Chuck Muth: How Not to Win Votes and Influence Conservatives

By Jason Wright, Editor

Filed Under Race for White House 2008 on Jul 6 

Chuck Muth’s latest op/ed (“Muth’s Truths”) is a welcome reminder of why I like him so darn much. There might not be another pundit I more frequently agree with.

Enjoy his latest on the GOP’s efforts to ram the McCain nomination down conservatives’ throats:

How Not to Win Votes and Influence Conservatives

I understand the frustration of many Republicans who just can’t understand how some conservatives just can’t bring themselves to support John McCain even though Barack Obama would likely be an even worse president than Jimmy Carter. I really do feel your pain. However…

It’s still a long, long way to election day. Many conservatives who are saying today that they can’t vote for McCain will come around and vote for McCain in November. Heck, I might even be one of them. But let me warn partisan Republicans that you’ll catch more wayward conservatives with honey than you will with vinegar.

For example, here’s what NOT to do if you want to persuade disgruntled (legitimately so) conservatives to vote for McCain in the fall rather than push them further away and force them to dig in their heels. This came to me recently in an email from an unknown McCain supporter:

“John McCain is THE Republican nominee, and though you may think he’s not ‘this,’ or ‘that’ enough for you, he is 10,000% better than the alternative. SO, enough of the ‘He’s not my first choice…’ crappola. McCain is your choice, period. Got it? Because, if you can’t suffer your personal political problems in silence, we don’t want to freaking HEAR from you. This ain’t the Whining Party, this is the Republican Party. Get over yourself, and get with the program.”

It is impossible to overstate exactly how stupid something like this is.

Conservatives, by definition, are independent thinkers. Liberals embody the herd mentality, where being told to “get with the program” actually works. But when you tell a conservative to “get with the program,” there’s a very good chance the conservative will go the other way just for spite. We are, at our core, anti-authoritarians. We don’t like being told what to do. By anybody.

And while John McCain might be the Republican nominee, he wasn’t MY choice…or the choice of a great number of Republicans. In fact, John McCain won the nomination by winning a lot of states in which NON-Republicans were allowed to vote for the Republican nominee.

It is not MY obligation to vote for John McCain just because he’s the Republican nominee. It is John McCain’s obligation to earn my vote. So far, he hasn’t. Doesn’t mean he can’t. He just hasn’t yet. But I can tell you this: Telling me to suffer the McCain nomination in silence and get with the program ain’t gonna cut it. That dog won’t hunt.

I could not agree more. I’m not required to vote for Senator Stiff just because he’s the nominee. I’m sick-to-death of hearing that I must support McCain because he’s the lessor of two evils. It’s almost always better on the soul to make no choice than a bad one.

Comments

25 Comments

  1. ShawnN on 06.07.2008 at 13:33 (Reply)

    Whoa, sounding a little Libertarian there now, aren’t we?

    Seriously, I love Chuck Muth. He’s the reason I found out about PD in the first place, so you can thank (or, I guess blame) him for me hanging out around here.

    And, surprise, surprise, I agree with the post 110%. Nothing ticks me off more than being told I should get in line and pull the lever for McCain.

  2. JE on 06.07.2008 at 14:45 (Reply)

    Agree completely. The problem with the ‘get with the program’ republicans is that they are just that…republicans. Anyone who brags they are “a lifelong ____(party of your choice here)” is a fool to some degree. I am a conservative. I don’t really give a rip what party the candidate is in if he/she is the best qualified and aligns most closely with my beliefs. Conservative does not equal republican, that’s just been the most common option that worked. This year “shut up and vote for mcCain” is not a slogan that will work. And for the
    ‘lesser of 2 evils’ people just remember, voting for the lesser of 2 evils is still a vote for evil.

  3. kristen on 06.07.2008 at 15:22 (Reply)

    I love Chuck Muth. I haven’t visited him in a while; need to do that. (Although, he seemed MIA for a little bit there.) This is a great piece.

    There are other options when voting: writing in a name, choosing someone from a less prominent party, etc. My father in fact voted for the person in the Constitution Party last election….knowing full well that he wouldn’t garner near enough votes to win; it’s the principle. I may do the same this year. But there’s still that part of me that is scared to death of BHO becoming our next Commander-In-Chief, which could push me to vote McCain. This is one of the tougher election years I’ve faced.

  4. Whodat in Texas on 06.07.2008 at 16:18 (Reply)

    What a load of sanctimonious crap! I muth protest!

    Muth: “It is not MY obligation to vote for John McCain just because he’s the Republican nominee. It is John McCain’s obligation to earn my vote.” Horse manure.

    Me thinks it is time “conservatives” let go of the word “conservative”. After all, wasn’t “W” a “conservative”? Didn’t all the conservatives line up for Bush II? Well, he has spent more money by far than did the “liberal” he followed. He has imprisoned border guards who shot a drug dealer, he went to war without a real plan, he has increased control of local schools by the Feds and he has sought stupid deals with evil people.”
    In my book, “W” stands for WORTHLESS and certainly not “conservative” in any way.

    And what did conservative Bush II do for the right-to-lifers? Same as his daddy and same as Reagan: nothing. Fact is, not much can be done. This is America and it is our nature to SUPPLY any service the MARKET DEMANDS. Women demand abortions. Thump your Bibles and beat your chest all you want, scream “conservative” until you can’t talk, but the market will supply what consumers want – or, they’ll go elsewhere (overseas, off-shore, back to butchers in back alleys. I am a Christian. There is sin all around me. I can’t even stop all of my own, much less change the whole world, especially just by voting for a politician who says he’s conservative.

    So, politics is like golf: You take the lie you’re given and you play the best shot you can. Weeping about how you got in that mess or trying to blame somebody else or looking for
    a miracle shot so trying to force a change of luck by swinging like an idiot – none of those things will help. Most will hurt. No, you find the sure way to the fairway, the lesser of the evils, and play on.

    To elect Obama, by either direct vote or by abdication of reason through pouting and quitting is like leaving your golf game because you won’t break par. Was Bush I par? Was Bush II par? You probably were never going to break par anyway. Forgetaboutit.

    Whodat ain’t “Conservative” if Bush II is conservative

    1. Jason Wright, Editor on 06.07.2008 at 18:41 (Reply)

      Whodat, I usually agree with you, and sometimes even find myself reciting your catchy rhymes in bed, but I just can’t dance with you on this one. This wasn’t a post about whether Bush was a conservative or not. I think most here would agree he’s proven that “compassionate conservative” means “liberal”.

      This is about whether we want yet another step backward by voting for McCain. Of course I’m not thrilled with an Obama presidency, but I’d rather feel good about my vote. I certainly don’t want to be responsible for putting McCain in office on the high probability he appoints cruddy judges (very likely). (not to mention his love affair with global warming and illegal immigrants)

      The difference between Obama and McCain is that with the D you know exactly what you’re getting, with the R you might as well play Russian Roulette until you lose.

  5. Troy La Mana on 06.07.2008 at 17:44 (Reply)

    Well Jason you know how I know Chuck and I couldn’t agree more.

    Whodat: This is exactly the reason Barr has my vote.
    The GOP needs a wake up call and if we just vote like sheep they aren’t going to change.

  6. Whodat in Texas on 06.07.2008 at 23:27 (Reply)

    Gentlemen, Friends,

    I got the “wake-up call” when my “protest vote” for Perot resulted in Clinton’s election.

    We sure taught Bush #I a lesson, didn’t we? ‘Course, we got Clinton.

    Sine then, I vote strictly “the lesser of the evils” and then pray they will be.

    Whodat is older and, perhaps not wiser, but certainly more pragmatic

    P.S. Jason, if you are turly reciting my poetry in your bed, you need professional help quickly. Step away from the blog and check yourself in!

    1. ShawnN on 07.07.2008 at 12:02 (Reply)

      Whodat, I mean no disrespect to a person like yourself whom I feel is a true conservative at heart…BUT…how many “wake up calls” will it take before your party (not mine) puts up a real conservative? I am amazed by the “I’ll take the slow death over the quick one” mentality. Having your rights stripped and your income confiscated is bad whether it is done quickly (Obama) or slowly (McCain). If you continue to reward your party by voting for whomever they give you, what makes you think they will change their behavior? Stop pretending that McCain is the answer to the problem. I for one, would be mad as hell if I were a die hard Republican and this was the best my party could do. Do you really think things are going to be better under McCain? When you have McCain’s Cap’n Trade shoved down your throat and you are paying $810 for a gallon of gas, you let me know how that saving vote for McCain went…

      Again, no disrespect intended, but I respectfully disagree…

      1. Whodat in Texas on 07.07.2008 at 15:33 (Reply)

        I don’t worry much about being disrepected. I believe that the First Amendment does not just insure our right to debate, it
        implies an obligation that we debate all sides,

        What we argue here, however, is not important compared to doing all that is legal to insure Obama does not win. To “vote on principle” or to “protest” or to use some convoluted logic that by losing (an Obama win) we will somehow win in the long run is beyond my understanding.

        The next president will likely appoint 4 or 5 SC judges plus hundreds of lower judges. On McCain’s worst day, I would feel safer with his judges than Obama’s (and his liberal lawyer wife’s) choices.

        What is the real goal? Do not lose. Do nothing that will insure losing.

        Take the lesser of the bad choices and let that be our starting point for the future, not suffer a loss which will take us even farther back away from our goal.

        Winning always requires pain and sacrifice. In this case, that means voting for McCain, somebody you do not like. But, losing (i.e., turning the gov over to the Barack Flock) is always worse.

        Whodat the philosopher has spoken
        (burp)

        1. ShawnN on 08.07.2008 at 12:48 (Reply)

          “To “vote on principle” or to “protest” or to use some convoluted logic that by losing (an Obama win) we will somehow win in the long run is beyond my understanding.”

          You mean kinda like fighting the loosing battle of the Alamo was without merit? As a Texan, you should be ashamed of yourself. Sometimes we have to fight loosing battles for the win in the long run. And just like the Alamo, I look at the loosing battle for a Bob Barr presidency as part of the long haul strategy. We can’t keep going down this road expecting a different result. You people are only looking at the next four years. A bit short sighted. I am looking at the battle for the rest of my life. Something drastic needs to happen – and if that is Obama, then so be it. Besides, could you really see Davy Crocket or Jim Bowie voting for McCain? Hell, they would probably challenge the man to a duel!

  7. Lazlo on 07.07.2008 at 06:06 (Reply)

    The second they call you a name, you will cower like the socially-dependent punks you are and vote for McCain.

    So stop fronting and keep on destroying the country.

  8. JE on 07.07.2008 at 08:42 (Reply)

    If the founding fathers had followed the ‘lesser of 2 evils’ and ‘got in line with the party’ we would still be having tea time in the afternoon. Though the taxes that drove them to war were alot less than what we pay now. As far as the Bushes…GWB got re-elected not because we all loved him but there were no other choices and we did the lesser of 2 evils…hows that working out again? I would make a comment about them being from texas but will defer out of respect for whodat…though i second the thought that quoting his poetry in bed means jason needs help. Serious help.

  9. ShawnN on 07.07.2008 at 12:06 (Reply)

    Amen to all three points (GWB, respect for Whodat, poetry in bed thing).

    I voted for GWB out of fear last election. Never again.

  10. Gary Russell on 07.07.2008 at 15:49 (Reply)

    Along the lines of these posts… a serious question…

    Is there ANY realistic scenario where a conservative uprising at the convention could result in a different nominee?

    1. David Kaiser on 07.07.2008 at 22:17 (Reply)

      The answer Gary is slim to none, and Slim just left town with a gal of questionable morals.

      1. ShawnN on 08.07.2008 at 12:25 (Reply)

        I didn’t know Slim was dating Hillary? When did that happen?

    2. Lazlo on 08.07.2008 at 06:35 (Reply)

      Not in today’s America.

  11. Gary Russell on 07.07.2008 at 15:50 (Reply)

    And, if so, is there a true conservative leader around whom the party could rally?

  12. Cordeiro on 07.07.2008 at 18:06 (Reply)

    Although I can see both Jason’s and Chuck’s logic and reasoning, I’m gonna have to side with Whodat on this one.

    I’m not a huge fan of Senator McCain. I’m not sure I’d be even a lukewarm fan of President McCain. Having said that, an Obama presidency is not one I think I could live with having facilitated by sitting this one out.

    1. Whodat in Texas on 07.07.2008 at 21:49 (Reply)

      Welcome Aboard, Cordeiro! I was sure getting lonely over here all alone…

      No matter what, no President Obama!

      Yes, McCain is not “conservative”, but he is nowhere near the Senate’s #1 liberal. Yes, McCain has some friends I don’t like, but I don’t like Rev. Wright and Obama’s wife and the convicted felon, and old hippie-weatherman and all the rest of the kooks and spooks who gonna come marching out when Obama takes over.

      1. Alaina on 08.07.2008 at 12:50 (Reply)

        I’ll join in with the two of you. Yes, there are things I don’t like about McCain, but who is ever really entirely happy with a candidate? I used to say anybody but Hillary, now, and I can’t believe I’m actually saying this out loud, she even looks good to Obama.

        Although I’m not entirely happy about it, McCain will have my vote in November.

    2. ShawnN on 08.07.2008 at 12:56 (Reply)

      Corderio – So you would rather see Bush after Bush after Bush. McCain after McCain after McCain? When does it end? You would rather die a death from a thousand toothpick pokes than take the knife like a man, rip it out, heal and get on with the battle? Kinda wimpy. You guys keep voting for the GOP. You let me know how McCain’s cap’n trade works out for you.

      I gotta go clean my pistol. Lazlo keeps talking about some revolution that might happen… but I’m not holding my breath. Conservatives got no Cojones any more.

  13. Lazlo on 08.07.2008 at 06:36 (Reply)

    Define “conservative”.

  14. Jason Wright, Editor on 08.07.2008 at 08:14 (Reply)

    Whodat makes good points, and I see his side perfectly. There are good arguments to make both ways. Sadly it looks like it may not matter whether some of us abandon McCain or not. Obama is looking strong.

    And I think it’s inaccurate to call a vote against McCain a “protest vote”. That’s not what I’d be doing at all. I’d be voting for the best candidate (in my view) of those available to run the country. Period.

    1. Troy La Mana on 08.07.2008 at 12:10 (Reply)

      My vote for LP started out as a protest vote. But I think Barr is, at this point, the better choice.

Leave a comment