VOTE TOMORROW - Special Primary Election for U.S. Senate

[ron_newman]

Tomorrow is the special primary election for the U.S. Senate seat recently vacated by (now Secretary of State) John Kerry. Democrats and Republicans will each choose a nominee for the final election, which will take place June 25.

If you are registered in a political party, you must take your party's ballot. If you are "unenrolled" (independent), you may choose which party ballot to take.

Polls are open from 7 am to 8 pm. Find your polling place at WhereDoIVoteMA.com.

Feel free to use this post for any and all discussion of tomorrow's election.

Comments

[ron_newman]

And I'll kick off the discussion with a link to cos's post on why Ed Markey is the better candidate.

[cos]

One more reason to vote for Markey: Carl Sciortino has said that he'll run for the US House if Markey gets elected to Senate.

[clevernonsense.livejournal.com]

Anyone else not voting out of irritation of how mediocre the choices are?

[ron_newman]

What would that accomplish?

(I'd love to vote for Mike Capuano, but he's not running.)

[clevernonsense.livejournal.com]

Low voter turnout has long been interpreted as a lack of voter interest. By happily contributing to lower turnout for this primary I hope it adds to the message that this seat should be challenged by another Democrat during the next election cycle.

That would accomplish a lot more than voting for either of these uninspired choices that basically toe the party line. I also really just dislike both of them.

[cos]

That'd be pointless. People expect low turnout in a special election primary, so nobody who matters will read the message you feel like sending. All it'd do is make you feel personally better, at best.

As for the choices: One of them will very likely become our US Senator and stay for a long time. Take a look at my post (that Ron linked to) to see the points on which they differ greatly - some very important things, like the fact that Lynch is somewhat anti-choice while Markey is fully pro-choice, or that Lynch supports oil and often opposes renewable energy development, while Markey tries to get more attention for climate change and pushes heavily for renewables.

If you really don't care about the points where these two candidates have big differences, then making yourself feel a little better by not voting out of irritation might be sensible. But don't fool yourself into thinking it'd send any message to anyone, and don't do it out of a pretense that they're the same or that it doesn't matter who wins.

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

+100

[clevernonsense.livejournal.com]

To be perfectly honest, I find your response pretentious and irritating (on top of wrong).

I do not want either as my senator. If I do decide to vote, I would not vote for either.

[ron_newman]

Three Republicans are also running, if they are more to your taste.

[cos]

> I find your response pretentious and irritating (on top of wrong).

I felt similarly about your original comment and your answer to "what would that accomplish", but at least I tried to answer by explaining why, rather than just a throwaway dismissal (which is what your original comment seems like). Hopefully it will inform or motivate some other readers of this post.

Whether you want either of these as your senator is somewhat beside the point at this stage: What matters is how you compare them. Like I said before, if you actually think it *doesn't matter* whether one or the other of them becomes your senator and stays for a long time, then you have no reason to vote for either of them, but your self-righteous pretense that it's all about whether you *like* them is silly and I hope most readers here are smarter than that.

Honestly it sounds like you just want to vent some irritation, and have a frivolous view of voting, too. Otherwise you might've answered by explaining why you don't see the difference between them as being important, and also don't have a preference about who wins the Republican primary.

[rozasharn.livejournal.com]

That's fine. Write in someone who would be a better candidate. That will do slightly more to send a message.

Not voting doesn't exert any influence on the game: it just means you can be counted out of the game.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Why do discussions of voting have to include at least one thread about proudly disparaging the act of voting?

For my part, considering how many different groups of people fought for my right to vote, I'd be ashamed of myself if I didn't, even if the candidates were far more similar and the choice much less clear-cut than is actually the case.

[gingicat]

*applauds*

[redcolumbine.livejournal.com]

(applauds) (waves lighter) (buys the T-shirt)

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

So tell me: what makes Markey mediocre, and what makes Lynch mediocre?

[pywaket.livejournal.com]

Not me. If you don't think there's any difference between Markey and Lynch, and that one of them isn't clearly a better choice, I'm not sure what I could possibly say to you.

Perhaps you should go and write in Ron Paul.