Fwd: What if the Republicans were ousted from control of Congress

[Gordon Fitch]

Ted:
> There are two strictly tactical reasons not to vote for Gore.  In the
> short-term his presence in the White House will perpetuate weak liberal
> opposition to policies (such as economic, environmental, and military) that
> would have been pursued equally under a Bush administration but against much
> greater Congressional hostility....  If he loses, on the other hand,
> there's a chance that a genuine progressive will get the nomination next
> time around.  And if not next time, then the time after that.  The key is
> that the New Democrats consistently lose their bids for the White House.
> With a Republican in charge again, particularly an obvious ingrate like
> G.W., the midterm elections of 2002 would send at least one house of
> Congress back to the Democrats.

Chuck Grimes:
> Ted (and Gordon),
> 
> It still comes down to the same question. Who would you rather fight
> and over what ground? 
> 
> I am not arguing for moving the democratic party to the left, but
> rather for a long list of potential targets of battle, whatever their
> effect on the democrats.
> ... [ entertaining mollusk diversion ] ....

I don't think you're analyzing the situation properly with
respect to cost/benefit.

The effect of a single vote in a national election is vanishingly
small -- so small as to have, obviously, _no_ practical value.
The election will go as it goes regardless of your vote.
Voting does not enable you to pick your government or your
antagonists.  The only way you can make a vote "count" at all
is to vote for highly marginal candidates and run their tallies
up to the point where someone may notice -- but even this is
rather dubious.

Therefore, if you're going to vote rationally, it has to be
for some other reason -- something like morals, or aesthetics,
or a religious sense of community with the people.  Unless
you're suffering from delusions of reference, your motives
are not going to be material or pragmatic, because pragmatically
speaking your vote is worthless.  Gore and Bush are not going
to be affected by your vote -- but _you_ are.

It turns out that, under the coldest cost-benefit calculation,
the way to vote is for whatever you really, really _like_.
If you don't like what's on the ballot, write something in or
stay home -- that's a vote, too, the closest you can come to
voting "No."  Vote what you feel and believe, because _you're_
the one who's going to have to live with what you did, and
whatever-the-hell-you-like is going to be a lot better company
than the memory of submitting to some thug when he wasn't
actually holding a gun to your head.