If Kerry becomes the nominee, why WON'T you support him?

[littlejoe]

And what are your plans?

[mondo joe]

1. FMA

I expect to support Kerry.

If he indicates his support of a Federal Marriage Amendment I will vote Libertarian instead.

[littlejoe]

8. Personally, I don't think he will want to address that issue.

[Cptn Kirk]

154. Legally it doesn't matter

As the pres need to approve (nor can he/she veto) a constitutional amendment.

However, I would find such a position repulsive and likely vote Green.

[CPschem]

2. He sure as hell gets my support if nominated. n/t

[liberalnurse]

3. He comes into this as the anointed one......

The DLC/DNC are self preserving democratic failures who could care less about the party beyond what they can suck from the veins of the constituents. They fail at leadership. we have all recognized the "spineless dem's" during this *bush regime.....Kerry is in place to insure that power remains constant. That is why Dean had to be eliminated in such a vicious fashion.

thus.....

I can not support Kerry.......

[nickinSTL]

7. FMA

"I expect to support Kerry.

If he indicates his support of a Federal Marriage Amendment I will vote Libertarian instead"

Hmm, I guess since Kerry has said he supports civil unions, I hadn't considered that he might back an amendment. Maybe if the amendment didn't exclude civil unions, he might. I hope not.

If he did, I might actually have to vote for some 3rd party. And, it would take a lot for me to not vote for the Dem to get Bush out.(woo, bad grammar)

[liberalnurse]

11. Sorry to disappoint you but he is going there.

He will go very much to the center now.......he won't come right out and say it ....he dances well. Look at his votes.....

[emulatorloo]

23. His votes are contrary to your position. . . .

He is in favor of civil unions, against a FMA.

[littlejoe]

27. I have looked at his record, and it is liberal.

He won't go there.

[BL_Zebub]

39. I'm assuming you stopped looking at his record as of 12/12/00

Because he hasn't done shit that could be considered "liberal" after that.

[lifelong_Dem]

60. Bullshit

He opposed Bush's tax cuts for the rich.

[Egnever]

73. Didnt he just abstain from the vote?

Thasts a lot different than oposition.

[Carolina]

111. touche!

[littlejoe]

16. Even a blind pig can find an acorn once in awhile.

The DLC and DNC are a bunch of spineless losers, but even they can be right once in awhile. Give Kerry a chance.

[liberalnurse]

19. That window of opportunity has expired.

[littlejoe]

28. You lost me. What window of opportunity?

[liberalnurse]

48. I had to be fair to myself and look at all the alternatives.

Kerry's window lasted about 6 hours........

[littlejoe]

53. That's the spirit!

[mermaid]

20. I Gave Kerry A Chance

I gave him a chance to support me and people like me. He failed. End of story.

[littlejoe]

29. What exactly was it that you needed support for?

[mermaid]

156. Inclusion for TRANSGENDER people in ENDA. Kerry refused to do it! n/t

n/t

[Liberal Dose]

121. Ditto what liberalnurse said

I'm still reeling. Can't figure out how to get behind Kerry, yet another 4 years of Bush is scary. :scared:

[Walt Starr]

4. I won't support him

I'll vote for him, but that's aas far as it would go.

[littlejoe]

30. We'll be glad to take that support. In the end, it's the vote

that counts.

[Walt Starr]

37. Voting for a candidate /= supporting a candidate

I'm voting AGAINST Bush in November, not for the Democrat. The Democrat is simply the vehicle to vote against Bush.

This is not support.

[truthspeaker]

5. he'll get my support if nominated

Same with Edwards.

edited to add: and the same for Kucinich! <Monty Python>"He's not dead yet!"</Monty Python>

The presidential candidate can't be all things to all Democrats. This is the whole country voting on one person. It's up to us to pay attention to state and local elections for our pet issues, and build from the bottom up.

I personally oppose the death penalty. But if I refuse to vote for any candidate who supports it, I would never vote in a presidential election.

Same with FMA, for me.

[Norquist Nemesis]

6. Support or Vote?

I'll vote for him if it comes to that, but I'm not supporting him financially, voluntarily, or otherwise.

[The Blue Knight]

12. Do I care for Kerry? No. Will I support him? Yes.

I won't be 18 by November (One month late :nuke:) However, I will donate to his campaign, and I will volunteer with my other friend who is pro-Kerry.

Guys, you may consider Kerry to be "Bush-Lite" which is an unfair accusation, but Bush-Lite is a hell of a lot better than Bush heavy, no?

[Walt Starr]

22. November 2nd will be the sixth presidential election I will have voted in

I'll vote for Kerry.

I won't spend a thin dime on his campaign, allow a square inch of my yard to house his signs, or spend one second trying to convince anybody to vote for Kerry.

If he's the nominee, all he'll get is my vote.

[BL_Zebub]

40. If you like Bush-Lite so much, why are you flying Kucinich colors?

Seems to be a major discrepancy there in my most unholy opinion.

[littlejoe]

42. So, what do you plan to do, if you think Kerry is "Bush lite?"

[BL_Zebub]

51. Vote for myself!

Why settle for a lesser evil? :evilgrin:

[littlejoe]

54. Seriously, what will you do?

[Walt Starr]

59. He told you

Looks to me like Beelzebub will get at least one vote in this election. Personally, if faced with a choice of Beelzebub and Bush, I would consider Beelzebub the lesser of the two evils.

[littlejoe]

80. That's a choice you don't have to worry about. But after trying

to find out just what he plans to do, if he offers no serious discourse on the subject, it matters not to me what his opinion is.

[RichM]

9. I won't support him because of his position on the war. Not just IWR, but

also his quiet acceptance of the occupation, his accepting the "WMD" lie, and his refusal to publicly state (as DK has stated) that OIL was a basic motive for the invasion.

I'll vote 3rd party. The Democrats (aside from DK & AS) thoroughly disgust me. I see most of them as complicit with Republicans - not as "opposition."

[littlejoe]

32. Sorry you feel that way.

[Deaner1971]

170. Why are you a Dem?

It sounds to me like you don't actually support the party, just a select few candidates.

Sorrym but the idea that someone doesn't want Bush out but, claims to be a Dem disgusts me.

[Snivi Yllom]

10. too many reasons to list

but here is a short list.

-IWR
-Patriot Act
-the DNC
-the DLC
-18 years of being an insider
-Continuous flip flopping on important issues according to the direction of the politcal winds

[liberalnurse]

13. Yes, I agree 100%

What a miserable example of leadership.

[The Blue Knight]

14. I have those problems with him too...but 3rd party vote is a vote for Bush

[Suziq]

18. I Couldn't Agree More

The objective here is to oust Shrub and his evil thugs from the WH. Voting for a third party candidate is not going to help accomplish this extremely important mission.

All the Dem candidates have faults I do not like, but think about it -4 more years of these thugs and we might never recover.

:hippie:

[Snivi Yllom]

81. I know I know...not voting or voting 3rd party is a vote for Bush

So what?

The alternative is?

...and when you say 'I have the same problems'...yeah, they are pretty unbefuckinglievably huge problems.

February 2003: "NO WAR IN IRAQ!"

February 2004: "Vote Kerry! Because it's not so bad he voted IWR."

[littlejoe]

33. If that is your interpretation, then so be it. But what will you do?

[liberalnurse]

50. I know I will not ever vote kerry.

Even if it means sitting home in November with many of my friends who also detest kerry.

[littlejoe]

55. You would do that, rather than help to insure a democratic victory?

Stay on the team. We need you.

[Deaner1971]

169. Thanks

Nice to know that if we lose, we can thank "Dems" like you who said, "Sorry but, if everyone doesn't support my candidate then I will just sit on the sidelines because I don't REALLY belong to a party but, an individual candidate."

[Snivi Yllom]

84. I have 9 months to think about it

Maybe I will change my mind, but now I'm so disgusted that I might just unplug my TV, stop reading newspapers, turn off the radio and abstain from all politics from September through the election.

That includes going to the polls.

Maybe.

[Deaner1971]

168. Find me a perfect candidate

"but here is a short list.

-IWR
-Patriot Act
-the DNC
-the DLC
-18 years of being an insider
-Continuous flip flopping on important issues according to the direction of the politcal winds"

"-the DNC": Why do you hate the DNC? Do you hate all Democrats?
"-the DLC": What is up with the hatred of the DLC by so many people here?
"-18 years of being an insider": Anyone running for President wants to be an insider. I am sick of this "I am not one of them so please elect me to be one of them" b.s.

Let me know when you find a perfect candidate who has never made a change to his philosophy or made a mistake.

[MaineDem]

15. I have supported him from the beginning and will continue

If he is not the nominee I will fight for and vote for that person.

[mermaid]

17. I Will Not Support Kerry, Because He Doesn't Support ME

I am transgender. Kerry has spoken time and again AGAINST including transgender people in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)

He doesn't support me, and he asks MY support?? Oh, that's TOO RICH!!!

No, I do not support him, and WILL NOT support him...EVER!!! :grr:

If he does get the nomination, i'll vote for hm only because my disgust for Kerry is outweighed by my ABHORRENCE of Bush. but my vote will be a vote AGAINST Bush...not a vote FOR Kerry!

And if Kerry wins in '04 bet your bottom dollar i'm going third-party in '08!

DAMNED if I'll support Kerry!

And I hope someone shows him my words!

[sweetcee]

24. Exactly: well put.

Perfect: "If he does get the nomination, i'll vote for him only because my disgust for Kerry is outweighed by my ABHORRENCE of Bush. but my vote will be a vote AGAINST Bush...not a vote FOR Kerry!"

However, whether Kerry or Bush wins, we progressives need to work our butts off for 4 solid years to do something viable beyond the 2 parties.

As the Rolling Stones once put it: "This will be the last time..."

[BL_Zebub]

45. An even better Stones quote for the occasion

Spare a thought for the stay-at-home voter
His empty eyes gaze at strange beauty shows
And a parade of the gray suited grafters
A choice of cancer or polio :evilfrown:

[lojasmo]

119. apropros of nothing

This song decries apathy, not a thoughtful choice and decision to abstain.

[littlejoe]

133. Welcome, lojasmo. You speak truth.

[nickinSTL]

35. Kerry and TG

"I am transgender. Kerry has spoken time and again AGAINST including transgender people in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)
He doesn't support me, and he asks MY support?? Oh, that's TOO RICH!!!
No, I do not support him, and WILL NOT support him...EVER!!!"

I wasn't aware of Kerry's stance on this issue. It's unfortunate, but considering his stance on gay marriage, it doesn't surprise me.

And Edwards? I highly doubt he supports TG rights, either.

Can I ask who you do support?

One thing I know, Kerry is a lot more likely to be sympathetic to TG issues than Bush.

[maddezmom]

44. Kerry supports ENDA

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/glbt /
~snip~
Priorities
Preventing Hate Crimes
John Kerry is an original cosponsor of the Hate Crimes Prevention bill, which would extend federal jurisdiction over serious, violent hate crimes. These would include crimes motivated by sexual orientation. Hate crimes rose a disturbing 3.5% from 1999 to 2000.

Ending Discrimination
One of John Kerry’s first acts as a U.S. Senator, in 1985, was to introduce a bill prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. He supports passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and has adopted a nondiscrimination policy for his Congressional offices based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
~snip~

John Kerry for President ~2004

[nickinSTL]

63. Kerry-ENDA-TG

It's great that Kerry includes nondiscrimination based on gender identity in his Congressional office policy.

It's also great that he supports ENDA.

However, none of this answers whether he supports adding TG persons to ENDA.

It does suggest it would be consistent for him to do so.

[mermaid]

157. Kerry Does NOT Support INCLUSIVE ENDA - IN HIS OWN WORDS!!!!

Subject:
2004 Presidential candidates positions on a trans-inclusive ENDA

Note: The Bolds and Size Fonts are my addition, to make my point!! - Mermaid

1a. As president, would you support and work for passage of a federal bill that outlawed discrimination in the workplace based on gender identity and expression?

CLARK: SUPPORT
Comments: All Americans should be treated with equality and dignity. I
would work to enact the Employment Non-Discrimination Act now stalled
in Congress.

DEAN: SUPPORT
Comments: As President, I will fight for enactment of the Employment
Non-Discrimination Act to remedy this gap in federal law.

EDWARDS:
Comments:

I believe discrimination is wrong.

I am an original
cosponsor of the Employment Nondiscrimination Act, which prohibits
discrimination based on real or perceived sexual orientation.

KERRY: OPPOSE

Comments: I oppose discrimination of all kinds and my office policy
prohibits discrimination in the workplace based on gender identity and
expression.

I believe that we should focus efforts on getting ENDA passed and signed into law, and I am concerned that adding gender identity and expression to the ENDA legislation is likely to significantly hinder that effort.

Editor Note: Basically, by his words, Kerry has just told us transgenders we are too controversial to deserve rights...he is willing to sell us down the river...we are being told by Kerry to move to the back of the bus!! Now WHY THE HELL should I support him, after he tells ME to go to the back of the bus?!?!?!

KUCINICH: SUPPORT
Comments: In May of 2000 Representative Kucinich signed a Gender
Public Advocacy Coalition pledge to publicly affirm that an
individual's gender expression or identity is not a consideration in
the hiring, promoting, or terminating of an employee in his office.

Mr. Kucinich reaffirmed this pledge in March of 2003.

LIEBERMAN: UNDECIDED
Comments: I do not believe that gay men or lesbians should be
discriminated against simply because they do not precisely meet
society's traditional stereotypes of how men or women should behave or
appear. I would support a law making clear that the ban on sexual
orientation-based discrimination cannot be evaded by claiming that,
for example, a man was fired not for being gay but for being
effeminate. As an employer myself, I have taken a pledge not to
discriminate in this way, and would follow through with this pledge as
president.

As for the broader category of gender identity, I am now studying it and have pledged to work with ENDA's other cosponsors to explore the issue and whether and the extent to which federal law should address it.

SHARPTON: SUPPORT
Comments: No American should be discriminated against on their job
because of sexual orientation.

Source: HRC's web site:
http://www.hrc.org/Content/NavigationMenu/HRC/Get_Informed/Campaigns_a
nd_Elections/Presidential_Candidates/Questionnaire_Responses/2004_Pres
idential_Questionnaire_Responses.htm

[nickinSTL]

160. ENDA/TG

From the quotes here, none of them really clearly answered the question you wanted answered. They say they support ENDA, oppose discrimination because of sexual orientation.

Kerry just gave a more detailed answer than most, and said what most of them probably think, except Kucinich. He's the only one who really answered the question asked, other than Kerry.

The fact is, I've heard that a lot of Gays and Lesbians feel the same way Kerry does. Which doesn't let him off the hook. I still think he's wrong on this, but between him and Bush, there's no contest.

[mermaid]

174. I Agree

Certainly, Kerry is better thsn Bush, and that is why Kerry gets a check mark from me in November, if he's the nominee. But bear in mind that it is passive support only. I refuse to ACTIVELY support the man who sent me to the back of the bus.

And if the current White House occupant were anyone other than Bush, I'd go 3rd Party if Kerry got the nomination. If Kerry wins in '04, bet your assets I'm going 3rd Party '08 unless Kerry changes his tune re:ENDA and transgender inclusion.

Because I refuse to actively support him. The only reason Kery is better than Bush is that Kerry sent me to the back of the bus...Bish wants to throw me bodily OFF the bus!

BUT...there you have it...in his own words...Kerry is willing to sell out the minority transgenders for the sake of political expediency!

We TG people are sick and damn tired of being the bargaining chips!

[corporatewhore]

21. NAFTA/GATT/WTO/IMF Plan Colombia

[JETS]

25. I am a Pennsylvania Independent

and I will vote for John Kerry if he is the Democratic nominee. The reason is that I would rather have John Kerry with his known faults than George Bush with his unknown virtues lead this country.

[Walt Starr]

26. I've never seen voting for the candidate as supporting that candidate

Canvassing, donating cash, putting up signs in your yard are all support for a given candidate. Just voting for the guy is never really supporting him, in my book.

[The Magistrate]

31. Those Who Will Not Vote For The Nominee Of The Party

Will be giving material assistance to the criminals of the '00 Coup. That is a damned odd way to display attachment to left principles, by rendering assistance to the worst elements of reaction in our polity.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[littlejoe]

34. True

[Iverson]

52. demonstrably false

Material assistance would be constituted by a vote, by funding, or by other in-kind contributions.

When searching for a slur for those who do not acquiesce to your false dichotomy, it is best to have at least a grain of truth to attach to it. For some of us, words still have meaning.

[littlejoe]

56. Words do indeed have meaning, and I am a firm believer

in saying exactly what I mean. So this is how I spell it out. Any action that does not support the democratic nominee to gain the white house in November is tantamount to lending your help and support to Bush.

[Iverson]

67. the shelter of belief

I have heard before that "if you're not with us, you're agin' us." Thank you for clarifying the model of reasoning that you think best here.

[littlejoe]

83. Glad to be of help. Truth out!

[Deaner1971]

171. How does a non-vote by a "Dem" help anyone BUT Bush

Just curious as to what logic leads you to conclude that a non-vote by one such as yourself would detract from anything but your own party's aims.

We seem to have a number of people who think that the world will quake and shudder when their lack of support puts George W. back in the White House. All you do is doom your own nation to poor leadership, an utter lack of compassion, and four years for Bush to stack the Supreme Court with enemies human rights. I would never say, "If you aren't with us, you are against us." However, you have to ask yourself, "who benefits by my actions?"

[The Magistrate]

57. You May Thus Comfort Yourself, Sir

But the position you advance here remains in error. The dichotomy is not false, but built in to the functioning of the system.

In our system, only two candidates have any actual chance of winning. What subtracts from the weight of votes behind one increases the weight of votes behind the other. All political strategists understand this, and thus all campaigns involve two prongs, one aimed at raising turn-out among one's supporters, and one aimed at depressing turn-out among supporters of one's opponent. It does not matter which proves most effective: what is aimed at is the maximum favorable differential between the number of votes cast for one's candidate, and for the opposing candidate. It is similar to equalizing pressure within some shell to the outside atmosphere to prevent bursting: increasing the pressure outside will do as well to support the structure as decreasing the pressure inside.

The course advocated here by some, to with-hold their votes from the nominee of the Democratic Party, in our electoral system, must have the effect of increasing the weight of votes behind the Republican candidate, and could lead to that candidate having more votes than the Democratic candidate. As the Republican Party today, beyond cavail, represents the worst elements of reaction in our polity, to act in the manner suggested is to act in support of the worst elements of reaction in our polity; it is, as a matter of practical effect, to sign on to the enemy's attempt to suppress turn-out favorable to the Democratic nominee. Such effective co-operation with the worst elements of reaction is a damned odd way to demonstrate the zeal of one's attachment to left and progressive principles.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Walt Starr]

66. The only reason this is true

is because people make it true.

Every time I hear this tired warn out argument, I thnk back to the Simpsons cartoon where aliens took both the Republican and Democratic nominations and won the election based on the tired old argument that a third party vote is throwing your vote away.

For shame. Every vote counts, including those for third party candidates.

[The Magistrate]

70. The Reason It Is True, My Friend, Does Not Matter

It is true, regardless of the reason, or of what a small nujmber of people may desire. It is built into the system, which demands that coalitions be formed before elections, rather than after them.

Votes for splinter factions are worth nothing at all, they do nothing but subtract from the weight of one coalition against the other.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Walt Starr]

77. They serve the most noble of causes

and in fact, their votes are perhaps amongst the most important, for if a coalition moves too far away from their base, these voters serve as notification that the wider coalition has failed.

I consider third party voters far braver and far more important than those who, like myself, are weakling cowards who choose to follow the herd.

[The Magistrate]

85. Nobility, Sir

Is not on my own list of good things, but rather the opposite....

"The louder he talked of his honor, the quicker we counted our spoons."

"Saints should be judged guilty till proved innocent."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[littlejoe]

90. In this political season, we do not have the luxury of

noble causes. Noble causes will get us clobbered this fall.

[Walt Starr]

94. Keep that in mind as we choose our nominee

If we do not choose wisely as a party, we will have written our own obituary.

Those who voted Nader in 2000 who were good Democrats prior to 2000 may do so again if dissatisfied with the nominee, which will indicate the party again failed to pay attention to its base.

George Herbert Walker Bush learned this lesson in 1992.

[The Magistrate]

97. If They Are Sincere Opponents Of Reaction, My Friend

They will vote for the nominee of the Party, to cast from office the worst elements of reaction in our polity.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Walt Starr]

98. Only if they hold an identical point of view to The Magistrate

Unfortunately, in this world everybody is different and reality dictates that all must come to the conclusion on who to vote for on thier own, your views notwithstanding.

[The Magistrate]

103. It Would Surprise Me, My Friend

To find we were in disagreement over the proposition that the worst elements of reaction in our polity today are the criminals of the '00 Coup, or the proposition that the eviction from office of those reptiles would be a good thing for the people of our country and the world.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Walt Starr]

125. I agree in the short term

For the long term, I see far worse enemies in control of the Democratic Party.

Were I not such a coward, I would take the long term view and vote that way in Novemeber, but alas, I am too much of a coward and will vote for whatever scoundrel the Democrats put in front of me this year.

[The Magistrate]

130. The Short Term, My Friend

Is all that concerns me just now: "Sufficient unto the day are the troubles thereof."

There is certainly no call to berate yourself, Sir, for tending directly to the most pressing crisis at hand, and it pains me to see you do so.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Walt Starr]

140. And I will be questioning taking the short term solution

all the way up to November 2nd because, quite frankly, the short term view may do more long term harm than a second Bush term.

[The Magistrate]

144. A Respectable Concern, My Friend

Still, as Mr. Keynes once said: "In the long run, we are all dead."

It is the immediate crisis most concerns me; nothing good can be done so long as the criminals of the '00 Coup retain their grip on office.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[littlejoe]

163. We have problems within our party, for sure, but

our problems within our party pale in comparison to the important task of ousting the dominionist republicans.

[littlejoe]

124. It is other people, not I who need to keep that in mind.

Kerry is a good man and will make a good, if not great president. I don't see horns and a tail on him. He is the democratic party's best bet against Bush, like it or not.


Those democrats who go third party, or sit on their hands will have to wrestle with their own conscience.

[BL_Zebub]

132. Your anti-devil slurs are most unappreciated!

" I don't see horns and a tail on him."

Thank Hell for that!

And Kerry will lose to Junior, if he is the nominee. You can bet your soul on it. :evilfrown:

[littlejoe]

134. You seem to take pride in portraying yourself as the devil.

If this is so, then you have the power to do something about it.

[littlejoe]

88. Third party votes do count. Just ask Al Gore.

[Iverson]

69. nice dodge

The false dichotomy is not the one into which you have packpedaled, but rather it is the one of your earlier posting in which failure to take your specific and recommended action is "material support" (your term) for Bush.

Even if you cannot directly admit an error, I note the withdrawl from the demonstrably false claim. Thank you.

[The Magistrate]

72. Nonsense, Mr. Iverson

What is described is direct and material support. You may not like it, but it is so. The left purist is the reliable ally of the reactionary, as a matter of practical fact, for the effect of the actions of the left purist is to strengthen the hand of reaction in the political contest. Reactionary strategists count on the actions of left purists, to reduce the effective opposition to them and their aims. They are, unfortunately, seldom disappointed, and scored a rather redoubtable coup in this regard in the last Presidential election. That error must not be repeated, and no one can now pretend ignorance of the effects of such wrecker's activity.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Iverson]

75. Wishing does not make it so.

You have confused the interpretive with the objectively measurable.

The rest is color.

You owe it to future successful cancer research, for example, not to engage in intellectual Lyszenkoism. So no, it (failure to obey your advice) is not direct and material support, and I am saddened that one who would don the clothing of intellectualism has returned to a demonstrably false claim.

[The Magistrate]

78. Again, Mr. Iverson, Nonsense

Reducing the weight of votes in the field against the worst elements of reaction gives these material assistance.

That is susceptible to objective measure, and in the case of the last Presidential election, that can be done by simply adding the splinter faction votes to that received by the Democratic nominee, and projecting the result on a state by state basis.

You may, of course, act as you are pleased, but you cannot escape the fact that, if you do not vote for the nominee of the Democratic Party in the fall, you assist the prospects for success by the criminals of the '00 Coup. It is a damned odd way to demonstrate zeal for left principles.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Iverson]

82. curious

"...and in the case of the last Presidential election, that can be done by simply adding the splinter faction votes to that received by the Democratic nominee, and projecting the result on a state by state basis."

I had no idea that the Democrats enjoyed a proprietary claim upon all not-Bush votes.

The assistance that you so strenuously wish to defend as "material" is, in fact, indirect and not material. I gave you a nice, concise definition of what would be material assistance in my first response. I hope you at least read it.

[The Magistrate]

89. We May Someday Find Time, Mr. Iverson

For you to expand my vocabulary, and my understanding of the meaning of various words in common usage.

The fact remains: the course you seem to advocate brings, when it is carried out, direct benefit to the worst elements of reaction in our polity. You have certainly not made any showing that voting for a splinter faction will decrease the chances for success in retaining office enjoyed by the criminals of the '00 Coup in the up-coming election. Are you of the opinion it does not matter to the people and the country and the world if these reptiles retain their grip on the military and economic machinery of the United States?

"If a man will continue to insist that two and two do not make four, I know of nothing in the power of argument that can stop up his mouth."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[littlejoe]

136. I don't know where you got your education, but I do like what

you say, and how you say it.

[littlejoe]

135. A lot of sound and fury signifying nothing.

[Iverson]

159. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

[littlejoe]

164. All that any of us have is just a little knowledge,

in the grand scheme of things.

[Guaranteed]

101. You mean like voting for the IWR?

NCLB? Tax cuts? The Medicare bill? Isn't our OWN PARTY rendering assistance to those Bush bastards?

[zoeyfong]

116. What if the nominee of the party has given criminal assistance to bush?

Not much of a choice, is it?

[littlejoe]

137. That hasn't happened here.

[LWolf]

139. That is not accurate, sir.

Those who do not vote for the democratic nominee are not giving assistance to BushCo..

Depending on why they vote elsewhere, or don't vote, they may be:

1. honoring/assisting the democratic process by voting for the best candidate they can find.

2. using their vote to send a message to the democratic party about the direction that party is traveling or choices that party has made. A party, or a party's voters, are free to make choices. That's what it is all about. But there is no automatic expectation that people who disagree have to join in. Just as we handle disagreement/conflict with our leaders with our vote, we may choose to handle conflict with our party the same way.

3. accepting that the democratic party is not a good "fit" for them politically, and finding a better fit.

Of course, they may also be indulging pique, enacting revenge, or other less worthy sentiments. But choices 1 - 3 have nothing to do with assisting Bush, and they are vital to the health of the democratic process, IMO.

I will probably vote for the democrat in November, barring any atrocities that cross my personal lines. But I'll fight for my right to make other choices without being branded an assister of the opposition, no matter who the opposition is. That's a right we are supposed to vigorously support, not tear down.

[The Magistrate]

141. It Is Actual Result That Matters, Ma'am, Not The Stated Intent

The actual result of splinter factionalism is material assistance to the worst elements of reaction in our polity. Persons may be acting from the various motives you ascribe, but that does not make the least diference to the effect of their actions. Further, when they act in such a manner, in the knowledge that, whatever their stated intent may be, the practical result will be material assistance to the worst elements of reaction, it certainly calls into question whether they are actually much concerned with opposing and breaking the power of reaction in our polity. If they were concerned with that, they would be sure to act in ways that did not give assistance to the worst elements of reaction in our polity, and avoid acting in ways that bring benefit to the worst elements of reaction in our polity.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[LWolf]

158. We stand on two sides of the same issue,

and see two different paths to address it. In reality, there is always more than one way to the goal. There is always more than one goal. As my favorite politician would say, they are "interconnected and interdependent."

For some, removal of Bush is the only goal. Regardless of what or who we replace him with, and what direction we take when new leader takes office.

For others, removal of Bush is one piece of the big picture. And you can work for that big picture from more than one direction.
For some of this group, "becoming" more like what you are working to defeat is defeating yourself. Those that have the wisdom to see this are not assisting the enemy. In the big picture, looking past any single election, we do not win anything if we become the status quo we are fighting. Therefore, some feel that the democratic party is willing, and even determined, to become more like republicans to make sure that they "win," then they have already lost, regardless of the outcome of the election.

It's a different perspective. More about winning a war than a battle.

Again, I will most likely vote for the democrat in November, regardless of who it is. George W. Bush has wreaked enough destruction on the nation, the planet, and my personal profession and livelihood, that I would replace him with the rotting carcase of a rat found in a back alley somewhere, if that's what was on the ballot come November. That doesn't mean I like the rat, or will work to invade and take over all the world's grain stores once he's in office. For my strong support at that point, you've got to put someone on the ballot who will bring the change I'm working for. That's the party's choice. Go with the status quo because you think you can't win without it; win now, lose later.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

161. Bears repeating:

For some of this group, "becoming" more like what you are working to defeat is defeating yourself.

[LWolf]

173. Yes it does.

:thumbsup:

[mondo joe]

162. I Won't Vote for Him if he votes against me

I'm willing to have gay issues take a back seat pretty often.

I'm willing to vote for him if he says a lot of thing.

But if he casts his support for a federal marriage amendment, he loses my vote.

And I don't give a rip what happens to the rest of the country - you might as well share my misery.

[BL_Zebub]

36. I cannot vote for anyone who is part of this problem

The "Anybody But Bush" mantra fails to account for a candidate who is backed by the very same criminals as Bush. I can not and will not vote for that candidate.

Furthermore, I cannot support a party that willingly destroyed the BEST FUCKING CANDIDATE in the race in order to promote this empty suit fraud that has NO CHANCE of beating Bush.

Like my candidate, I make no apologies whatsoever for my honesty.

[The Magistrate]

38. It Is Not Your Honesty, O Infernal One, In Question

It is whether you really want to lend material assistance to the worst elements of reaction in our polity, as a means of demonstrating your attachment to left principles. Even a less reactionary figure is to be preferred to a more reactionary one, where there is no other figure with a real prospect of defeating the latter.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[BL_Zebub]

46. I believe you have missed my point, Sir.

When two evils are representative of the same evil, is one really a lesser evil?

Can there be such a thing as a good global fascist PNAC corporatist?

One hears a lot about Mr Kerry's image or alleged record as a "liberal", but his record of the last three years, or under the Bush regime, shows quite the opposite - a voting record which supports the regime's agenda.

I find nothing factual to indicate he would do otherwise if elected.

[littlejoe]

58. Few people share your opinion. Are you content to be an

extremist and take potshots at the establishment from the sidelines, or are you prepared to help remove a great evil in this world?

[zoeyfong]

117. Right is not determined by numerical support.

Those of us who do not support kerry are no more sitting on the sidelines than kerry supporters are. If a certain number of democrats choose a nominee who they should know will not be able to achieve the number of votes required to win, then they are just as responsible for that loss as the people who don't vote for him.

[The Magistrate]

131. Electoral Success Is Though, Ma'am

Those persons who choose the course of the splinterist and wrecker rather than combine with the Party into a clenched fist against the worst elements of reaction in our polity are those who will bear the onus for defeat, should that occur in consequence of their purism. Should that be the result, they will be even more marginalized, powerless, rejected and isolated from both the Party and the people of the country, than is the case even now.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[littlejoe]

165. We are not talking about the primaries here.

[The Magistrate]

62. That Argument, O Infernal One, Does Not Impress Me

The two figures are not of equal degree, and to refrain from effective opposition to a greater evil is to collaborate in the realization of the greater evil.

You toss about the word fascist rather loosely, and it does not seem to have much meaning in your usage of it. The "corporate state" of fascism is one in which the state directs the corporation, as any industrialist who attempted to cross Mussolini or Franco found to his dismay. The situation here today is very different. Fascism seems a useful slanging term, but is rather threadbare from overuse on the left, and carries very little weight anymore.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[littlejoe]

43. Your sig line is confusing. I thought Bush was satan!

[BL_Zebub]

47. Not even close.

While it's true that I own Bush Junior's soul, I deeply regret the investment. Such power should never be wasted on one so stupid :evilfrown:

[JackRiddler]

41. here's one of my reasons

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=354151

[Iverson]

49. Kinder, gentler empire is just not good enough.

n/t

[Sean Reynolds]

61. I DID support Kerry until he was too stupid to realize

That he was voting to send our military off to die in an unjust war. Many people here on DU and around the country urged Kerry to PLEASE vote no on the Iraq War. He ignored their cries, voted yes and because of it 500+ American troops are dead. 10,000+ Iraqi civilian's are dead.

He sunk his OWN ship when he supported that war. He knew damn well President Bush didn't want to rush to the UN and get approval. He just saw that Bush's ratings were around 70% and the support for the war was the same. He CAVED. Thats when I said, bye-bye Mr. Kerry, enjoy your warmongering campaign.

[The Magistrate]

65. Nonsense, Mr. Reynolds

The vote was a meaningless exercise. The invasion of Iraq would have taken place, on the military and political schedule desired by its promoters, however that vote turned out.

The sole responsibility for the invasion of Iraq lies with the person who conceived, pressed, and executed the policy, and with no other person whatever. The war-mongers are the criminals of the '00 Coup, and no others.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sean Reynolds]

68. If it were meaningless, then why did Kerry vote YAY?

I mean, one would think that if it actually were meaningless Kerry would have stood up to Mr. Bush and said NO.

But of course, he didn't - nor did most in congress. Sadly, if the Democrats would have attacked Bush back then like they are doin' today, we might not be in Iraq.

[The Magistrate]

76. The Resolution, Mr. Reynolds

Contained elements of a political trap. If sufficient Democrats had voted against it, the entire Party would be slurred as soft creatures seeking to tie the hands of the man seeking to defend the country against Satan himself, and the great majority of the populace would have rallied to that cry. This line was launched anyway, but without the effect nationwide it would have had, had the vote been much closer.

The vote for the resolution preserved viability for campaign for higher office, and that is why Sen. Kerry, and Sen. Edwards, cast the votes they did. They preserved themselves from widespread harm, which is the chief object of political calculation. Persons incapable of political calculation would do well to avoid the profession, and will experience difficulty in commenting on persons who are professionals at it.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sean Reynolds]

79. So you're basically backing up what I said earlier?

About how Kerry did it because it was the popular thing to do? So he basically whored himself out for political gain, even though it was at the cost of 500+ American lives.

Good to know I have an evil BIGGER case in not supporting Kerry.

[The Magistrate]

96. Hardly, Mr. Reynolds

The resolution was meaningless as a measure of governance.

It had signifigance only as a political trap.

Skilled politicians avoided that trap. Some judged, correctly, that their local standing was so high that they were immune to it.

Since the invasion would have occured regardless of how the vote went, which is the point some here seem to have dificulty appreciating, to say that the invasion, or any of its consequences, were caused by that vote, is a statement without any foundation. No matter how that votye would have gone, the invasion would have occured. responsibility for the invasion rests with the person who conceived, pressed, and executed it, and with no one else.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sean Reynolds]

104. Skilled politicians have no heart.

Or they'd of voted no on the resolution no matter what. Face it, Kerry sold out. He could have voted his heart and said NO, but he voted with his political life; knowing damn well he was going to run for president in 2004. So he voted yes.

It's a shame.

[The Magistrate]

105. Indeed, Mr. Reynolds

You are learning, Sir. That is a prerequisite for the trade. Sam Goldwyn said it very well: "The key thing is sincerity. When you can fake that you've got it made."

"I am a man of principles, DSir, and chief amomng them is flexibility."

"Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disasterous and the unpalatable.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!""

[Sean Reynolds]

106. And thus I won't support a sellout.

Kerry falls into that line.

I think it's about time we elect leaders that actually care about the better good of mankind. Not leaders that wage war with no evidence. Not leaders that strip away our freedoms in the name of fear. NOT leaders that whore themselves out to special interests. People wonder why only 50% of this country votes? Pfft.

[The Magistrate]

108. Vote To Oppose The Worst, Sir

There are no good men, but some are more bad than others. These latter are to be opposed, smd often the only available medium to do so is slightly less bad men. Sort of like allying against Hitler with Stalin....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sean Reynolds]

109. And Kerry for Bush?

[The Magistrate]

112. Sen. Kerry, Sir

Is nowhere near so bad as the jackanapes ensconced today in the Oval Office.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sean Reynolds]

113. Except he's a Bush enabler.

So in fact we're going to trade Bush for Bush-lite.

[Walt Starr]

127. You are a far more courageous man than I, Sean.

I'm too much of a coward to take the long term view and vote my conscience.

Good on you!

[Sean Reynolds]

128. Walt, it's all I've got.

And I'm not going to let some punks here at DU take it away from me!

[littlejoe]

166. Cowardice has nothing to do with it. Pragmatism should win the day!

[The Magistrate]

129. Nonsense, Mr. Reynolds

You cling to the view that the invasion of Iraq could have been stopped by a vote in the Senate. It could not have been. Therefore the cry of "enabler" is hollow and false. The fact is that the invasion of Iraq is the responsibility of the criminals of the '00 Coup who conceived, pressed, and executed the act, and of no other. The only thing that "enabled" them is the structure and practice of governance. It has a nice sound, the line you press, but it is a false and misguided line, that will produce no good result.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sean Reynolds]

146. Maybe not stopped....but the fraud could have been brought to light.

Instead, Dems buckled.

[The Magistrate]

149. Not Till Disproved By The Event, Sir

It is only the falsification of every claim by the criminals of the '00 Coup by the events that the people's minds have opened to the realization they were swindled by those reptiles: nothing shorter would have served.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sean Reynolds]

150. I don't agree.

Sorry, but Kerry should have known that Bush was going to pull a stunt like this. Millions of people world wide didn't buy Bush's story, why did Kerry and Edwards?

[The Magistrate]

151. You May Not Agree, Sir

But that is an error on your part. Nor do millions of people around the world much concern me in this question, as only citizens here can vote in our elections. The great mass of the people in this country would not have been convinced by anything short of the events that have demonstrated the lies, incompetence, and profiteering.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sean Reynolds]

152. What is popular doesn't equal what is right.

THAT is the error on your part. The fact is, Kerry voted because it was the popular thing to do and I do not think that makes an effective leader. I want a leader that will take unpopular stances on issues if he/she truly believes them to be right.

Because of the popular decision, 500 troops are dead. We've lost ALL respect in the world community and we've turned Iraq into bedlam. IF Kerry would been strong enough to stand up against Bush, the war probably would have waged on, BUT it'd of been a moral victory for MANY liberals. He didn't. He folded because it was the popular thing to do and now he tries to have it both ways. Well ya know what? I'm not buying the new, Anti-Iraq War Kerry. If he truly were against this war, he would have shown it by voting no.

The facts still stand. Politicians continue to sell out their people for what is popular. John Kerry has a history of doing this since Bush took office. Now I ask you, is this the kind of leader you want atop the Democratic Party?

Remember when the Democratic Party was the party that STOOD up for what was right and not popular? Remember when the DNC stood up for civil rights, when most Americans didn't think it was the right thing to do? Remember when the Democratic Party stood up for women's rights, even though it was clear that it was a very unpopular thing and the ERA failed? Today, these Democrats won't stand up for what is right, rather they'll continue their status quo message in hopes of getting elected. Well what are they going to do when elected? Will Kerry still do the popular thing, rather than the right thing?

If Kerry wins the nomination and actually does become president, he's got an election in four years. Will he continue to play it safe because 'an election is coming'?

Here's a question for you. What if FDR stalled the New Deal because it was the 'popular' thing to do? What if Johnson stalled the Civil Rights movement because it was the 'popular' thing to do?

Politicians have the power to change the world. Sadly, only a few actually use that power for the better of mankind. The rest either use it wrongly, or don't use it at all in fear of it being unpopular. Often those are the people that lose in the end.

[The Magistrate]

155. Beware The Man Concerned With What Is Right, Sir

The elected official prepared to substitute his own sense of right and wrong for the perceived will of the people can be a damned dangerous thing. It is not to be wished for lightly; the results are seldom pretty, and not infrequently bloody. In the eyes of its authors, the war you so deplore was right, and a moral duty incumbent on a good and Godly man, a thing to be done whatever anyone else might have thought wise or expedient or any other thing, of that sort that is mere dust before a righteous man doing what he knows is right.

Do not leap to the assumption, Sir, that what you believe self-evidently right, everyone does. Put bluntly, the odds are overwhelmingly against that proposition. You are, at bottom, calling for rule by moralists, answerable to nothing but their own view of themselves as moral exemplars, and an old rogue like me is incapable of conceiving anything more apt to produce tyranny and injustice on a colossal scale.

My preference is for men of human scale, aware they are fallible, and a little uncertain about what to do, who hesitate to go against the sentiments widespread among the people of the country, and accustomed to consult those sentiments in making their decisions when wielding public power. Such people present little danger to democratic rule.

To answer your questions, Sir, the fact is that the New Deal was immensely popular, and it was precisely for that reason it was put through Congress with extraordinary speed by President Roosevelt. Nor was it viewed as particularly radical by the great mass of the people. It was opposed by Communist groups as vociferously as by Chambers of Commerce, and the proposals of Sen. Long, which enjoyed great national following, were far more radical than any proposal of President Roosevelt. By the time President Johnson put through the various Civil Rights acts, these, too, were widely popular in the country, although still the focus of great opposition at the South. They did not do much more than codify a body of court decisions built up over the previous decade, and the excesses of southern defenders of segregation had repulsed the people of the north and west decisively in the previous years.

"Saints should be judged guilty till proved innocent."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[littlejoe]

167. No truer words were spoken here today.

[ibegurpard]

87. So you are in effect saying that the vote was for political expediency

Why is it that I get attacked for voicing that opinion? :shrug:

[The Magistrate]

92. Perhaps, Sir

You say it like it was a bad thing. To my view, it is a necessary thing, and often a good thing....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[ibegurpard]

99. That it often is.

But in this case it wasn't. And more insightful interpretation of the polls would have revealed that Americans were very conflicted on this issue...a very strong case could have been made for voting no... in which case the goals of political expediency, denying Bush, and making a statement against a policy of pre-emptive attack ALL would have been served.

[The Magistrate]

102. That, Sir, Is A Debateable Point

It is certainly the case that events have turned out somewhat differently than those who made that calculation must have expected they would. To say that competent professional judgement was exercised is not to state that judgement is infallible, or was necessarily correct. But an incorrect judgement, even, at that time, is no good grounds for claiming identity between either of of the two leading Democratic candidates for the Presidency, and the criminals of the '00 Coup.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[zoeyfong]

120. Sorry, but 'the mob made me do it,' is no excuse.

Ironically, had kerry the backbone to vote no on the war, he would be in a stronger position today. Perhaps if enough of our leaders had stood against the war, the mob might have been stopped. Doesn't really matter what the excuses are; the response to matters of war and peace is what defines the character of a national leader, it is not something to be cynically used for political positioning. Kerry faced the test, and he failed. How can we know that if he faces a similar or greater mob outcry in his first term, he will not succumb the pressure to maintain his 'viability' for re-election?

[littlejoe]

71. Well put, Mag. Kerry, as well as almost every other politician

realized a very important tenet: You don't have a career without a job. A no vote, however courageous it may have been would have been a career killer at that point in our national hysteria.

The bottom line is that the vote didn't matter. Bush would have had his way no matter what.

[zoeyfong]

123. Some people would have and did choose risking reelection rather than

supporting a unwise, unnecessary, unjust war. That's the difference between those who have what it takes to be president and those who don't. By 'what it takes' i don't mean the machiavellian conniving and ruthlessness to make it to the top at any cost.

[vision]

93. In Post 31 you say

"Those Who Will Not Vote For The Nominee Of The Party

Will be giving material assistance to the criminals of the '00 Coup. That is a damned odd way to display attachment to left principles, by rendering assistance to the worst elements of reaction in our polity."

Voting for the resolution was giving material assistance to the criminals of the '00 Coup. If we ostercize those who do not vote for the nominee in '04 how come we welcome those with open arms that supported the criminals as regards Iraq? The Senators one vote is more powerful than any single voter.

[The Magistrate]

100. Not In Any Important Way, Sir

The invasion of Iraq would have taken place regardless of how that vote turned out. The deployment of military forces, and their commitment to combat, is a prerogative of the Executive, as our government currently functions. The responsibility for the invasion of Iraq lies with the criminals of the '00 Coup who conceived, pressed, and executed that action, and with no one else.

What is at issue here is whether the criminals of the '00 Couip are to be retained in office, or evicted from office. Some advocate a course that will have the effect of increasing the chance that the criminals of the '00 Coup will retain their grip on office, and claim to be doing this out of their zeal for leftist principles. It remains, to my view, a damned odd way to show that.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[BradCKY]

64. I will support any democratic nominee

The stakes are WAY too high after 3 years of Bush. IMO this is the worst possible time to protest by not voting Democrat, after all Bush has done so far do you want to even imagine what he will do with another term?

[sleipnir]

74. I refuse to "support" Kerry because a nearly dozen horrific votes/no-votes

that he has made in the last three years: IWR, No-Child Left Behind, Patriot Acts I and II, Overtime Bill, etc, etc. I'm not saying I won't vote for Kerry, that's silly, but I won't be wearing any campaign buttons, donating time and money, or even trying to convince people to vote for him.

I'm sorry, I just can't support a man whom I disagree with and despise on many issues. It's just not going to happen. On Nov. 2nd, Kerry will get a check mark from me, but that's all.

[polpilot]

86. I'll vote 'against' Kerry but it's actually 'for' him...like his IWR vote.

Get it. It won't MATTER that I don't vote 'for' him because it just doesn't really 'count' like his Iraqi War vote.

[littlejoe]

91. Does this mean you will sit out?

[NightNurse]

95. Lock Coordinates! Prepare to Engage Thread "Cloaking Device"! ENGAGE!

with apologies to the Great Patrick Stewart!


:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: Be gone flame-bait thread!

[wadestock]

107. He's a good man

Don't get caught up in over thinking this.

Step 1 - Get in.

Step 2 - Repeal tax breaks to the rich.
I always thought lobbying the rich like Clark proposed.....to "ask" them to contribute (it's the patriotic thing to do) would be a nice strategy.

But ultimately if he gets the tax thing right and we pay down the debt like we did for about 5 years under Clinton, we will have saved our capitalistic machine from self destructing.

I support him 100% because it's the only way to save the country from a madman.

[Carolina]

110. I expect

to support him in the voting booth because the alternative is so bad, but I CAN'T STAND HIM.

[jhfenton]

114. I cannot support Kerry for a variety of reasons,

including his support for unconstitutional gun-control measures, the Patriot Act, and the BCRA (The Bipartisan Incumbent Protection and Free Speech Supression Act of 2002).

Since I can't support Bush, either, I'll probably be voting for the Libertarian candidate.

[zoeyfong]

115. He supported the war in the worst way. I'll be voting 3rd party/write in.

[Name removed]

142. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dryan]

118. Exciting Time for Democrats

Let me start off my saying that I have been involved in politics since I was 4 years old and help my mother pass out fliers for Adlai Stevenson -- I'm 51 now! So friends I have been at this a long time. This has been the most exciting primary season I have ever experienced and its only February. More people are coming to the caucases and out to vote in primaries. All the candidates have gotten people excited about politics this year! Frankly, they are all better than george bush.

The first rule of politics is that at 7:01 PM on election day, someone has lost and someone has won. The second rule is to remember rule number one. If you can't get over that fact than politics is not for you. I know that it is very disheartening to work your tail off for a candidate only to seem them loose. Believe me, I have lost count of the candidates I have worked hard for only to see them go down in flames. There are no final victories though -- or final defeats.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

122. A cliff notes version of the majority of responses on this thread:

BECAUSE I JUST WON'T

[arwalden]

126. Hmmm.... I keep reading the equivalent of

LA LA LA LA LA LA LA!

[littlejoe]

143. Will you vote for him?

[The Magistrate]

145. She Is A Sensible Lady, Sir

Be certain who your sights are on, lad....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[littlejoe]

172. ahh, but we live in such uncertain times, friend.

[SinkingInTheRain]

138. I don't like him or his voting record

I hoping Kucinich and Dean get together and run third party against him. That could be a winning team to take down Bush.

[molly]

147. LOL!!!!!!

[serinlea]

148. I think we're doomed with Kerry as the nominee, BUT...

Sadly, I believe that once the Repugs really turn the full force of their weight and money against Kerry, he will go down in flames. I don't think the race will be close enough to matter whether I vote my conscience or not.

If this turns out not to be the case, I will hold my nose and vote for him, because in the end, it's all about the SCOTUS. I don't want to see Roe v. Wade overturned.

But if the race isn't close (in either direction), you can be sure that I'll be voting either Green or Libertarian. I wasn't a Democrat before this election, and I will not vote for someone whose voting record and demeanor both make me sick unless it will actually make a difference in getting rid of Dubya.

[BourgeoisPig]

153. NAFTA, WTO, Fast Track, IWR, Fox support