It’s too soon for defeatism: We have an option that is not third party, Romney, or Obama.
Some say that either Romney or Obama will be our next president, but at this moment in time there is still a feasible alternative. A write-in candidate with a sufficiently unifying platform could win in a landslide. And a sufficiently unifying platform exists. We still have a choice — and the ability to take it.
The statistics show that there is now a greater number of independents (38%) than Democrats (32%) or Republicans (24%) (Pew Research, 2012 June http://pewresearch.org/databank/dailynumber/?NumberID=1513) and those who do identify with their party are unhappy with that party’s choice for presidential candidate (Pew Research, 2012 June http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/04/partisan-polarization-surges-in-bush-obama-years/). Obama voters proclaim “at least he’s better than Romney” while Romney voters say “at least he’s not Obama”. Both candidates represent a small enough fraction of the people that allowing either to control the nation is ludicrous.
Voting third party is not an option either, as there is no unifying third party candidate on the ballot.
There is, however, a unifying presidential platform available, and a way to put such a president into office this election – if the people so choose.
Every Fourth of July we display our shared values when we join together to say, ‘We refuse to be exploited. This is a nation of the people, by the people, and for the people.’ This is an American value common to Tea Partiers and Occupiers, Libertarians, Republicans, Democrats, Socialists and Anarchists, the politically devout and the politically disenfranchised. We all want the same thing: and end to the use of the political system by the elite to exploitation the people.
The platform would be simple: The nation should be of the people, by the people, and for the people. This can be implemented by taking no other policy positions. This would mean leaving the nation’s legislation choices and declarations of war to the will of the people as actualized by Congress.
We would need to crowdsource the search for a candidate who is behind this platform, work together to get them registered as a write-in candidate in many states by the deadlines, and spread the word without fundraising or advertising, via internet or word of mouth. We would use our display of support before election day as a gauge for whether enough of us are committed by Nov 6, to determine how to cast our vote. (Imagine the Facebook group: “If 30 million people join this group by election day, I’m voting for candidate X.” Barak Obama has 29 million Facebook fans.)
This path would remove the impact of campaign fundraising and party jockeying from influencing presidential decisions. It would give us a candidate not insane enough to spend their lives in a highly visible political career grabbing for presidential power. It would give our nation policy decisions that we don’t have to vote for in a single package, like an assorted box of candies.
And this path is still feasible. With the power of the internet that fuelled Facebook and the Arab Spring, a peaceful revolution is possible this November. The power is in the hands of the people.