nothing stopping you from throwing it out and writing new ones. So he did, and our country has prospered because of it.
winex
4 years ago
I rhink that Romney would have been a very good President.

McCain would have been terrible. I voted for McCain when he ran for the House, but started voting for whatever Libertarian was running for Senate in every campaign after that. I did the same in 2008 when he ran for President.
gammanu95
4 years ago
Look at Romney now. He voted in favor of Trump's impeachment, when there was no crime! He's a bitter hack.

As far as Libertarians, um... hell no! They want to eliminate national borders! A country without borders and immigration controls is not a country.
Go back on the gold standard? China, Russia, and EU would dominate the US. There is not enough gold in the world to match our GDP. The only way to get more would be to attack another country and take theirs.
No regulation of anything anywhere? People are too stupid and too greedy to be trusted with that. Right now, our government is too large and cumbersome, but wholesale deregulation would be an express ticket to the bad old days of the 70s with rampant pollution, rivers on fire, and smog-choked cities.
Only landowners will vote? Ever heard of "no taxation without representation"?
The answer is term limits and the extinction of the career politician. Senators appointed by the state assembly, and not popular vote. Finally, a 60% threshold should be enshrined in the Senate, to prevent the tyranny of the majority and make bipartisanship and moderation the norm.
Longball300
4 years ago
^ What he said.
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion