I’m thinking the biggest appeal Obama has is that it would be someone completely new to complain about.

If Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul endorsed Constitution Party along with the “VDARE-Takimag seal of approval” things could get interesting (5-15%). Americans are fed up with the duopoly and it is dishonest to support the culture of death candidates like the McClintiacs and Obamas. The duopoly asked the Buchananites to leave years ago, and it’s time we take them at their word. Also if Bill Kristol is concerned enough to have Alan Keyes check the Constitutional Party escape hatch, it is worth exploiting. It is also the only honest choice having been through years of dishonest duopoly.

Give me a break please, every vote
Obama gets is an endorsement of his far left ideas. Every vote Baldwin, Barr and Nader gets is a warning to our rulers. Obama may be the best of 3 rotten choices, but he is still awful.

Support the most-Anti American candidate becaue he will guarantee Jihadi victory. Dhimmute Uber Alles.

“That is, he’ll quickly become the “crazy conservative” candidate who’s all too easily marginalized and demeaned”

Exactly what they think of the writers and readers of TakiMag, Chronicles, American Conservative, VDARE, the Paulists, the Paulites, Paleo-Libertarians, citizens for a christian commonwealth, the yeomans of the old south and the agrarians of the brand new “world order “ southern partisans and others.

It is clear that neither of the mainstream candidates possesses an ounce on principled conservatism in his veins. Moreover, the act of voting implicitly yields consent and ascribes a measure of legitimacy to a system which deserves none.

I voted for Peroutka in the last election knowing good and well he wouldn’t win. But I voted for him on principle because he was the only candidate for whom I could, in good conscience, cast a vote. I didn’t and currently don’t care what the media or the masses think; this statement is almost an oxymoron because the masses don’t think. They do, think, and behave precisely as they are told and conditioned.

After all, most people perceive the left/right dichotomy as a valid measure of assessing ones political views when, in reality, it is flawed as you seem to rightly suggest.  But I don’t think that most people will re-evaluate such things by a mass movement of conservatives to the Obama-camp. In other words, the fact that most people even take an ideology and view it in light of a John McCain or Obama tends to suggest that most people will be unable to break out of their shells of conformity and realize there is more to life than Republican and Democrat. Indeed, I might be so bold as to suggest that there is also the danger of the masses perceiving that some conservatives are moving to the left of John McCain. This is also not helpful.

Finally engaging in politics, in my opinion, will never bring about permanent change. It will only encourage politicians to misbehave.

Insofar as pragmatic solutions to this conundrum are concerned, I prefer to watch my back and my family and stay under the radar knowing full and well that all empires fall.

As for the election, I have considered voting for a hamster or, more abstractly, for the statement “Kiss my ass.” On second thought, I fear that Federal dollars might actually be funneled to such an endeavor.

Voting for Obama to defeat McCain is a terrible idea.  The greater his majority; the more he will think that he has a “mandate.” Besides that what will you do if Hillary is in the veep slot?

I am rather uncomfortable about a clergyman who is involved in politics. I believe that the clergy are “called” to their work and politics is the domain of Caesar.

The above said, if Mr. Buchanan or Mr. Paul endorses Mr. Baldwin, I will vote for him. 

I agree with the poster that those who are not happy with either the Democratic or Republican candidate should vote for a third party candidate. That is, if that person’s views and the party platform are acceptable to the voter.

If not, at least write in a vote for somebody!

Part of the reason CP and LP candidates get less than 1% of the vote is self-fulfilling prophesy: “I agree with him, but he’ll get an embarrassingly low vote total, so I won’t vote for him.” Too many people think this way.

I’d rather vote for who I want and let the chips fall where they may.

Probably Supreme Court Justice Hillary Clinton. And the party pays off her debts which includes $11M rebate to pay her expenses for dragging things out.

If conservatives vote for Obama and then Obama wins the nomination, conservatives won’t be able to oppose him as easily…

Conservatives need to immediately oppose whomever gets into office because amnesty will be one of the first hot issues.

If conservatives are cheering an Obama nomination, they won’t be as ready to oppose him.

Coulter and the rest would be blamed for “electing that left winger” into office.

The way McCain will lose is if conservatives refuse to vote for him. The GOP base will be split.

Under Clinton there was a strong conservative movement because it was united in attacking him. Under Obama an even stronger and more radical movement could potentially develop, but it must be opposed to Obama.

Solution: oppose both Obama and McCain. Either don’t vote or vote third party.

RonL,

who’s worried about jihad when there’s a tangible invasion taking place right now across our Southern border?

Lind’s solution to Iraq seems similar to Baldwin’s btw: exit and allow a state to form. If anyone knows fourth generation warfare, it’s Lind.

Richard, Richard, Richard. A vote for Obama will be interpreted as one more supporter of his policies. A vote for Baldwin is a rifle shot. It says I oppose John McCain from the right.

BTW, Taki and Sam Francis endorsed Peroutka in 2004.

Richard,
I cannot go along with your idea, which I think is pretty nutty. All things being equal, in a “perfect world,” where the dominant culture treated our ideas with a modicum of respect, such a plan might at least be debatable. As it is, for traditional conservatives and libertarians to vote for Obama this fall might,
indeed, ensure an Obama victory and only make certain that our marginalization increases at a much greater pace. Obama is the scariest candidate since George McGovern (who really wasn’t that scary). With Democrat control of Congress more or less assured and Republicans afraid of their own shadows, support of a messianic egalitarian like Obama will make things worse exponentially. We might all be in jail in a few years.

I am not arguing, however, for McCain. I think, where possible, voting for Chuck Baldwin is entriely preferrable. At least neither Obama NOR McCain would get our votes. And in states like my own North Carolina, with its totalitarian voting regulations, I shall write in (again) the name of Jefferson Davis, on the theory that is is better to vote for a dead president who was good, than a bad one who is alive.

Great set of comments correcting the Richard Spencer third party fallacy.  Actual US history is that third parties create change later adopted by major parties.

If you want status quo, vote major party, i.e. you don’t like 3rd party ideas.  If you don’t want status quo, vote 3rd party. That is what US history is.  That is where real change comes from.  When a 3rd party gets 10 percent of the vote or even less, the majors will coopt part of its program.

I see that NRO has sucessfully spiked the water supply at Taki to make you all look ridiculous!

I actually have high hopes that an Obama administration may go in the opposite direction from predicted.  I refer to his Philadelphia speech on race in which he noted being raised by a white grandmother who confided her own discomfort meeting black people on the street.  He seemed to many commentators to be disparaging his grandmother’s racism, but I think, to the contrary, he was disclosing his understanding of, and even sympathy for, white resentment and belief in the injustice of traditional liberal racial politics.  After all, Obama, while he has brown skin, was raised in a totally white home, albeit as liberal and nonprejudiced as they come, and was infused with their impressions of the racial divide in America, not that of those conventionally called “African-Americans”.  I actually have hope, if you’ll pardon the word, that Barack Obama may do for “counting by race” what Richard Nixon did for America’s enmity towards communist China - bring an end to it.  Who else could we elect that would have the credibility to do so?