NOTE: The views and opinions expressed in this are purely my own. I simply want to expound upon my political thoughts regarding this year’s election, and I hope that there’s someone out there that finds this of interest.
If you’d like to read about the Republican candidate, go here. If you’d like to hear my thoughts on the Democratic candidate, go here. If you’re interested in knowing more about California’s propositions and measures, go here.
First of all, I think it’s funny that the California ballot pretends this is more than just a two party run. It barely qualifies, so why not put the two major parties at the top? It isn’t alphabetic. Is it by when they registered? If so, wouldn’t Hillary be on the page before the nominees are listed? She’s been running for president since she was 8.
Let’s not rule out the other three parties. Let’s examine them seriously.
La Riva is very much against war, calling Clinton a war hawk and accusing her husband of being a war criminal as a result of the bombings in Kosovo and Bosnia. She’s the true “blow-up the system” candidate. She wants to change everything and work towards absolute equality. She is on the ballot in only a few states (Vermont, New Mexico, Iowa, Louisiana, Colorado, Washington, New Jersey, and California), and is the founder of her party. She previously had been a member of other parties and had tried to get the nomination through one of them, losing to Ralph Nader. While I admire her advocacy for social justice, I see her overall political views to be too radical for this moment in time. Realistically, a vote here would be valuable only as a protest against the two party system that sends a message that you want a more socialist agenda. If she were to actually become president, I would have serious concerns about how well she could play with others.
Stein ran against Hillary before. I bet you didn’t know that? She was the Green Party candidate in 2012, but since this election has been such a dreamboat for America, she’s getting a lot more buzz as an alternative this time around. If you were upset that neither of the major candidates seem to be focusing on climate change enough, then this is your platform. They want to declare a state of emergency on the environment and get to work. Stein is the organic, clean fuel, environmental candidate, so much so that she has drawn criticism for her stance on GMOs and vaccines. She’s also a jobs advocate, believes health care and education are rights, wants to try to end poverty, and wants to reform the judicial, veteran, and immigration systems. While the Democratic Party likes to think of themselves as the place for idealists, they tend to attract pragmatic progressives who don’t think the Green Party has a chance at actually winning. Stein’s priorities are very specific to fixing what her party perceives as being broken, and unfortunately that narrow point of view has made her into a sort of pariah. With not much chance of making it to The White House, this is the team you vote for if you want to send a message that you care about the environment more than you do about party politics.
It’s kind of interesting how much The Libertarian nominees are discredited as totally incompetent when you take into account the fact that both Johnson and Weld have been governors. Their platform is the ultimate hands-off approach to governance. If you want to know their stance on abortion or drugs or even education, it’s basically that people should be able to make their own choices without government interference. They do, however, have some areas that they find important enough to get involved in, such as criminal justice reform, wasteful spending, and term limits. There does seem to be an inherent flaw in the ideology, in my opinion. The official platform for education says, “Governors Gary Johnson and Bill Weld believe nothing is more important to our future as a country than educating our next generations.” However, making education a priority and then saying that you will “end the department of education” seems like a contradiction. Or maybe I just don’t get it. Also, saying that the free market rights itself is a worry. The free market is driven by low costs, which has led to historical slavery and environmental destruction. Whole species of animals have been “righted” by the free market, and despite the fact that conscientious people know that child labor is used in creating their smart phones, they still buy them. The only thing that protects the most vulnerable from being exploited is intervention on behalf of the people (ie government). So I don’t personally favor Libertarian ideology, but then again, I don’t really know exactly what they stand for. Johnson got booed at the Libertarian Convention for suggesting that maybe it’s a good idea to actually test people for competence behind the wheel before letting them drive. In a party so divided that the merits of a driver’s license is a hot topic of debate, it’s hard to say what a Libertarian actually believes, and since Johnson often gives non-committal answers or sounds uninformed on various topics, it is really hard to see what he personally stands for. I guess the point in 2016 isn’t so much to consolidate the party’s platform into one cohesive model so much as to confront what some voters perceive to be a broken system. Again, with little actual chance of moving into the beltway of Washington this election cycle, this is a protest vote. Libertarians tend to either be disenfranchised Republicans or disenfranchised Democrats, proving that the two party system is so poor at representing people that the one thing people running from both parties can agree on is that they hate the two party system.