Last night I had nothing to do for about two hours. So I turned on the debate and listened while I got to work on my sock drawer. I think it is clear to any objective person that Michelle Bachmann was the clear winner. She was sharp and in our face. But it was the one of the frontrunners who got my attention.
I've never been thrilled with the Man's track record or his stance on important issues, but last night he took it to another level. He proved to me that he is bought and paid for by the AARP and that he will do the bidding of the BIS through their Federal Reserve front office. He is part of the problem, not the solution.
I have said to myself in the past that he is not my favorite, but if he gets the nomination, I'll vote for him. That has changed. There are now, only three Republicans (out of the eight popular candidates) I will vote for. If it is one of the five I have ruled out, I'll go third party.
Some will say you can't do that, it's like voting for BO. The popular vote does not determine who is President, it is the Electoral College. In some states every vote is important and the outcome can be decided by a few. Some states vote down clear party lines and their results are all but written in stone. I live in Utah and it will go to the Republicans regardless of what happens. Ross Perot had more votes in Utah than Clinton.
What my vote does do, is send a message. I can join along and say I am fine with the Keynesian candidates of the Republican Party by padding their stats, or, I can can say this man is not buying what they are selling. I can look myself in the mirror knowing I am not one of the enablers. Which is worse someone who compromises their principles to win an election, or a voter who compromises their principles to elect a winner? If people stop buying their product they will either improve the product or go out of business.