-
-
- I voted for gun rights, so I voted Bush. There were other concerns as well, but that was the main one–I hold the belief that if a legislator tries to revoke the long-traditional/constitutional right of firearms ownership, then they’ve probably got lots of other things in mind I won’t like as well.
~
- I voted for gun rights, so I voted Bush. There were other concerns as well, but that was the main one–I hold the belief that if a legislator tries to revoke the long-traditional/constitutional right of firearms ownership, then they’ve probably got lots of other things in mind I won’t like as well.
-
I voted for Bush in large measure because I just couldn’t see turning the national defense of the United States over to those bozos.
Also, I couldn’t stomach the thought of Michael Moore gloating.
I voted for Bush.
I’m a big subscriber to realpolitik and believe that, at heart, all countries are. As long as elected officials answer to different electorates, I expect those officials to do what’s in their best interests. I see the UN as a mechanism for weaker powers to keep the US in check by appealing to America’s inherent sense of fairplay and justice. When other imperial powers had the gun, they used it. Now that the US has the gun, everyone else says “lets talk about it.” I think the motives of most of the members of the Security Council are disingenous and am glad that Bush acted unilaterally. The bottom line is that if it is in Europe’s interest to help us, they will. If not, they won’t. But cooperation should be established on a mission-by-mission basis, not by the sham of a world governmental body.
I don’t believe that France, German, and Russia were taking the moral highground regarding Iraq. I believe they were more interested in oil development deals that enriched themselves. I don’t want the policies regarding the security of the US based on how it affects the bottom line for France.
I think Saddam was surprised when we ignored the UN. He was counting on a war being vetoed. I don’t want other dictatorships basing their strategies on the belief that the US’s policy will get gummed up in the SC. Hopefully other countries will now take into account the fact that the US is willing to act unilaterally and in a preemptive capacity. It appears Qadaffi did.
I believe in pre-emptive war though not necessarily in the case of Iraq. But as a doctrine, its necessary. In this age, waiting for the first strike is a recipe for disaster. Strike first and hard if you think you’re going to get hit. But you really must think you’re going to get hit.
I disagree with Bush on virtually every domestic issue. Most of these, however, can be changed with a new president. Right now the issue must be Iraq. Decisions here cannot be repealed. I probably wouldn’t have invaded, but now that we have, we have to deal with it, I think Bush can handle it better than Kerry. War requires steadfastness and aggression, qualities I think Kerry is seriously lacking.
I don’t care about the past except as something from which to learn. Even if I think Bush made a horrible mistake in invading, I will still make my decision on who is best for RIGHT NOW. That’s Bush.
Kerry’s play for Iraq is to engage our allies. What do France, Germany, Russia, etc. have to gain at this point? NOTHING. And they would rather see us fail. So Kerry’s plan for Iraq is essentially a non-plan. Any plan is better than no plan. I want the annals of history to record Iraq as a success and whether that is true remains to be seen.
Kerry hasn’t provided a remotely reasonable plan for anything. He promises everything to everyone. Bush’s budget may be a joke, but Kerry’s is thrice so. I believe a President should do what is best for the country, not what the people necessarily want in the short term. I don’t want Kerry’s policies to sway with every little wind of change in popular opinion.
I held my nose and voted for Bush/Cheney because there really wasn’t another viable candidate, in my opinion.
Could you explain why you thought Bush was a valid candidate and Kerry was not?
I voted for Bush because I agree with almost all of his foreign and domestic policies. Most of the above posters have said it better than I (as usual).
about the only policy I disagree with is his plan for Social Security. But I can live with that.
I voted for George Bush.
Short take:
What I want is a Leader who a) takes no nonsense in foreign policy, b) has a realistic energy policy even if it demands tough sacrifices, c) reduces goverment and taxes d) someone I could use as a role model for my children (i.e.not Clinton)
Bush gives me a, d, and some of c, Kerry gives me maybe d.
Long Verbage:
Bush Why? Because he is a decent, moral, stick to his core values type of person. Even if I disagree with some of his stands, (His more goverment handouts, enviroment, science issues. lack of tougher immigration policy, lack of a real energy plan )
Kerry to me was promising too much and seemed to “political”. Putting a trial lawyer on the ticket was also too much. I did not want our foreign policy driven by the UN.
What drove me to the first time in my life actually putting a political bumper sticker on my car was the Michael Moore movie. Also things like talking about a draft after Bush had specificaly said there would not be one, the NYTimes, CBS. Those things turned me from luke warm into a Bush supporter, and contributor.
I do not feel that the Patriot Act has comprised my personal liberties at all and in times of war we need to protect ourselves. If the gov wants to read what books I take out of the library its fine with me. No problem with a national ID card or profiling.
I do not consider myself religious at all, but issues like removing the word “god” from the pledge of allegiance and removing the ten commandments from court rooms are distastefull to me therefore I prefer a little more conservative judges.
I use to considered myself an independant and never voted republican till Bill Clinton’s 2nd Pres campaign. His dallying in the oval office opened me to the republican POV. Though I did think the Republicans pressed that issue way too far.
Now if the Dem’s had put up a decent (moral), moderate, tough on terrisom canidate with a real get tough energy policy I would had gone that way.
It’s all been said above. The main two reasons for me:
I believe Mr. Bush will do better with the economy.
I believe Mr. Bush will do better with Iraq and other external menaces.
Also, what SPOOFE said rings true with me as well. The anti-Bush rhetoric I got on a daily basis (primarily from this board I might add) really galvanized my decision. There are a lot of good, valid reasons to vote against Mr. Bush. But 90% of what I heard was either lies, mis-truths or insults. Saying these sorts of things probably made the speaker feel good about themselves, but it really really turned me off. It’s the whole Fahrenheit 9/11 mentality, not really paying attention to facts, not really having a plan for things to be better, just whining and trying to stick to to the Man. And though Mr. Kerry isn’t the nut-job that Michael Moore is, I ended up feeling his campaign was really just a polished version of Mr. Moore’s philosophy.
“Galvanized” is the perfect word to describe the effects of the anti-Bush rhetoric on me. When all of the left’s arguments are hyperbole, insults, and fact-mining, you begin to wonder if they have any valid points at all. I know one pollster came to the conclusion that Michael Moore’s rants and documentaries put more people over to Bush than Kerry.
I am a hawk. Kerry is a dove.
I appreciate that Kerry wants to avoid Lyndon Johnson’s mistakes in Vietnam.
But he seems eager to repeat Neville Chamberlain’s mistakes in Munich.
The war in Iraq has had problems (as all wars do), but if Bush’s opponents had been making policy, Saddam Hussein would still be digging mass graves today.
To a great degree, I did so for the same reason I did last time. (“I want my g*dd@m money back!”) And hey! Looks like I got my wish. But he wasn’t able to keep the cuts from coming with expiration dates, so of course I had to vote for him again, so that he could go back to Congress and nail 'em down permanently.
Plus there’s the added reason that we’ve got a war to finish… no, not just finish, but win. I chose the candidate with the better war record.
AND, though it goes somewhat along with fighting confiscatory taxes & getting control of my own money back, I’m REALLY in favor of broader access to medical savings accounts. I know that’s anathema to anyone who wants to nationalize health care, a la Kerry. But I heard Bush specifically mention favoring these types of accounts in at least one speech. Having your health care expenses paid with pre-taxed income is a great idea, and having a special savings account that you manage would completely obviate the need for a federal health care program.
It happened some to me too.
Go read my threat at http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=260595 and see how much smack I was given. It’s basically impossible to have a reasonable discussion on these issues when every mouth-foamer can jump in and scream anything he wants.
Clue to mouthfoaming political ranters: You’re not going to convince anyone with half a brain just by calling people or candidates stupid and spewing obvious propaganda everywhere.
I dream of a day when I can have an internet discussion about these things in which everyone simply discusses.
Sigh…
Yes, I will also add that I was extremely put off by the seemingly prevalent attitude of many democrats. I have heard democrats say basically that people voting for Bush or other republicans are basically morons with no brains. I certainly beg to differ. I think this attitude, which I see a large amount of on the internet boards of which I participate (definately including this one), is a real put off. I generally keep to myself as it is not possible to have a real discussion about it without people screaming their opinions.
Don’t get me wrong, I am sure there are plenty of republicans that do the same thing, but I think if you went and analyzed the STMB, you would find a dominating left, “i’m right and you’re an idiot” attitude. It’s quite a shame since I know the people that do this are probably the minority, but the squeaky wheels get the grease, if you know what I mean.
This thread is one of the few where I have not seen people spout their opinions in reasonable terms. Quite a pity, that. I get disgusted by how people from both parties act every election, not sure what we can do about it. I just mainly keep my views to myself, and express them on my ballot. I am not really one to call others names or argue over politics.
I voted for Bush, however, if we had a true multiparty system I likely would have gone for Badnarik. Here were my reasons:
War) - I do believe that Iraq is part of the WoT - insofar as the War on Terror was never advertised as being only about bin Laden and AQ but rather as a broad war against states sponsoring terrorism. So while I don’t exactly support the war in Iraq, I also don’t feel that it is a diversion. I do not believe that the war is going particularly well- however, I do think that Bush is more likely than Kerry to achieve some amount of stability in Iraq. While I was never 100% sure what Kerry would do in regards to Iraq, it did seem to me that had Kerry won it would have been perceived has a mandate to withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible.
Economy) - It seems unlikely to me that any president has much control over the economy and based on the inflation, unemployment etc. etc. numbers I’m inclined to think that the negative take on our economy is a bit exaggerated anyway. I do disapprove of the massive amount of spending that we’ve seen with Bush, however I’m also strongly against Kerry’s plan to rollback the tax cuts on the wealthy.
Gay Rights) I’m in favor of gay marriage - however, since neither of the candidates are, it’s sort of a moot issue. I don’t believe that Bush’s gay marriage amendment (which I oppose) or the recent state amendments indicate some sort of widespread bias against gays, but rather a backlash against the events in CA and MA.
Abortion) Very opposed to abortion. Don’t necessarily think that making it illegal will solve the problem, but nonetheless I agree more with Bush on this one.
I also support privatizing social security, instituting school vouchers and reforming the tax code- while I wish Bush would do more on these issues, he’s still closer to my beliefs than Kerry. And then there are alot of things that I believe (such as legalizing drugs) that neither candidate supports.
So there ya go. That’s basically how I approached the election. Had Badnarik been a more viable candidate or had the Democrats nominated Lieberman, I might have voted differently.
Another Bush supporter
While I certainly don’t agree with him all the time, I believe he is a man of his convictions. He doesn’t take a poll prior to making a move and he doesn’t say something he doesn’t believe in just to get your vote.
Kerry on the other hand - snake oil salesman. Say anything to anybody, whatever mood crowd he was in front of that day - that’s what he believed in. His “Can I get me a huntin’ license here” was the icing on the cake. Pandering asshole.
At least with Bush I know what he stands for and what to expect. I can stomach the few items we disagree on much better than having to think about Kerry in the Oval Office.
I believe Bush will get the inheritance, or “Death Tax”, abolished. Period. Only reason.
Yes. The primary issue for me in this election was national security, foreign policy and terrorism. Kerry’s 35 year old record demonstrated to me that he is deeply distrustful of the exercise of American power and overly enamored of the concept of internationalism for its own sake. I simply did not trust him to protect the security of the U.S. and the west generally to the extent Bush has/will.
Bush and the Republicans are on a short leash with me–I’m not on board with them on social issues. Had 9/11 not happened, I probably would have voted for Kerry.
One more thing, if I can not be too much bother.
Kerry may have just been pandering to the voters he knew were in his camp in order to increase their turnout, but the change in his attitude toward the war in Iraq strikes me as rather shameless.
I also have a deep suspicion that he’s much more on the side of people who have (IMHO) a fantasy view of the world that lets them think that people at the core are good, and that anyone can be reasoned with. Some people have never had consequences come down on them. They don’t believe threats and sneer at entreaties. I teach school, go and ask me about how human nature needs to be shaped rather than let run free.
Other people know there are consequences, but are so convinced of the cause that they’re just gambling they won’t happen. They’re willing to go down with the ship if someone does thwart them, but if someone doesn’t, they get their evil way (see Hitler and Bin Laden). Hardcore liberals have somehow gotten the idea that the hippies were right about people, and that everything could be fine if everyone would just groove. The problem with grooving too far is that it leaves you at the mercy of people who are willing to ignore right and wrong and are willing to inflict their way on you unless big enough actions are taken so that they care to stop.
I am a conservative Christain. I am opposed to abortion and I am in fovor of family values. Bush was the only choice for me, Kerry has IMHO abhorrent views on things.
Everyone else has already said most of the things I was going to say better, but I’ll try anyhow.
I am firmly against abortion for any reason beside protecting a woman’s life or health. My father was adapted back in the early 50’s, and I honestly believe that if abortion was legal then I would not be here today.
I think the Fair Tax Plan is a very good idea, and there is a better chance of it being successful if Bush is president.
At the time I belived going into Iraq was the right thing to do, or at least not the wrong thing. I thought Iraq had WMD just like most people in the world at the time. It wasn’t until after we got there that we found out the he doesn’t have them.
I also think that we pay to many taxes as is, and that the government is too big. Now, I don’t believe that Bush will reduce government, after all he didn’t in his first term, but I do believe he will grow it at a slower rate then Kerry would have.
Bush is not the best president we have ever had, but he is also not the worst. If the democrats had run someone else, then it is possible I might have voted for them instead, however I don’t think any democrat that I think is worth voting for would ever get out of the democratic primaries. I also never heard one good reason to vote for Kerry, the only thing I heard during the campain were reasons to vote against Bush.