This reader will vote for Obama because Romney would be a catastrophe on many levels:
I am just the opposite of many here. I will be abandoning the Green party for the first time in years because, while I did not vote for Obama, the difference between Democrat and Republican is, for the first time I can remember, significant enough to warrant my voting for a less than ideal candidate to avoid electing a truly awful one by default. Even if ed. policy is your only issue, I don’t see how anyone thinks the strong ALEC-driven push to privatize the entire system is the same thing as RTTT. And if you look at all the other issues, the prospect of a Republican in the White House becomes scary enough to vote against Romney, at all costs.
Diane, you have spent the last several years pointing out that it is poverty that creates failing schools, rather than failing educational personnel. I applaud you for being nearly the only strong public voice challenging the prevailing deform movement. However, I cannot believe you are suggesting anyone vote in such a way as to create what will almost certainly be widespread increases in poverty (and therefore worse education for many more kids) through the regressive policies proposed by Paul Ryan and hs running mate. Please, swing state folks–hold your noses and vote for the far lesser of two evils.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I certainly respect your decision. That said, I don’t hold much hope that the Democrats have the political will to what is necessary to fight the conditions that lead to the highest child-poverty rates (23%) among the major industrialized nations. Once upon a time, a few generations ago, that wasn’t the case. As a European-style socialist, member of the Democratic Socialists of America, I can no longer vote for the “less of two” evils. My values prevent me from doing so. Should the Democrats miraculously return to their progressive roots, unlikely until corporations are stripped of “personhood” and elections are publicly financed, I will reconsider.
LikeLike
I think the question boils down to whether you belive that Obama and the Democrats offer any real alternative to the GOP. For me, the past four years shows that the answer is “no”: Obama has consistently moved to the right under the guise of being “bipartisan” and “centrist”; he has accepted in large part the right-wing phony baloney on Wall Street, deregulation, and offensive “defense”, foreign policy, and certianly education. In my opinion, the difference between the parties is simply deciding which one will get us to Hell faster; the destination will be the same in either case.
I see my (likely) vote for the Green party as wholly a moral statement, with the ope that enough will follow that the press and Dems have to start taking a hard look at the truth.
Still, if you want to vote “strategically”, consider that a GOP win will mean that the Dems. will have to offer some sort of balance and will likely block or modify a lot of GOP legislation. If the Dems win, the GOP will only get more irrational, figuring that Obama will keep moving to their position in order to “compromise”. And the corporatists will laugh all the way to the bank.
LikeLike
“And the corporatists will laugh all the way to the bank.”
Unfortunately, tis so true.
LikeLike
Democrats can only be a balance that can block or modify Romney/Ryan’s initiatives IF they have a strong majority in the legislature — and if that majority doesn’t include too many conservative Democrats (because some of them are very conservative and don’t always vote the way we think they should).
If R/R are elected, the same voters will be voting for Republican representatives, and our already mostly Red legislature will become even Redder. If there is some sort of sweep and Democrats take both houses by storm, well, then Obama will likely also win. So I think your vision that Congress will stand up to a Romney/Ryan administration is very unlikely. The numbers just will not add up.
I’ll add that I am also very disappointed with Obama; I think the pundits who describe him as a sort of moderate Republican have it right. However, I do believe he is the lesser of two evils and that the best we can do is the best we can do. There is a value to going down the road to Hell more slowly, that means when the times change, we will have a shorter trip back.
Change is going to have to come from the bottom up — it always has. I look at Wisconsin, Occupy and the Chicago Teachers’ Strike as very hopeful signs. The first lunch-counter sit-ins didn’t end segregation and our first efforts at ending this second Gilded Era fueled by neo-liberal economics may not succeed either. But maybe, just maybe, we are on our way.
LikeLike
I agree with the post about voting for Obama anyway — sort of. There is a difference between the two parties. Here’s how I usually define it: Democrats annoy and disappoint me, but Republicans appal and infuriate me. So I’ll vote for Obama, but it probably doesn’t matter because I live in Massachusetts, which is about as far from a swing state as you can get. (Local Obama supporters who want to help the campaign have to work phone banks or drive up to New Hampshire. The local GOTV for Obama is meaningless unless you believe Romney has a chance here — and neither Obama nor Romney seem to think he does, as shown by the fact that neither will spend a dime on ads targeting Massachusetts voters.) So what I’m curious about is whether that writer will not only hold his nose and vote for Obama … but also support the campaign in other ways, like giving time or money.
LikeLike
“Democrats annoy and disappoint me, but Republicans appal and infuriate me.” That captures my feelings exactly. I have voted Green in several past elections, of course because the Green Party platform best reflects my own views, but even more because I live in Connecticut and don’t have to vote, in a state so Blue, to stop the Republican’s advance. This year, as even my home state looks ready to elect a vapid and reactionary Republican to the Senate, I won’t take the chance. It’s easy for me to cast a vote for Obama.
LikeLike
Linda needs to go away!
LikeLike
The cynics, or the realists, are saying teachers have nowhere else to go. But they can always stay home. And a bad contract in Chicago will mean anger hat will fester for years.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/10/us/illinois-strike-emanuel/index.html
“Fordham University professor Mark “Naison said the policies favored by Obama and Emanuel have gained traction among Democrats because they appear to be a low-risk way to bring in campaign donations from the corporate world.
Romney, Obama spar over strike
“It makes perfect sense that Emanuel pushes this, because this policy makes money for the Democratic Party,” he said. “The big funders love it. Teachers hate it, but teachers don’t have anywhere else to go, right? They’re not going to go Republican.”
“So, if you look at this fairly cynically, you can beat on teachers without undermining the Democratic Party base that much and bring in much-needed financing from the corporate sector. Emanuel is at the forefront of both,” he said.
He called teachers “collateral damage to the Democratic Party’s fundraising strategy.” “
LikeLike
CNN is at it…again. If you clicked the link, you can READ a story that presents two sides. However, 4/5 (80% for all you stats lovers out there!) “watch” segments (which, presumably, had been broadcast on CNN) were pro-CPS: one w/our “friend” Steve Perry weighing in;
one w/Mayor Emmanuel; one w/the CPS Board of Ed. President; one with an upset (over the strike) mom; one covering the picket lines.
Why would you suppose THAT was–because, perhaps, more people
WATCH TV rather than read CNN online? I ask, again, can we be done with the Jim Walton-headed CNN? All the news that’s fit to…
broadcast–for the 1%, that is.
LikeLike
I had planned to meet the neighborhood organizer for the Obama campaign tomorrow to discuss working at a grassroots level in support of the President in my community. I just cancelled, letting her know that the President’s lack of support for public education and embrace of Arne Duncan’s policies have been troubling for some time. His lack of involvement in Chicago is the last straw. I will vote for the democrat running against Romney, but will not offer any further support – no time, sweat, muscle or money.
I would encourage others to write, tweet, and post on the FB pages of the President, First Lady, VP and others. Let them know: starting now, your support is conditional and based on his performance on this test.
Though you can’t publish a post on these FB pages, you can leave comments in posts that are already up.
LikeLike
What I would really like to see is a PAC or Super PAC that identifies and supports candidates for public office who (a) understand what is going on in the debates over educational policy, and (b) understand what a sound educational policy should be, and (c) have a realistic chance of being elected or re-elected.
LikeLike
I think we should keep an eye on Progressives United. Russ Feingold–former Wisconsin senator–and others of his ilk have been sending information on good, viable candidates. This could be the Tea Party arm of the Democrats. They have the potential to gather strength, hopefully, for the 2016 election. Look them up and see what you think.
LikeLike
The differences between the Obama/the Democratic party and Romney/the Republican party are distinct and many (healthcare, environment, taxation), but they are most vividly and simply represented in the form of the last four justices added to the Supreme Court.
If you truly believe that there’s no substantive difference between Elena Kagan-Sonia Sotomayor and Sam Alito-John Roberts, then you might have bigger problems than deciding what fringe party to waste your presidential vote on.
LikeLike
I completely agree with you and the author of the original post. It’s all well and good to promote ideological purity when it’s only your own neck on the line. When I was in law school, my torts professor challenged us to always consider this when making a policy decision: Who pays the price? Who bears the burden?
Who would pay the price for a Romney Ryan presidency? Even if we assume Obama is “the same” as Romney-Ryan on education (which is not really the case) what about everything else? I think these people would pay the price:
* Seniors and impoverished people without ID’s who will be denied the right to vote;
* Children and adults with disabilities or preexisting conditions who will be denied health insurance coverage;
* Middle-income taxpayers who will bear an undue burden because their income is earned from labor rather than capital gains;
* Women who will be unable to secure needed health care when Planned Parenthood is shut down;
* Women who will be denied the right to terminate a pregnancy without government interference in her private deliberations with her doctor;
* People who will lose their life savings in an unregulated Wall Street (2008 was no so long ago);
* All citizens who will breathe polluted air and drink polluted water because of lax environmental standards;
And then, as Tim points out, there is the Supreme Court. The current conservative majority, through the Citizens United case, has allowed staggering amounts of private anonymous funds to be pumped into efforts to influence elections. They have also dramatically weakened affirmative action. Brave Americans fought for years to win precious victories such as Brown v. Board of Education. Are we willing to let Romney pick any more justices?
Sorry to rant and rave. I am nearly 62 years old. When I was born, Brown v. Board had not yet been decided, women who needed an abortion needed to arrange an illegal procedure, and male teachers were routinely paid more than female teachers. Discrimination against those who were gay or lesbian was unquestioned. During my first year in college I watched the televised draft lottery that would send young men off to die in Vietnam.
There is no question that I will vote for Obama and do my best to see that he is elected. My life experiences tell me that Romney would be so much worse on so many issues. I am also not willing to have the most vulnerable of my fellow citizens pay the price for a right-wing Tea Party controlled administration.
LikeLike
I can’t concur. The democrats need new direction away from the current educational deform movement and away from their neoliberal ideology. The only way to get this radical change is for a radical to take the white house, allow for things to get even worse, so the democrats will re-energize with a different, more “democratic” approach. It’s exactly what happened with republicans when they lost the last presidential election – the tea party came about. We need the democrat version of the tea party. Obama is not it.
LikeLike
That was what a lot of friends of mine believed in California in 1966 when they declined to support the incumbent Governor, Pat Brown, a good old Hubert Humphrey type liberal who had defeated Richard Nixon four years earlier in 1962, and instead they figured it would be a good thing if Brown’s opponent, Ronald Reagan, were elected — because there would be a reaction and things would move further to the left in the long run. It didn’t happen. California hasn’t been the same since and Reagan used the governorship as stepping stone to the Presidency.
LikeLike
As educators, we have an obligation to educate our elected officials and the public as to what needs to be done to improve our public educational system. Right now in this country money talks louder but that is not an excuse for us to stop fighting for what we know from our own classroom experiences has to happen so we can provide a quality education for all of our children. It is quite evident that Mitt Romney has a strong desire to privatize our schools. If we do not vote for President Obama and Mitt Romney is elected President, our fight will be even harder.
LikeLike
Yes indeed And I suspect Diane agrees with you and me. Yes, we will have to be an opposition on education after we elect Obama–as well as a few other things. Twas always so and will probably always be so. But if we win in November we can’t afford to squander a moment in building our forces to turn around the Clinton/Bush/Obama/Romney support for privatized dumbed-down education. . If we lose, there will so many different fights that are even more critical than schooling that we’ll go crazy or withraw in despair.
LikeLike
Last year at this time, I thought similarly to the original poster (OP), that not voting for Obama meant risking handing over the presidency to Republicans, God forbid.
Today, however, I realize that I can really only vote my conscience and my conscience says that, whatever good intentions Obama may have originally had, he has proven himself to be a pawn of corporate profiteers and he just can’t be trusted.
I happen to think that anyone who can sell out America’s children is capable of virtually anything. Unless Obama does a total turnaround, which I don’t see happening now, my vote will probably be going to Dr. Jill Stein of the Green party, which has an excellent platform on education: http://www.gp.org/committees/platform/2012/
I think we need to get behind a Progressive third party in a big way. Considering the millions of P-16 teachers and their voting family members who feel betrayed by the Democratic party, as well as large numbers among the 99% who now recognize that Democrats are just as culpable for the inequitable distribution of wealth in this country as Republicans are, I think this just may be the time for that to happen.
Democrats no longer represent labor or support the unions which made the middle class possible in this country. Since the middle class has declined while corporate profits increase, we need to see unions growing, not dwindling. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/04/was-the-decline-of-american-unions-inevitable-ask-canada/ So, at this point, I’m willing to take the risk and vote Green.
LikeLike
I am increasingly dissatisfied with Obama as we head toward the election. The Democrats will never tack to the left without a signal from the voters. Maybe we should ask swing state voters to vote for Obama and encourage those voters in heavily blue states to vote for Jill Stein. Maybe then someone in the Democratic party will understand our dissatisfaction.
LikeLike
All they’ll understand is that no matter how badly they mistreat teachers, they can still depend on them to vote Democrat when it matters. It’s a green light to behave worse toward teachers in the coming four years.
LikeLike