Author Topic: Not voting  (Read 4391 times)

Robert Johnson

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #15 on: August 31, 2020, 03:27:22 PM »
I voted for McMullin in 2016.

You're brave. If I had voted for him, I wouldn't admit it in public.

Pastor Ken Kimball

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #16 on: August 31, 2020, 06:44:04 PM »
I voted for McMullin in 2016.

You're brave. If I had voted for him, I wouldn't admit it in public.
Nah.  Just Norwegian-Irish (2 biggest chunks of my Heinz 57 heritage which includes English, Scots, German, French, Jew, and Dane--I'm naturally conflicted).  The Irishman said, "To H--- with both   of them. Let's go with Mc guy."   And the Norwegian says "Yah sure.  They both smell like bad lutefisk."    Clinton was crooked and I figured Trump was just stringing people along with a pretense of being pro-life, pro-national defense, etc. and I figured he'd revert to the pro-choice Democrat he was for most of his life after getting elected.  So now the Irishman is saying, "He's a horses' a-- but that's still better than the rest of lot being pitched at us."  And the Norwegian says, "Yah sure but he still stinks.  Uff da.  Pass the butter and salt." 

Rev Geminn

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 774
    • View Profile
    • www.afoolishway.com
Re: Not voting
« Reply #17 on: August 31, 2020, 08:12:28 PM »
I have never not voted.  I don't miss a primary, municipal elections.  I like how you expressed the idea of voting in terms of the magisterial role of a Christian.  I had never really considered it in those terms.  I generally try to express my thoughts in terms of "Vote.  For whomever you line up with.  The act of voting is the important thing." 

In 2016 I voted for the Libertarian candidate.  I'm so committed to this group that I can't even remember his name right now.  I do recall that William Weld was the VP candidate.  I'll vote Libertarian again- Jo Jorgenson is the presidential nominee.  She's the only major (?) party candidate with no credible sexual assault allegations!  She appeals to my limited government proclivities.  She appeals to my pro-constitution thoughts and I think she actually likes the 10th amendment quite a bit, a highly overlooked amendment in my opinion.  And I vote 3rd party in the hopes that a 3rd party will gain some momentum and try to break the duopoly that is anything but duo.  Perhaps I have shared this sentiment here but I put both parties in a car of their own.  Each car is headed for the cliff.  Republicans are driving a luxury sedan of some sort- a Cadillac, Lincoln, Buick.  They are driving leisurely, stopping at scenic overlooks, sticking to the speed limit within reason, enjoying the drive.  They'll reach the cliff when they reach the cliff.  The Democrats are in a Corvette, a Mustang, a flashy roadster.  The pedal is down, the engine is doing what it was meant to do.  They have got to get to the cliff with as much as speed, enthusiasm, excitement as possible.  Let's reach the cliff with fun and gusto!  That's my thought.  You can do with it what you want.     

Going further in this, I like voting 3rd party because I'm a pastor who serves a congregation of individual people.  In a completely ordinary and common setting, there are pro-Trumpers, never-Trumpers, pro-Biden folks, anybody but Trump folks, and possibly a few others.  By voting for a 3rd party candidate, I'm not on anyone's side.  "Pastor's on our side!  Pastor's against us!  Pastor's with them!"
 Nope.  Pastor votes 3rd party.  People here already think I'm a closet Romanist so I don't need to make anymore divisions, LOL  They keep coming into my office pretending to ask a question while looking all around for my poster of BXVI.  They don't know that the poster is hiding behind my massive life-size statue of Walther with his arm around Stephan.   

A question I do have is somewhat related...who does a vote for a 3rd party candidate help?  A friend of mine, who completely disagrees with me politically says that a vote for Jo Jorgenson is really a vote for Trump.  He says that by voting for Jorgenson I'll get what I want-generally conservative policies, generally anti-abortion positions, generally conservative judges, generally conservative stances yet can keep my hands clean because I didn't vote for the Orange Man.  But why couldn't a vote for Jorgenson be viewed as a vote for Biden?  Any help with that notion?

Jeremy

PS- And before I hit "post" Pastor Scott Geminn linked something from a Unity group promoting a host of politicians and political figures- Reps. Tulsi Gabbard and Dan Crenshaw, former gov. Jesse Ventura, former administration figure William McRaven, former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang, a few other folks.  It was intriguing.

Thanks for mentioning that, Jeremy.  For those interested you can find out more here:https://articlesofunity.org/.

We find out tonight which duo got the number one slot.  My first choice was the Tulsi Gabbard/ Dan Crenshaw ticket. All of the options were great, I am content with whoever wins.  Even if they don't make it to the official ballot box I am just happy that I got to vote for two people who I genuinely believe in.  That alone is a first for me when it comes to my personal history of voting for president.

Peace,
Scott+

RogerMartim

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
  • Vede que grande amor nos tem concedido o Pai...
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #18 on: August 31, 2020, 08:22:04 PM »
I am not a Republican by any stretch of the imagination, but I think that it would be good that a a person who is genuinely Republican vote for Biden in order for their house to be thoroughly cleaned up, fumigated and all. Trump is at variance with any good Republican values—it's merely cultic at best and I think quite dangerous. He is already starting to flirt with QAnon which the FBI has named as a domestic terrorist group.

James J Eivan

  • Guest
Re: Not voting
« Reply #19 on: August 31, 2020, 08:39:12 PM »
I am not a Republican by any stretch of the imagination, but I think that it would be good that a a person who is genuinely Republican vote for Biden in order for their house to be thoroughly cleaned up, fumigated and all. Trump is at variance with any good Republican values—it's merely cultic at best and I think quite dangerous. He is already starting to flirt with QAnon which the FBI has named as a domestic terrorist group.
Voting to ‘clean house’ that results in Schumer, Pelosi, AOC, Schift, Nadler et al in power would be so disastrous that there would end up being no house to save ... or worth saving. No Thank you!

Pr. Don Kirchner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11161
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #20 on: August 31, 2020, 08:45:32 PM »

I believe that people who do not vote for the president should not criticize the president. They could have had a say in who was elected, but didn't.
Your word choice is confusing at best ... Taking your above post literally “ I believe that people who do not vote for the president should not criticize the president.”, you should not be criticizing the president since your body of posts indicates that you didn’t vote for the president.

Perhaps you really meant to state “I believe that people who do not vote in the presidential election should not criticize the president. 

Words mean things .. think, and use your words carefully and wisely.😲

In all fairness, James, I knew what Brian meant, particularly given his subsequent sentence. Note that he did not capitalize the first use of "president." And, perhaps you should have in your response.  😉

Let's leave the quibbling to others.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2020, 09:20:05 PM by Pr. Don Kirchner »
Pr. Don Kirchner

"Heaven's OK, but it’s not the end of the world." Jeff Gibbs

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 16657
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #21 on: August 31, 2020, 08:51:14 PM »
I am not a Republican by any stretch of the imagination, but I think that it would be good that a a person who is genuinely Republican vote for Biden in order for their house to be thoroughly cleaned up, fumigated and all. Trump is at variance with any good Republican values—it's merely cultic at best and I think quite dangerous. He is already starting to flirt with QAnon which the FBI has named as a domestic terrorist group.
This is a telling post. Win or lose, Trump stands to garner ballpark half the vote. To call it "merely cultic at best" is to reveal a view of the nation and its citizens that is simply so at odds with reality that it is hard to engage. Do you not have any friends who are Trump supporters? Are they part of a cult?

B Hughes

  • Guest
Re: Not voting
« Reply #22 on: August 31, 2020, 09:23:58 PM »
I am not a Republican by any stretch of the imagination, but I think that it would be good that a a person who is genuinely Republican vote for Biden in order for their house to be thoroughly cleaned up, fumigated and all.

  Sigh ...  I could just as easily say I'm not a Democrat by any stretch of the imagination, but I think it would be good that a person who is genuinely Democrat vote for Trump in order for their house not to be tainted with the stench of Left wing corruption.

 Insulting isn't it?
« Last Edit: August 31, 2020, 10:38:31 PM by B Hughes »

Mike Gehlhausen

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #23 on: September 01, 2020, 08:25:25 AM »
I am not a Republican by any stretch of the imagination, but I think that it would be good that a a person who is genuinely Republican vote for Biden in order for their house to be thoroughly cleaned up, fumigated and all. Trump is at variance with any good Republican values—it's merely cultic at best and I think quite dangerous. He is already starting to flirt with QAnon which the FBI has named as a domestic terrorist group.

That's certainly the argument of the Lincoln Project, and they do claim to be Republicans. 

Link

I don't know how many centrist Republicans are convinced by their arguments.  I know that I am not convinced by them to vote Democratic beyond possibly voting for Biden, but I don't consider myself that centrist.  I identify as conservative but not reactionary.

As with so many other things, I don't know whether the QAnon thing is just more trolling of the press or not.  If Trump loses, then I don't know whether Republicans I've admired like Lindsay Graham, Rand Paul, and Nikki Haley go back to the reasonable positions that they had or at least turn the sow's ear of Trump into a silk purse.  Mitch McConnell has already shown himself to not feel beholden to back up Trump on the more foolish things he says.

The argument I hear from some of my friends is that this is all just a WWE act, and Trump is actually much more stable than the image he projects.  It's a convincing if not reassuring argument.  I've still an itch at the back of my mind though about some of the more fringe elements -- like the QAnon people -- whom that image encourages and what that means for the rest of us.

The disregard for things like the Hatch Act and rules against emoluments indeed seem like arcane legal strictures whose loopholes have been winked at by both parties for many years.  But Trump's disregard for them seems to be blatant.  I know that it plays to his "drain the swamp" rhetoric, but it disturbs me all the same.  I'd rather that Trump had accepted the $400,000 presidential salary and divested himself more fully of other financial holdings than the situation we have now.  Arguments can be mounted for having the White House made into a campaign site and hosting international summits at Trump resorts, but I still find it distasteful.

I've said before that I see similarities between Reagan and Trump.  Both were ridiculed as unworthy and incompetent before elected;  both touched a chord deeply in the electorate.  But where Reagan was the Great Communicator and surrounded himself with smart people that he listens to, Trump tweets out scattershot messages and seems to disregard the advice of those around him and turn them over quickly.  When Reagan's taff changed, they continued to say good things about him after they left; the ones that Trump has turned over tend to criticize him harshly after departure such as Rex Tillerson, Jim Mattis, and Jim Bolton.

Despite all of this, I think I probably would have voted for Trump if it had not been for the coronavirus. His inability to stay on a consistent public message with Fauci and Birx is troubling.  I still may vote for Trump because despite my believing Biden to be moderate himself and a more temperate leader, I cannot convince myself to support the Democratic agenda.   It's between voting for Trump and not voting at all.  I don't where I'll end up.

D. Engebretson

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4247
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #24 on: September 01, 2020, 08:40:19 AM »
I identify as conservative but not reactionary....

.... I still may vote for Trump because despite my believing Biden to be moderate himself and a more temperate leader, I cannot convince myself to support the Democratic agenda.   It's between voting for Trump and not voting at all.  I don't where I'll end up.

I suspect that many who identify as Republican are much as you describe.  I would include myself among them.  There is much about Trump's personality and actions that turn me off.  There are times when I can't understand why he is saying what he is saying to doing what he is doing.  But at the end of the day it is the "Democratic agenda" that concerns me more - the overall direction of this party that includes Biden and Harris, but is also a lot larger than them.  I am concerned that if the presidency flips to the Democratic fold, that, along with a Democratic House (and Senate?) could be a return to a no restraints Obama-era legislative push. In that scenario I see more than a fair amount of overreach in regulation.  There is a reactionary quality to this push for regulation, and I want restraints on this.  A Republican presidency still seems to be one way to hold that line. 
Pastor Don Engebretson
St. Peter Lutheran Church of Polar (Antigo) WI

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12061
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #25 on: September 01, 2020, 10:01:32 AM »
Who gets to decide who and what is "really" Republican and who and what is RINO and who or what is the lunatic fringe and should be ignored? Similarly for Democrats. I am unconvinced by arguments that Trump isn't really Republican. He is not where the party as been in the past and there are many who self identify as Republican who aren't exactly where he is. But this cycle he is the Republican leader and candidate.


Biden who is now talking like a centrist leaning Leftist is still to the Left of where Democrats used to  be. AOC and the Squad, not to mention Bernie Sanders and the whole Socialist wing of the Democrats are still loud voices among the Democrats. Can there really be any assurance that they aren't really Democrats?
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 16657
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #26 on: September 01, 2020, 10:39:41 AM »
Who gets to decide who and what is "really" Republican and who and what is RINO and who or what is the lunatic fringe and should be ignored? Similarly for Democrats. I am unconvinced by arguments that Trump isn't really Republican. He is not where the party as been in the past and there are many who self identify as Republican who aren't exactly where he is. But this cycle he is the Republican leader and candidate.


Biden who is now talking like a centrist leaning Leftist is still to the Left of where Democrats used to  be. AOC and the Squad, not to mention Bernie Sanders and the whole Socialist wing of the Democrats are still loud voices among the Democrats. Can there really be any assurance that they aren't really Democrats?
There is a lot of shifting around. As I see it, the two parties build on three sets of underlying sets of principles-- Libertarianism, Socialism, and Cultural Conservatism (usually religious). Those three basic worldviews have to get distilled into two parties, so there has to be a lot of overlap. Everyone subscribes to a certain degree of all three; it is more a matter of ranking them in terms of emphasis. Reagan was able to claim almost exclusive control of the libertarian and culturally conservative legs, isolating the "liberals" who are/were socialist in spirit without liking the word until recently. But he was an exception. 20th Century Joe Biden, for example, represented a strong strain of cultural conservatism.

Critical theory has come to identify cultural conservatism almost exclusively with racism and white supremacy. That's why Trump's appeal to cultural conservatives is so repugnant to progressives. To them it is just flagrant racism. But it isn't in reality. It is affirmation of the traditional culture of the electorate; only those who view it all through a certain lens see that culture as essentially, inherently racist and unworthy of conserving. That's why two people can watch the same speech and one person see nothing but base, rank bigotry (usually in the form of "dog-whistles" and code) and another person see inspiring, uplifting talk. It isn't because the latter is likely racist; it is because the former sees the latter as necessarily racist.

Cultural Conservatism depends on particular history rather than abstract principles. Hence the 1619 Project designed specifically to attack it, or the debate about Mt. Rushmore and the effort to defend it from attack. By insisting that America is founded on racism, progressives can identify cultural conservatism with racism. This happens with nearly every debate. Much BLM and antifa's goals (with the help of crital theory on campus) is to wake white people up to the evil of their own history and culture. To them, only people who don't know about that evil or who positively approve of that evil could possibly want to preserve traditional American culture.

So, to take a completely hypothetical argument, a cultural conservative would have no problem with laws that say, for example, that a restaurant may serve pig but may not serve dog. A Libertarian would reject such rules as arbitrary, and a Socialist would say they are bigoted against people from differing cultural traditions. The cultural conservative views it a matter of people voting to endorse their own culture, and not because they hate anyone. They simply want to perpetuate their culture in their laws and customs. Same with things like schools changing "Christmas Break" to "Winterval." Libertarians don't care, Socialists view it as positive progress, and cultural conservatives see it as decadence, a cutting off of the future from the past like severing the tree from its roots.           

jebutler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1595
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #27 on: September 01, 2020, 02:26:42 PM »
I believe Lutherans who live in nations with elections have a moral, religious obligation to vote. It is not their duty as citizens, it is their duty as magistrates. You can't just wash your hands of the matter and claim to have clean hands. You can't fulfill your vocation as a fraction of Caesar by neglecting it. It doesn't matter that you never asked to live in a representative republic where the government was determined by elections; you live in one. The early Christians were never asked about living in the Roman Empire, either. Too bad. That's where they lived. Therefore they were to be subject to Caesar.

Unlike Jeremy I have not voted several times. I never vote in primary elections: I believe primaries should be closed to all but party members and I refuse to join any political party. I have opted not to vote in three presidential elections:; 80, 84, and 2016. I will not vote in this presidential election either. One is a fabulist, plagiarist, and sexual harasser and the other is Donald Trump. The only reason I'm voting at all in this election is that I want our sheriff to be reelected.

I do not see voting as any sort of obligation--moral or otherwise. I am obligated to give honor and respect to those in authority, I am not obligated to vote for any of them.
These are things that we can discuss among learned and reasonable people, or even among ourselves. (Luther, SA III, paraphrased).

passerby

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
    • View Profile
Re: Not voting
« Reply #28 on: September 01, 2020, 05:15:12 PM »
I agree with not voting in this election and think this article makes several good points (although I would add the pro-life concerns as among my reasons for not voting for Biden):
https://spectator.us/wont-vote-2020-election/?fbclid=IwAR1I2dwOSLQQA3WlCtGZ8AGSYNbIFXnAzZBSBwZk-eOPMGR6NjaDb2a_8wQ

Mark Brown

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1180
  • Pastor, St. Mark Lutheran, West Henrietta, NY
    • View Profile
    • Saint Mark's Website
Re: Not voting
« Reply #29 on: September 02, 2020, 10:28:00 AM »
This is the problem of democracy (or at least the sham of democracy).  You do have a say in the government, however small and seemingly inconsequential it is.  Even not voting is you having your say.  So from the point of the theological law the people are responsible for what their government does much more so than say a monarchy or even a totalitarian state.  The only way out of this is Luther's "Sin Boldly".  We don't make a choice (or a non-choice) between black and white.  Everything we do is tinged with sin.  So make your choices and trust in Jesus.

And if everybody realized that if you want democracy, and there is no opting out of it legally, you will be held accountable by a just and almighty God.  Maybe they would start to take it more seriously.  And odious astounding mediocrity cleptocrats like Hillary Clinton, empty suits like Joe Biden, and parasitic opportunists like Trump wouldn't be our only choices.  When people really cared and took their duties as citizens seriously you got people like Washington, Hamilton and Jefferson or Lincoln and Douglass.  It is possible to have people of ambition that are not terrible people.