Reply #10: That's the way it goes, unfortunately [View All]

[question everything]

How much "electability" went into Clinton campaign back in 1992?

Back in 1998, when Bush's name first surfaced I knew that he was going to be the next president. Because of his name, and because the Republicans were aching for a "Bush" to beat Clinton-Gore. It really would not matter what he personally stood for. He was going to be manipulated by the RW for revenge of the Clinton years.

Dean scared me and he scared many. He is against the war in Iraq, as is Kucinic, but the majority of the voters supported it - at least, until recently. According to TIME poll, more than 50% still do.

This is a year where a military experience does count, whether we like this or not. This is why Clark was brought on board.

We do not always vote for the candidate; we vote for his/her ideas and philosophies and I will take Kerry over Bush any day.

Do people here prefer to be martyrs, to cling to a purity of thought, to say that they did not compromise their conviction while Ashcroft marches to Patriot III through X and beyond? Do people would rather venues like this one closed down or dwindled because Big Brother watches who posts here? Do people want four more years of Bush so that he can appoint one, perhaps two Supreme Court justices?

I am not willing to take the chance. The nature of politics is that it is based on compromises. And we have the system of checks and balances. One reason why California ended up in such an economic mess and Davis replaced with the Gropernator was because the Republicans in the assembly shriveled into an insignificant majority and no one was there to check for fiscal responsibility, to force the Democrats for compromises.

I may not like all of Kerry's past actions and future proposals just as I did not like Clinton's. I think that many of us were waiting for a "none of the above" - yet another candidate who would be perfect. But we are stuck with this roster. If Edwards is still viable I will vote for him on Super Tuesday but I will vote for Kerry in November. I have to. The stakes are too high for four more years of Bush.

Especially for Dean and Kucinic and Sharpton followers who, I think, are the most diametrically opposed to Bush. Are you really willing to sacrifice four more years of Bush-Ashcroft-Scalia just to preserve your purity? Are you afraid that if your candidate wins he, too, will end up making compromises? I am not a psychologist but I have to wonder about this kind of an attitude.