Dispatches from Shakesville’s Descent Into Madness

I think Melissa McEwan has now officially waived her right to not be called a PUMA:

When you assert that a failure to support Obama is de facto support for McCain as unqualified fact, you are engaging in the discussion as if every American lives in a swing state, the electoral college doesn’t exist, and the presidency is decided by a national popular vote total. All of which are wrong.

Very few of us are going to be casting votes that have the potential to determine the outcome of the election.

Many of us can vote for neither of the two major party candidates without helping or hurting either one. And the rest of us, who do live in swing states, can engage in strategic vote exchanges.

Your failure to acknowledge these realities makes your entire argument intellectually dishonest.

Litbrit and Sir Charles say most of what needs saying about this piece of narcissistic crap, but I’ll just add that we’ve heard this all before. Eight years ago, Nader supporters were protesting that they’d organized voter exchanges (which are, by the way, totally illegal), about how the popular vote didn’t decide things even as Nader campaigned in swing state after swing state, about how they could lodge protest votes without making an impact when they ended up flipping New Hampshire and Florida for Bush. They were making the exact same arguments that McEwan makes here, and look where it left us.

For the record, McEwan says she’s still undecided. Wow. You know, if McCain wins, and Indiana would have flipped it, I will remember this act of rank irresponsibility. As I’ve said time and again, there’s no reasonable action for a progressive to take this year other than a vote for Obama/Biden. Those, like McEwan, who pretend this isn’t the case are deluding themsleves.

3 thoughts on “Dispatches from Shakesville’s Descent Into Madness

  1. Eight years ago, Nader supporters were protesting that they’d organized voter exchanges (which are, by the way, totally illegal)
    This is a misreading of the situation with vote swap web sites in 2000. Obviously Nader was trying to throw the election to Bush for his own reasons. He didn’t like the vote swap sites. Republicans didn’t like the vote swap sites either. Bill Jones, who was then Secretary of State in California and a Republican, threatened criminal action on the basis of the speculative legal theory that vote swap sites are illegal. The courts have so far ruled against Jones and in favor of vote swap sites.
    On the other hand, Melissa McEwan’s argument is plainly bogus. Vote swapping is only a partial, damage-control solution to the problem of infighting.

  2. More to the point, what about the states that aren’t “swing states” but just might be. California is not a swing state, but with an anti-gay marriage amendment on the ballot as well as an anti-choice proposition (combined with a popular Republican Governor and plenty of Republican voters in the state) the state could be in play, electoral college or not.

  3. Despite her (and her acolytes) continual protestations to the contrary, McEwan is a single-issue voter. Or, to be more precise, a single cluster-of-issues voter. And worse, she has so blown the importance of her cluster of issues into epic proportions that she’s lost absolutely all sense of perspective on what this election really means. This election is not a referendum on feminism or gay rights. It’s a referendum on thousands more things, important to millions more people–including women and gay folk.
    She’s quick to skewer people on their ignorance of privilege when it comes to issues of sexism, yet she’s chronically, willfully ignorant of her own privilege (and arrogance) that leads her to believe that the country can take four more years of Republican policies.
    Melissa’s life will not likely change very much if McCain is elected, so she’s comfortable with sitting back and sacrificing thousands of other people just to make a point. And that’s what pisses me off about her more than anything else. HER issues are the only ones that matter, as far as she’s concerned. If it doesn’t affect her directly, then clearly, it doesn’t matter, and she shouldn’t bother voting accordingly.
    Funny. That’s the same kind of attitude one usually sees from Republicans.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s