Here at our campaign, we're trying to decide why there would be Undecided voters left in this country right now. I said that certain groups that are completely left out of the major parties, such as Libertarians, Classical Conservatives, Log Cabin Republicans, might still be Undecided. So, as a Libertarian, who are you voting for: Bush, Kerry, the Libertarian candidate, none, or decline to state?I call myself a "small-l libertarian," although I did vote for the Libertarian candidate, Harry Browne, in the 2000 election. I did briefly volunteer for the Bush 2000 campaign in New Hampshire, but that was more out of lack of other interesting options (I was on a school program in which we had to volunteer for someone in the NH primary, and I had no strong allegiance to any of the candidates at that time). In this election, though, I will not be voting at all. My reasons:
I am currently registered to vote in Massachusetts. I could have maintained my registration in Texas, but didn't bother. Those are perhaps the two safest states in this election. My vote would make no difference. I don't think the popular vote is a more valid mechanism than the electoral college and thus feel no impulse to affect the popular vote tally.
My normal reaction to this situation would be to vote Libertarian. It would help them get ballot access and (teehee) federal funds, and I am not a huge fan of the two party system. However, the LP candidate, Badnarik, is a loon. I can't cast a vote for a whack-job. I have nothing in common with the Greens. There is nothing for me to vote for.
I hope that is a sufficient explanation, Kathy. I wish you luck, though, because if your guy wins we get gridlock, and gridlock is good.