For the Undecided Voter

I once made a rule and playfully joked that my blog would never be the place to talk about religion or politics. And I know I’m not alone in that declaration.

But the reality is that people don’t want to talk about things like that because there are no absolutes. There is no right or wrong. There is no black or white. And when you talk to people who see either one of those topics in that way, it can be very uncomfortable.

I’m not here to make you uncomfortable. I’m also not here to persuade you or convince you or even belittle any of the candidates out there.

I’m here to talk about my personal politics because it’s something I get asked about frequently. So let me put it out there.

political parties

Photo credit: DonkeyHotey


I’m a conservative.

I prefer that term to Republican but the fact is that I am a registered Republican. However, I tend to vote based on my views and values (which are typically conservative) instead of following a party line.

If we’re friends on Facebook or you follow me on Twitter, that’s probably not a surprise. And yet, people are still a little perplexed. I frequently hear the tone in their comments saying something like…

“But Fadra, you seem so bright. Are you sure you’re a Republican?”

To put it bluntly, yes, I’m sure. And I’m not alone, although it feels like it at times.

But I don’t mind people asking me why I am a Republican. I don’t mind talking about who I plan to vote for in this election and why.

In fact, just a few short days ago, I made it known that I “liked” Mitt Romney’s page on Facebook and was pleasantly surprised to see friends who had done the same. But the question arose…

“Ok, deep breath, no judging, just curious, what is appealing to you in the Romney campaign?”

First of all, thank you Jessica for asking in such a respectful way. It really made me pause to see if I could articulate my response. Here’s what I came up with…

 “Jessica – Fair question. I’ll try to keep it simple. I tend to fall the way of the Libertarian. Fiscally conservative and more socially liberal. But I believe in a strong foreign policy. My views and values right now align most closely with the Republican party platform (yes I’ve read the whole darn thing). While Mitt Romney wasn’t my first choice, I’ve come to terms with what he has to offer, specifically in terms of correcting the economy and leading the country into a strong recovery, which in turn, trickles down to affect a lot of the social programs. I believe in fixing the problem and not just putting a band-aid on it. I am also looking for a candidate that has a strong set of morals and ethics, something that is very questionable with our current President.

With that said, I believe in the rights of gay men and women to formal a legal union. I frankly don’t care what you call it. I believe women should have a reproductive choice. I just don’t think the government should be required to pay for that choice. I believe in access to affordable healthcare for all. I just think Obamacare hurts those that already have that access. 

The media perception is that Republicans are rich, old, white guys. Many of them are. But most of my friends feels the same way I do. The same way many Democrats do. They just differ in the priorities of these issues and the means by which these issues are solved.

Neither candidate is ideal. But I’m voting for the candidate that most closely aligns with what I believe is good for the country.


That’s not rhetoric. Just my humble opinion.

I’d love to create an outline of not only why I’m FOR Romney but also why I’m AGAINST Obama. It would include information about joblessness, record-breaking deficit, questionable foreign policy, increased taxes, increased spending, GM bailout, Benghazi, and the list goes on.

But people like Chris Bird have done a much better job than I could. Even 13 year old Jenny Cantrell spells it out simply and eloquently. Obama had a four year chance and we’re really not any better off than we were four years ago.

I’ll admit that Mitt Romney wasn’t my first choice for the Republican nomination but I’m happy to see a moderate in the role of candidate. And Romney has a successful record as a businessman and politician. (However, I hope not to see any White House pets if he is elected). He wants a chance to make a change over the next four years.

As for Barack Obama, I don’t think he’s a bad guy. He sings a mean Al Green. But his views are historically and consistently socialist. That’s something I don’t want for this country. And he’s had nearly four years in office to do what he promised to do when he was first elected with two of those years having a Congress with a Democratic majority. Frankly, we need more than just ideals and promises. We need a plan of action.

It IS time for a change.

As an undecided voter, here’s my hope for you: Don’t take anything at face value. Don’t believe every graphic that gets posted on Facebook and shared 527,000 times. Read. Research. Find another source and read some more. Know that almost all media outlets have a bias in one direction or another. And finally, vote your conscience. Your vote is yours and yours alone. Use it wisely.

  • Tara R.

    My political views seem to fall in line with yours. I’m a card-carying Republican too, but would say I’m fiscally conservative/socially liberal. It comes down to choices, and which one I feel best protects my family. That is my first priority. And, right now, for me… Romney is my choice.

    • FadraN

      Glad to hear it. Just make sure you get out and vote!

  • Andrea(LilKidThings)

    Wow, I could have written your email response almost word for word. SO glad you decided to share with us! I just have one more question. Do you vote early or wait till the big show? Am an election day geek myself :)

    • FadraN

      I am an election day geek too. For me, it doesn’t count unless I’m walking into the polls and getting my “I voted” sticker on Election Day. I just wish I had a chance to vote when we had the metal levers. Now THAT was voting!

  • shellthings

    Thanks for your honesty. I usually feel so outnumbered in my political beliefs(at least as far as twitter/fb, not so much IRL) that I tend to keep quiet b/c I think that a tweet or fb post isn’t going to change anyone’s opinion and I don’t feel like dealing with a debate. But, your post has me rethinking that a bit.

    • FadraN

      Shell – you are SO not alone. Sending some info to you shortly to let you know that. There are many of us that feel the way you do.

  • D. Travis North

    I love and respect that you recognize that you are not 100% party aligned. I think most of don’t fall into one side or the other (it’s not black and white), but I feel that some people settle in one camp or the other. We shouldn’t do that…as citizens, we should read into everything. So first of all, kudos for recognizing that. As a preface to my comments to come, realize that I am Liberal…but it’s not black and white for me either…I am just much more aligned with the liberal views.

    Respectfully, I want to hit on one point about economic policies. “Record-breaking deficit” is the phrase that is used. Adjust for inflation and scale for GNP, truth is that the actual record is held by the F.D. Roosevelt administration. FDR had to create a lot of public works projects like the Hoover Dam, the highway system, utilities and so on to create jobs. This cost the government lots of money. And that is necessary. Governments have to operate counter-intuitively in that regard…spend to recover, cut back in good times. Time and time and time again, that has been the case. And so the deficit doesn’t scare me. What scares me more is that could try to mend the deficit pre-maturely, cutting services and benefits to the public in order to get the number back to zero. That would leave the general public in a bad situation – that’s when inflation is most likely to increase…and at a time when salaries are not budging, that could be really bad. This is where I fear Romney’s business sense is working against him. Government is not a business…it cannot be or it would fail.

    And so I believe that Obama’s approach is the right one. I acknowledge that he hasn’t gotten that far into it yet…it’s a difficult pendulum to swing and it is moving in the right direction…and I feel he’s gotten a lot of resistance. But four years isn’t enough. even took FDR 8 years to start to make an impact (remember, he was in office for 12 years – the first and last of our three-term presidents, save for his death). My fear, then, would be if Romney were to take office, he’d be trying to overcompensate the pendulum the opposite direction. Romney’s trickle down model – very similar to Reagans – doesn’t work. Reagan proved it. He was a likable president, but we are still paying for his fiscal failures. I believe a return to such policies would lead us into a path to failure. Further, I believe Romney’s abandonment of the Green Industry (procured from Romney’s own site, BTW) is short-sighted because that is where the world economy is going, and he would take us out of competition there. You know who leads the green industry right now? Germany (obvious) and China. We need to compete there…it would refresh our economy, it would create jobs.

    So that is the basis for my ballot this year, and there’s not much else to it. There are other hot button issues that irk me – same sex marriage, immigration, etc – but I don’t believe those issues are going to be resolved this term. So it’s really the economy that is my biggest issue. And I don’t think Romney has a plan that works.

    Now you and I have talked before (on twitter) about this very thing. And I love and respect your views and I really appreciate that you are not blind. You and I have differing opinions. But I can’t deny you yours because I truly believe you thought about them deeply and seriously. I don’t have respect for the blind voters who haven’t read the reports or the plans, I don’t have respect for those who vote one way without research. You are CLEARLY NOT ignorant and your views are based on something. I admire that, I love that, I respect that – I cannot say that enough. I wish more people were like you in that regard.

    So thank you for sharing your views.

    • FadraN

      Wow – I’m flattered. I respectfully disagree but I still feel flattered :)

      I don’t believe that forcing an opinion down anyone’s throat has EVER influenced a vote (or has it?) I also think that keeping the conversation open is so important because after Election Day, roughly half the country is going to have to live with the fact that their candidate did not win.

      I’m with you. There are hot button issues that aren’t deciding factors for me. I’m looking more at the big picture, the long term stability of this country, and how to better solve problems both domestically and globally.

      Having been both unemployed and uninsured during Obama’s administration, I got a very different perspective on the need to take care of people truly in need of help. But I also got the perspective that the current government does not incentivize people to create a better life.

      With that said, you did school me a bit. I’m actually a huge fan of FDR and I hear what you’re saying. You also having to consider he was president during WWII. As with Bush, war disproportionately increases the deficit. No way around it.

      I haven’t sited the sources for this video but the first 2 minutes are interesting. and this is an interesting piece from a free market economist.

      It’s okay if you don’t click the links but I like to try to back up what I’m saying :)

      Thank you for stopping by and reading (even though you are decided) and for commenting!

      • D. Travis North

        You’ll want to read my response to Kevin above – I do see potential in the conservative “free market” approach (which is a misnomer, in my opinion, because I don’t believe liberal approach restricts free-market…just more of a watchdog approach). I can’t get to youtube at the moment for some reason, but I will go watch that video. But I did want to offer my perspective as an employer. Truth is that I also had to lay off people during Obama’s administration. I laid off all five of my staff members and I am now working on my own wearing many different hats. That sucks, I don’t like it. But I don’t believe it’s a direct result of Obama. I do believe that it’s a result of bankrolling 9-11: A lot of big government spending uncharacteristic of our Republican President at the time. But I think we made a mistake there by loosening up some of the regs at the same time. Frannie May and Freddie Mac f’ed up. Wallstreet f’ed up. The housing market inflated WAY too high and people were buying houses on ARM loans that shouldn’t have been able to. That is a big problem and I would like to avoid that again.

        Back to 2008. I am not so ignorant to believe that Obama inherited the worst economy ever. But I think the economy had enough inertia that no one could have prevented the years to come. McCain wouldn’t have done it either. As a company, we were projecting a down-turn in the economy before that election (we’re Land Development…our slow-down started well before Obama took office). So we saw it coming. But I also believe it takes longer than four years to pull it off. Furthermore, I believe if there is a drastic policy change – ala Romney – I believe the course change could take another 6-8 years to come around. And I don’t think the middle class can take that course change.

        FDR – He was president during WWII, that much is true. But he took office in 1933 and the US didn’t enter WWII until after Perl Harbor in 1941 during the start of his third term (and we didn’t mobilize immediately…but Pearl Harbor was incentive to pull us in). Speaking strictly about the economics, the US economy was already on it’s upswing well before WWII thanks in part to his first 2 terms. WWII was just the element that solidified and stabilized our economy. Sad to think that way, but the war created a lot of jobs. But FDR and the government created a ton of jobs before that. It’s his pre-war policies I respect most. He created the NPS, the interstate highway system, and a number of great public works projects. That is stuff I think we need to do now: High Speed Trains. Green infrastructure (solar, wind, hydro, hydrogen cell, green roofs, etc). Just think of the jobs that would create?

        Speaking from the perspective of Land Development (my career, I’m a Landscape Architect), I can say that no one would invest in green infrastructure if there weren’t some incentives. But I will say that the regulations put forth by our local governments – Philadelphia specifically – has done wonders to keep my company afloat through this recession. 3/4ths of what I do is a direct result of such job-creating regulations. And they are liberal regulations.

        But again I’ll go back to my initial summary – regardless of what you believe, I think it would be irresponsible for us to try to change the swing of the pendulum mid-arc. We are mid-arc right now with liberal policies under Obama. Romney’s policies – whether they would work or not – would try to change that swing, and that pendulum does have enough momentum that it could hurt someone in its redirecton.

    • Kevin Cullis

      Travis, I respectfully disagree with your statement, “FDR HAD (my emphasis) to create a lot of public works projects like the Hoover Dam, the highway system, utilities and so on to create jobs.” In nearly all cases if governments were to stay out of the way or an economy it would right itself.

      If you look at Harding’s (and later Coolidge’s and Hoover’s) Secretary of Treasury Andrew Mellon’s policies you’d find he created the Roaring Twenties. He: cut tax rates from 70% down to 25% (see the Laffer curve), cut government spending through attrition and “business savings,” (i.e. any reduction in govt needs in spending government budgets were reduced, not like today where any savings are “spread around to others) with these economic realities he was able to reduce our national debt from $24B to $18B by the end of the decade. The ONLY thing that needed to change was the loose money/credit that caused an overheated economy, which if there were some tighter regulations for money credit it would not have had the “crash” it did. Also, Hoover’s economic policies and later FDR’s doubling down on higher taxes and government spending increased the level of bad economics and prolonged it beyond a normal rate of recession/depression. Most historians are NOT economically inclined and so misrepresent the economics of the time.

      Check out what Mellon wrote and how he saw how to fix the problems we had: “Taxation: The People’s Business”

      • FadraN

        Kevin – I love that there are people like you that dig into history to help us understand the context of today. I’m better at remembering the latest celebrity gossip that spouting statistics about former, current, or future policies. And also, thanks for the schooling. I should have paid attention more in U.S. History.

      • D. Travis North

        Kevin – I would like to state up front that I do believe that there are more than one way to right an economy. I do believe many of the conservative approaches do work eventually. And obviously I believe more of the liberal approaches work as well. It’s two sides of the same coin and I do believe wholeheartedly that the economy CAN correct itself without government involvement. However…the reason I favor the liberal approach is because of the checks and balances – keeping business owners honest, giving the lower and middles classes a fighting chance and so on. I simply believe that the liberal approach has far less peaks and valleys if it can be carried out for a longer period than just four years.

        You specifically mentioned the roaring 20’s. Great time period filled with lots of economic growth. But you’re overlooking some of the more subtle details there: 1) The roaring 20’s created much more of a separation between the upper class and the middle class. The history books focus on the prosperity, but it’s really focusing on that upper class (and frankly, the crime that resulted). Prohibition was part of that…it really created a sub-economy (a black market if you will) that made a lot of weathy businessmen. You can’t talk the roaring 20’s without also talking about speakeasys. 2) The drastic cut in taxes (which I support, but not to that degree in such a short period of time) freed up a lot of money for the wealthier businessmen to play in the stock market, a place where they clearly did not belong. To boot, at the same time the reduced government lost it’s ability to regulate things and that led to the stock market crash. That compounded with the Dust Bowl and a ton of other factors led to the Great Depression. It would be fair to blame it on one specific detail, but many economists agree that the perfect storm of events wouldn’t have been possible if the economic policies of the Roaring 20’s weren’t so drastic.

        My feeling is that the conservative policies are focused on the business, while liberal policies are focused on the individual. Again, I do believe both will work in the long run. But I also believe that the liberal approach is more stable in the long run. Besides…without a prosperous middle class, where does the business come from?

        • Kevin Cullis

          Travis, thanks for the online conversation.

          Regarding your comments: “1. I favor the liberal approach is because of the checks and balances – 2. keeping business owners honest, 3. giving the lower and middles classes a fighting chance and so on. 4. I simply believe that the liberal approach has far less peaks and valleys if it can be carried out for a longer period than just four years.

          1. To a certain extent I agree with this idea, but my version of the checks and balances are not economic, but laws. Fairness in laws, not fairness in incomes. Fairness in laws is so not one segment gets an upper hand. Great laws (the rules we live by), well thought out laws means everyone has a chance. Concentrating on THIS part ensures the rest.

          2. I 100% agree, people (businesses, government, AND consumers) all lie. See #1 above.

          3. See #1

          4. When governments “control” economies, you have LARGER peaks and valleys for longer times, see FDR’s policies and you’ll see why. You can’t plan your way out of a bad economy. Let the economy right itself.

          5. The Roaring twenties allowed the lower classes to get out of poverty!!! The economic tide raised ALL incomes. Sorry, but that’s a good thing.

          Thanks Travis.

  • Kristin S.

    Fadra, I respect you for coming out with this so thoughtfully put. I like your attitude and I respect your opinion. I lean left, and frankly, I’m tired of people complaining about “leftist loonies” and “liberal moderators” and “the liberal media” as excuses all the time. I lean left because I could never vote for someone like Paul Ryan, who would – and HAS – voted against providing emergency contraception for rape victims, and with his personhood laws wants to make it more difficult to get contraception.

    I have plenty of conservative friends, and my husband is also a registered Republican. But the thing is that he and I agree that things like choice and gay marriage doesn’t belong in the presidential election. If we removed those things, it would be a clearer choice for more people. I don’t understand how women who are for choice and gay rights can align with the GOP, but the way you put it above starts to make a little more sense.

    I’d like to see more of this kind of post where someone talks about their beliefs and why they believe them rather than the senseless bashing of the other side. It’s why I stopped following Chris Bird for a while, but I realized that I need to see what she is saying too because I try to read EVERYTHING lest I start drinking the Kool-Aid. I didn’t mind Mitt Romney by himself, because under that party line I think he wants to be moderate. The GOP is forcing him further to the right and I don’t like it.

    Thank you for your statements, Fadra. Excellent job.

    • FadraN

      Let’s be fair. There ARE leftist loonies much as there are rightist loonies. Just doesn’t quite sound as good. I think the extremists get the most press and that’s why it feel like this country is so politically polarized.

      I also understand that unfortunately politics are a game. And just as Romney is bringing in the moderates on both sides of the fence, having Ryan as a running mate assures them the Tea Party vote.

      Personally, I loved McCain. And I liked Palin. And then frankly, I couldn’t really stand her. But it didn’t change my vote because I respected McCain and thought he could do the job. Maybe I’m wrong to discount the running mate but I can’t remember a good VP in recent years.

      I will say that the media IS very biased. I will say that it mostly leans left. And when it doesn’t lean left, it leans right. The biggest problem is that media is no longer the unbiased voice it once was. It used to be that someone like Walter Cronkite was the voice and face of the nation, without question. We need to re-establish trust with the media again and I think we’re getting further and further from that.

      But I SO appreciate you taking the time to read and comment. I’m glad to have good discussion from all sides!

      • Kristin S.

        I loved McCain too! Another case where I was poised to vote Republican but could not with Sarah Palin as his running mate. My husband tells me that the VP should be the least of our worries, but I tell him that he only has to look back as far as LBJ to see how that could go.

        I do read media of all sides, and one of my favorite authors is, sadly, quite the vehement Obama hater. But I try to see his point and I wish more people would do that. You’re so right about the biased media in general, and I miss the old days of straightforward news. Now, everyone is a pundit, and people like Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter stir up resentment and negativity. I know there are people like that on the left side too, and I don’t like them either. I really treasure the opportunity to sit and talk to people like you about the issues calmly, addressing the points where we converge, and agree to disagree where they don’t. I appreciate your honesty.

        • D. Travis North

          I was very undecided about the 2008 election. Like yourself, I liked McCain. I liked Obama too…but I wasn’t sure how I was going to vote. I was very close to voting against my party lines. Then Palin came along. It’s not that Palin is herself a bad person. I just think she didn’t compliment McCain well. And if it were left up to McCain, he wouldn’t pick her. But that’s the point. I saw that move as representative of the GOP’s ability to manipulate McCain. Up until that point, I thought he was a good candidate. But then he caved to the GOP’s direction. I feared that would happen if he were in the white house as well. I pulled the lever for Obama.

          I see the same thing happening again. I don’t think Romney is such a bad guy…he’s much more moderate than he would like GOP voters to believe. But he is clearly being manipulated by the GOP. Paul Ryan: Why? He’s nothing like Romney, and it was clear to me that it was GOP’s pick, not Romney’s. So Romney can be manipulated too…and I fear that he wouldn’t be the moderate conservative that he really wants to be. Bad news IMHO. And I think that should be a concern for moderate conservatives as well. Moderates won’t scream loud enough to be heard. In contrast, the extremists will…and the’ll get the grease if Romney wins. That’s what I fear…

          • FadraN

            I don’t think Ryan was Romney’s just as I doubt Biden was Obama’s choice. Romney = older, businessman, moderate. Ryan = young, ultra-conservative, public servant. It was kind of the opposite for the Obama-Biden ticket. Obama was the young, energetic, African American leader. Biden was the old white guy with decades of experience. Both parties try to cover the spectrum. And I’m with Kristin’s husband. The VP is the least of my worries.

  • Mara Shapiro

    See, I’m Canadian. So…slightly socialist it is. I just cannot get over the Republican right’s views on reproduction, homosexuality, and healthcare. I’m lucky, though, I don’t have to choose.

    • FadraN

      Wait – you’re CANADIAN? No, I don’t think we can be friends 😉

      It’s a complex issue and frankly I don’t think women should agree 100% with either side. I think they both have it wrong.

  • Katherine

    Fiscally conservative, socially liberal. Yes, exactly.

  • Jana Anthoine

    You and I are exactly the same in our beliefs… and we already knew that. Thank you for putting this out there so beautifully.

  • Taylor

    Hi Fadra,

    I’m 22, and I am a LOT better off because of Obama’s policies than I would be otherwise. Two main reasons:

    1. Obamacare gave me access to health insurance by letting me remain on my mom’s plan (which we still have to pay for obviously). I work full-time, but at a start up. Our company is growing quickly (creating jobs what what!), but we can’t afford benefits packages yet. I would not be able to work here if I weren’t still on my mom’s health plan.

    2. Obama loosened restrictions on Pell Grants, which allowed me to receive one two years in a row after two years of college debt piling up. I estimate that my college debt would be almost doubled at the moment if it hadn’t been for that.

    Obama’s policies gave me the opportunity to continue working with entrepreneurs rather than going the corporate route (which I love), and effectively cut my college debt in half.

    That’s enough to earn my vote.

    Also, I have a lot of gay / lesbian friends, and I could never ever ever ever EVER vote for someone who would continue to restrict their human rights. It’s so important to me because I’m close to the issue- and it breaks my heart.

    • FadraN

      Taylor – at 22 years old, I wouldn’t expect you to have the same challenges, wants, and needs as that of an (almost – yikes!) 42 year old woman. The only thing I have to ask myself is do I want to create policies to benefit someone that will in turn harm me? It’s a delicate balance and not an easy question.

      As I mentioned, I believe every person should have the right to affordable healthcare. But under Obama’s plan, people like me that already have good health insurance would be forced into lesser coverage. I’d like a better plan.

      I have a lot of gay/lesbian friends as well and it frustrates me to think that people see this only as a black or white issue. For some, it offends them to take a religious institution and offer it to a a group that directly goes against their religion. Personally, I believe that a gay couple should have the right to form a civil union and receive the same spousal benefits as a married couple. The biggest issue comes down to “the word.”

      In all of these circumstances, there IS room for compromise. It’s when EITHER side refuses to see the viewpoint of the opposers that people get angry.

      We preach tolerance as a solution and I’d like to see a lot more people exercise it.

      • Taylor

        Definitely makes sense. My mom always says that if you aren’t a liberal at 20, you have no heart- if you aren’t a conservative at 40 you have no brain.

        In terms of gay marriage / civil unions – I think you’re right that the ‘word’ isn’t so important as the result, which has to be civil rights.

        I’m terrified of the merging of church and state and am thus really scared of a Romney / Ryan administration. I know the President doesn’t pass laws and has relatively little power in domestic policy, but that’s little comfort to me. At 22, I haven’t seen enough of the world to vote on a basis other than social policy and the constitutionality of social policies that candidates talk about.

        The Supreme Court does give me hope if Romney / Ryan get elected. To me, Loving v Virgina (1967) is a pretty clear sign that gay marriage will become legal nationwide: “Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.” – Chief Justice Earl Warren of the United States Supreme Court, Loving v. Virginia, 1967 (replace ‘race’ with ‘sex’ and there ya go). I’m pretty confident that’ll happen regardless of who is president. I’d like it to be under a person who supports that decision, though.

        In terms of healthcare, Congress has voted on Obamacare something like 32 times and it’s never gotten overthrown. Less worried in that arena.

        One huge thing I’m scared of with Romney Ryan — those open Supreme Court seats. Terrified.

        • Kristin S.

          I’m the same age as Fadra – almost 42 – and I have friends who are very intelligent on both sides of the coin. So the old adage “if you aren’t conservative at 40 you have no brain” doesn’t hold water for me.

          My husband is a die-hard Republican and in the petroleum business, so he begs me to vote Republican “for our future”. I, on the other hand, agree with you that the idea of those open Supreme Court seats could be appointed by the Romney/ Ryan team. Romney doesn’t worry me – I believe he’s moderate enough at heart to choose wisely. However, with the influence of Paul Ryan and the evangelical right at his ear, I fear for the future of both gay rights and choice. At the same time, the recent decision to uphold Obamacare, warts and all, hinged on a conservative justice and he made his decision based on what he thought the law said. That’s heartening and makes me believe that whether Romney/Ryan or Obama/Biden wins this election, there are enough people fighting for the causes that are important to us to make a difference.

          Taylor, your well-crafted dialogue is impressive at only 22. Keep questioning and thinking about it, and you’ll know which candidates are best for you.

  • Pingback: What If Romney Wins? | all.things.fadra()