Why I Voted For Daggett

Avatar

Mark of New Jersey

Mark is a Founding Editor of The League of Ordinary Gentlemen, the predecessor of Ordinary Times.

Related Post Roulette

27 Responses

  1. Avatar Will
    Ignored
    says:

    Firstie-firstie? Girlie-girlie? WTF?Report

  2. Avatar Koz
    Ignored
    says:

    “I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: until Republicans figure out what they’re for, they’re going to continue having serious problems with good governance.”

    Yeah, I wish Republicans were more aggressive policy-wise (especially wrt health care on the national stage), but that’s a secondary issue for the moment.

    What’s primary is actually a matter of sovereignty of all things. The way things are now, the way the citizens reassert sovereignty over the apparatchik class is by voting Republican. I wish our stores of citizenship were stronger, but that’s the hand we’re dealt right now, and we have to play it. In this context, voting for a minor-party candidate is a lame copout.Report

    • Avatar Mark Thompson in reply to Koz
      Ignored
      says:

      Daggett has been consistently polling well over 10% in the polls. If I don’t think Christie will be noticeably less-bad than Corzine, then why in the world would I vote for Christie?Report

      • Avatar Koz in reply to Mark Thompson
        Ignored
        says:

        Geez, I didn’t know he was over ten whole percent, Obviously he’s in with a fighting chance then.

        As far as voting for Christie, that’s an easy one for me at least. At the risk of repeating myself, the way citizens in America reject the nomenklatura is by voting Republican (and few places more than New Jersey). I hope in the future there will be other ways, and the citizens avail themselves of this opportunity depressingly rarely. But it’s way better this way than not having the opportunity at all.Report

        • Avatar Mark Thompson in reply to Koz
          Ignored
          says:

          The trouble of course is when you view the opposition as just as bad as the status quo. Politicians have this weird way of interpreting votes for them as a “mandate” rather than as “I’m not a fan of yours, but the other dude’s been really crappy.” A third party candidate getting double-digit support in the polls – averaging around 15% – however, represents at minimum a viable protest vote. Moreover, in a three-way race in a low-turnout election, a third party candidate with that kind of support can even have a remote chance of pulling off the victory – and yes, I am aware that it’s a remote chance.Report

          • Avatar Koz in reply to Mark Thompson
            Ignored
            says:

            “Politicians have this weird way of interpreting votes for them as a “mandate” rather than as “I’m not a fan of yours, but the other dude’s been really crappy.” “

            That’s true, but that sounds like a problem we can deal with when it comes. It looks especially small potatoes in this case, electing a Republican in New Jersey, and one without much of a program at that. Among other things, this goes against wrote you wrote in the original post.

            “A third party candidate getting double-digit support in the polls – averaging around 15% – however, represents at minimum a viable protest vote.”

            Two problems with that: first, your “protest” vote comes at the expense of a viable (winning, maybe) candidate in a position to change things. And this supposed “protest” is not the one means the American people currently have to reject the nomenklatura, which is by voting Republican, not third party.Report

            • Avatar Mark Thompson in reply to Koz
              Ignored
              says:

              “your “protest” vote comes at the expense of a viable (winning, maybe) candidate in a position to change things.”

              Except for the fact that his lack of any kind of agenda demonstrates that “change things” just means “will do nothing other than be completely incompetent at managing the bureaucracy.”

              “And this supposed “protest” is not the one means the American people currently have to reject the nomenklatura, which is by voting Republican, not third party.”

              When a third party candidate has demonstrated that he is at least viable, voting Republican is not the only way of rejecting the ruling elite. Indeed, voting Republican (or, as the case may be, Democrat) is often simply saying that you prefer to replace one set of proven failures with another set of proven failures.Report

              • Avatar Koz in reply to Mark Thompson
                Ignored
                says:

                “Except for the fact that his lack of any kind of agenda demonstrates that “change things” just means “will do nothing other than be completely incompetent at managing the bureaucracy.””

                That’s an odd charge to make against Mr. Christie. The US Attorney’s job is, if nothing else, a matter of managing a bureaucracy.

                “When a third party candidate has demonstrated that he is at least viable, voting Republican is not the only way of rejecting the ruling elite. Indeed, voting Republican (or, as the case may be, Democrat) is often simply saying that you prefer to replace one set of proven failures with another set of proven failures.”

                No, rejecting the nomenklatura is something that goes way beyond one race, to what the parties represent culturally in the American context. And there is simply nothing in recent American political history to suggest third parties are a viable vehicle for reclaiming the sovereignty of the American people.

                For people like you and me, the reality is that right now we need the Republican party a lot more than it needs us. But I suspect that’s a lot more troublesome for you than me, which I’m guessing is really the issue here. That is, there’s a common psychological wall of distaste between liberals and dissident conservatives at the prospect of a Republican actually winning anything important.Report

    • Avatar JosephFM in reply to Koz
      Ignored
      says:

      Right, because replacing one set of apparatchiks with another worked so well over the last nine years…Report

  3. Avatar Dave
    Ignored
    says:

    15 years is an eternity for some of these youngins. I think Will may have still been in diapers. :pReport

  4. Avatar Qman
    Ignored
    says:

    You wasted your vote! Chris Daggett is a Dem plant whose only running to take votes away from Christie. The most recent Daggett robo calls CLEARLY show that the Dem party is supported Daggett. Daggett also has NO chance of winning so you obviously don’t care about change. Look at Christie record as a prosecutor. This guy has balls and took down some big political guns. This is EXACTLY who you want as our new governor. I’m sad that you decided to throw your vote away during such a crucial time in NJ history.Report

  5. Avatar Dude
    Ignored
    says:

    You idiots can’t figure it out. It’s about policies not political parties. We need someone who can cut waste and corruption. Why wouldn’t you vote for a guy with a track record of putting corrupt people in jail? The mind boggles….Report

  6. Avatar Sam M
    Ignored
    says:

    So OK. The plan regarding the property taxes seems pretty detailed. But the rest of the stuff from the first link? Like this?

    “We need a governor willing to start talking seriously about reducing the real cost drivers of ever-rising salary, health care benefit and pension costs…”

    We need to begin discussing issues? That’s what the governor does? That’s what counts as being “for” something? Has the Republican candidate come down firmly against beginning to discuss these things?Report

    • Avatar Mark Thompson in reply to Sam M
      Ignored
      says:

      Actually, if you look at the second link, he gives the specifics of what needs to be done to cut those costs. But beyond that, a big part of competent governance is actually identifying specific problems that are politically risky to identify.Report

  7. Avatar John Howard Griffin
    Ignored
    says:

    Puddle Cruiser.Report

  8. Avatar Sam M
    Ignored
    says:

    I agree that the second link has details. The first does not. It basically does everything we seem to criticize Republicans for doing. Namely, it offers pretty weak tea from a policy perspective.

    Let’s discuss taxes. OK! While we are at it, can we all agree that the health care syste, needs reformed? Can we all agree that taxes are too complex? Can we all agree that we need a more secure nation and better schools?

    Sure.Report

  9. Avatar Justin_Anderson
    Ignored
    says:

    Given the results tonight, it would seem that many of the potential Daggett voters went home to either Christie or Corzine. What a horrible choice to have to make. I’m afraid we might have a similarly horrendous choice of candidates here in MA next year.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *