posted
If i were at least 18 and registered as a voter, I would vote for Kerry. I saw an article that tv stations are going to ban anti-bush ads, but let any anti- things run in tv. btw, bush doesn't know how to accept revolution, such as homosexual marriage, for religious or Biblical reasons.
posted
I have a theory that thousands of democrats around the country are confused when they see John Kerry on TV. They thought they were voting for a popular movie comedian.
Posts: 48 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will vote for Kerry because he is not Bush. And silently apologise to Ralph Nadar as I fill in the circle.
Posts: 2711 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
want2write, I suspect Bush is perfectly capable of accepting revolution. It just has to be for the right cause.
Posts: 1114 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think we should have an opinion about who should be president. I think we should all be neutral.
Posts: 276 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really really hate shopping. It's boring, and I never buy anything anyway, so what's the point?
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm voting for the 'Orson Scott Card/Nora Roberts' ticket!
That way we can nuke anyone to the left of Rush Limbaugh and stop having to pay those insane taxes on furs, diamonds and yachts!
Posts: 2752 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will most likely vote for Bush as well. But let me state that though I generally fall on the conservative/republican side of issues, and I consider myself an independent, there is no way I would ever vote for Kerry. IMO he is too much into the slander and party politics already in this campaign. His only major platform/stratagy seems to be to denounce G.W. in every way he can and create and harness the anger he can generate. While this will play well with democrats who think along party lines, I think it will turn off moderate voters (such as myself). I only wished John Edwards had beat Kerry. I think he had a lot more to say.
Posts: 181 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm voting for Kerry because there's no way I'm voting for Bush. I would vote for Clinton if he could run again. Although I am sick of hearing about the election every time I watch the news; it's only March!!!
Posts: 58 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lambert, only people with -severe- dimentia could possibly disagree that the republican party makes some rather abstract abductive leaps in their press announcments. (i'm not saying you are dimented, however, such behavior does seem to me to be awfully crooked)
Further more, there is at least circumstantial evidence that the bush administration, at some level of hierarchy or other has a pathological tendency to misrepresent information.
In the end i'm not positive i'm anything more than barely luke warm on kerry. However, i will take kerry over bush any day of the week.
Posts: 4482 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm voting for Kerry because I disagree with Bush on every issue except abortion.
If I had any confidence that Bush would actually do anything about abortion, I would probably vote for him, but he hasn't. Instead he has this whole gay marriage thing going on that's really bugging me.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I am reading here again and again is that those of us who will vote for Kerry are doing so for mainly 2 reasons:
1) They vote democrat no matter what. (i.e. "I would vote for Clinton if he could run again..")
2) They will vote for Kerry simply becasue I hate Bush.
I am not hearing that anyone will vote for Kerry based upon his own virtue. Am I the only one alarmed by this??
Posts: 181 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm voting against Bush this November, myself. *wry laugh* But you know what? I don't feel ashamed of that.
It's his own fault for polarizing the country and following some benightedly stupid policies. If he's set it up so that some people would vote for a trained monkey before they'd vote for him, he has only himself to blame.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Me, I wanted to see a Democrat with real ideas and a bit of distance from the long-standing Wasington power auction go up against Bush.
Now, with the Dems selecting basically Bush the eloquent, I'm less inclined to vote to make a change. Kerry will probably pull either Dean or Edwards in as a drum beater, but honestly, either of the two men would have made a better Presidential candidate and president than Bush.
Kerry, well, ummm... no charisma and after what 24 years in Washington, I have to wonder if there's any real connection with the people anymore. Not that I think there is much on the Republican side, mind you, but if we have to cross horses in midstream, I want to be able to change to a stronger, better horse, not one with remarkably similar bloodlines and capabilities.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, there is a difference between voting for someone because you hate the other guy and voting for someone because you don't like any of the other guys policies. Voting for who you disagree with the least a perfectly acceptable, IMO.
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Afte reading your responces I have more questions:
First, in reference to what Tom wrote; "It's his own fault for polarizing the country..." I have to question if that was entirly his fault or is the true origin of the polarization really due to bipartisan ill will?
Second,
"You know, there is a difference between voting for someone because you hate the other guy and voting for someone because you don't like any of the other guys policies."
I agree. The point that I am trying yo make is that IMO, Kerry's only convincing argument is that he is not Bush. I have not heard anything about his plans, with one exception. That is massive tax cuts, which is something all politicians promise. It is almost automatic anymore. I guess I am just not impressed with his "I hate Bush too" platform. Will he have anything of more substance to say?
Third, As I stated above I too beleive that Edwards, or even Dean for that matter, would be better able to compete with Bush b/c at least they had other things to say. I was rooting for Edwards especially and was disappointed when the democratic convention sided with Kerry and his rhetoric. Thus I think we all were deprived of a legitimate option in a Edwards vs. Bush campaign. But no use wondering what might have been I guess.
Posts: 181 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
PaladinVirtue, you made a good point when you asked: "I am not hearing that anyone will vote for Kerry based upon his own virtue. Am I the only one alarmed by this??"
The support for Kerry seems to come mainly from those who are ABB--"Anybody But Bush."
Of course, I have to admit that I am not so much pro-Bush as I am anti-Kerry. So make me ABK--"Anybody But Kerry." For me, character is the deciding issue. Because of this, the last person I would ever want to see in the Whitehouse is Kerry.
The problem for Kerry with the campaign the way it has gone so far, as I summarized in my earlier post in this thread, is that Bush has so far succeeded in framing the debate, and making it be about the issues he wants it to be about. Kerry has been largely limited to reacting, which mainly consists in denial and in characterizing the Bush crowd as being "a crooked group," and "a bunch of liars"--as he stated himself on that occasion when he thought the microphone was off.
There is a lot you can say legitimately to criticize the character of a person running for president, since by almost universal agreement, character is a major factor to consider. However, such criticisms need to be substantiated. Just hurling insults as Kerry did is a classic ad hominem attack, where he denounced the character of his opponent in place of responding substantively to the issues being contended. This was immediately recognized by national media commentators (liberal as well as conservative) as inappropriate, a violation of the rules of proper debate, besides the fact that it was disrespectful to the President of the United States.
Perhaps part of the reason for Kerry's resorting to an ad hominem attack on the president is his frustration, resulting from the fact that his campaign is nearly out of money after all the spending needed to win the primaries, while Bush has over $100 million to buy ads with. At present, Bush is out-spending Kerry 6-1 for campaign ads, and there is nothing Kerry can do about it.
[ March 15, 2004, 11:58 AM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love the way all the same people who always vote democrat and all the same people who always vote republican always point out the foibles of the people they wouldn't have voted for anyway and say, "Oh, he MADE me vote for the other guy with his behavior."
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
Find us an honest politician, and I'll show you a woman that definatively hates shopping.
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
. Synesthesia, are there any others like you? I must meet them. wow.![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
