Election day is quickly approaching and the prospects for the White House are looking as bleak as ever. The two major party candidates in Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are making Richard Milhous Nixon’s degeneracy look like child’s play. We live in bleak times, but we need not fret too much. The masses need not be doomed to only two choices. There are alternatives. There exist independent candidates who will not win the election but represent the potential for disrupting the status-quo. One can vote for Gary Johnson or Jill Stein or simply not vote at all and each choice presented here could be better than a vote for Trump or Hillary.
Gary Johnson is the #Libertarian Party candidate and represents a platform for limited government and individual freedom. Sure, Johnson has his shortcomings as well. He didn’t know where Aleppo was, but despite that still has a more level-headed foreign policy plan than either Trump or Hillary. Johnson is firmly non-interventionist and on reasonable grounds. The reasonable grounds are those three areas that the U.S. has intervened which are Egypt, Iraq, and Syria, where the intervention has only led to chaos. That chaos has enabled extremist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS to fill the power vacuum which was created by the overthrow of the regimes.
Another Independent candidate one could opt to vote for is Jill Stein. Stein is running for the #Green Party and is similar to Gary Johnson in foreign policy issues and marijuana legalization. She differs, however, in her economic policies. In one such economic case, she is suggesting that student loan debt should be completely canceled. Stein said that “The president has the power to cancel student debt using quantitative easing…” Stein’s proposal is wrong in that the president does not have the executive power to control the Federal Reserve, the organization responsible for printing money and quantitative easing. Furthermore, such a policy would diminish the worth of the dollar and drive up inflation. Thus, the students would still be in trouble along with the rest of us.
If the choices of Trump, Clinton, Johnson, and Stein are still unsatisfactory, one could simply opt not to vote at all. Many people will claim that a good citizen is obligated to vote even if the voter is relegated to voting for the lesser of two evils, but I disagree. The decision to abstain from choosing between nothing but bad choices is a morally acceptable decision. Also, this person opting not to vote can still reasonably complain about the government. After all, this person is still forced to pay taxes and follow the laws that this government passes regardless of voting or not voting. #2016 Election