Letter about should you vote 3rd party?…
To the Editor,
Not this year if you want to protect our democracy. This election, the danger is too real to “symbolically” vote for someone to show your dislike of the two-party system. We have actual election deniers on our ballot; we have one party whose platform says they will eliminate Social Security and remove our freedom to decide what we do with our own bodies. Let that sink in: one major American political party is ready to rip the rug out from under seniors and take away your choice and your voice.
This November is truly an historically dangerous moment for democracy. We know the election will come down to a narrow margin and, more than ever before, EVERY vote will count.
This November you can choose candidates who are on record defending your right to live how you want, love who you want, and make your own most personal decisions. You can choose the candidates who have visited Fillmore County frequently over the past six months. You can choose candidates who’ve knocked on over 14,000 doors and shown up consistently to listen and talk to voters like you.
I know, it sometimes feels good to “buck the system” and show the world you’re going to do your own thing. But this November, I encourage you to reconsider and use your voice to defend our choice.
Julie Fryer
Chatfield, Minn.
Keith Allen says
Hi Julie,
“We have one party whose platform says they will…remove our freedom to decide what we do with our own bodies”
Within the past 18 months, you’ve personally severed decades-long friendships with sensible folks who’d only hoped you’d grant them acceptance as they were forced to make choices regarding what to do with their own bodies. My mother, my wife, and my sister all sacrificed employment tenure to fight for this right you speak of and have no regrets about doing so. Why is it that you only find that freedom important when it’s applied to the talking points of your own political party?
As to the specifics you were alluding to within your commentary–most people fall within the middle-ground and will vote for candidates with moderate stances on abortion. In Minnesota’s gubernatorial race, the conservative candidate supports abortions in cases of rape, incest, or endangered health of the mother. The candidate also supports expanded access to contraceptives. This won’t come across as particularly extreme to the majority of Fillmore County voters.
“Election deniers”
There’s been controversy surrounding tightly-contested elections from both parties as far back as my 40 years of life allows me to remember. The majority of one party was and may still be skeptical of the 2016 presidential election, and a great many of the other party remain skeptical of what occurred on election night in 2020.
Am I an election denier? Are you an election denier? The current Whitehouse press secretary is on record denying both the 2016 presidential and the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election results. The losing presidential candidate in 2016 used her immense reach to continuously deny the legitimacy of the winning candidate throughout his term. Are they election deniers? Or is it only people you disagree with that can be labeled “election deniers?”
In order to give people more faith in elections, I’d suggest more control of how votes are cast and counted–but we all know that idea sends partisan fanatics into a tizzy.
Julie, I wish you all the best. But I see you throwing stones from your glass house.
Doug Baker says
We are not a democracy. We are a constitutional republic.
Anonymous says
This 2018 op-ed published by the Baltimore Sun, authored by a history professor, sheds further light on the term “constitutional republic” and what it means: https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/op-ed/bs-ed-op-1129-constitutional-republic-20181128-story.html