My Election Day Decision
I explain the reasoning behind my 2024 vote.
Note: I hadn’t planned on writing anything before the election results came in, but I shared this at Racket News and believed I owed it to my subscribers to know what I wrote there. Here’s who I voted for in 2024 and why:
When I first registered to vote, I registered as a Democrat. At the time, my thought process was I could track Democratic candidates while I might ask my parents about Republican candidates (they were both Republicans) and get an idea about who to support. Truth be told, though, I never really had an allegiance to any party.
The first Presidential election I voted in was 1992. While I found Ross Perot intriguing, I had questions about his decision to withdraw from the race, then re-enter, and wound up voting for Bill Clinton.
I didn't vote in 1996 because I forgot to do so. In 2000, I didn't follow things closely and voted for George W. Bush. In 2004, I found myself not liking either candidate and voted for Ralph Nader. And in 2008, I was impressed with Barack Obama and happily voted for him.
I then saw what happened under Obama and was disappointed. I also came to the conclusion that I really wasn't the type of person who wanted to be a political party member. Therefore, when I had to update my voter registration, I registered as an independent.
In 2012 and 2016, I voted for Gary Johnson for President. In 2020, I didn't cast a vote for President because I wasn't enthused about any of the candidates, though I did vote down ballot.
Now, in 2024, I cast my vote for Donald Trump. Allow me to explain why.
Simply put, while I can't say for certain what I will get with Trump in terms of policy, I know exactly what I'm going to get from Kamala Harris, both in terms of policy and in terms of her ability to actually make decisions.
When it comes to policy, I can see what's coming with Harris: More forever wars, more reckless spending, more immigration with no reform in sight, more of the censorship industrial complex, more placating corporate America, and more ideological nonsense about race relations and biological sex.
As far as making decisions go, I can already see that Harris is going to let the bureaucrats run the show like they've been doing the past four years, all while going after average Americans who might say stupid things, but that doesn't make that a crime.
I keep hearing people say that Trump will weaponize the system against his critics, but if he had wanted to do that, he would have done so during his first term. Meanwhile, look at the past four years to see who is in charge and who is weaponizing the system.
Back to Harris: The woman cannot answer the simplest of questions in which people understand exactly what she means. Compare Harris to Hillary Clinton and Stacey Abrams. There are plenty of things Clinton and Abrams say that I don't agree with, even things I think are ridiculous, but they are both able to answer simple questions, in ways in which people know what they support or believe. You don't get that with Harris.
The reality is that Harris failed to get any traction in the 2020 Presidential primaries, to the point she pulled out before the Iowa caucus even took place. Then we watched as Democrats and their apologists in the media denied that there was anything wrong with Joe Biden, until they could no longer deny it, at which point they made Harris the nominee.
After having watched Harris stumble in trying to offer simple explanations for where she stands on the issues or how she differs from Biden, I turned my attentions to Trump and listened to him more carefully. There are still things he said that I don't like, but I see him doing more to build a coalition of sorts.
I listened more to JD Vance, his vice presidential pick, and found him to be insightful. I don't agree with everything he says but, in Vance, I see someone who will listen to people, empathize with them and push for changes that will benefit all Americans, not just a select few.
I applaud Trump for bringing Tulsi Gabbard into the fold. I strongly support Gabbard's foreign policy stance, in which she supports noninterventionism and wants to seek peaceful resolution as much as possible.
I have become more intrigued by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., even as I'm skeptical about his observations regarding vaccines and autism. I do not believe vaccines cause autism and that people backing the claim are falling into the "correlation equals causation" trap.
With that said, I don't dispute that there are people who have experienced real negative side effects from vaccines and we need to know more about why. That way, we can do a better job of advising people about vaccines, rather than treating them as "one size fits all" and, when it comes to risk, declaring "nothing to see here." And, yes, it is possible to inform people about risks without declaring that all vaccines are dangerous with no benefit at all.
Second, I do believe RFK Jr. is onto something regarding the food we eat. I do question whether we should have advised people to eat less meat, eggs and dairy products and eat more grains, particularly when it comes to cereal. It's also time to ask whether or not switching from beef tallow to vegetable oil for most cooking was a wise decision.
I'm also hopeful that Vivek Ramaswamy will get a position in Trump's Cabinet, should Trump win. I think Ramaswamy does a great job presenting his cases. Also, his willingness to listen to anyone, even if he disagrees with their position, is exactly what I want to see.
I've also seen Trump's willingness to listen to people of all backgrounds and let them have their say. I was impressed by his willingness to let a group of Muslim voters speak at a rally in Michigan. Meanwhile, Harris is lecturing pro-Palestine supporters about how "I am talking here" like a scolding mother instead of saying something more diplomatic like "I understand your concern, but please hear me out."
I am skeptical that I will see a lot of changes under Trump but I am certain that we won't see anything change at all under Harris. And the reality is this: Some things need to change because the establishment has fooled around long enough.
With Harris, I know what I'll get and I don't like any of it. Therefore, I'll take my chances with Trump. He wasn't that bad the last time he served, even if I didn't care for the way he played politics. I may not be certain what Trump will do this time around but better to chance that than to stick with the status quo that we will get with Harris.
(By the way, for anyone asking if I registered as a Republican, I did not. I remain registered as an independent and I plan to keep it that way. I did not vote in the primaries and I accept that, but I have voted in the general election via early voting.)