Anyone else having difficulty voting for Kerry?

[William_WaLLace_]

Unfortunately, I will not be able to vote for Kerry in 04. He has voted for things I personally abhor, namely the Iraq War, and the Patriot Act, and the excuses he gives to justify those votes does not add up for me personally, I know many of you disagree or are in the ABB camp, but I myself am not in that camp since in my opinion voting with Bush on most issues represents a general agreement with Bush, and why vote for Bush-lite?

So I have a dilemma, and I am sure I am not the only one. Who do we vote for? I was thinking of writing in Dean Or Kucinich? Anyone else thinking of that? Or should I just sit at home in Florida on election night, being in Florida, I truly wish I could give my vote to the Democratic nominee. However, from the inception of most of the Democratic campaigns, Kerry and Edwards were the two I could not support, and try as I might like, I cannot support Kerry.

[Quetzal]

1. OK

don't support Kerry.

Vote for Nader, Camejo, or Cobb.

Or just write someone in.

[BOSSHOG]

2. Don't forget the team

Kerry will be bringing to the White House and replacing those that bush brought in. It may be argued that Kerry is bush lite, however, the people who would make up his administration should be comprised of anti-bush professionals. Please reconsider.

[Classical_Liberal]

3. Kerry is better than Bush, and particularly in Florida there is no excuse

for a progressive to not register a vote to throw that asshole out of office. Yhere is no doubt about it. I will personally suffer if Bush is re-elected and so will minorities, women and the poor.


He is also not my ideal. There is no doubt about this either. That is why it is important to form a coalition within the Democrats. That is what Dean is doing now. You won't change a damn thing by focusing on one election, or by focusing on third parties. It has to be a long term strategy to take the democrats back, such as the one Goldwater followers in the republican party did.

[JI7]

4. is it personal moral issue ?

[Nailzberg]

5. Considering the alternative, I have no problem voting Kerry.

I was a Dean fan from the start. After Trippee took over, I started to drift to Edwards; and my primary vote went to him.

Understanding the alternative to Kerry, I have no problem voting for him.

In an open seat, my conscience tells me to vote for the person I believe in most. If I believe in neither candidate, I don't vote.

But an race where an incumbent is screwing up my country, I have no problem voting for the lessor of two evils. I might disagree with some of Kerry's positions, but I've seen what the alternative is, and I cannot allow another four years of it.

[bowens43]

6. You're right......

bush will make a fine president.....

[Paradise]

23. lol, thanks,

couldn't have said it better. :toast:

[DeepModem Mom]

7. Not in this election, and not in Florida --

Project your abhorrences into the future. Which candidate is more likely to wage more wars, as the PNAC agenda is advanced? Which candidate is more likely to expand the Patriot Act even further?

[still_one]

8. Just remember what Nader said a few days ago

If you want bush to lose vote for Kerry

[mouse7]

9. Don't support Kerry. Pickering will make a fine SCOTUS Chief Justice

Just think of the accomplishments a Charles Pickering Court would have.

[yorgatron]

10. if ONLY for the sake of the supreme court

you should vote kerry.

[Caromill]

74. And not only the Supreme Court

But also the Courts of Appeals, and the Federal District Courts as well. Four more years of Bush appointees to the federal judiciary would be a disaster of unimagined proportions. And most of them would still be there when most of us are dead. Think about it.

[William_WaLLace_]

107. what about voting for Democratic Senators???

And writing in someone other than Kerry? After all the Senate is the one that confers appointments to the Supremem Court?

And who has Kerry mentioned that he would nominate that would be better than who Bush has nominated????

Are you just being hopefully optimistic? Thats fine to be optimistic, but I prefer facts, especially since Kerry let me down with his votes on the IWR, and Patriot Act.

[mouse7]

192. Democratic Senators can't keep Bush neo-cons off court forever

If it's not Pickering, or the next one like hime, it will eventually be the 17th one like him.

The first name I keep hearing for Supreme Court coming from Democrats is Carl Eller (former Minnesota Viking) now Minn. St. Supreme Ct. justice. Fantastic record, brilliant man.

It's foolishness to claim Dem Sens can block what a President can do regarding the Supreme Ct. Complete and utter nonsense. The president will eventially get what he wants. Senators cannot shut down the Supreme Court.

You are voting for a whole Executive Branch team when voting for President, not just the office of President. To claim a Kerry administration would be no different is more foolishness.

And write-ins? Be serious. Might as well write in Donald Duck to get Minnie Mouse to be appointed to the Supreme Court. Same chance for a write to win as Minnie Mouse showing up for the swearing in ceremony.

[xchrom]

11. he is more conservative than me, much more,

but as a gay man i have to be pragmatic. my heart is socialist -- but the supreme court and aids funding will not allow me that luxury.

[namvet73]

12. Not at all!

1) Bush seems to be about as intelligent as a lizard.
2) You're not voting against Bush, you're voting against an entire dysfunctional administration made up of ex-CEOs
3) You're also voting out Ashcroft
4) Bush has no empathy, has no experience at a war. He has never felt the terror of being at war.
5) Bush, as we have seen, is incapable of admitting to mistakes.
6) Bush isn't even a conservative, he is a right wing extremist. If you read the philosophies of conservatism and liberalism, you will find that Bush is more like a dictator. He actually does not fit the conservative philosophy. Actually he is one who is dictated to. Getting rid of Bush will be getting rid of Chaney. I think Bush is somewhat of a puppet with Chaney working the strings.
7) We have already witnessed that Kerry IS capable of admitting mistakes and correcting his course. He is capable of learning. Bush is not capable of learning.
8) Someone else said that Nader recommended voting for Kerry. Nader is aware that the Democratic party has also needed some correction, but I think, this time, he knows he can't win and knows that the Democratic party is the best of the two major parties
9) Bush is trying to eliminate overtime, has cut taxes for the rich and is on record as stating the "poor people are lazy" (Google it in quotes and you will get the rest of it from one of his college professors)
10) If you are not sure of the differences, listen to the Mark Levine show on the web at: http://www.radioinsidescoop.com/ He was a congressional attorney, is very knowledgeable and is nice to call in to with your questions. You can also e-mail him (go to the website) he is reserving one show per week on answering questions on the differences between Bush and Kerry.

I have been hurt, too. I lost my software job two years ago. I don't even know what to train for anymore. What can I do that fits my abilities that can't easily be off-shored? The Bush administration not only doesn't care about any American workers, it is encouraging our loss of jobs.

No, there is not one iota of doubt in my mind that this administration has to go.

Finally, no president is going to be perfect and it's not going to be easy for any new president to turn things around. Bush is an anomaly.
He is not only imperfect, he is downright dangerous. Bush in a second, lame duck, term will be like a bull in a china shop. He scares the hell out of me. I would gladly even take another republican over Bush. If we can remove Bush and at least BEGIN to stop or turn around the direction that Bush has set, we will have accomplished something.

At the very least, Kerry can think. He is intelligent and I think he is able to work with others better. I would be very surprised it Bush ever debated Kerry. Bush is inarticulate, needs a script, doesn't know history, does not have enough curiosity to even try to understand the depths of issues like stem cells or sociological issues. Bush is the first president in my memory (about half a century) that does not do press conferences. Kerry would make Bush look like a fool in a debate and he knows it.

He is a spoiled brat, whose parents have bailed him out of everything and lives in a bubble. He needs to be forced to live in a ghetto apartment with a ghetto family to understand how poor people live and that some of them work multiple jobs just to scrape by.

I think one of my cats would be better than Bush.

Think it over carefully.

[ArkDem]

43. You hit the nail on the head

>He is a spoiled brat, whose parents have bailed him out of everything and lives in a bubble. He needs to be forced to live in a ghetto apartment with a ghetto family to understand how poor people live and that some of them work multiple jobs just to scrape by.<

This is where Kerry is so much better than Bush. I believe he can truly relate to the common man. He has spent his entire life fighting for the downtrodden. Unlike Bush, he has a heart!

[William_WaLLace_]

108. Yet if elected he will be one of the 5 most wealthiest

Kerry will be amongst the wealthiest presidents ever elected, I am not so sure that makes him a commoner.

[tishaLA]

109. Yes, that FDR was so bad for "commoners," wasn't he?

[William_WaLLace_]

114. Was FDR very wealthy?

I am not sure he made the top 5 list, I believe and could be wrong Kerry hits the number 3 spot.

[The Magistrate]

130. The Roosevelts, Sir

Were immensly wealthy, and had been for a very long time.

You would be well advised to look into these matters somewhat, before essaying comment on them; to do otherwise cannot reflect much credit on you.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LE'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[mobuto]

184. Visit the FDR homes in Hyde Park, New York

"Homes", as in plural, and tell me if they were wealthy.

Not only are the Roosevelts enormously wealthy, but they have been enormously wealthy since the 17th century.

[ArkDem]

198. So FDR had his money given to him?

He didn't earn it?

But 'old money' people are all evil...

[KC21304]

173. You have said the magic words. Gigs up, game over.

[Jacobin]

49. Excellent post

I too hate the idea of voting for Kerry because of IWR, but not only am I voting for him, I'm sending him money. It's hard to do, but given the alternative, its a no-brainer.

[sampsonblk]

13. I have a problem voting for Kerry

But I don't have a problem voting against Bush. When it comes down to it, that's the choice we are stuck with. So Kerry it is.

[namvet73]

15. Very well put. There's even a name for it.

It's called a Hobson's choice.

[JNelson6563]

33. What I find the most amazing in all this

Is that the Kerry people are more than happy with this. Hate Bush? Hate Kerry less? Hooray! A great Kerry victory!

Ugh.

If people think that is winning I gotta wonder....

Julie

[sampsonblk]

45. What I find amazing...

is that the party leadership seems to be ashamed of who we are. The things we talk about here are not mentioned on the campaign trail. I guess we just have to hope that Kerry is strong on our issues once he gets into office.

So we get a pretty generic candidate this time. Kerry is the party's Bob Dole. War hero. Been in the senate for a long time. Good party man. And boring. Can't forget that part.

[onehandle]

14. Suggest writing in Karl Marx.

You know you want to.

That'll make your post just that much more pointless.

[JohnLocke]

67. Best. Post. Ever.

:yourock: :yourock:

[molly]

16. So - vote for Bush

[FlashHarry]

17. Then Bush gets another vote.

If you vote for anybody but Kerry--or don't vote at all--you concede a vote to Bush. As long as you know that, vote your conscience.

[emulatorloo]

18. Why distort Kerry's record? Why punishing Kerry to reward Bush?

Study the record, he does not vote "with Bush on most issues." The two votes you specifically mention are more complicated than you make them out to be, but I think you know that. John Kerry did not vote up/down on war, John Kerry did not vote for John Ashcroft to abuse civil rights. Bush and Ashcroft bear the responsibility for what they have done.

On the whole though this argument is similar to the Bush attack ads on Kerry, where a few votes are cherry-picked and oversimplified to make a case that just isn't so.

But besides that, what I do not understand is why you instead want to let George Bush off the hook. You seek to punish Kerry. Somehow what George Bush has done seems ok to you - so much so that you will through your vote away with the only result being that you will help GWB win another term.

At any rate, you should do what you feel you must do. But be aware of the consequences of your actions - your protest vote will help Bush. Bush will destroy us.

Thanks for your consideration.

[seaglass]

19. Is this your final answer? You cannot vote for Kerry for the

ultimate goal of getting rid of Bush?

If you cannot act beyond your own selfishness for the good of this country, then you might as well sit home.

[Kolesar]

20. Not after seeing a replay of Kerry's 1971 presentation as V.V.A.W.

A week ago I saw a replay of his comments to the Senate Committee (Armed Services?). He was brilliant.

The Vietnam War was the biggest issue of my youth, and any man who worked so hard to end it is not only a hero of mine, but someone who I would trust.

Go John Kerry!

[FlashHarry]

21. I'm sorry, but this is bullsh*t.

Sorry to take it out on you, but I'm sick to death of these posts. It is very simple: if you truly feel that BushCo is bad for America, you will vote Kerry. End of story.

Mods, please delete, if you feel this is too harsh.

[AntiCoup2K4]

60. What you are forgetting is WHY BushCo is bad for America.

And it's because he is controlled by a criminal cabal of global fascists. All Kerry will do is put a shiny new wrapper on it. Perhaps his domestic agenda will be more tolerable than Junior's. But a Hell of a lot of good that will do any of us when the next PNAC/PPI invasion begins and the rest of the world is justifiably more pissed off.

[William_WaLLace_]

105. I just do not see the major differences

I have listened to Kerry, an I just do not see significant promise to change as Howard Dean, or Kucinich, or Sharpton would instill.

I just see more of the same, perhaps to a lesser degree.

[FlashHarry]

110. Nice try. You can't argue with math.

Vote for another candidate, or don't vote at all, and you withhold a vote that could've gone against Bush.

And don't hand me that "there's no difference between the parties/candidates" bull. Nader pulled that four years ago, and look what that got you. You want Roe v Wade overturned, and an arch-conservative Supreme Court for the next twenty years? Vote for a third party.

This election is different.

[unblock]

22. hold your nose and vote for kerry

credit kerry with planning to run for president.

senators planning presidential runs have to tread very carefully with their votes. incumbent presidents are always trying to get the senatorial opponent to cast a vote they can run against.

with siding with bush on the iraq war vote and the patriot act, these issues are neutralized. now bush can't so easily paint kerry as opposing his terror war. bush would have gotten a lot of mileage out of kerry opposing the patriot act, e.g. we on du hate the patriot act, but the masses just think it's something the president wants and needs to fight terror. so by siding with bush, that issue vanishes.

notice how bush has had a tough time of painting a negative image of kerry.

try to see kerry's votes in the last couple years in this context. do you honestly think president kerry would have pursued the iraq war or the patriot act? no. president kerry i'm sure will be much more to your liking.


even if you don't buy this argument, please vote kerry anyway. defeating bush is far too important. would you rather support the guy who pushed the patriot act?

[RogueTrooper]

24. self indulgent rubbish

get a grip.

[OneBlueSky]

25. consider the prospect of Chief Justice Scalia . . .

and Associate Justice Ashcroft . . . if you have no other reason to vote for Kerry, at least consider the damage that Bush Supreme Court appointments would do for the next 30-40 years . . .

[H2O Man]

26. Say that we are driving down a highway.....

....and we realize that we've gone the wrong way. We want to get to a community to the east, and son of a gun, we've been heading west! Now, if we turn around, and go in the correct direction, it does not mean that we are obligated to stop in the first village we come to. But it does mean that we have to pass through it first, in order to reach our destination.
To say you can't vote for Kerry is like saying you don't want to stop in that first village. No, we all want to go far further to the east. But we aren't going to arrive at our destination by continueing in the westwardly direction.

[Onlooker]

27. I assume you're reasonably comfortable

I assume you make an okay living, are not gay, are not a person of color, are not in a situation that might require you to have an abortion, are not an Arab-American, and so on. It's a nice luxury to vote your conscience. I envy you, but too bad your conscience does not take into account that actual impact that Bush's policies will have on people. I'm a gay man, and I fully expect Bush to appoint a Supreme Court that will restrict gay rights. Even now, in many areas, gays can be fired for being gay.

[molly]

28. Selfish is the word of the day

:shrug:

[Cocoa]

47. safe assumption, I'd say

[William_WaLLace_]

111. Actually I am some of those things

Specifically, I am an Indian male, and might as well be Arab, since most ignorant Americans cannot tell the difference, but I often often get mistaken for Spanish, since I am light skinned, and have no accent.

I am a law student, that recently graduated, so I am banking on a decent living. Not gay, and at this position of my life if my girlfriend was pregnant, I would have the baby, I could not say that 2 years ago.

Kerry doesnt really seem to be a champion of gay rights either? Or do I mis perceive his "they can have civil unions, but not get married" isn't that the same stand as Bush?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

134. When has Bush promoted civil unions? When has Bush stood for gay rights?

Don't they require deductive reasoning in law school anymore? Do they teach EVIDENCE? They did when I went.

[The Magistrate]

159. And Is It Not Wonderful, Ma'am

To know that he would allow his girlfriend to carry to term, this year, if he got her pregnant?

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[REP]

195. I Noticed That

Very handsome of him to 'allow' his girlfriend to give birth now, since he would have prevented it if it had had happened two years ago. I suspect he wouldn't've prevented it by wearing a condom or getting a vasectomy, either.

[HFishbine]

29. Put a hold on that thinking

In many ways I agree with you. The most compelling reason I have for voting for Kerry is to stick it to the Bushlickers, but that would be the first time in my life I will have voted against someone, instead of for someone, and at a time when I feel it is necessary to have someone to vote FOR.

However, I'm holding out hope that Kerry's VP nominee may mitigate some of the reservations you and I have. So, I'll wait and see. Kerry can nominate someone who mirrors his troubling positions, or someone who broadens and balances the ticket. We'll see.

[William_WaLLace_]

120. I could vote for Dean, Sharpton, or Kucinich

But how likely are they to getthe VP spot, not likeley.

[Sinistrous]

30. It must be hard for you to live with us poor flawed plebeans.

I bow down before your exquisite perfectionism. Perhaps you could share with us how your profound intellectual acuity has found Mr. Kerry's "excuses" to be so fatally flawed.

[union_maid]

31. I wonder how many of us could have done better

I wonder how many of us could have contributed what Kerry has contributed, stayed politically viable so as to be able to continue to have an effect on the nation and been 100% ivory soap pure in voting, disregarding any need to compromise or pander to those that do the voting.

In answer to your question, it really doesn't matter who you vote for or who you write in. This is a two party, winner take all system. Any statement you're trying to make will be washed away in the tide of events that follow this election, whichever way it goes. If Bush wins by a plurality he'll claim a mandate. As we've seen, even losing the popular vote won't stop him from claiming a mandate. Any registered voter who doesn't vote for Kerry is voting for Bush. Anyone who doesn't vote for Kerry is voting for more rollbacks of environmental standards, loss of social security benefits and further cutbacks to benefits for the neediest in our country, a system of taxation that continues to move wealth upward and decimate the middle and working classes, for Supreme Court nominees who will further erode our civil liberties and in general for evil. Make any statement you want, or no statement at all, but understand what your vote counts for, not just what it means in your own mind.

[zoeyfong]

185. And a vote for Kerry is a vote for war; guess we're damned if we do,

and damned if we dont.

[trogdor]

32. Sure I do...

...but that's why I wear bifocals, so that I can find the row his lever is on.

[emulatorloo]

36. LOL n/t

[JohnLocke]

69. LOL (nt).

:yourock:

[mobuto]

34. No problem at all

My biggest problem will be getting to the polling place. I live about a hundred yards away, so I expect I'll walk, but if I'm not near my house I'll have to think of when it'd be convenient to go over. And if I'm out of town, I'd have to order an absentee ballot. These things require thought. So maybe I will have difficulty voting for Kerry.

Also, which inaugural balls will be worth going to? I have no idea.

[RichM]

35. Sure, I feel the same as you do. Here are my suggestions --

First of all, it only matters who you vote for if both the national & Florida races look very close shortly before the election. If either of them looks like one party or the other has a clear advantage, one person's vote doesn't really matter, so you get a "free vote."

If you are in the situation of a free vote, you can use it to explore possibilities & help yourself decide where your views & sympathies really lie. You could look at the Greens, or Independents like Nader, write-ins like Kucinich etc, or different Socialist Parties. I will most likely vote for a socialist candidate this fall, for example - probably the one called SEP, if it gets on the ballot in Calif.

If the race looks like another very close one, both nationally & in Florida, you could consider holding your nose & voting for Kerry as the lesser evil. It's a personal decision, of course, and you have 8 months to think about it. Maybe the way the campaign unfolds will help you make up your mind. I wouldn't allow myself to be pressured into a decision like that, though, by what a bunch of hysterical Dem Party partisans think about it, such as many of the dolts who have responded to your thread thus far.

[Sparkly]

37. No pressure

I mean, not *that* many people have been affected by this administration, right? And the Chimp didn't vote for the IWR and the Patriot Act...

The only "pressure" I see is about urging people to consider the consequences. Nobody's threatening, bribing, or blackmailing to get anybody else to vote Bush out. You don't even have to tell us who you vote for.

It's amazing to me that Kerry is getting hammered for being a radical "Massachussetts Liberal," and people here complain he's not liberal enough. His voting record is about at the limit of how liberal it gets before you can't get elected, stay elected, build consensus and majorities and have a shot at becoming president. If he were any more liberal, he wouldn't have a chance at beating Bush. Think they're calling him "weak on defense" now? Imagine if he hadn't voted for the IWR or the Patriot Act!

I'm not saying this is how it should be; I'm saying this is how it is.

[mobuto]

39. Amazing

The Democratic Party hasn't nominated a candidate as liberal as John Kerry since George McGovern in 1972 - 32 years ago - and yet DU Bolshies still aren't satisfied. They can go to hell for all I care.

[AntiCoup2K4]

62. George McGovern didn't vote for the Vietnam War

He didn't vote for the Nixon agenda consistently since Nixon illegally took over the government either. (And not just because Nixon was actually elected.)

[mobuto]

66. LOL- Game, Set, Match

John Kerry didn't vote for the Vietnam War. In fact he was outspoken in his opposition to it.

But George McGovern most certainly did.

He voted for the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, which went much further than the IWR in supporting the use of force. Both the IWR and TGR were hoaxes foisted on the Congress by a dishonest administration, and neither was the fault of the legislative branch.

So I'm sorry, you're simply wrong.

To be consistent in your opposition to John Kerry, you would have had to have been ready to vote against George McGovern as a war instigator in 1972.

ON EDIT: I might add that anybody would did or would have supported McGovern in 1972, with the TGR, and who refuses to support Kerry in 2004, because of IWR, is nothing but a shallow, myopic hypocrite.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

70. Thanks for demonstrating how truly uninformed the Kerry haters are

Every day on this board people post fawinging admiration of FDR....the guy that MADE sure we got into WW2.

[redqueen]

73. Really?

FDR personally ensured our entry into WWII?

I dunno... there are lines of influence in the halls of power that most of us common folk will never know about. I can't blame FDR for that without some kind of evidence to back it up.

[Doomsayer13]

168. the writing was on the wall

Preparations were being made to enter the European theater before Pearl Harbor. Pearl Harbor just gave FDR the justification to take the fight to Europe and Japan, which he was going to do anyways, it also put the public squarly in his corner.

[redqueen]

199. Not arguing, since I'm sure that's the case

but I still don't see the personal tie in. It's obvious based on evidence available now that bush wanted to go into Iraq from day one. I don't see that kind of evidence personally linking FDR to WWII.

[Classical_Liberal]

90. Liberals like fighting fascist. That was a cool war.

.

[JI7]

194. George McGovern loves John Kerry

if you remember, george mcgovern endorsed wes clark for president. but he was on tv when john kerry won the iowa caucus and he spoke very highly of john kerry. i thought he would take the chance of try to attack kerry to help the candidate he supports, but he didn't. he said good things about clark and said he will continue supporting clark, but at the same time only had good things to say about kerry.

i was really happy when bill clinton said those kind words about mcgovern at the democratic unity dinner. especially the part about how he is still proud to have supported and worked for his campaign.

[hippiegranny]

59. you say to-may-to

i say to-mah-to. you say dolt, i say realist.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

72. There you go again. Many people gave thoughtful answers with

valid considerations and you reduced them to "dolts."

So those who prefer to ignore the real world are also saying: "please ignore me." And they will achieve that result. Chomsky

[mitchum]

97. If you want some real dolts, I can recommend...

[seaglass]

99. Hey, where did the thread starter go???? n/t

on edit - whoops, I wasn't asking you mitchum, just posted in the wrong place...looks like he's back:-)

[William_WaLLace_]

119. I was sleeping!

eom

[Name removed]

171. Deleted message

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

[mitchum]

175. Maybe you can find someone to indulge you over at the...

amen corner. Ooops...looks like there's not much going on over there. How about that?
Get over yourself, Richie

[William_WaLLace_]

116. thanks

Nice Post.

[bushbegone04]

169. perfectly put

you said it right - i too have trouble voting for Kerry

[drumwolf]

38. What state do you live in? You never indicated that piece of info.

If you live in an overwhelmingly Republican state (like Texas or Indiana) or an overwhelmingly Democratic state (like Massachusetts), then you probably have the luxury of not having to vote for Kerry.

If you are not living in a state that is very firmly skewed to one party or the other, then I agree with everyone else who has responded here: if you do not vote for Kerry, you are effectively voting for Bush.

Edit: Let me add in something else. If you ABSOLUTELY cannot be persuaded to vote for Kerry (or if you live in an overwhelmingly Rethug state and can afford to vote third-party), consider voting for the Greens instead of Nader. You'd be doing more good by supporting the Green Party and helping them maintain their foundations. On the other hand, Nader is an independent motivated by nothing more than his ego.

[mobuto]

41. Indiana?

Indiana could be close. It isn't all that close at this point, but things change. As the race progresses, it may well be in play.

[cyclezealot]

40. I have the same dilema.

I called Kerry's office too many times complaining of his awful voting record. But, read the Nation..It is on line...Story by David Corn..(March 15.) Not that I buy it all.. Still too many awful votes.
But I have the luxury of living in a blue state. I think? With that option, I just might vote for Nader.?
Living in Florida, I would be a little more careful...Things like Privitatization of Medicare,Social Security. Federal budget, tax cuts. Gutting labor...
The Nation article "Whats right about Kerry," is worth reading to put our Kerry problems in perspective.
I just wrote Kerry a letter. Said I might vote for you, but to inspire us, get us to contribute, you need reconsider 1) the Iraqi vote, 2) Nafta, 3) Medical care....
Maybe try to leverage him to go our way on issues a little more.That is why I think Kucinich campaign is a good thing...Try to make Kerry more palitable...Go Dennis. Make Kerry a better candidate.

[zulchzulu]

42. You may as well vote for Bush and call it a day

Since you don't see the importance of voting Bush out and haven't understood the real differences between Kerry and Bush, you may as well just vote for Bush. Or Nader. Whatever.... Heck, why not just stay home on Election Day. There are probably going to be some good "reality shows" on.

Write in Carrot Top. He didn't vote for the Patriot Act.

[Zorra]

44. No. You have got to be kidding.

The parallels between the undemocratic, Machiavellian legislative manipulations of the Nazis in the 1930's and those of the Republican Party and the Bush administration of today should not be ignored. The 2000 election fiasco in Florida, the undemocratic re-districting farce in Texas, media consolidation, the Patriot Act, the electronic voting issue, the deliberate exclusion of Democrats from some legislative meetings, and the Bush administration’s false statements to, and subsequent betrayal of, Congress and our country that led to a premature pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, are but a few of many examples of this undemocratic political activity that parallels the activities of the Nazi’s in the 1930’s.

We cannot afford to ignore the tragic mistake that was made by the Germans, and must not repeat this mistake when casting our vote November. We simply cannot allow this undemocratic, repressive, and bloodthirsty right wing administration to continue its assault on our democracy.

Despite many of our, in my opinion valid, disagreements with the direction of the Democratic Party, there is far more at stake right now than ideological differences. If you consider yourself “left-wing”, or just a believer in democracy, then you are probably horrified at the actions that Bush and his administration have taken since they assumed power. What kind of monstrous things are they going to do if they retain power for four more years? Many more people will die from their unwarranted, violence oriented policies, and many, if not all, of our rights will be restricted and/or abolished.

http://www.opednews.com/michaels032604_3rd_party.htm

It's this simple: Elect Kerry or lose your freedom.

[WI_DEM]

46. as you can see posting this type of thing here is bound

to get a less than stellar response. I'm no Kerry fan either. I will vote for him on one issue alone and that is the Supreme Court, but I would never think it is my duty to tell another American citizen how they should vote--that is a matter of conscience--and too many people have died and not only in foreign wars but marching for civil rights and workers rights and the rest to take your vote away from you. What you decide to do in the ballot box is sacred and if you feel strongly about something you should do what you think is right. Don't listen to all of those who say your vote is going to elect Bush--Kerry has to earn your vote and the votes of millions of people. If he doesn't succeed and you vote for a third party candidate you feel best represents your views on the issues then you didn't vote for Kerry and you didn't vote for Bush--you voted your conscience. More power to you.

[Sparkly]

50. Again, nobody is "taking your vote away from you"

This is simply a discussion of the consequences of voting one way or the other. You're right -- your conscience is for you to live with. As my mother used to say, "Make your decisions with your eyes open."

My own conscience could never allow me to cast a vote that effectively supports Bush's chances of re-election. The stakes are high, the race is close, and Kerry is as liberal a Democratic candidate as we've seen in a long time.

Is there a way we can discuss the options, consequences and reality of the situation without being charged with trying to "pressure" anybody or "take away" somebody's vote?

[WI_DEM]

52. the consequences of someone not voting as the majority

here would like. Stop pressuring people and let them make their own decisions. I will admit that he invited it by posting this here--I don't buy the argument, for instance, that Nader elected Bush--it was a corrupt political system in the state of Florida that decided to not count all the votes and a deeply partisan US Supreme court which allowed that outrage to happen. Yes, Nader got more votes than the margin of victory for Bush in Florida but on the other hand he had no real impact in Tennessee which was Gore's homestate and which he ignored until it was too late or West Virginia a traditionally democratic state which also slipped from Gore's grasp when Bush decided to target it with tv ads and the rest and Gore didn't respond.

[Sparkly]

83. And again...

Is there some way people can express their opinions without being accused of "pressuring?" Are the people who attack Kerry "pressuring" me not to vote for him?

Seriously, what's the line between stating an opinion and "pressuring?"

I'm not going to get into a rehash of 2000 - let's deal with the present. The fact is that a vote for anybody but Kerry is NOT helpful in removing Bush. Whether or not you believe the old saying that "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem," at least I think it should be okay to say, "Here's why I think it's important to be part of the solution!"

[otohara]

48. Bush Thanks You

so does Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Condi, and the rest of the lying bastards.

[mzmolly]

51. Are there any other issues that matter to you and yours besides

the ones you noted above?

If so you may want to reconsider.

Dean and Nader have both said, if you want Bush vote for ABK. Any One But Kerry.

[CabalBuster]

53. Both Bush and Kerry are Skull and Bones, so I won't vote Kerry n/t

[mobuto]

56. Both Bush and Kerry wear boxer shorts

Who cares?

Ralph Nader was in Don Rumsfeld's class at Princeton.

Likewise, who cares?

[zulchzulu]

178. Do you read Doonesbury?

Answer first and I'll tell you why I asked.

[Walt Starr]

54. I think Kerry is a vile, disgusting, opportunistic, political hack who

will never do anything to help the little people, the environment, stop the war, or stop the march to empire.

And I'm going to march right in come November 2nd and cast my ballot for the man.

If I'm right about him, I vote Republican in 2008. If not, I vote to re-elect.

[William_WaLLace_]

115. out of all the insults I got for posing a reasonable question

Your post made me think the most. Maybe I can give Kerry a chance in 04', and vote repug in 08' if Kerry gets elected, and thats a big if, and lets me down, as I am pretty sure he will.

Thanks Walt.

[Walt Starr]

200. Not a problem, William_Wallace

My dislike for Kerry is only superceded by my loathing for Bush and that's the only reason Kerry will get my vote.

I'll be taking November 2nd off as a vacation day in order to recover from the wretched projectile vomiting I will be engaged in after casting that nasty ballot, but I'll still be voting for the gold-digging, botox-injecting, opportunistic hack who support the bombing of innocent women and children.

[hippiegranny]

55. no

no difficulty at all. i would vote for a ham sandwich if it ran against bush with a d behind it's name.

[Cuban_Liberal]

57. None whatsoever, since I want to save America from the right-wing.

I'd prefer NOT to live under a 'Bush Court' for the next generation and a half, thank you!

[redqueen]

58. Nope

Not me. At times I get worked up and hate the idea of voting for him, but then I just think about the SCOTUS, the two anti-choice bills recently passed by this regime, the war for empire the PNAC crowd managed to con so many into supporting, etc., and it gets real easy to imagine myself voting for him - even canvassing for him.

Texas will probably go to bush. Due to that likelyhood, I've was considering voting third party to send a message to the Democratic leadership. However lately I've been thinking I won't even vote third party from here - to send a message to bush that however many of us in his home state prefer Kerry.

Kerry has to tailor his message for what he believes will sell with the majority of voters. We have to consider everything he says with that in mind.

[Snivi Yllom]

61. I have many problems w/ Kerry, but in the end, W needs to be evicted.

I will be holding my nose big time when I vote.

[flpoljunkie]

63. Surely you are not serious. All of your options will help * win in 2004!

And this, my friend, is inexcusable.

[BigBigBear]

64. Kerry's not my first choice

but I will enthusiastically support the removal of these incompetant think-tank dropouts.

Kerry has more brains, more experience and a deeper dedication to public service than Bush does. Not even close.

[Thrill]

65. Why waste your time writing in a vote?

Just vote for Bush. Thats basically what you're doing anyway.

[info being]

68. Dean does not differ in Iraq...in that he didn't want to get out.

I'd say Nader or Kucinich. Or just do like the rest of us and plug your nose, and vote Kerry, for the good of the country.

[shivaji]

71. If Kerry wins in 2004, forget the liberal agenda for 8 years

Kucinich and his agenda will be sidelined & silenced for the
duration of Kerry term(s). Kerry will flip-flop, accomodate the right wingers and corporations as he has done dozens and dozens of times in the senate.

[redqueen]

77. Psychic?

We can't know what Kerry will do. We have a pretty good idea about what bush will do, though.

Besides, if Kerry does what you say he will, we'll have four or eight years to build up the third-party movement.

[Sparkly]

82. Which begs the question, "If Kerry DOESN'T win in 2004,

*then* what?"

[Walt Starr]

94. If that happens, join me in 2008

If Kerry sidelines the liberal agenda, I vote for the Republican in 2008.

[Bread and Circus]

75. No, I have no problem. He's fine. Bush is a Nazi. What sort of...

clarification does one need...

[Paradise]

76. c'mon william_wallace_

you just wanted to get 'flamed', didn't ya :silly:

[Festivito]

86. ding ding ding! waste the libruls time. nt.

[William_WaLLace_]

113. No

Intelligent Discussion would be nice though. Since when did people get so staunch about simply voting for someone because he was perceived as a little bit better?

[Paradise]

163. "It's a joke, son,

I say, I say, it's a joke." - Foghorn Leghorn :)

[WitchWay]

78. I'm sure having trouble

I thought I couldn't vote for him. But right now, I'm going to give him until the convention, before I completely discount him as a choice. I'm giving him one more chance to make some meaningful commits, and to perhaps accept responsibility for one particularly wrong vote.

If Kerry is still the pro-war, imperialistic candidate who is unable to offer anything but crumbs -- I'm with Nader 100% and will work to get Nader as much support as possible. If Kerry is too compromised to really represent the public, though -- it shows he will be involved in a process that moves the party more under corporate interests, and moves the country more and more under the egregious free trade agreements that are inherently corrupt and destructive to American Sovreignty.

[laruemtt]

79. i was just thinking this morning

isn't there SOME way we can get somebody else to be the nominee??? i put the kerry bumpersticker on my car and felt kinda sick doing it. certainly not pumped like when i put clark's sticker on.

sheeesh, this is the first time ever i've been disenfranchised for the party nominee - he's already chosen and i don't even get to vote here in wv until May!!!!

[Pastiche423]

98. isn't there SOME way we can get somebody else to be the nominee???"

I'm still holding out a little hope on that!

I have yet to vote in my state's primary, hence, my vote already is irrelevant.

Kerry was not nominated by The People. I, and many more Americans did not have a voice in the selection of the Democratic nominee. Given that, why should our votes be relevant in the GE?

[JVS]

80. Write ins don't get counted usually

So if you want to issue a protest vote that will register you really have to go with someone on the ballot

[otohara]

81. Calling William Wallace - Hello William Wallace

where'd you go WW? Why start a thread - then disappear from the discussion>

[William_WaLLace_]

102. I woke up at 3 pm today

I finished law school last semester and now I get to kick back and study for the bar. So I made this thread as I watched Matthews here at 4 am, and went to bed.

And woke up at 3pm-lol. Life is nice right now:) Anyway, I am back and reading all replies, and even posted myself.

[pezcore64]

84. well

i totally agree with you that there is no excuse for the way he voted. i was hoping people would realise what a jackass he is during the primary, but no luck :(

ill vote for him tho.

ill just make sure to keep it in mind when re-election time comes around.

[_Wayne_]

85. Kerry's lifetime voting record reflects a liberal ideology

And his platform, as it stands today, sounds great. I am a strong liberal, (pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-decriminalizing drugs, pro-affirmative action, pro-removing tax exempt status for religious institutions, pro-raising taxes for the rich, lower taxes for middle/lower class, pro-no more corporate welfare, and so on, I really like what Kerry is saying lately, and excited that he has a chance to beat Bush given the state of our corporate controlled entertainment tabloid celebrity sensationalizing media.

I've followed the Dem presidential campaign very closely, and followed Kerry's movements for the last year. I like the guy a lot, and think he'll make a wonderful president.

I hope you'd reconsider. We need every vote here in Florida.

[William_WaLLace_]

100. wow!!

Your still alive? How come I never hear from you anymore-lol.

Im taking the bar exam in July:)

[northernsoul]

87. President B*sh thanks you for your support

and Jeb will be counting on your continued "principled stand" when he runs in 2008

[Alenne]

88. I'm having more difficulty believing your post is serious.

I think you were trying to start a flame war.

[William_WaLLace_]

106. nah

I don't like to fight with people I don't know and on the Internet, its just a legitimate question.

I am even capable of being swayed to vote for Kerry, but have seen no concrete reason to do so, other than the optimistic view that Kerry will be better than Bush, but why???? What has Kerry promised specifically that should make me overlook his votes on issues that I hold near and dear to my heart?

[Alenne]

151. Being better than Bush is a very good reason.

If you are looking for someone who has voted the way you want them to on every issue then you probably won't find any candidate to vote for. Kerry may not vote the way I would want him to on every single issue but when I look at what he wants to do for this country and what Bush has already done to this country the decision is not very hard to make.

I don't think when he is elected I will agree with everything he does but I will probably agree with most. I know if Bush is elected I will not agree with 99.9% of what he does.

It's your vote. Do what you think is best with it.

[GalleryGod]

89. Hey, Wild Willie!?

GFY:nuke:

[WilliamPitt]

91. No

No trouble whatsoever. I'm looking forward to it the way a kid looks forward to Christmas morning.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

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

[LuminousX]

93. Uh... I dislike Kerry, still able to vote without hesitation

Right now it is more important to cut the head off of the GOP serpent than worry about trifles. We've got Dean, Clark, Edwards and Kucinich to beat on Kerry if Kerry strays too far off the proper path.

[VelmaD]

95. Do you know anything about his record...

other than PATRIOT Act and IWR? Seriously. Look into how he's voted on a score of other issues near and dear to the liberal heart and then come back and tell me he's just the same as Bush.

[William_WaLLace_]

104. those issues matter to me the most

I do know of his flip flop voting record, but those two issues hit home the most.

Pre-emptive war is a doctrine I am very very concerned about, and that really stands out to me more than many other issues.

Also, I have been and always will be a bit of a civil liberties buff. I value what little freedom we have left here in the USA, and it is very very little. Thus, I have concerns about candidates that vote to abrogate the small amount of freedoms Americans have left.

[wyldwolf]

112. Flip flop voting record? Elaborate please?

[The Magistrate]

117. Indeed, Mr. Wolf

It is interesting how these "not a dime's worth of difference" types always seem to find the Republican attack line du jour most apt to their purposes....

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[William_WaLLace_]

118. well

As Bush said-lol, for the Patriot Act and against it, for No Child Left Behind and against it, for the Iraq War and against it, and thats just one Senator from Mass.

I know that does not address his "voting record" but one puzzling thing is that he voted against the IWR is 91, which I supported, and for a pre-emptive invasion in 04, odd eh?

[wyldwolf]

121. You're right - your reply DOES NOT address his voting record

Why do you find it odd that you and he disagreed on the IWR '91 and IWR in '03?

I was against them both. Odd, eh?

[William_WaLLace_]

129. at least your position is more consistent

In 1991 you had Saddam invade a country without cause. In 03 Saddam was crippled and mute, an innefective leader which may have lost ontrol in a few years.

So why vote against a war when the threat is definitive and clear in 1991, and for the war in 03 when there is no danger, and Kerry knew there was no danger, or he should have if he wants to be a leader.

There are other things in his voting record, you really want to take this route?

[The Magistrate]

131. Then Produce Some Of Them, Sir

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, philosophers and divines."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[wyldwolf]

133. no...

...in '91 Saddam had cause and permission from the Bush I administration.

and, sure, if you want to go a few rounds with me on Kerry's voting record, let's go. But be prepared to understand that senate votes are not always as they appear. Often, votes are won and lost based on stipulations that are attached to the bill.

[William_WaLLace_]

132. Kerry's voting record

if you can not see inconsistencies then you need some education and then we can talk:)

Abortion:
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on disallowing overseas military abortions. (May 1999)

Education:
Voted NO on Educational Savings Accounts. (Mar 2000)
Voted NO on school vouchers in DC. (Sep 1997)
Voted NO on requiring schools to allow voluntary prayer. (Jul 1994)

Foreign Policy:
Supports multilateral cooperative internationalism. (Oct 2003)aside: ask the French before going to war
Voted YES on limiting the President's power to impose economic sanctions. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on $17.9 billion to IMF. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba. (Mar 1996)
Voted YES on ending Vietnam embargo. (Jan 1994)
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence. (Aug 2000)

Trade Policy:
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
Voted YES on permanent normal trade relations with China. (Sep 2000)

Government Reform:
Voted NO on require photo ID (not just signature) for voter registration. (Feb 2002)
Voted YES on continuing funding for the National Endowment for the Arts. (Aug 1999)
Voted NO on banning more types of Congressional gifts. (Jul 1995)

Gun Control:
Democratic Party shouldn't be for the NRA. (Nov 2003)
Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology. (Aug 2000)

Homeland Security:
No new generation of nuclear weapons. (Sep 2003)
Voted YES on allowing another round of military base closures. (May 1999)
Voted NO on deploying missile defense as soon as possible. (Sep 1998)
Voted NO on prohibiting same-sex basic training. (Jun 1998)
Voted NO on 1996 Defense Appropriations. (Sep 1995)

Immigration:
Amnesty to anyone here over 5 or 6 years. (Sep 2003)
Voted NO on limiting welfare for immigrants. (Jun 1997)

Social Security:
Voted NO on Social Security Lockbox & limiting national debt. (Apr 1999)
Voted NO on allowing Roth IRAs for retirees. (May 1998)
Voted NO on allowing personal retirement accounts. (Apr 1998)
Voted NO on deducting Social Security payments on income taxes. (May 1996)

Taxes:
Voted NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years. (May 2003)
Bush tax cuts reach 32 million in middle class. (Sep 2003)
Voted NO on cutting taxes by $1.35 trillion over 11 years. (May 2001)
Voted NO on eliminating the 'marriage penalty'. (Jul 2000)
Voted NO on across-the-board spending cut. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on $792B tax cuts. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on requiring super-majority for raising taxes. (Apr 1998)
Voted NO on FY99 tax cuts. (Apr 1998)

War & Peace:
Vietnam didn't threaten US; US war crimes did. (Apr 1971)
Vietnam war was criminal hypocrisy and tore apart US. (Apr 1971)

Welfare:
Voted YES on welfare block grants. (Aug 1996)
Voted YES on eliminating block grants for food stamps. (Jul 1996)
Voted NO on allowing state welfare waivers. (Jul 1996)

[wyldwolf]

136. as I said to you in a previous post...

In the senate, votes are won and lost based on extra stipulations placed on bills.


But let me pick just one out of your GOP list:

War & Peace:
Vietnam didn't threaten US; US war crimes did. (Apr 1971)
Vietnam war was criminal hypocrisy and tore apart US. (Apr 1971)


Nothing inconstant here.

Vietnam DID NOT threaten the US.
But the Vietnam war WAS criminal hypocrisy.

[William_WaLLace_]

141. And Iraq did threaten the USA in 03?

Iraq is as much a threat to the USA as is Janet jackson.

So he realized Vietnam was no threat, but later he fell apart about Iraq?

[wyldwolf]

145. This last post of yours has nothing to do with Viet nam

...and if you'll take the time to study the issue instead of parroting fringe talking points, Kerry was clear in his vote that he was authorizing force as a last resort and expected Bush to return to the UN.

But you know this already.

[tishaLA]

139. Please elucidate

the inconsistencies here. Thanks.

[William_WaLLace_]

142. you can read

can you not?

[wyldwolf]

147. You can do more than cut and paste, can you not?

All that was requested of you was to highlight the portions you found inconsistant and comment on them as to why. Maybe your GOP buddies didn't cover that portion with you yet?

[tishaLA]

152. I'd just like for you to shine your light of truthfulness

on the record. What do you see as the inconsistencies here, Mr. Wallace? Can you explain the prevarications, the flip flops, and the problems? I'm sure you can make it all clear to me.

[The Magistrate]

143. Good Try, But Incomplete To The Point Of Uselessness, Sir

To make sense out of such a cut and paste dump, you need to specify actual bills, and note which votes are on amendments or procedural matters, or occur where there are several similar bills in process at the same time, and some are voted against while one is voted for, that seems preferable in some detail. There are also details of the necessary log-rolling of legislative work that ought to be provided. That is, of course, if your purpose is make sensible comment, rather than to sloganeer and uphold some initial prejudice in the matter....

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET"S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[William_WaLLace_]

146. the record speaks loud enough

To illustrate the point that was made.
No further info is required for me, if it is for you than you should do the research you suggested.

[wyldwolf]

149. You STILL haven't shown why the record is a problem

And I don't expect that you will.

[The Magistrate]

154. You Are Not Very Good At This, Are You, Sir?

Without the sort of detail mentioned, your cut and paste dump is useless for any purpose, including your own, and, put bluntly, as it is you who are producing the evidence, it is incumbent on you to produce it completely....

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Hav]

197. You aren't very good at illustrating your point.

Maybe Kerry's record speaks for him, your post though, was a poor joke at best. You picked the wrong rightwing post to make your point. The post you copied and pasted wasn't made to illustrate his incosistencies as you would have realised if you had taken the time to read it before posting it here.



if you can not see inconsistencies then you need some education and then we can talk

Yes, let's look at your gem of a cut and paste work.

Abortion:
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on disallowing overseas military abortions. (May 1999)

Where are the inconsistencies? Where did he flip-flop? I see him voting against a ban on abortion, then I see him voting no on banning partial birth abortions and then I see him voting no on disallowing overseas military abortions. The record is very clear to me. I see him standing up for a woman's right to choose.
It's a mystery why you chose that summary of his record to prove he is a flip flopper.
Let me guess, you didn't read it.

Education:
Voted NO on Educational Savings Accounts. (Mar 2000)
Voted NO on school vouchers in DC. (Sep 1997)
Voted NO on requiring schools to allow voluntary prayer. (Jul 1994)

Where is your proof that he flip-flopped?
Are they connected to each other at all?
Let me guess, you didn't read it.

Foreign Policy:
Supports multilateral cooperative internationalism. (Oct 2003)aside: ask the French before going to war
Voted YES on limiting the President's power to impose economic sanctions. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on $17.9 billion to IMF. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on Strengthening of the trade embargo against Cuba. (Mar 1996)
Voted YES on ending Vietnam embargo. (Jan 1994)
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence. (Aug 2000)

First, explain the inconsistencies? For example, I see 2 votes against embargos (ending an embargo and against strenghtening an embargo. It is very clear who needs to check his reading skills.

Second, nice rightwing talking point about asking the French whether the US can go to war or not. It doesn't surprise me in the least that you have no problems at all to repeat with these rw talking points and that you obviously agree with their flawed logic by posting them here. On the other side I have to assume that you didn't read what you cut and pasted very carefully, if at all.

So let me guess, you didn't read it.


Trade Policy:
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
Voted YES on permanent normal trade relations with China. (Sep 2000)

Again, I see him voting yes on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam and then I see him voring yes on permanent normal trade relations with China. Besides the fact that these are 2 different countries, where are the incosistencies?
Let me guess, you didn't read it.


Government Reform:
Voted NO on require photo ID (not just signature) for voter registration. (Feb 2002)
Voted YES on continuing funding for the National Endowment for the Arts. (Aug 1999)
Voted NO on banning more types of Congressional gifts. (Jul 1995)

I don't see these 3 votes being connected to each other.
Where are the incosistencies?
Let me guess, you didn't read it.

Gun Control:
Democratic Party shouldn't be for the NRA. (Nov 2003)
Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology. (Aug 2000)

I still don't get it. Where are the incosistencies?
Let me guess, you didn't read it.

Homeland Security:
No new generation of nuclear weapons. (Sep 2003)
Voted YES on allowing another round of military base closures. (May 1999)
Voted NO on deploying missile defense as soon as possible. (Sep 1998)
Voted NO on prohibiting same-sex basic training. (Jun 1998)
Voted NO on 1996 Defense Appropriations. (Sep 1995)

It's getting tiresome, but when do you start to prove that he is a flip-flopper? How did you expect to persuade us with these votes?
Let me guess, you didn't read it.

Immigration:
Amnesty to anyone here over 5 or 6 years. (Sep 2003)
Voted NO on limiting welfare for immigrants. (Jun 1997)

I don't see you getting started on incosistencies.
Let me guess, you didn't read it.

Social Security:...

Let me guess, you didn't read it.


Let's make it a bit faster now because I'm getting bored.

Taxes:
Voted NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years. (May 2003)
Bush tax cuts reach 32 million in middle class. (Sep 2003)
Voted NO on cutting taxes by $1.35 trillion over 11 years. (May 2001)
Voted NO on eliminating the 'marriage penalty'. (Jul 2000)
Voted NO on across-the-board spending cut. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on $792B tax cuts. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on requiring super-majority for raising taxes. (Apr 1998)
Voted NO on FY99 tax cuts. (Apr 1998)

War & Peace:
Vietnam didn't threaten US; US war crimes did. (Apr 1971)
Vietnam war was criminal hypocrisy and tore apart US. (Apr 1971)

Welfare:
Voted YES on welfare block grants. (Aug 1996)
Voted YES on eliminating block grants for food stamps. (Jul 1996)
Voted NO on allowing state welfare waivers. (Jul 1996)

When you see incosistencies, please tell me.
But let me guess, you didn't read it, you didn't read it and you didn't read it. Am I right?
I'm sure I am.


You chose the wrong article. That wasn't the rw memo to show that Kerry is a flip-flopper. Too bad isn't it? All that trouble and you didn't even manage to select the right article.
No further info is required for you? I believe you.
Like Clinton said: "In order to be successful they (the right) have to make people stop thinking. And they are very good at that."
Indeed, they are incredibly good at that.

[redqueen]

201. Thanks and bravo!

I stopped reading that list after I noticed NO inconsistencies.

That was a lot of effort, and I commend you for it. :)

I hope and pray it makes a difference!!!! If the thread starter is in a swing state we need that vote!

[Sparkly]

156. I don't see inconsistencies

Abortion:
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on disallowing overseas military abortions. (May 1999)

This is a pro-choice record. I think you lifted this from a rightwing site claiming Kerry's "too liberal," not "inconsistent." At least get the smears straight.

As for Bush's "for this and against it" nonsense, I can't believe anybody here takes Bush's campaign spin for fact!

[The Magistrate]

122. So, Sir

You are aware of three matters on which the man has voted in a career spanning decades?

You do pay some attention to public affairs...?

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[wyldwolf]

127. What he'll do next...

...is go searching for the tiniest little details about Kerry to "prove" his point.

Hey, William_WaLLace_ ! The RNC has done your "work" for you!

[tishaLA]

137. Thanks for the informed post, sir :-)

reciting the chimp in chief's lies about Sen. Kerry is sure to bolster your credibility.

[William_WaLLace_]

144. so his actual voting record

Is comprised as lies made by Bush? You all need some help, you are truly deluded.

[mitchum]

96. I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince you...

because your vote isn't that goddamn precious. But you will still have to live with the consequences of not voting for the Democratic nominee. The burden is not on LOYAL Democrats, but on you.

[William_WaLLace_]

101. So I should vote for Kerry because?

I should vote for Kerry because he is not as bad as Bush? I just don't know if that makes sense, since when does one have to settle for the lesser of two evils?

My personal opinion is that Kerry is as evil/bad as Bush since he voted for the legislation I detested the most, that which subjectively matters to me. Now we can all disagree on what values we each place emphasis on, but I personally have a problem voting for a candidate that voted for the Iraq War, Patriot Act, and no child left behind. And he really makes no apology for voting for these things? He certainly has not promised to undo the damage by removing the troops, or seeking to nullify these pieces of legislation?

So in my opinion, and this is all opinion, it is optimism that makes you all believe Kerry will do so much better than Bush, it seems they agree on most things.

Anyone else willing to write in Howard Dean, or Kucinich?

[Redneck Socialist]

126. It helps if you think of it as voting against bush.

I'm not excited by the prospect of voting FOR Kerry either, but as I live in a swing state too our votes matter greatly this time around.

Will President Kerry dramatically change the direction of the country? No, but on a host of issues from the environment to judicial nominations the change in direction will be dramatic and for the better.

I can't just throw up my hands and say Kerry is not good enough. Sure Kerry made some bad votes, but if there had been a President Gore Kerry would not have even been in the position of having to make a choice on those votes.

So I am going to vote for Kerry, and then I will go on fighting like hell for the issues that matter most to me. At least with Kerry we will have a slim hope of moving in the right direction (left).

As unpalatable as Kerry may be the alternative is far, far worse.

[mitchum]

170. Please RE-READ the previous post

That is all

[ulysses]

103. perhaps not the easiest of things,

but I plan to do it.

:shrug: ymmv.

[dolstein]

123. Sure -- he's too liberal for my tastes, but I'm voting for him anyway

Honestly, I don't know what the rest of you DU'ers are whining about.

[The Magistrate]

124. You Are A Good Fellow, Mr. Dolstein

"There is just no pleasing some people."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[private_ryan]

125. God bless you

Write Dean in. As soon as the Congress finds out that you did they'll appoint him.

[William_WaLLace_]

128. cool

I didnt think so, but since you said that I will definately do that now!!!

Thanks for the info, I didnt know my one vote counted that much, I am so special!!

[The Magistrate]

135. That You Are So Special, Sir

Is the whole thrust of your initial comment above, initiating this discussion. You complain that a thing does not reach you personally, and that you cannot submerge your peculiar preferences in a larger effort beyond yourself....

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[William_WaLLace_]

138. I wont sacrifice principles

I will not sacrifice my basic beliefs in order to vote for a candidate that is remarkable similar to the one that people are trying to oust.

I vote for someone because they represent the ideals that I hold myself, or at least they are close. kerry is no closer to me than Bush, and thus I do have some issues with voting for him.

Instead of your ad hominem attacks, perhaps you should take a moment to expalin to me and a few others why Kerry is so great.

[The Magistrate]

150. How Very Special, Sir

And how kind of some political figure, who must to gain office secure a majority of votes in a district or state or nation, to take the care and time to represent the ideals you hold yourself. You are a marketeer's dream, Sir, a one-man niche with disposable income, who knows just what he wants, and will spare no effort to get precisely that....

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sparkly]

158. That was a particularly great post.

"And how kind of some political figure, who must to gain office secure a majority of votes in a district or state or nation, to take the care and time to represent the ideals you hold yourself."

This is what I've tried to say -- no candidate will please everybody on all the issues, period, so we can all assume we'll disagree with Kerry to a greater or lesser extent. And no nominee can possibly win an election by espousing far-left policies that are easy to *say* if you aren't looking to win or expecting to get consensus in office and be effective once there ...

Anyway... I like the way you said it better. :)

[The Magistrate]

161. Thank You, Ma'am

You are too kind....

It is at the root of some problems we face, though, unfortunately. Electoral politics requires the assembly of the largest and broadest groupings possible if success is to be achieved, and the sort of niche marketing people become accustomed to in our modern culture militates against this somewhat, on a wholly personal level. Committed radicals probably would not like being explained in terms of a person seeking just the right label among the eighteen varieties of tuna on the shelf, but viewed coldly, there are similarities to the two phenomenon, and peculiarly modern American ones to boot.

"I am a man of principles, Sir, and chief among them is flexibility."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Sparkly]

164. Dang

I had to read that twice; never thought of it that way. I *have* noticed that the crackers shelf has become incredibly complicated. So if there are 18 variations of something, each suited to a niche, how does one candidate become the Uber-Product? Without being dishonest or incredibly shallow or... Hmm... Maybe it's no wonder the Bushboy is so popular.

You make a great point, Magistrate.

[mitchum]

172. Your one vote doesn't make that much of a difference...

but the attention apparently does

[Guaranteed]

186. There are millions out there like him. nt

[w4rma]

140. Nope. I have no difficulty at all voting for Kerry. (nt)

[ncrainbowgrrl]

148. Yes, but I have a harder time NOT voting for Kerry.

I shall be holding my nose come november.

[Piperay]

153. NOT one single little bit

and any vote not for Kerry will help keep chimp in the WhiteHouse. :argh:

[oasis]

155. Why not write-in the person you most admire? yourself perhaps.

[William_WaLLace_]

157. will you vote for me as well?

Maybe then it would be worth it...

[Sparkly]

162. You once ate a lunch I didn't agree with :)

But really, if we were going to vote solely on principle without any compromise, and if compromise means voting despite disagreement, an awful lot of us could only preserve conscience by voting for ourselves.

If we were to vote our favorite candidates, we'd have at least an 11-way split.

Personally, my conscience would hurt if I did't do everything possible to get Bush out, and he then got four more years. Would writing in my ideal candidate make that feel any better? Not for me.

Anyway, I'm still wondering about the posts above -- the ones with the rightwing cut/pastes and Bush quotes...

[GOPBasher]

160. The difference between Dems and Repubs.

There is no one at freerepublic.com that will NOT vote for Bush, despite things that are decidedly anti-conservative: explosion of government spending and the deficit. There are many leftists that will not vote for Kerry, because of couple votes.

[Catholic Sensation]

165. this is what the main post looks like to me

Two votes are enough to condemn a man? Good to see you buying into the ultra-leftwing crap that Kerry isn't liberal.

[Forkboy]

166. I am

but I will.

[The Magistrate]

167. Good For You, My Friend

Always a pleasure to see you about the place, Sir.

"He's no fun...he fell right over...."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTATDS!"

[askew]

174. I personally can't stand Kerry for a ton of reasons, but as I live in

a swing state (I can't frickin believe Minnesota is a swing state), I will decide my vote based on the VP candidate. If the VP candidate actually appeals to the base, not catering to the remaining 3 swing voters in the country, I'll vote Kerry with no problem. Kerry has already swung hard center-right in the primaries and while he may have been really liberal 5 years ago, he isn't anymore. Not on the issues that matter to me. So, it comes down to the VP for me. Otherwise, I'll either write in Dean or skip the presidential vote and vote on everything else. And no, it won't be my fault if Kerry loses, it will be his for selling out the base and everything the party used to stand for, in my opinion. I vote my conscience period. And I think you should do the same.

[Kerry in 04]

176. So he voted for the Iraq war?!?!?! Didn't he listen to all of the lies...

Bush and co told America?? * convinced a LOT of people war was needed. Now if Kerry voted without all of *s lies then that is a different story. Still, he is a MUCH better choice than *. For the sake of the nation and the future of the children of the U.S.A., vote KERRY!!!!!!!!!:dem:

[yardwork]

177. I will have no problem voting for Kerry.

Rather than whining about how imperfect he is, I plan to spend the next seven months trying to convince a lot of people I know that Kerry is not "too liberal for Americans."

If he were any more liberal I probably wouldn't have a shot.

[fujiyama]

179. You live in Florida!?

Are you seriously asking this question?

Why are you asking others here to be "convinced"? You already have a preconcieved notion about Kerry and want to maintain that. That's fine, but don't act like you want to be convinced otherwise. If you don't believe Kerry will make a difference, go ahead vote against Kerry. That's your right. Don't come here whining when Bush invades another country or does something else you despise.

Being that you live in a swing state with a very large number of electoral votes, the choices are pretty clear. You either vote for Bush or against him - and the only way doing that is by voting for Kerry. If you write in a candidate, it's about as good as not voting in the first place. Many times they aren't even counted.

BTW, regarding the PATRIOT Act, a sunset provision was inserted in it. If Bush and Ashcroft get it their way that provision will be gone and it will be made permanent.

So, what are you "asking" people for? You have research skills. You know Kerry's record. If you think one of the most liberal senators serving will govern the nation the same way as the most right wing president in US history, I'd really like to take a puff of what you're smoking.

[Dr Fate]

180. Thanks for nothing. I hope you do well under Bush Jr. in 2004.

n/t

[William_WaLLace_]

190. I will try, thanks

I will have a lawyer salary, maybe I can even benefit from those tax breaks the Dems voted for, namely Edwards!!!!!

Yummy Yummy come April 15th next year!

[Dr Fate]

191. Good for you. Thanks for nothing.

n/t

[freeforall]

181. I don't think it will make any difference

who you vote for. Considering that the corporations own the candidates, will it really make any difference?

I haven't heard Kerry say anything really dynamic, and I don't think Americans will hear it anyway. Look what happened to Dean. America is not ready for a new vision. Politicians are not going to improve the country. Only when the people decide to take back the power will change occur. And, like, that's going to happen.

We're screwed!

America, wake up!!!

[fujiyama]

182. Kerry may be a moderate...

as far as Canadians are concerned, but he would probably be the most liberal candidate running for president in the last 30 years or so.

[Bill Todd]

183. Wow - 178 responses so far, in less than a day

And I'm not going to wade through them all, having gotten a reasonable taste in the first 50 or so; perhaps I'll go back and read the rest later.

The only advice I can offer is that if you truly detest Bush (as it appears that you do), then make sure that you're sure you have a good reason if you're not going to vote for Kerry.

Simply not being willing to vote for what you consider to be the lesser of two evils seems a bit weak: it's reasonable to find this an intolerable position to be placed in, but at the end of the day you still have an opportunity to make a difference, albeit not as much of a one as you'd wish to. I have the same problems with Kerry that you do, but if that were the only issue I'd vote for him and even actively support him, because Bush is so significantly worse in virtually all respects.

My own reason for refusing to support Kerry is because I feel that it's imperative to weaken the grip that the DLC and its cohorts have on the party rather than effectively endorse them by offering support and making it even harder to dislodge them next time around. I originally got forced out of the Kerry camp because I was so utterly disgusted with him and most of the rest of the party for failing to speak out during the run-up to the war last year, and there's been no sign since then that the party leadership is returning to the principles which the party used to stand for - so I will continue to bash them unmercifully until they do, regardless of the consequences.

But I feel that with such a decision comes the responsibility to try to effect change in the party, and in Kerry's positions, before the election rather than just sitting back and letting them find out on November 2nd. Because real evidence of change would be enough to get me on board, and I really do want Bush out.

If November comes around and you still find yourself unable to vote for Kerry, at least try to cast a vote that makes it clear to the party that it lost your support, and to whom. First of all, if you're going to write in anyone, make sure that Florida is a state that actually tallies write-ins for unregistered candidates so that your voice will be heard. Otherwise, support a candidate who most closely reflects your values and positions: there was one of those candidate-preference tests floating around here a couple of days ago, and while its analysis may be kind of simplistic it worked for me (my own preferences on a scale of 100 came out Green - 90, Dean - 86, Kucinich - 80, Socialist - 75, Kerry - 71,... Libertarian - 27, Bush -11, and that's very much what I would have expected).

Good luck. And don't let the strident ABB majority here convince you that you're doing something morally wrong if you don't vote for Kerry, any more than you should let yourself sit this one out just because you're mad. This election is going to be an important one, but there's also more at stake than simply who winds up sitting in the oval office: pay attention, be informed, and come to a real decision rather than just follow the herd, because that's the kind of voting behavior that we need to get this party, and this country, back on track, and that kind of change happens one person at a time.

- bill

[William_WaLLace_]

187. nice post bill

I think we agree on a lot of things. So Bill who will you vote for in November? It seemed implicit within your statement that you may support Kerry, is that correct? Or will you take the Nader route? Or something else?

You know a lot of people on this thread made arguments that Kerry's voting record was not that bad, etc. But they forget for me the pivotal votes were the IWR, and Patriot Act, I do not think I could vote for someone who voted for the IWR.

Kerry has said he was misled, but a leader leads, and other Senators found the WMD argument made by Bush tenuous at best. I think Kerry is more motivated by pleasing the DLC and political maneuvering than being a leader.

[Bill Todd]

188. If Kerry and the party don't shape up in some credible manner

then I'll see whether New Hampshire tallies write-ins.

If it does then unless Howard does something truly strange between now and November I'll write his name in: his candidacy really did represent what I want to see in national government, and I don't think that the party will have any difficulty understanding the meaning of that vote. Plus, I'll have the satisfaction of voting for someone rather than just against someone, though as I noted previously that satisfaction alone would not prevent me from supporting Kerry: it's the larger problem of perpetuating control of the party, and thus even if it wins the election the country as well, by people whom I consider to be about as unethical as, and only somewhat less objectionable than, the neocons.

Failing all the above, probably Green unless they make a strange candidate decision. I'm not that fond of Nader, so he's kind of a last resort.

For me, Kerry's IWR vote, while either seriously misguided or crassly unprincipled, is less of an issue than his subsequent failure to stand up and speak out clearly against the invasion in the month or so before it occurred - as he had specifically promised to do in his floor speech supporting the resolution if Bush failed to abide by the spirit (and explicit conditions) in which the resolution was passed.

By late February/early March of last year, it was clear to anyone paying attention that there was no imminent threat to the U.S. by Iraq, that the U.N. not only would not authorize but opposed an invasion, that no credible alternate coalition of international support had been created, that most of the population of the world opposed the invasion, that (at least according to polls) a majority of the U.S. population opposed invading without U.N. approval, that Bush & Co. were overtly misrepresenting intelligence regarding WMD in Iraq, and that the restarted inspections were proceeding effectively. Reportedly Kerry was deluged with entreaties from his Massachusetts constituents to speak out; I certainly urged him to do so, and urged the party leadership as well.

Robert Byrd was right: their silence was shameful. They lost my support at that moment, and have yet to do anything to earn it back. I hope that they will before November.

- bill

[William_WaLLace_]

189. I agree with you totally

I really really liked Dean as well, I thought he got a raw deal from the DNC and media.

Hopefully he'll be back in 08'?

[Hekate]

193. Thanks for bringing us W's second term...

...and the continuing destruction of our nation. Do us all a favor and simply stay away from the polling places; sing "Margaritaville" all election night; and keep your non-participation in mind when every day a new headline proclaims our transformation from a once-great republic into a narrow-minded theocracy ruled by godless corporations accountable to no one but their stockholders. Keep your ideological purity close to your bosom when the oldest of the Supremes start retiring and Bush begins to nominate as many as three new justices and a new chief justice, handpicked by the Heritage Foundation and PNAC.

And so on and so forth. I'm sure that these petty concerns of mine are as nothing compared to the satisfaction you will feel knowing that you did the (self-)righteously right thing by spurning a candidate who has not attained a supernatural state of perfection. After all, it worked for Ralph Nader.

Hekate

[Imalittleteapot]

196. ABB period.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

[Moderator]

202. Locking.....

The author is no longer with us.


DU Moderator