I predict, "JFK will sit..."

[King of the Americas]

"...as President, again."

President Bush isn't playing to the middle enough, and is already attacking Senator Kerry as a "big Liberal".

No way, Kerry was chosen because he was the most vanilla and the least likely to offend, the middle.

I believe the Right is merely trying to motivate their base, as to avoid a landslide.

I live in the middle of the Bible Belt, and have heard of no one who voted for Gore the last go round, but are planning to vote for the President in November. However, I have met and heard many people here say that "Bush hasn't 'earned' my vote, this time." Granted they say they don't support Kerry, and wouldn't vote for him, but they say they will likely not vote for anyone and just stay home.

No less than a dozen people I have spoken with suggest that so long as gas prices stay close to or over $2 a gallon, Bush will have failed to earn their vote.

Personally, I am voting for Nader, if he runs. Just to punish the Democrats for not being Liberal enough. I am so sick of 'moderate' candidates. There are things you have to stand tough for, sincere Liberty being one of them, Equal Rights another. And when our Democratic Presidential Candidate can't say outloud that a Woman's Right to have and Abortion is Paramount to a civil society, and that Homosexuals are People too and deserve any and all Rights afforded to Hetrosexuals, then we have lost our Liberal tones.

Who are you voting for and why?

Who do you think will likely win the election, and why?

 

[Tmy]

I predict that Allah will smite the RNC with a Torpical Storm!!!

Its hurricane season on the east coast you know!!

 

[Tmy]

Im voting Kerry. Ive done the 3rd party thing in the past but not this time.

W's whole stem cell thing really burns me up. Its proof that hes a religious kook who will do "jesus'" bidding rather than the american peoples.

 

[CFLarsen]

King of the Americas,

Just curious: Why have you stopped putting asterisks around "I"?

 

[Linda]

Let me get this straight: Kerry is too moderate, so you're voting for Nader which will likely result in the right-winger Bush being reelected. Isn't this cutting off your nose to spite your face? What a ridiculous idea...

 

[Ed]

The dems may not be liberal enough for you but the US is basically a conservative country. The chances of a liberal being elected are nil. Sorry 'bout that.

 

[CFLarsen]

Just clarifying:

"Liberal" in the US (apparently) means: Free-spending, close-to-communism, touchy-feely guy.

"Liberal" in Europe (certainly) means: Right-wing, free-market, union-bashing, generally-unloving guy.

What a strange world we live in....

 

[RandFan]

America is diverse. There is not a clear majority of any one group. Politics requires compromise and coalition and those coalitions are ever changing due to shifting attitudes about issues. America has become less and less extreme. The far left and far right while potent political forces are just not enough to ensure victory. Politicians must walk a tight rope of appealing to both the middle and extremes of their ideology without offending either.

George Bush has raised spending to new records. In addition he has embraced Vincente Fox and reforms for allowing illegal immigrants to stay in America legally. This has angered many conservatives who accuse Bush of catering to the middle. I know people who refuse to vote for Bush because he is too liberal. They believe that it would be better to lose the election than reward GWB after he betrayed the party.

Sound familiar?

 

[Ed]

Just clarifying:

"Liberal" in the US (apparently) means: Free-spending, close-to-communism, touchy-feely guy.

"Liberal" in Europe (certainly) means: Right-wing, free-market, union-bashing, generally-unloving guy.

What a strange world we live in....

The basic distinction (a very gross simplification) is the relative amount of power/responsibility in the central government. Liberals seem to think that centrally administered programs are better than leaving things up to the states.

 

[Questioninggeller]

Im voting Kerry. Ive done the 3rd party thing in the past but not this time.

W's whole stem cell thing really burns me up. Its proof that hes a religious kook who will do "jesus'" bidding rather than the american peoples.

I've been on voting strike in the past, but not for this one. I'll be voting Kerry in November, although I'll take a long shower afterward handing in my vote.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Im voting Kerry. Ive done the 3rd party thing in the past but not this time.

W's whole stem cell thing really burns me up. Its proof that hes a religious kook who will do "jesus'" bidding rather than the american peoples.

So you expect him to put aside his moral beliefs to win over voters? I suppose if he did do that, you'd accuse him of pandering.

 

[Jocko]

So you expect him to put aside his moral beliefs to win over voters? I suppose if he did do that, you'd accuse him of pandering.

Maybe if he threw someone else's stem cells across the reflecting pool in protest, that would be cool too.

Funny thing is, as a Catholic, Kerry should be more dogmatically opposed to SSR than a Methodist like Bush. Go figure.

 

[Jocko]

I live in the middle of the Bible Belt, and have heard of no one who voted for Gore the last go round, but are planning to vote for the President in November. However, I have met and heard many people here say that "Bush hasn't 'earned' my vote, this time." Granted they say they don't support Kerry, and wouldn't vote for him, but they say they will likely not vote for anyone and just stay home.

No less than a dozen people I have spoken with suggest that so long as gas prices stay close to or over $2 a gallon, Bush will have failed to earn their vote.

Dude, you live in TEXAS. It doesn't matter what your friends say, GWB has your state in the bag. Get used to it.

Personally, I am voting for Nader, if he runs. Just to punish the Democrats for not being Liberal enough.

Well, it's probably safer that way. I know how allergic you are to success. Wouldn't want a case of those early November hives, now would you?

 

[Meadmaker]

Just clarifying:

"Liberal" in the US (apparently) means: Free-spending, close-to-communism, touchy-feely guy.

"Liberal" in Europe (certainly) means: Right-wing, free-market, union-bashing, generally-unloving guy.

What a strange world we live in....

That's correct, as I understand it. Here in the US, the Democratic party is labelled "liberal", but in Europe, the Republicans would be more "liberal".

In my opinion, the left wing in America is not very liberal. Liberal, with its root "liber" as in "liberty" and all that, should be all about freedom. However, in America, I think it is more about "fairness".

It's no wonder that the Democratic party doesn't like the label "liberal". They have given it a bad name.

 

[Batman Jr.]

Personally, I am voting for Nader, if he runs. Just to punish the Democrats for not being Liberal enough. I am so sick of 'moderate' candidates. There are things you have to stand tough for, sincere Liberty being one of them, Equal Rights another. And when our Democratic Presidential Candidate can't say outloud that a Woman's Right to have and Abortion is Paramount to a civil society, and that Homosexuals are People too and deserve any and all Rights afforded to Hetrosexuals, then we have lost our Liberal tones.

Before you go voting for Nader, consider your priorities. Is it more importunate that you vote a truly liberal candidate in or vote Bush out? I would agree with you that Nader's motivations are probably much more idealistic and beneficent than the other two candidates despite his adamancy portraying him as an egotist. But if we're going to submit a vote to a third party, let's wait until the Democrats and Republicans conflate sufficiently, when—to paraphrase Bill Maher—the choice between the two parties becomes more a choice between Coke and Pepsi than a choice between Coke and "Jesus Juice."

 

[CFLarsen]

The basic distinction (a very gross simplification) is the relative amount of power/responsibility in the central government. Liberals seem to think that centrally administered programs are better than leaving things up to the states.

Well, that's odd, too: If we consider EU the superstructure in Europe, there is a distinct difference between how the various liberal political parties in the European countries view EU. In Denmark, they are pretty much in favor of it, while in the UK, they are far less charmed by it.

 

[CFLarsen]

I've been on voting strike in the past

Just curious: What did you think you - or the country - would gain from that?

 

[Art Vandelay]

Re: Re: I predict, "JFK will sit..."

But if we're going to submit a vote to a third party, let's wait until the Democrats and Republicans conflate sufficiently, when—to paraphrase Bill Maher—the choice between the two parties becomes more a choice between Coke and Pepsi than a choice between Coke and "Jesus Juice."

You mean, when almost everyone in both parties agrees that schools should have a daily affirmation of the principle that belief in God is an important part of patriotism?

 

[varwoche]

The dems may not be liberal enough for you but the US is basically a conservative country. The chances of a liberal being elected are nil. Sorry 'bout that.

As evidenced by the blowout 4 years ago?

 

[Batman Jr.]

Re: Re: Re: I predict, "JFK will sit..."

You mean, when almost everyone in both parties agrees that schools should have a daily affirmation of the principle that belief in God is an important part of patriotism?

Or if the candidate representing the Republicans is not an arrogant and nauseatingly pious neoconservative, but instead more of a centrist.