Saturday, November 3, 2012

Which Candidate are You Pimping Out to All Your Friends and Are They Worthy of Your Vote?

Today is election day here in the US. I swear I must be cursed to have to go through major elections twice in on year lol. (Just kidding.) I remember the election day tensions in Amritsar. I wasn't allowed to leave the house. My family didn't feel safe leaving the house but they did still go out and vote. While safety is not an issue in the same sense here in the US, we do have to worry about our future.

I get sick of hearing all the politics around election time just like most Americans. But this year I'm viewing things differently. I'm hearing so much negativity and slander based toward the 2 primary candidates. Many people are making judgments and accusations against men they don't even know. So I decided to test some of their theories.

Most of the people I've talked to don't even realize a woman is running for president of the US this year. Obviously, just like with everything else, the amount of money you can spend on advertising makes a difference in how many votes you get. I have an experiment I would like for you all to participate in. You don't have to post your results in a comment though it would be appreciated. There's no right or wrong answers as all elections boil down to opinions.

Just for the record, we are supposed to be voting for the candidate who addresses the issues that are important to us. The issues we feel are going to help make America better once they're addressed and plans are made to fix the problems. However, since the elections of 2008, the primary issues being discussed seem to be gender and race. Let's see how you would vote if you didn't know these two factors.

Without searching to find out who these candidates are, I would like you to decide who you would vote for. There are 6 US presidential candidates. Select your candidate based on the information provided. Compare that to who you have intended to vote for before reading this chart. If it matches then you are not voting based on race or gender. If it changed, then please consider researching your candidate more before casting your vote tomorrow. (For my Indian readers, your vote counts here too and I would love to hear your comments based on what you've heard of the US candidates and who you think would be better.)

For the record, I have expressly mentioned those groupings that are mixed culture. I know race should not be a factor but it is important to consider that this brings a unique offering to the table because with 2 cultures, you always get a broader view of the issues and have the potential to see more solutions from different perspectives. IMO that is. For my Indian readers who may not know, "VP" means Vice President. 

You will also notice I skipped over the most controversial issues at hand. Most of you know those and I didn't want to give away who each candidate was because I want your unbiased opinion. If you know who these people are, you may only think of the race or the heated issues and not look at all 6 equally before making a decision.

Candidate 1: This candidate is a businessman running alongside a judge. This candidate seeks reduction of our debt and protection of civil liberties. This candidate is of mixed ancestry and has been in political offices since 1994 bringing 18 years of experience to the White House. The candidate believes our government should not be overly-invasive and that we should limit military intervention. This candidate wants simplified tax laws and to ban federal bail out of the individual states. This candidate favors the Federal Reserve Transparency Act and thinks the central bank should be audited and the Federal Reserve System eliminated. This candidate is also fighting for reduction of the national debt.

Candidate 2: A Harvard graduate and doctor. This candidate would know best about how to address the health care situation and what would actually work in real life and has worked to provide citizens with better access to health information. This candidate addresses concerns with toxins in our environment, foods, etc. and has spent several years fighting for job creation. This candidate has held political offices since 2002 bringing 10 years of experience to the White House. This candidate advocates for the protection of Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare and for empowering the 99%. This candidates running mate (VP) is renowned world-wide for their work in anti-poverty measures.

Candidate 3: This candidate is a former lawyer and promotes American self-sufficiency, job creation, amnesty for illegal immigrants, and better medical coverage for those on Medicaid or Medicare. Another important fact about this candidate is the dedication to the American family. This candidate is running on an inter-cultural ticket (either the candidate or the VP is not white). This candidate has been in politics since 1997 (with a vacation in the middle of his career) and brings 11 years of experience to the White House.

Candidate 4: This candidate wants a smaller government, job creation and reduction of the national debt. Another major topic for this candidate is stopping illegal immigration which includes using the military to enforce entry restrictions. This candidate stands behind the historic precedents of amnesty for illegal immigrants not working. This candidate also wants to protect Social Security, simplify taxes and then regulate monetary values awarded in malpractice lawsuits. This candidate has held political offices since 1973 bringing 29 years of experience to the White House.

Candidate 5: This candidate, a former businessman, is seeking a smaller government that makes national security decisions based on electoral politics. This candidate wants more jobs created and to promote the self-sufficiency of the U.S. (not using other countries resources as much). Another point to consider is this candidate wants a more culturally diverse political and economic landscape. This candidate also wants to shrink our debt and to empower small businesses. This candidate has 5 years experience in politics and is coming back from a long absence from the field.

Candidate 6: Lawyer who advocates for human rights. This lawyer has actively taken on big business and upholds the right of the common people and general public. Has held public offices (political) since 1999 giving him 13 years of experience to bring to the White House. The campaign from this candidate centers on empowerment of the public voice. This candidate is running on an inter-cultural ticket (either the candidate or the VP is not white). This campaign also addresses the issue of bringing real life answers to the country rather than dominating the landscape with the ideals of the wealthiest in America.

Just my own opinion.....Candidate 4 sucks. Bleh. I can't help it. After you do your thinking, look him and all the candidates up via the links below. You will see how much he sucks from an inter-cultural relationship/expat perspective. He's clearly not well versed in cultural aspects and has a very narrow view of some of America's major issues and he even uses some fairly discriminatory comments on his official website. I can only imagine how popular he is with the white supremacists factions. .....And he's from Virginia. What a blemish to my home state. (All of this is MY opinion and you don't have to share it.)

In my research, I noticed the biggest candidates had the least amount of useful information on their site (useful to those of us without a dictionary on hand that is) and had the most confusing information. In the true form of American politics, they also had the most slanderous information on their biggest opponents. One based his entire website off comparing himself to his opponent. I found that an interesting way to go about telling people your worth - because it didn't include much information on him, only his opposition to the opponent. I don't find that useful when making my decision but it doesn't matter, I'm not voting for either one of the major candidates this year. They simply don't embody what I want for America and I will sleep much better knowing I didn't vote for either one of them.

So how did you do? What candidate would you choose based on the small amount of information above. Many of them seem to be talking about similar issues, just in a different way. Some of similar ideas on what to do but different ideas on how to do it. I know I didn't provide enough information for you to make a truly informed decision. This blog just isn't big enough for all of that. But, hopefully what I did was open your mind just a little so you can see that there are 4 other candidates besides the major 2 (Obama and Romney) that you should consider looking into.

You only get one vote every 4 years. Once you vote, if that candidate wins and you find out they're not so good after all then you have no place to complain. There just may be a much better candidate who is also more deserving of your vote based on the issues that are important to you. The only thing you can do is make the best informed decision possible. Don't take it lightly, the future of America is at stake. Where do you want to be in 4 years?? What is really important to you?

I don't know about you but where I come from it's almost taboo to discuss who you voted for. Hence I'm not asking anyone to disclose their vote here. You certainly can if you want to and you're more than welcome to post anything you feel is important for voters to know. I will disclose who I voted for after I have placed my vote. I do that because I don't want any political propaganda to confuse or try and sway me. I prefer to remain stubborn and make my own decision based on what's important to me. After all, politics is opinion and I'm not about to get lynched for thinking differently and I have no interest in getting to a political argument online.

Please make sure all of your comments are respectful. Let's leave the mud-slinging to the candidates since they're so much better at it than we are. Not to mention, they have the financial resources to dig up all that dirt and we don't. BUT please do share links to critical facts. Facts only. I like documents, studies, etc. that show something important and have no interest in slanderous or opinionated blogs on the subject. Thank you for observing those simple rules by not posting them. Now you can scroll down to see which candidates I was talking about above. They are listed in the same order both above and below. No peeking till you make your choice!

Know Your Candidates: (How did you do?)
1: Gary Johnson & Jim Gray
2: Jill Stein & Cheri Honkala
3: Barack Obama & Joe Biden
4: Virgil Goode & James Clymer
5: Mitt Romney & Paul Ryan
6: Rocky Anderson & Louis Rodriguez


  1. James Harris and Alyson Kennedy of the Socialist Workers Party are also on the ballot in some states, as well as another female candidate (and all female ticket) in Peta Lindsay and Yari Osorio of the Socialism and Liberation Party, although that's a stunt of sorts as Lindsay, at 28, is not old enough to be eligible to become President.

    There are lots of candidates, yes, but our political system cannot really function as a true democracy with the Electoral College casting our votes. If all votes for a state go to one person, it makes more sense to have a two-party system where instead of voting for the candidate you like the most, you vote AGAINST the candidate you like the least.

    Even in countries with multiple parties like India, the minor parties really work better at a local/state level and then they lend their support to the major parties at the national level. And the parliamentary system lends itself much better to multiple parties, even.

    I think in order for what are now 'minor' parties to have more of an influence, it cannot start at the federal level. Groups like the Green Party cannibalize the Democrats and make it easier for Republicans to get elected. The Tea Party knows this so they don't put up their own candidate but instead will support the Republican candidate instead of putting up candidates that are closer to their libertarian viewpoint. Once we see mayors, then state congresspeople and then governors, elected from minor parties, that is when I think a shift would happen.

  2. Also just to actually address your post (lol, i forgot to do that), we have different front-running issues in every election. Economy. War. This time, it's women's rights, which is playing out all over the world at the same time, just in different aspects which are bound to their particular cultures. I don't think any of these issues is 'invalid' at all. I think it is healthy for us to look at and talk about race and gender instead of sweeping it under the rug. What we do not talk about is what allows injustices to continue.

  3. I agree with you. I know these smaller parties are all about taking votes from the major two candidates. But this year, I really feel like (for the first time ever) that the democrats and republicans both need to be kicked out of the running. I'm not sure if it's because I'm older and wiser to their tricks or because my view of the issues has changed but I don't like either one of them. I"m sorely disappointed in Goode. Ugh. He makes me sick now.

  4. You're right again. I would never vote for a candidate based on race or gender but I know people who have. Those same people now regret their decisions because afterward they saw the candidate did not serve their needs. I've seen it in local elections as well as state and national but people never learn. Race and gender are just not good determining factors for anything in life, especially not public office.

  5. "Once you vote, if that candidate wins and you find out they're not so good after all then you have no place to complain"

    Conversely, if you do NOT vote, then you have every reason to complain because you did nothing to contribute to elevation of that vermin to a political post.

    By the way, Obamney will win the Presidential election.

  6. Lol. If you don't vote you can complain about not having a decent candidate.