From: bam@bnlux1.bnl.gov (Bruce A. Martin)
Subject: Re: washington post on pe
Organization: (none)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 22:29:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.1305.194@channel1> "lois laulicht" <lois.laulicht@channel1.com> writes:
>
>...
>Those who have threatened to go fishing in Nov...please don't!
>
>Let's hope we have a candidate we can vote for.

Even if you DON'T have a candidate you can vote for, PLEASE DON'T GO FISHING
this November.  Even if you cannot stomach any of the candidates available,
GO INTO THE VOTING BOOTH AND DO SOMETHING:  write in your own name; write
in Frank Zappa or Albert Schweitzer; write in "Mickey Mouse"; write in
"F--- You"; whatever turns you on -- BUT DO SOMETHING.

This year, more than any time within memory, voters of the USA were FED UP
with the kind of candidates being offered by the two establishment parties.
The people were mad as Hell this year:  finally, they rose up and said
"we're not going to take it anymore!"  The Perot boomlet was a very good 
example of this sentiment.  PLEASE DON'T LET IT GO TO WASTE BY STAYING HOME.

Staying home is considered an "abstention"
(by Roberts' Rules of order and, more importantly, by the Media).
That is how not-voting is regarded -- regardless of what message 
you THINK you are sending.

When you abstain from voting (by not registering or by staying home),
you are endorsing the choice of the majority and saying:

	"Whatever the rest of you decide will be just dandy with me."

This year, staying home says:  I think Bush and Clinton are BOTH fine
candidates for President, and their party platforms are BOTH wonderful.  
If that accurately describes how you feel, then I won't criticize skipping
this election.  However, unless you truly think that Bush or Clinton would 
be good for the country, PLEASE DON'T STAY HOME.

This November, too many people will march into the voting booth, hold their
nose, and waste their vote on "the lesser of two evils".  That's terrible,
but staying home is worse:  it endorses BOTH of them.  If you think that Bush
and Clinton are both bad for the country, SAY SO!  Vote for a third party
candidate, vote for Donald Duck, vote for yourself, whatever -- don't wimp
out by staying home.  In Nevada (only), you can pull the "None-of-the-Above"
lever.  In some areas, you can get a paper ballot and put a big "X" thru it
and write "A pox on BOTH your houses".  (Void votes ARE counted.  A million
VOID votes would make the news.)

Now, I'm fortunate enough to have a candidate whom I can vote for in good
conscience.  I'll walk out of the booth feeling proud that I did my best, not
ashamed that I had to compromise, and I won't have to lie about it 2 years
later when the winner proves to be a big disappointment.  However, I'm not
using this to convince anyone to vote for my candidates (Marrou/Lord).
Just don't waste your own vote by staying home and having it counted 
as a vote of confidence for the wonderful choices you've been offered
by the Demoblican/Replicrat/Incumbent party!

Vote for yourself; for Roger Rabbit, cast a Void vote, vote for Gorbachev,
Jack the Ripper, Ronald Reagan, or Jimmy Carter.  Just do something, 
ANYTHING -- pleeeeeeeeze DON'T GO FISHING!

It would be a perverse waste of your time and effort it the press was able to
call the 1992 Presidential election a mandate for either of the two parties!
If apathy and laziness gives Bush & Clinton 98% of the vote between them, 
the media will declare it a victory for the current policies and leadership
of the two parties, and they will justifiably write the obituary to the
discontent exhibited earlier this year.  If enough people stay home instead
of casting a protest vote, then this year's disgust with politicians will be
soon forgotten, and the politicians will be back to business as usual for
another generation.  Don't lose the momentum -- JUST SAY NO to Bush & Clinton!

Bruce A. Martin
(usual .sig omitted)