# Convince me to vote for Kerry
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [June 9, 2004, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416 "2004-06-09T05:24:51Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Cardinal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardinal)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/1 "2004-06-09T05:24:51Z")
Well, I’m not saying that it’s possible necessarily, but I’d like to hear some reasonable, um, reasons.
To have a match,
Me: For small govt., empowering people to do for themselves instead of pretending the government’s job to take care of the people, govt. enforcing a level playing field instead of enforcing equal outcomes, pretty much the core GOP platform.
Not happy with W. on all levels. Seems to stick to things past when they’ve become bad ideas, not happy with way intelligence or prisons were handled. He should have made sure that his commanders knew he would have nothing to do with unethical things, and probably should have gone publicly on record with his stance.
You: Not a nut case, not going to try to tell me that W. went to war to do well in the polls, is making gas prices go up just so he bring them down at the last minute, not just insulting because you hate him on some visceral level, not believing that W. actually lied about what he knew about Iraq.
Remember, I don’t have to read this thread, and I honestly kind of don’t even want to start it, considering the kind of replies that I expect to get. Vitriol will only make me leave and invalidate your and others’ points. This is kind of like the army, where one person can ruin it for everyone. I have enough of dealing with jackasses in real life (seriously), and I don’t have to put up with it here, too.
---
### Author:  [@Linear\_Crack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Linear_Crack)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/2 "2004-06-09T05:34:27Z")
> [@Cardinal](#):
>
> Remember, I don’t have to read this thread, and I honestly kind of don’t even want to start it, considering the kind of replies that I expect to get.
If the SDMB can’t convince you, no one can. 😉
BTW, I was born in YL!
-LC
---
### Author:  [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/3 "2004-06-09T07:28:03Z")
I think you’re barking up the wrong tree. You want people to convince you to vote democrat, when you’ve made it clear you disagree with democratic ideology. How’s _that_ gonna work?
> [@Cardinal](#):
>
> Me: For small govt., empowering people to do for themselves instead of pretending the government’s job to take care of the people
What do you mean, “pretending”? You don’t think the government is supposed to take care of the people? Do you believe in complete anarchy? We have laws, and those laws protect the people. You can argue the _degree_ to which you believe it shoud be done, but it makes no sense to say the government “pretends” to take care of the people. There’s no pretending about it, that is the function of government.
If you want any kind of coherent discussion, you need to identify some specific issues where you believe people can be “empowered” or “not empowered”. Then we can discuss how Kerry may or may not accomplish that as president.
If you believe in fiscal responsibility in government, I can tell you that the democrats have a much better record in that regard.
> [@](#):
>
> govt. enforcing a level playing field instead of enforcing equal outcomes, pretty much the core GOP platform.
If you’re referring to affirmative action, Kerry supports it, so he’s not going to be an ideological match for you there if you are against affirmative action. He also believes in enforcing civil rights.
> [@](#):
>
> Not happy with W. on all levels. Seems to stick to things past when they’ve become bad ideas, not happy with way intelligence or prisons were handled. He should have made sure that his commanders knew he would have nothing to do with unethical things, and probably should have gone publicly on record with his stance.
>
> You: Not a nut case, not going to try to tell me that W. went to war to do well in the polls, is making gas prices go up just so he bring them down at the last minute, not just insulting because you hate him on some visceral level, not believing that W. actually lied about what he knew about Iraq.
It’s not really necessary to go that far. It’s hardly extreme to say that Bush made 2 mistakes in pushing the Iraq war: (1) Claiming that Saddam had a huge arsenal of WMDs, and that he was a “grave and gathering” threat to the U.S., and (2) Claiming that Saddam had direct ties to al Qaeda, and _implying_ that he had something to do with 9/11. You don’t have to say he lied if you don’t want to. How about “misled”?
Or forget that altogether if you want. How about the fact that he ignored the sage advice of many people high-up in the military who told him he needed to send more troops? Or his overly-optimistic scenario that the Iraqi people would greet us as liberators and it would be done with? Or the premature “Mission Accomplished” banner, when we were just getting started? Or the flagrant violation of the Geneva convention which has caused a MAJOR international flap, which they first tried to blame on supposed rogue soldiers, which has now been traced right up to the top level of his administration, with ‘smoking-gun’ memos?
Or how about the testimony of former members of both his and Clinton’s administrations that he failed to take the al Qaeda threat seriously until after 9/11, and was obsessed with Saddam from day one of his administration?
Bush has made lots and lots of mistakes. And that’s before we even get _into_ the question of whether he has deliberately deceived the American public. No vitriol here; just an honest opinion of Bush’s performance as president. He made his choices, and I happen to think they were the wrong choices.
If you don’t believe any of this stuff, and you still think Bush is a great president, then by all means vote for him. But you’ve indicated that you aren’t entirely happy with Bush, so I guess you have to ask yourself if that outweighs the couple of ideological differences you have with the Democratic platform. Either that or vote for a third party. I happen to agree with a lot of Kerry’s stated ideals, but if _you_ don’t, how can I convince you to vote for him?
---
### Author:  [@Oy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oy)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/4 "2004-06-09T11:52:20Z")
WIthout vitriol, don’t you think that the Bush administration has done quite a bit of damage, **Cardinal**? Our foreign relations are pretty much in the toilet now; a lot of nations fear us. Maybe you think that’s good; a fair number of people seem to. But consider this: fear drives people (and nation-states) to do irrational things.
The current Attorney General seems to want to create a nation in which Christian fundamentalist morality is enforced by law; is that your idea of small government? This is a government which has stated “If you’re not for us, you’re against us and unpatriotic.” Is that the attitude you want from your administration?
I’ve noticed that a lot of people, when they say they are for smaller government, really mean that they want lower taxes. If that’s the most important issue to you, then Bush is your man. But I hope you don’t have kids, because they’re the ones who will pay for it.
---
### Author:  [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/5 "2004-06-09T12:06:02Z")
> [@Cardinal](#):
>
> Me: For small govt.,
Then you won’t be voting for George Bush, will you?
[http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Sep/09062003/nation\_w/90279.asp](http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Sep/09062003/nation_w/90279.asp)
> [@](#):
>
> The government has grown so much under the Bush administration that the federal work force is the largest it has been since the end of the Cold War, a new study says.
>
> In a reversal of years of downsizing, about 12.1 million people worked for the federal government in 2002, according to the study by the Brookings Institution’s Center for Public Service. That is more than at any other time since 1990, when the figure was 12.6 million.
---
### Author:  [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/6 "2004-06-09T14:22:44Z")
If you need convincing at this point, frankly I don’t know what to tell you. The case for non-Bush speaks for itself. I don’t care who you vote for, but don’t vote for Bush. Hell, vote libertarian. Really. I like libertarians.
---
### Author:  [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/7 "2004-06-09T14:50:47Z")
Yes, definitely. If you’re fed up with Bush, but don’t agree with the Democratic party’s positions on various issues, then vote Libertarian. They’re a basically interesting philosophy that could use some public support. And aside from the radicalism that comes from being such a small movement, they’re basically what the GOP was 30 some odd years ago.
---
### Author:  [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/8 "2004-06-09T15:10:52Z")
Kerry isn’t Bush.
Trust me, that’s all the answer you are gonna get.
Regards,
Shodan
---
### Author:  [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/9 "2004-06-09T15:11:54Z")
> [@Shodan](#):
>
> Kerry isn’t Bush.
>
> Trust me, that’s all the answer you are gonna get.
Isn’t that the case whenever somebody’s unhappy with the incumbent?
---
### Author:  [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/10 "2004-06-09T15:34:02Z")
**Shodan** is no doubt referring to his repeated attempts to get folks on the left to explain why Kerry should be president and what Kerry would have to do to lose their support.
He has been told repeatedly that many posters would simply vote for anybody besides Bush and that Kerry’s actual policies don’t matter one bit.
* * *
**Cardinal** , your politics sound pretty close to mine. I’m a small government conservative/libertarian type. Registered independant.
I’ve got plenty of bones to pick with Bush. He is far from perfect. However, Kerry would be far worse. He has a voting record that’s more liberal than Ted Kennedy. He will push for much larger government if elected.
The good news is that even if Kerry wins, he won’t be able to do much with a Republican house and congress. The really good news is that if Bush wins, he won’t have to worry about re-election again and can really start implementing some change. (hopefully) His tax cuts were a good start, but he needs to cut government programs much more aggressively than he has been. With four more years, free from worry about re-election, he can do this. Education vouchers and social security privatization would both be very possible in a Bush second term.
---
### Author:  [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/11 "2004-06-09T15:37:55Z")
> [@Debaser](#):
>
> His tax cuts were a good start, but he needs to cut government programs much more aggressively than he has been. With four more years, free from worry about re-election, he can do this. Education vouchers and social security privatization would both be very possible in a Bush second term.
I guess you didn’t notice the about government GROWING under Bush, eh? How much Bush could get done is up for dispute anyway, since Democrats stand a reasonable chance of taking control of the Senate.
---
### Author:  [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/12 "2004-06-09T16:13:33Z")
> [@Debaser](#):
>
> **Shodan** is no doubt referring to his repeated attempts to get folks on the left to explain why Kerry should be president and what Kerry would have to do to lose their support.
>
> He has been told repeatedly that many posters would simply vote for anybody besides Bush and that Kerry’s actual policies don’t matter one bit.
Well, I can say that Kerry would lose my support if, like Bush, he decided to use “I hate Gay people lots and lots and lots!!!” as one of his campaign themes. That’d wouldn’t get me to vote for the Dry Drunk in Chief, but it would pull me out of the Kerry camp.
> [@](#):
>
> **Cardinal** , your politics sound pretty close to mine. I’m a small government conservative/libertarian type. Registered independant.
How can anyone who has a lick of libertarianism to them vote for George “I Hate Freedom And Appointed John Ashcroft To Prove It” Bush? The man’s White House has used 9/11 as an excuse to wage an all out roll back of the Bill of Rights.
> [@](#):
>
> The good news is that even if Kerry wins, he won’t be able to do much with a Republican house and congress.
Clearly, when it comes to keeping the government books in order, a GOP Congress and a Democratic President is a good mix. Republican President with Democratic Congress spelled big deficits and growing government (Reagan era, Bush I). And pairing a Republican President with a Republican Congress has resulted in the largest and fastest growth of government in history, which when mixed with reckless tax cuts (reckless because they weren’t offset, reckless because Bush ditched PayGo and other budget controls) have produced a deficit of absurdly immoral proportions. And I mean immoral – it is absolutely wrong at a fundamental level to foist this sort of debt on the next generation, and Bush should be ashamed. But I’m sure he isn’t. He flat out doesn’t care.
> [@](#):
>
> The really good news is that if Bush wins, he won’t have to worry about re-election again and can really start implementing some change.
Don’t hold your breath. He will govern just as he has governed now. He loves big government, only he wants to telling you what to do in your bedroom instead of how to run your business.
> [@](#):
>
> Education vouchers and social security privatization would both be very possible in a Bush second term.
Not even a remote chance. And in any case, even if one supports education vouchers, to implement them at the Federal level is absurd. Federal money for education isn’t like state money, it doesn’t impact pupils as directly. If you want vouchers, you need to work at the state level. At the federal level, it’s just not effective. And it’s also an abrogation of the Republican tenet of decentralized government.
Not that Bush cares one lick about maintaining philosophical continuity with the traditional notions of the Republican party.
---
### Author:  [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/13 "2004-06-09T16:20:09Z")
There are a thousand wonderful reasons to vote for John Kerry. Here are just a few:
College Tax Credit: Kerry proposes a credit of the first $4000 in tuition for each year of college. As the parent of an incoming college freshman, that appeals to me much more than continuing to let the wealthiest Americans raid the treasury.
Education: Kerry recognizes the flaws in the “No Child Left Behind” act. Kerry will make sure that we do not turn our schools into test-prep institutions. From Kerry’s web site:
> [@](#):
>
> Politicians can talk all they want, but at the end of the day the most important thing in a classroom is the people who work in it. Yet too often, teachers, most of whom are performing heroic work under difficult circumstances, take the blame. John Kerry wants to support teachers and paraprofessionals with better training and better pay, with more career opportunities, more empowerment and more mentors. What the public schools of America need is an advocate in the White House. As President, that’s what John Kerry will be.
Tax Reform: [Kerry’s Tax Plan](http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/economy/10million.html) is worthy of a thread of its own.
> [@](#):
>
> John Kerry’s Plan to Create 10 Million Jobs
>
> The Most Sweeping International Tax Reform in Over Four Decades in Order to Encourage Companies to Create Jobs in America and Stop Shifting Jobs Overseas for Tax Reasons
>
> John Kerry is unveiling a comprehensive economic agenda that will unleash the productive potential of America’s economy to help it create 10 million jobs in his first term as President. Over the next several weeks, Kerry will unveil a series of proposals that will restore confidence in the economy and spur job creation.
>
> Today, Kerry is detailing a key part of his overall jobs agenda - a proposal to undertake the most sweeping international corporate tax reform in over four decades. Kerry will eliminate all of the tax breaks that encourage companies to move jobs overseas and use the savings to encourage companies to create jobs in America. Kerry will help jumpstart job creation with a New Jobs Tax Credit paid for by a one-year tax holiday to encourage companies to reinvest their foreign earnings in America. International tax reform is part of Kerry’s overall plan to regain America’s competitive edge, together with policies to lower the cost of health premiums for companies, modernize our information infrastructure, make energy more affordable, increase investments in education, and regain confidence in our fiscal future.
>
> SUMMARY OF JOHN KERRY’S TAX REFORM
>
> FUNDAMENTALLY REFORM AMERICA’S INTERNATIONAL TAX SYSTEM. John Kerry will fundamentally reform America’s international tax system, eliminating tax breaks for companies that create jobs overseas and using the approximately $12 billion in annual savings to cut the corporate tax rate. Under John Kerry’s plan, more than 99 percent of taxpaying companies will see their taxes go down.
>
> ```
> * End tax breaks that encourage companies to move jobs overseas by eliminating the ability of companies to defer paying U.S. taxes on foreign income.
>
> * Close abusive international tax loopholes.
>
> ```
>
> - Cut the corporate tax rate by 5 percent.
>
> JUMPSTART JOB GROWTH WITH A NEW JOBS TAX CREDIT AND A ONE-YEAR TAX HOLIDAY TO ENCOURAGE COMPANIES TO REPATRIATE PROFITS
>
> ```
> * Restart job growth today with an expanded New Jobs Tax Credit that covers new jobs in manufacturing, other industries affected by outsourcing and small businesses.
>
> ```
>
> - Increase investment to jumpstart the economy by encouraging American companies to bring their foreign profits back to America as part of a comprehensive tax reform that ends incentives to keep future profits overseas.
If the above makes sense to you, and it does to me, the Kerry reforms are reason enough to vote for him. I challenge anyone to read the Kerry tax reforms and pronounce them as “liberal”. Kerry is truly a visionary, and exactly what America needs at the moment.
Drug Benefits for Seniors
The Bush Medicare Bill prohibited the government from negotiating lower prices fro the drug manufacturers. Kerry’s plan would eliminate that restriction. John Kerry will allow individuals, pharmacists, wholesalers and distributors to reimport FDA-approved prescription drugs from other countries at lower prices.
I don’t wish to burden the reader with an overly long post, but I recommend that you visit [www.johnkerry.com](http://www.johnkerry.com), read the positions on the issues, and ask yourself if you support his ideas. I think you’ll be surprised at how much common sense lies in his proposals.
---
### Author:  [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/14 "2004-06-09T16:32:48Z")
Thanks for the snapshot, **BobLibDem**. I have actually posted material regarding Kerry’s tax plan before. Unfortunately, folks like **Shodan** and **Debaser** only hear “He’s not Bush.”
**Debaser** goes into the lightning round as well, repeating the favortie old standby: “Kerry will be far worse.” How this is unlike “He’s not Bush” is beyond me. **Debaser** does try to support his statement, by saying “he’s liberal” and “he’ll push for big government.” Yes, this is like trying to support a mahogany credenza with a balsa wood flyer, but you have to give him some credit for the effort.
Anyway, I think it is important to rephrase “He’s not Bush.” In actuality, those who use the phrase mean, “He’s not a deadly incompetent half-wit.” Which, as far as presidents go, is a crucial first start.
---
### Author:  [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/15 "2004-06-09T17:54:24Z")
> [@spectrum](#):
>
> Well, I can say that Kerry would lose my support if, like Bush, he decided to use “I hate Gay people lots and lots and lots!!!” as one of his campaign themes. That’d wouldn’t get me to vote for the Dry Drunk in Chief, but it would pull me out of the Kerry camp.
Kerry, like Bush is opposed to Gay marriage, is he not?
> [@](#):
>
> How can anyone who has a lick of libertarianism to them vote for George “I Hate Freedom And Appointed John Ashcroft To Prove It” Bush? The man’s White House has used 9/11 as an excuse to wage an all out roll back of the Bill of Rights.
The bill of rights is just fine. Despite all the scare mongering about how the Patriot act has eroded our civil liberties, there are plenty of folks who just aren’t buying it. I’ve read thread after thread on the Patriot act and John Ashcroft’s supposed evil. It just isn’t there.
> [@](#):
>
> And pairing a Republican President with a Republican Congress has resulted in the largest and fastest growth of government in history,
Cite?
> [@](#):
>
> Not even a remote chance. And in any case, even if one supports education vouchers, to implement them at the Federal level is absurd. Federal money for education isn’t like state money, it doesn’t impact pupils as directly. If you want vouchers, you need to work at the state level. At the federal level, it’s just not effective. And it’s also an abrogation of the Republican tenet of decentralized government.
A president that is in favor of school vouchers would be a good thing for both the federal and state levels getting vouchers to happen. I’d tend to agree that having vouchers implemented locally would make more sense, however, I don’t see why that makes it absurd for those of us who like the idea of vouchers to vote for a president who favors them over one who doesn’t.
---
### Author:  [@Debaser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Debaser)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/16 "2004-06-09T18:12:06Z")
> [@Hentor the Barbarian](#):
>
> **Debaser** does try to support his statement, by saying “he’s liberal” and “he’ll push for big government.” Yes, this is like trying to support a mahogany credenza with a balsa wood flyer, but you have to give him some credit for the effort.
Actually, I am [not](http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040301-085725-5267r.htm) the [only](http://www.drudgereport.com/mattjk11.htm) [one](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,109259,00.html) saying this.
> [@](#):
>
> National Journal, the non-ideological, authoritative weekly magazine that covers Washington politics and policy, issued its congressional vote ratings for 2003 last week. Not surprisingly, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, who is increasingly looking like a cinch to be his party’s presidential nominee, found himself in familiar territory. Once again, Mr. Kerry has staked out the far-left fringe on the National Journal’s liberal-conservative continuum.
> On a scale that ranges from 0 to 100, Mr. Kerry compiled a composite liberal score for 2003 of 96.5, the highest in the Senate. He eclipsed proud liberals like Paul Sarbanes (94.7) of Maryland, Barbara Boxer (91.2) of California, Tom Harkin (89.3) of Iowa and the Senate’s liberal lion, Edward Kennedy (88.3), his Massachusetts colleague. It was the fourth time in his 20-year Senate career that Mr. Kerry compiled a composite voting record that was unsurpassed in its liberalism by any of the other 99 members of the Senate.
> [@](#):
>
> [The ratings system was first devised in 1981 under the direction of William Schneider, a political analyst and commentator at CNN, and a contributing editor to National Journal, who continues to guide the calculation process. Data processing and statistical analysis were performed by Information Technology Services of the Brookings Institution. A panel of National Journal editors and reporters initially compiled a list of 140 key congressional roll-call votes for 2003 – 63 votes for the Senate and 77 for the House – and classified them as relating to economic, social, or foreign policy. Roll-call data was drawn from the Congressional Record.]
> [@](#):
>
> The National Journal reports that Kerry voted liberal 95 percent of the time on economic issues in 2002
---
### Author:  [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/17 "2004-06-09T18:32:06Z")
> [@Debaser](#):
>
> **Shodan** is no doubt referring to his repeated attempts to get folks on the left to explain why Kerry should be president and what Kerry would have to do to lose their support.
>
> He has been told repeatedly that many posters would simply vote for anybody
> besides Bush and that Kerry’s actual policies don’t matter one bit.
We could go on and on about the positives of Kerry, but the OP has already poisoned the well by strongly implying he doesn’t believe in Democratic ideology. The Democratic party is generally for civil rights, environmental protections, education, etc. If one has a strong belief that such things are outside the purview of the government, then there’s really nothing to discuss, because what _I_ consider a positive, you will consider a negative.
> [@](#):
>
> The good news is that even if Kerry wins, he won’t be able to do much with a Republican house and congress. The really good news is that if Bush wins, he won’t have to worry about re-election again and can really start implementing some change. (hopefully) His tax cuts were a good start, but he needs to cut government programs much more aggressively than he has been. With four more years, free from worry about re-election, he can do this. Education vouchers and social security privatization would both be very possible in a Bush second term.
You seem to have missed Fear Itself’s post, where he showed that government has _grown_ under Bush. I really don’t think you can fob that off on Bush being “worried about re-election”, unless you care to explain how being worried about re-election would cause someone to do the exact opposite of what he, in your mind, supposedly stands for.
You’re not gonna get smaller government in a Bush second-term. If you just can’t bring yourself to vote for Kerry because you think he’s too liberal for you, then it would make more sense to vote Libertarian.
---
### Author:  [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/18 "2004-06-09T18:52:05Z")
If you’re already unhappy with what Bush has done so far, imagine what he’d do with another four years in office, without the spectre of re-election restraining his excesses.
I think **erislover** has it covered, though; at this point in the game, the best reason not to vote for George W. Bush is George W. Bush.
---
### Author:  [@Saxman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saxman)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/19 "2004-06-09T20:24:06Z")
From my own reading, there are two problems with the assertion that “Kerry is more liberal than Ted Kennedy” based on those roll call surveys. My primary issue is with the simple categorization of votes as “conservative” or “liberal” based solely on the bills’ partisan proponents. For example, I believe it’s the ADA listing which suggested that voting against Bush’s prescription drug plan was “liberal”. I’m sure that’s quite a shock to all the conservative Republicans who voted against it, also…
My lesser problem, again I think more with the ADA tabulation, is that because Kerry was on the campaign trail in 2003, he only returned to Congress for close – and highly partisan – votes. As such, it follows that his overall voting record for 2003 would in fact be more consistently partisan than that of someone like Ted Kennedy who had been present for a wider range of issues.
---
### Author:  [@Cardinal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardinal)
#### Post date: [June 9, 2004, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416/20 "2004-06-09T21:04:29Z")
> [@](#):
>
> We could go on and on about the positives of Kerry, but the OP has already poisoned the well by strongly implying he doesn’t believe in Democratic ideology. The Democratic party is generally for civil rights, environmental protections, education, etc. If one has a strong belief that such things are outside the purview of the government, then there’s really nothing to discuss, because what I consider a positive, you will consider a negative.
I didn’t say that. I was telling you where I was coming from.
The people who are slamming Kerry out of hand aren’t getting my attention any more than those slamming Bush for being “dumb”.
> [@](#):
>
> “He’s not a deadly incompetent half-wit.”
This is exactly the kind non-reason / vitriol that I was talking about. The conversation can sink to this level, but I won’t be here to read it.
Also, I can spot holes in the reasoning sometimes here. Both sides want to point out the parts of an issue that argue for their side.
“He’s growing government” sounds like a big slam for a Republican, except that I’m sure one of the other slams would be, “He’s ignoring national security at a time like this” if he weren’t adding people to security teams/forces.
Mind you, I’m not a ditto-head at all. I told you where I was coming from, asked you all for good reasons to change, and in part got responses of “it’s unfair because you aren’t coming from where I am”, and “your guy is a doodyhead.”
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/convince-me-to-vote-for-kerry/249416.md?page=2)