Cantwell: I voted for Kerry because blah blah blah (and go into something that relates to her campaign, not two years ago)
McGavick: I voted for Bush because (thinks to self... Oh lord, this will screw me, won't it?)
And Bruce Guthrie, the Libertarian, actually makes a great point. He voted for Badnarik, the Libertarian, and the reason why was because he didn't want his vote to be wasted.
Hmm... Interesting... Tell me more...
His point was that if the two major parties gave us a race where almost 40 percent of the eligible voters stayed home, what kind of race is that? His vote was for a real choice, a real conversation.
While I never would have voted for who he voted for, I do respect the point he made. Low voter turnout is never a real concern for major party candidates. I would fall down a flight of stairs of a Democratic candidate ever said "If we get a good turnout, I'll be your next governor."
Passey apparently agrees with me:
I thought Bruce really nailed the first question about who did you vote for for President and why. He spoke about how low voter turnout showed that the American people thought that their choices were terrible, and that he voted for change -- the Libertarian candidate, Michael Badnarik -- because he didn't want to waste his vote on the lesser of two evils. It was a fantastic answer and a great start to the debate.Pointing out that low voter turnout, though a very good point, seemed ironic for me coming from a Libertarian. As Gary Hart pointed out (generally), if you believe government only needs to secure the borders and a few other things, what is the real point of you being and engaged, informed citizen? Libertarians, it seems, because they are much more attracted to a smaller, limited government in scope, wouldn't be all that concerned with civic engagement. But, if they were, limited engagement by voting probably would be the greatest extent of their interest.