Why bother to vote Republican?

(Hat tip to Cox and Forkum for the cartoon. You can read their related commentary and links HERE.)

I'll tell you why. Because the alternative could be so very, very much worse. For Republicans like myself who are unhappy with many things about the Republican party, I offer this excerpt from the Cox & Forkum site, of an article by Robert Tracinski:

From Real Clear Politics: The Democratic Party Adds Nothing to the National Debate by Robert Tracinski.

Like many on the right, I have been deeply unsatisfied with the Republican Congress. The Republicans, I thought, ought to lose enough seats in the November congressional elections that they feel they've been punished for runaway federal spending.

But as the election gets nearer and I think more about what is at stake, I have come to realize that the best outcome is for the Democrats to lose. The Democrats' failure to regain control of either house of Congress would be a good start. But an unambiguous and humiliating defeat--even a loss of Democratic seats in the House and Senate--would be much better.

The best thing we can do in this election is to crush the left--because the Democratic Party adds nothing of value to the American political debate. ...

In the American system, of course, we don't vote for parties but for individual candidates. So if your local congressional candidate has championed a particularly evil political agenda, is under indictment, or is named "Katherine Harris," then by all means vote for the other guy. But if your local House and Senate candidates are unexceptional--and too many of them are--then your vote is really about which party should have the power to appoint committee chairmen, hold hearings, issue subpoenas, and steer the nation's legislative debate. And the Democratic Party no longer has anything of value to offer. ...

[I]f you want to have a debate over how to fight and win the War on Terrorism, you'll have to have it within the right. The left contributes nothing but proposals for surrender, appeasement, and passivity. As far as the war is concerned, that "D" next to a candidate's name on the ballot stands for "defeat." ...

The more the left fades from the scene, the more the national political debate will be a debate within the right. The American system is not friendly to monolithic one-party rule. The moment one party begins to dominate, it tends to split apart along its internal fault lines. The more the Republicans dominate American politics, therefore, the more intensely they will debate among themselves ...

I can't guarantee that such a debate would produce the best result--I would like to see the emergence of a small-government, pro-immigration, pro-war, secular right--but I can guarantee that such a debate would be more interesting and much more productive than the debate we're having with the left right now.

(bold emphasis mine) This largely reflects my own views. The Democrats have ceased to be an effective opposition for quite some time now. I had hoped that their loses would wake them up and cause them to re-group into an effective opposition, a "loyal opposition".


They seem incapable of this. The money of George Soros seems to have bought the Democratic party, putting it firmly in the grip of moonbats like himself. The only enemy they seem to perceive is US.


They are so obsessed with regaining power to implement their domestic socialist policies that they are incapable of even perceiving dangers in the international arena. Multiculturalism and Political Correctness prevent them from recognizing or even criticizing Islamic fascism, even though it completely opposes many of the liberal causes Democrats claim to support. But it is worse than just having blinders on. Many of them actually believe capitalism and American patriotism are the real enemies, and that attacks on us are justified.


I lived in San Francisco when 9-11 happened. I could no longer continue living in that Democrat dominated city, because the mantra there about 9-11 was almost universally: "But of course, we DESERVED it." Many of the people who believe this are now in positions of power in the Democratic party.

I now live in rural Oregon. 72 percent of the voters in my county are Democrats, yet many of them vote Republican. I can't tell you how many Democrats have lamented to me about their party: "The Democrats have become the "Anti" party. They are only ever against things anymore, they don't DO anything positive." Many Democrats feel abandoned by their party.

I think this also hurts the Republican party. Without an effective opposition to oppose them, they listen to their constituents less and less. Yet I think Trancinski is right: I would rather give my attention to intelligent debate within the Republican party, rather than waste my time trying to "debate" an hysterical, demoralized and suicidal Democratic party. I will not assist such a party in gaining votes under ANY circumstances.