An Independence Day quandary

In America we have set aside this day to celebrate our independence, and hopefully we will all take a little time to consider how blessed we are to live in a country where we enjoy such a great degree of personal freedom. I expect that with this being a presidential election year we are all a little more mindful than usual of our rights and responsibilities as citizens of this great country, particularly our right and responsibility to elect our own leaders.

Deciding which candidate to support is a lot greater chore for some of us than it is for others. Polls have shown that about one third of the population nearly always supports the Democratic candidate and another third usually support the Republican, regardless of who the parties put on the ticket.

But that is not quite the whole story. A very small percentage of US voters hold some allegiance with third parties, parties that usually don’t get a lot of attention next to the well-established and well-financed Big Two. But they are out there – the Libertarians, the Greens, the Constitutionalists - wild-eyed idealists standing up for their principals in the face of overwhelming odds.

For the most part, the third party system is usually passed over as a mere curiosity on the political scene. The actual number of votes they accumulate (assuming they can actually get on the ballot) usually peaks at no more than a few percentage points, if that. But in a very close election, a third party candidate can play a spoiler role. It is widely acknowledged, for instance, that George Bush would most likely have lost in Florida in 2000 if Ralph Nader had not been on the ballot in that state, and that would have changed the outcome of the entire election.

Nader is running again this time around, but he does not appear to be generating enough buzz to be much of a factor in this election. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a potential spoiler in the field. This year that role could be filled by Mr. Bob Barr, a former Republican congressman from Georgia who is carrying the banner for the Libertarians this year.

If Barr can siphon off a few disenchanted conservatives from John McCain in some closely contested states, he could swing the election to Obama. And Barr’s home state of Georgia is one in which he could draw enough support away from McCain to make a difference in the outcome.

That puts me in something of a difficult situation. Although I do not belong to any particular party, I have long felt an affinity for the libertarian view of “hands-off” governance, and I have pulled the Libertarian lever in the voting booth a number of times.

If my only consideration was picking the best candidate for the job, I would almost certainly vote for Barr. But reality being what it is, I have to consider the fact that the odds against his being elected are exceedingly long, and in a sense a vote for him could arguably represent a vote for my least desirable candidate (Obama). That isn’t a factor I can completely ignore.

But neither can I ignore the huge disappointment I feel for what the Republican Party has become. There was a time when they strove to be the party of small government and personal freedom, but that time has obviously passed. Today Democrats and Republicans both believe in large, intrusive federal government with virtually unlimited power. They merely have different opinions on which sections of the Constitution should be trampled on the heaviest.

So, do I vote for the candidate who most closely shares my views, even though he has no realistic chance of winning, or do I hold my nose and vote for the “lesser of two evils”? I guess in the end the decision will rest on just how much separation I see between those two “evils.” For now, the jury is still out.