My Recommendations for Election 2024
No, I won’t give you a list of names. I will give you a list of things that warrant de-election, and a process for deciding who’s best to represent you. This was REJECTED for being TOO STRONG.
THE FOLLOWING CONTAINS SATIRE, IRONY, SARDONIC WIT, CAUSTIC HUMOR AND EXPRESSIONS OF FRUSTRATION AND DISGUST AT OUR GLORIOUS LEADERS, THEIR OLIGARCHICAL CONTROLLERS AND VARIOUS OTHERS WHO HAVE GIVEN US THE SITUATION WHICH WE CURRENTLY “ENJOY.” IT IS NOT MEANT TO SUGGEST ANY COURSE OF ACTION OR INCITE VIOLENCE OT OTHER ILLEGAL ACTS.
IF THIS TRIGGERS YOU, OR YOU’RE NOT SMART ENOUGH TO RECOGNIZE THIS, DO NOT READ IT.
ITS A GRUMPY OLD RANT, YOU MORONS. NOTHING MORE. KEEP SCROLLING AND GET OFF MY LAWN! AND TURN THAT DAMN NOISE DOWN!
November 5, 2024–Every outlet on the planet has already given you their endorsements for this election cycle.
Haven’t read them yet? Don’t worry, I didn’t read them, either. We’re good. They won’t let me on any of the Editorial Boards that write them, for some reason. I can't imagine why. Oh, well. C’est la vie.
I generally ignore endorsement unless there’s a good explanation as to why I should waste my precious vote on the knuckleheads any particular outfit likes, even (especially) the ones I write for. I’m just ornery that way. I can make up my own mind, thank you very much.
I’m certain the recommendations and endorsements of the [unnamed rag that rejected this article because it was ‘too strong”] were made only after careful analysis of the candidates and their positions, and you should give them your utmost attention and consideration prior to going to your polling place today.
(Yes, they made me say that, and still rejected the article. Go figure.)
Sadly, we can’t just vote to hang them all on general principles and be done. Until that happy day arrives, here are the criteria I’ll be useing to decide who I’m going to vote for in today’s elections:
For President, I’d recommend a businessman and entrepreneur with a proven record in the office of peace and prosperity, who was opposed by some of the most evil, venal, craven, wicked and despicable people on the planet over the lackwit DEI hire selected by a cabal of many of those very same evil, venal, etc., etc., to be their nominee when their first choice, the Dementoid they said was “fine,” obviously wasn’t.
One was duly selected as his party’s nominee through the standard primary process. The other was…not.
One has a organic base of millions of Americans who genuinely support his plans and policies, and embrace his vision of a better, safer, more prosperous—some would say Great—America. The other miraculously went from the most unpopular Veep in history to the greatest great thing in the history of greatness, literally overnight (if you believe the lamestream legacy media)…until she opened her cake hole and spewed out the word salad. She’s bought herself a ton of endorsements from influencers (while several others have revealed the deals they were offered and turned down), and trotted out a stream of celebrities to read the teleprompter and say nice things about her.
When you’ve got a gazillion dollars of Chinese money and Diddy’s list, you can do that. Allegedly, of course. Just sayin’.
Can you guess who I’m going to vote for today?
Spoiler Alert: not Kamala.
Want an easy way to vote? Just vote AGAINST every incumbent. Things might not get better, but could they get much worse? Somehow, I doubt it. If we do that often enough, eventually we may get a decent bunch. Then, we can reconsider throwing all the bums out.
But, if you’re too much of a weenie to do that, then look up your Congresscritter’s record on these key votes and issues:
-if they voted FOR the NDAA that reauthorized and expanded FISA surveillance, funded DoD trans treatments and abortion travel and a host of other heinous and stupid things? Vote AGAINST them!
-if they voted FOR the last Continuing Resolution without the SAVE Act to keep illegals from voting, instead of shutting down the government to force the inclusion of the SAVE Act? Vote AGAINST them.
-if they’ve ever waved any flag other than the American flag on the floor of Congress, vote AGAINST them. Ditto wearing the flag of any foreign power in any way—their loyalty should be to America, period. Double ditto if they’ve ever worn the uniform of a foreign nation within the halls of Congress. I don’t care where they stand on any other issue—vote AGAINST them. Any of these things shows divided loyalties (if not outright treason) and they don’t need to be in the U.S. Congress. Full stop. ANY other nation. Ruritania, Grand Fenwick, Latveria (especially Latveria!), Do. Not. Care. You are there to represent the United States of America—or you don’t need to be there at all.
-if they’ve been in the House for more than 6 terms or the Senate for two terms (12 years, alone or in aggregate)—vote AGAINST them. They are part of the problem. If they’ve been there more than 20 years, they ARE the problem. See my previous comment on what we can’t do just on general principles.
-if their support for term limits, a balanced budget amendment, completing the border wall, deportation of illegals and actually fixing Social Security a la Simpson-Bowles is not ironclad, vote AGAINST them. If you don’t know what they did this cycle, follow what they actually do (not what they say) this term, and act accordingly next time around.
I can hear the whining already: “Oh, Doc; you have to support the Ratfinkocrat Party. You have to vote the straight party ticket. Blah blah blah yada yada yada.”
Yeah, no. I actually don’t have to, in the privacy of the voting booth. If you choose to be a good little Borg drone for whatever party has assimilated you, go right ahead. You’re probably better off letting someone else do your thinking for you, anyway.
Would now be a good time to mention that I’m old enough to remember when the Democrats ran this state? That I’ve heard that same “support the party” line about BOTH of them?
Straight ticket voting is one of the reasons we’re in this mess, and we can’t ditch it soon enough to satisfy me. This doesn’t mean that I won’t mainly vote for Republicans on the ballot later today—I certainly will. But, I also happen to know at least one complete stinker with an R after their name that I will NOT be voting for, ever. I know them and it’ll be a sunny day in Niflheim before they get my vote, party affiliation be damned.
No, I’m not going to name names. They’re probably not in your district, anyway. And if you’re a Republican in my district and you think it might be you, it probably is. Maybe. I ain’t saying…but I am watching. *makes 2-finger eye pointing gesture*
If you were expecting me to spoon-feed you a list of names, you’re doomed to be disappointed. Too bad, so sad; hate it for you. What I have given you is a method to pick the person(s) to best represent you.
Choosing who to vote for should be a process, not a knee jerk reaction. Hopefully each party can help with that, and a good set of recommendations (with explanations) should be able to help, too. But, it all needs to start with you.
Think about what issues really matter to you. For many Democrats, it’s abortion, first, last, always. As a single issue, it’s in the high 20% range for them, but only mid-upper teens for Republicans. I personally want a good economy, security and safety, peace, prosperity and a small government that leaves me alone and doesn’t raid people’s homes to slaughter their pets. That means Republicans these days, at least in theory.
Key words: in theory.
That being said, I also think we need people of good character who will try to do the right thing. Political power at all levels is horribly corrosive, both to get it and to keep it. Parties are no less susceptible to this than individuals—but that’s a rant for another time.
Here’s one last suggestion for when you vote today: if you haven’t done your homework, and truly don’t know any of the candidates or issues?
There’s no law that says you can’t leave that particular bubble blank.
And if you’re eligible to vote today and don’t, OR you’re ineligible and vote anyway?
Here’s your card: Go To Hell. Go Directly To Hell. Do Not Pass GO. Do Not Collect $200. Go To Hell.
I’m sure you’ll find a lot of Democrat mail-in ballot voters already there.
Yes, it’s true—this was rejected for being “too strong” and “you can’t tell our readers to go to hell,” even if they’re illegals who voted ILLEGALLY. Obviously, that editor was afraid that outlet’s readers wouldn’t recognize a Monopoly card that’s become a cultural icon and part of our national zeitgeist. Sadly, I suspect they’re right about that. They also objected to me calling for the hanging of Congresspersons, despite my clearly stating that we can’t do that. They’re getting a copy of Vince Flynn’s Term Limits for Christmas this year. Fortunately, we have Substack for just such satirical, ironical 1st Amendment emergencies.
I did think about not publishing it, but two things kept coming back to me. First, that unless we assert our Constitutional rights we are passively giving consent to others to take them away, and second, “Publish and be damned!”
Does a platform have the right to reject a piece? Certainly—their editorial standards are their own to set and enforce. Pieces get rejected all the time. Do I have the right to go to another platform, like this one, and rant about it. Oooooh, yes.
Follow Doc Contrarian everywhere or contact him by email from his AllMyLinks page, where you can also find his Amazon #1 book Beyond MAGA.