Comments on: My presidential endorsement: voting your pocketbook

By: Robert

Robert — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 17:19:42 +0000

Timothy,

I agree with your reasoning (somewhat) in this piece. I’m glad you endorsed Obama over Romney, but it really isn’t a legitimate endorsement if you plan to vote for someone else. But I am understanding the reasoning you give so that those in more competetive states will vote for Obama.

Good on you for posting the reasons this is good for EVERY one.

And JAY,
Tim did in fact mention the case of Ms Windsor. It’s right up there in the article…

By: Hyhybt

Hyhybt — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 02:50:42 +0000

The word “only” is important there. Yes, everybody cares about their own money, but many people care about other things too.

By: Jay

Jay — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 14:43:08 +0000

Ask Edith Windsor which candidate would be better for her pocketbook. She had to pay $350,000 in taxes that she would not have had to pay had she been married to a man instead of a woman. President Obama is fighting to have DOMA declared unconstitutional; Romney has said that he will defend DOMA.

In any case, the Democratic Party’s record on job creation and other economic indicators is far better than the Republicans. Vote Obama.

By: MCB

MCB — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 08:38:35 +0000

@Neon Genesis
I think a better way of wording that sentence would have been, “Gary Johnson is a Gilded Age lunatic who just happens to be pro-pot and pro-SSM.”

By: Neon Genesis

Neon Genesis — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 03:57:06 +0000

I’m confused. What’s wrong with being pro-pot again?

By: TampaZeke

TampaZeke — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 03:19:26 +0000

Hear, hear Timothy!

Very well stated.

By: MAJeff

MAJeff — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 01:35:33 +0000

Gary Johnson is a Gilded Age lunatic who’s pro-pot and pro-SSM. He may be less anti-gay than Romney, but he’s surely someone who favors the same upward distribution of wealth and income. Hear him on the radio last night…he’s basically a Randian lunatic.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 01:33:57 +0000

Way to go, Timothy. ; )

By: Ben in Oakland

Ben in Oakland — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 23:26:40 +0000

According to the anti marriage people, married life improves all measures of prosperity and health for married people. So, if we’re not allowed to be married, we will be disadvantaged in terms of prosperity and health.

Another pocketbook reason to vote for people who support us.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 23:11:25 +0000

In the spirit of full disclosure, I have to let you know that I won’t be voting for the candidate that I endorse.

I will be voting for Libertarian Gary Johnson. I live in California and have the luxury of knowing that my vote cannot possibly have any impact on the results. So I can vote for the guy who most closely reflects my views on the broadest range of issues.

If there were any chance of the electoral votes going the other way I would vote for President Obama. But he will win by double digits in my state, regardless of what I do.

But that’s my state, and probably not yours. Please consider that if you live in a swing state, a close state, or pretty much any state other than CA, WA, MA, VT and CT, it’s probably best if you let that Libertarian, Green, or other third party candidate fend for themselves and vote for the President to be reelected.