Would you folks vote for Kerry if he is the nominee?

[SyracuseDemocrat]

Would you guys vote for Kerry if he manages to get the Democratic nomination for president? I know that I would. Here are the 4 choices in this poll:

Please respond to this thread too and tell me yes or no, and why, if you don't mind, :P

[jiacinto]

1. I just voted

nt

[CMT]

2. yes

eom.

[blm]

3. Easily...because

Kerry and Kucinich are two of the most liberal candidates of my lifetime. I am proud to support them.

[DrFunkenstein]

6. Beyond Traditional Liberalism

I kind of think, perhaps wrongly, of liberalism as devoted to the core issues of past generations such as civil rights, labor, women's rights, and the various programs that make up the social safety net.

I think of progressivism as a sort of second tier of reformist liberalism embodied by groups like Public Citizen. Campaign finance reform, media democracy, renewable energy, cutting corporate welfare, fighting corporate crime, environmental racism, infrastructure rebuilding, trade regulation, and such seem to me to be more activist-oriented issues that define the progressive movement. I can easily someone as being liberal, but not progressive - at least in the terms I see them.

One of the reasons I am so strongly for Kerry is that he has been quietly leading the progressive fight for such issues. With the exception of Kucinich, who in certain ways epitomizes the progressive movement, Kerry is by far the most consistently progressive choice.

Even his controversial vote was steeped in the core beliefs of progressive internationalism. Say what you will about the vote (and you will), Kerry's vision of foreign policy is not far removed from that of Katrina vanden Heuvel (a personal idol of mine from The Nation).

Look at Kerry's record. This is not spin or fancy-dancing. Kerry's record - and vision - is squarely in the second tier of liberalism, the rarified air of the progressive circle.

[blm]

8. To me, liberalism IS progressive theory in action.

They are not separate philosophies in my mind.

[DrFunkenstein]

10. Can a New Democrat be liberal?

I wouldn't consider the New Democrats as progressive, but I could see them as liberals. Hillary Clinton is an excellent example of the distinction to me.

[blm]

11. It depends on the New Dem?

do their compromises favor the left or right? The corporations or the people? There are New Dems who lean left and there are New Dems who lean right. Hillary would be a left leaning New Dem and Dean would be a right leaning New Dem by their past records.

[DrFunkenstein]

4. Only Ralph Nader Represents A True Alternative To The Duopoly

Uh, just kidding. Heh heh.

(Although election reform IS badly needed).

BTW, I was just goofing around Project Vote Smart, and came across Kerry's record on election reform.

Motor-Voter bill: Yes.

HR3295 Help America Vote Act of 2002: Yes.

Shays-Meehan Campaign Finance Overhaul: Yes.

McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Overhaul: Yes.

Never taken a PAC since entering the Senate, and has consistently pushed for campaign finance and election reform, many times working with Sen. McCain.

PS - Anyone think Nader would make a great head of the GAO? How about the SEC?

[DrFunkenstein]

23. For the Record, That Wasn't Me Voting For Nader in the Poll

I think if Nader wants to "excite the masses," he should throw his weight behind the candidate(s) that are most willing to embody progressive ideals. Why not Al Sharpton? Nader obviously doesn't care much about "electability," and Sharpton is a very progressive choice, as are Kucinich and Kerry.

Entering the race would only sow more confusion in an already crowded field.

[burr]

24. Are you sure?

How do you know I didn't put you under a hypnotic trance and have you vote for Nader, when you thought you were voting for Kerry? Or did you put me in a hyponotic trance and force both of us to vote unwillingly for Nader, when we really wanted to support Kerry, or maybe the other way around?

I don't remember voting, do you? :tinfoilhat:

[DrFunkenstein]

25. I can't...I can't remember!

Who am I and what is Chelsea Clinton doing here with Geraldo? Which one has the moustache?

Must...kill...Queen...must...kill...Steve McQueen...

[Parche]

5. Kerry is the one

Because of his leading issues,
Healthcare
Using at least $50 billion to fix America's infrastructure, roads
schools etc.. while helping Americans get back to work
$50 billion that would have gone overseas under bush
He is a Veteran with medals to show for it
He is a fantastic speaker, and will make bush run
His endorsement to and by the Firefighters of America

[lkinsale]

7. No need to vote here because I'll support any Dem we nominate n/t

[CTLawGuy]

9. yes

Anyone but Bush 2004 (preferably Dean however :))

[DeTHuGoFTHuGS]

12. Stay home?

Stay home and let Bush gets another four years?! Hell no! I don't care who will be the nominee, as long as he/she is a Democrat

[LWolf]

13. Yes.

Why? Anybody But Bush.

He does not get my vote in the primary.

[chimpymustgo]

14. Happily. Kerry is a very strong candidate.

He's number two behind my guy John Edwards - but I think those 2 are the most ELECTABLE.

[Alex146]

15. Anyone but Bush

'nuff said.

Alex

[DrFunkenstein]

16. Can we safely shorten that to "ABB"?

I think Anyone But Bush (ABB) should be our mantra.

[TSIAS]

17. Yes

I would answer the same for any Dem who gets the nomination (even Joe).

[burr]

18. Maybe, although I know that is not one of the choices.

It depends on who else is on the ballot, and it depends more on whether or not Kerry is willing to improve the tone of his campaign. More importantly, he now needs to scrap the agreement he made with Lieberman, Gephardt, and Edwards to only participate in six debates at the max. I cannot support any politicians who make such Nixonlike deals that hurt democracy, and I shall not reward them with my money or my vote.

[Cornus]

19. Definitely *YES*

Especially if it were a Kerry/Clark or, BETTER YET, a Clark/Kerry ticket.

[MercutioATC]

20. My choice is Dean, but ANYBODY but Bush...

I'll be very happy if Dean wins the nomination, but I'll vote for whomever gets the nomination.

[SyracuseDemocrat]

21. this may be a stupid question

but, why do some people on here always act like politicians should have to earn their vote, and kiss their feet, and agree with them 100% on every issue? Maybe they don't realize that their vote is only ONE vote, and that, essentially, they aren't as important as they thought they were. Maybe it's just my opinion, but I think that most of the viable Democratic candidates care more about someone donating $2,000 to their campaign, so what does it really matter if you don't give the candidate your vote?

[burr]

22. well-stated...

but ask this question again in six months. Will the answers be different?

The important thing is supporting someone you know believes in what they are campaigning for, as opposed to someone who will says one thing in the primaries and something else in the fall. I want someone who will not just get nominated on electability and nice speeches, but someone who I am convinced truly believes in their agenda..

They do not have to agree with me 100% of the time, but they do need to show some consistancy and interest in what they are campaigning on.

[tpub]

26. ABB

I would, of course, vote for Kerry, because I'm campaigning for him now.

But I will vote in the general election for whoever get the democratic nomination.

on edit: I finally got my star, YAY!