How would your life be different, depending on which of the major party candidates got elected? Are you aware of any specific policies they advocate that will directly affect you or your loved ones in terms of your job, disposable income, lifestyle, etc?
Working for a federal agency, our top guy in Washington has already stepped down, but I’ve outlasted several of them over the past 15 years. No big differences.
Just about all I can come up with is that I’d just as soon have someone who considers himself a little more on the liberal end of the continuum (okay, the liberal end of the middle of the continuum) to fill any Supreme Court vacancies. The idea of a couple more Thomases and Scalias is pretty damn scary.
I’ve been thinking about this for a bit, wrestling on who to vote for. I basically see the changes on the horizon like this:
Bush elected: Gets probably two Supreme Court nominees (Rehnquist and O’Connor). Will probably try to pick more justices like Scalia and Thomas, because that’s who he says he likes on the SCOTUS, but who knows what they’ll really turn out like? The thread about left-drifting justices bears this out. And that’s what will happen with a Republican-controlled Congress. All bets are off if the Dems win.
Otherwise, not many changes that I can see. Bush will get back fast-track trade authority, US involvement in the Middle East peace process will prbably less, because I don’t think Dubya is capable of doing what Clinton has done. I think our whole China policy will move forward a bit. That’s about it, though. He doesn’t strike me as someone who’s going to take chances or shake things up too much.
Gore elected: Definitely more pressure on increasing firearms regulation. More environmental restriction. I don’t think Gore will affect the SCOTUS much, since O’Connor and the Big R probably won’t step down if Gore’s elected. I think Gore probably has a better clue on foreign policy, but doesn’t have the personal charisma to pull off any big breakthroughs.
All this assumes that the economy keeps humming along. I don’t think either man is especially adept at handling crises. If the GOP wins Congress, Gore will probably be fairly ineffective.
As far as how they would personally affect me, I don’t think they would. A big thing for me would be loosing of export regulations, but I think either one will pursue that. Trade with China would be good, but they’ll both go after that, too. Otherwise, I
'll just keep on keeping on. I’d prefer fewer taxes, but I don’t feel taxed to death. I’d like better schools, but I don’t think they’re going to hell. Just call me Status Quo Man.
Thanks, Necros. The last paragraph of your post was what I was mainly interested in. I am well aware of the other lengthy debate going on here. My goal in initiating this thread was to take the debate to the most personnal level. While I certainly do not advocate determining who to vote for based solely on personal self interest, I think it is one relevant factor to be considered.
One of the posters in the other thread observed that Nixon’s prolonging of the Viet Nam War caused him to be drafted. Anyone think they will get/lose a job depending on the next Pres? Anyone think their taxes will increae/decrease sufficiently to significantly change their lifestyle? Will your entertainment options be affected? Will you personally be unable to purchase a particular type of gun you want? Anyone in the services think their duties will differ vastly depending on the outcome?
Sorry I didn’t see yours when I posted, Tretiak. Would you please explain? Your statement seems a bit general. How do you define “Gore’s war”? Are you thinking of any biomedical research in particular? Do you personally experience a medical condition that makes this especially significant to you? (Sorry, if too personal.)
I assume I could become ill and die no matter who is elected. I am unaware of my having any dire condition (nor can I reliably anticipate developing such in the immediate future) that is on the verge of being cured by current biomedical research
I have to vote for gore this year (ack). Can’t vote for Bush, didn’t vote for his dad. They’re both crack smokers (some literally, some figuratively)
For personal reasons, I cannot vote for someone who would not protect a woman’s right to choose what happens to her body. I am vehemently anti-abortion and vehemently pro-choice. Bush reminds me of everything I hate about America, close-mindedness, big-business, what’s in it for me mentality. Gore’s not great but he’s not that bad. And I’d throw all my taxes out the window so that government stays off my body.
It sucks to have to make a decision over one issue but its the main one for me (personally speaking-- that’s how you wanted it.)
Professionally, I’d vote for nader, but throwing my vote at him is taking a vote away from the only person that can defeat bush. I guess I’m not so much pro-gore, just anti-bush.
If Bush wins, I could end up paying far less in taxes (I’m in the bracket (under 35K) that Bush wants to have paying no taxes at all), and I could end up being able to manage at least part of my Social Security fund. Of course, that depends entirely upon such actions getting through Congress. However, should Bush win, the business I work for will do better- as a small phone company, we prosper by government demands to deregulate the regional Bell companies, and the Repubs are more interested in deregulation.
If Gore wins, my girlfriend might end up being covered for medical insurance (actually, a moot point, as her mother’s insurance coverage will start to cover her in March, and it’s unlikely Gore would get a plan in and through that takes effect before then). And that’s about the only change in my personal life I forsee, which again is moot, and dependent upon a willing Congress. However, should Gore win, the business I work for may suffer hard times- as a small phone company, we can easily be squeezed out of the market if the government decides that ‘uniform service’ is more important than competition, and begins transfering power and money back into the regional Bells.
So generally, I can’t see any personal good coming from Gore’s election, while Bush’s election holds a possibility for an easier, better-paid life.
(Of course, I still predict that in the next president’s first term we’ll hit a major recession, possibly accompanied by or precipitated by a major stock crash, so my life will likely suck either way.)
Gore: lot’s of people would get goodies that wouldn’t affect me. Change in the tax code would not affect me. My tax would either stay at the same rate or get higher to pay for increased social programs. My employer would probably feel the pain of minimum wage increases, environmental, affirmative action and OSHA programs, possibly necesitating decreased employment.
Bush: I will get a tax cut, I would be able to have a choice over my future children’s schooling. I could put more money away for retirement which would help me sleep at night. I could keep my gun without becoming a criminal.
Honestly, Gore is against offering any help to people like me (making a decent living) and is pretty much against the corporations that pay my salary. none of his programs do me any good and most would do harm. I would be a fiool to vote for him.
With Bush I’ll be able to better plan my retirement. More options will be available to me with regards to investing. Since I also expect a tax break, the money that I don’t have to give to Uncle Sam can easily be invested, instead.
With Gore I’ll get to pay more in taxes. The business community will withdraw, there will be a major recession, and the feds will need a tax hike to shore up revenues.
I’m voting for Bush.
Gore: bigger government takes an even larger bite out of my paycheck, the quality of schools in general will continue to fall, products will continue to cost more due to increased envirnmental reg’s, I will worry incessantly about my youngest son who is entering the military in 2 months, and I will continue to buy more pepto-bismal nightly after listening to the administration spinmeisters.
Bush: smaller chuck out of my paycheck, if my grandkids’ school is deficient, my kids will be able to send them elsewhere, my parents will get immediate help on affording their precriptions, the cost of living will be lower due to less government regulation, I won’t worry about my kid being put under some UN asshole’s control, and my bill for pepto-bismal will hopefully go down :D.
(Aside)
I also agree with John that a recession is likely during the next administration regardless who is at the helm. I for one would prefer Bush to have the reins since he has actually had business experience as opposed to Gore who has been primarily a career politician.
Thanks, Gad, for keeping me honest. That didn’t come out as I meant it to. What I mean was not that justices drift left; instead, I meant that in most cases, you can’t necessarily tell what justices a president will appoint based on past history, and that you can’t necessarily guarantee the justice (citing John Corrado’s 60 percent conservative retention rate) you appoint is going to stay that way. Is that a little more clear?
To expand on my earlier post to give you more if what you were looking for, Dinsdale.
Bush is good for me because:
I work for a large, multinational corporation that will probably benefit from a Republican administration.
I make more money than your average bear, and would prefer to pay less in taxes.
I am in favor of keeping guns.
Gore is good for me because:
I like to think that if my family needed an abortion, we should be able to get one.
So, on a personal interest level, Bush has more points on his side. Of course, I’m not voting for either of them, which demonstrates that we can definitely sacrifice self-interest for higher purposes.
I will be voting for Gore. I oppose the school voucher nonsense. It will most definately leave poor kids behind, because they’re parents will not be able to afford private schools, even with the vouchers. ( I think that’s the point) Gore also opposes school vouchers.
I have agreed with a lot of the points Bush has made, but I can’t escape the feeling that he’s just blowing smoke up my ass. Like when he said he wouldn’t run a negative campaign.
I generally do not watch commercials, particularly political commercials. But I saw this one as part of story on MSNBC. (I didn’t see it anywhere else) Basically, it was a typical negative ad: Gore said THIS (liar), then Gore said THIS (liar), etc., etc. MSNBC were asking political pundits why Bush ran the ad, and did it mean he was abandoning his ‘positive’ approach.
I don’t think the ad ran very long. And I’m pretty sure it wasn’t nationwide. I wouldn’t think anything of it were it not for his promise NOT to go negative. I was momentarily hopeful that neither side would resort to mudslinging, but I think both will.
I talked about this in another thread. I heard Bush’s promise to run a postive, issue-oriented campaign. Then I saw a prominant Republican at the delagation say how they were going to be positive. Then this talking head said ‘Don’t be suprised when Gore ‘goes negative’ early. He’s very good at going negative. That’s the kind of mean-spirited politicain he is!’ I’m afraid it’ll be business as usual in both camps.
I’ve never had a doubt that we’d see quite a bit of negativity from both sides.
I rememeber seeing “an ad” on MSNBC that was shown for commentary purposes, rather than as advertising. It may be the one to which you refer. If I recall, the ad was run by the RNC, not the Bush campaign.
Look for both candidates to run fairly straight issue oriented stuff with the DNC and RNC slinging the mud. That way the candidates can claim the straight and narrow while still getting the mud out.
During most of this campain I have thought that it just didn’t matter to me which one of these lackluster candidates wins, but now I have changed my mind. Not that I believe I will be effected much personally by any of their policies , maybe I will, who knows. I certainly hope not. But I just do not like the budget proposals made by Bush. It’s that simple. If the electee is able to get his new proposal across then I have to back Gore. I like the way he plans to spend our money much better than Bush. Why people can’t see that Gore’s proposals are the more noble effort I just don’t understand. The Republican attitude displays to me how selfish Americans can be. I don’t for the life of me see why we need a tax cut other than you have an awful lot of pretty prosperous people that are just not satisfied. The more you have the more you want. I find it pathetic and a little bit disgusting.
