Not me. I won’t be voting at all, since I’m not a US citizen. (Anyway, we got our own exciting “elections” here on 9/12.)
My contentious view is based on gut feeling, my wife’s words and one CNN interview. We saw this interview - more like a feature really - about a month ago. I was getting more and more put off by Kerry’s unwillingness to commit on anything - well, no so much commit, as to just come out and say what he felt and believed. He seemed embarrassed by the early 70s radical Vietnam stuff - but agin, not really embarrassed, as carefully aware of its negative implications for his election chances now.
My wife’s words. She just said at the end: “He says what he thinks people want to hear”.
I think many people will vote for Bush because with him at least you feel you’re getting a human being, however flawed.
Do I have my finger on the pulse, or is this merely a furriner’s rantings?
Rog I hate to say it, but you’re pretty close to nailing it down. You might as well get prepared 'cause BUSH is going to be re-elected. God knows I hope I’m wrong but I’m not.
Kerry is a weak ass candidate that has a terrible track record when it comes to his consistancy or his ability to take a stance on his beliefs. He is a true politician. I don’t trust ANY of them myself. Least of all the BUSHES…however, GWB has fucked up and lied and cheated and you name it. He’s done it. BUT the idiots are convinced that he’s doing it for the right reasons. He’s ahead in the polls and has yet to drag Osama out…followed by the announcement that troops are coming home. He’s got a lock. Texas is his, Florida is his, and the latest polls show that he’s ahead in California. Hell, with those three states he can’t lose.
Personally, I think professional politics should be outlawed. Term limits should definitely be in place. Special interest groups and lobbyists should be convicted for treason and hung in public.
It’s about time to start cleaning house around here, starting at the top. I wonder if it’ll ever be clean enough again to honestly be called “The Whitehouse.”
Oh I know (and so does he), but I have to agree with gramps and say that Kerry doesn’t prostitute himself as well. Despite his mistakes, Bush is the more likable candidate. He knows how to appear genuine.
It’s kind of funny actually. Truth be told I’m not particularly thrilled with Bush. I think going to war with Iraq was the right thing, but that it could have been handled much better. I think his general foreign policy tack re: the war on terror is correct, but that execution is only fair. Their were many reasons for going to war with Iraq originally talked about, yet Bush allowed the issue to be framed in WMDs, which was convenient, yet as it turned out, a bad bet.
I’m not all that thrilled about his domestic policy in terms of the big government programs like his prescription thing. These are not the actions of a conservative.
So, I think there was a real opportunity for the Democrats to take the White House. I would have voted for a quality Democrat like Lieberman, or Bradley, or any of a host of others. Instead, we got Kerry, who really is unelectable, IMO. The whole Wintersoldier thing is just unforgiveable, and the Swiftvets have succesfully recharacterized Kerry’s Vietnam service from heroic to opportunistic. Now the Government is investigating he medals. There is the possibility of falsification. Personally, I don’t think they should do it. Even if he’s vindicated, the taint of the investigation is sure hurt him, and I don’t think it serves any good purpose to attack him in this fashion.
The only thing that I know for sure is that a rich white male, child of privilege, Yale Graduate, Skull and Bones member will take the White House in November.
I’ve said in many other threads that I find Kerry to be much less principled than Bush is. Bush is much more likely to back policy based on those principles rather than on what he thinks is popular. In that sense, it’s hard to know exactly how Kerry would act in certain situations, but it’s pretty easy to figure out what Bush would do.
Is Kerry for or against the Iraq war? Beats me.
He is against the death penalty… but not for “terrorists”.
He’s for free trade, but will go after “Benedict Arnold CEOs” who “ship American jobs overseas” (to paraphrase his statements)
He’s pro-choice, but thinks life begins at conception (whatever that’s supposed to mean)
For some Americans it might just boil down to the devil you know vs the devil you don’t. Many Americans, for sure, do not agree with Bush’s principles There are quite a few I don’t agree with. And he does go against them for expediency from time to time (steel tarrifs come to mind).
This is going to be a tough decision for me in November, but Kerry could make it a lot easier by taking a firm stand on a few things (like whether or not the Iraq war was a mistake). And I agree that we have a very weak Dem candidate going up against one of the weakest presidents the Pubs have every gotten elected.
Thank The Founders for checks and balances in the constitution. But sometimes you need to go a bit further and make sure the President is not of the same party in control of Congress. Bush, unchecked, has done a lot of damage that he’d never get away with if the Dems controlled Congress. Kerry, OTOH, will certainly face a Republican House even if the Dems take control fo the Senate (which I’m not sure they will).
I rarely vote 3rd party, but that option is looking more and more appealing…
Rich - yes …not in comparison to most of the opposition
white - yes …not relevant IMHO at least not for MY vote
male - no …she’s got more balls than a lot of her male counterparts :rolleyes:
child of privilege - yes …you sure about this?
Yale Graduate - yes …I don’t know if that’s a plus or not anymore.
Skull and Bones member - no? (got me there) …me too
Problem I’d have is the fact that she’s got some skeletons of her own. I never was comfortable with that whole WhiteWater fiasco. Plus, she’s a lawyer.
Haven’t met one (personally) yet that I completely trusted. Present Doper community excepted of course.
I think I’d still might rather vote for her though instead of Kerry. Damned shame ain’t it? If Juliani (sp?) were a Dem. I think I’d be okay with that. I just kinda got to like the guy after seeing him deal with the tragedy in NY.
Who knows anymore? A choice between evils. Third party’ll just ensure BUSH gets in again. WOW Is it too late for Unca Cece to run? :smack:
That’s his STRENGTH…a lot of people think that his “ignorance” hurts his credibility. That is completely wrong. He will get a lot more votes because of his “good 'ol boy” charm than he will lose by appearing ignorant or rough around the edges. The people that realize he isn’t actually making the calls. His advisors are the one’s who really run the show know this is just an act. They will vote a straight ticket anyway. It’s the borderline votes that hinge on his cowboy act. I saw it here in Texas for many years. He’ll get up and give 'em that John Wayne pep talk and they run for the voting booths as fast as they can 'cause he’s just another one of the guys.
The ignorant fucks around here still brag on the fact that he lives just down the road from us. Like we’re some kind of neighbors or something.
Do you remeber when Poppy went to the grocery store and it blew up in his face?
“I may not be perfect…but I’m not a pussy.” Isn’t that the jest of what his message is?
Yeah, I’ve heard it before.
IIRC didn’t HE call Ann Richards a drunk when he was elected Gov. of Texas?
That’s probably true. People don’t expect Bush to be too bright, so when he says something whacky, well that’s just Bush. But people expect Kerry to be smart and articulate so when he hems and haws, it sounds worse. Of course there are many, many pro-Kerry (or at least anti-Bush) folks who would say the opposite. That Bush is an idiot and it gives them the creeps everytime he says something like “they hate us for our freedom”. I guess that to a large extent it depends on to whom you are predisposed to be sympathetic.
I don’t really get this position. In what way has Bush shown himself to be principled ? Stubborn or self-serving I can see, but principled ?
Why would Kerry have to be “for” or “against” the war in Iraq, or “for” or “against” abortion - is there no room for more complex positions ?
Kerry’s position on abortion is perfectly tenable to my way of thinking - abortion is wrong, but it’s still a personal decision. Why does this need to be legislated ?
I believe Bush’s appeal is that he’s practically a cartoon. His policies are bite-sized and pre-chewed, and nobody’s afraid they won’t understand them.
Kerry’s a little more complex. If we’re really lucky, this might mean that he weighs the pros and cons, and makes decisions based on something other than blind arrogance. It remains to be seen what he’s really made of, but maybe he’s worth a try.
His position on stem cell research is a big negative for him at the polls. He could soften his stance quite a bit and still not lose the “religious right”, but his (Christian) principles speak to the wrongness of the action. Now, I completely disagree with his principle, but that doesn’t change their validity for him.
How do you decide policy if your not for or against something at some level? The Senate may be a debating society, but the president, in the end, has to be the guy who decides what administration policy is. He seeks advice, but he doesn simply cast a vote. He’s the guy in charge.
On abortion, what does it mean to say “life begins at conception”? Is he saying that the fertilized egg is alive? No one on either side of the issue would dispute that. It’s a meaningless phrase. Does he mean **human **life begins at conception? If so, then what is human life and should the government protect it?
He likes to talk about doing things differntly on Iraq had he been president. Yet he says he’d still have voted to authorize war even if he knew everything he knows today. Huh??? And during the build-up to the war, long past the time when it was clear that Bush was going to exercise his authority, are there any public statments from Kerry that would should take a more tempered route, go more slowly and build a broader coalition? There were plenty of Democrats who voted against the resolution and who spoke out against the build-up to war as it was unfolding. Did I just miss the public statements that Kerry made? If I did, I’d be truly happy to learn about it.
I don’t doubt that a president Kerry would not have taken us to war in Iraq. I consider that a plus for him. What makes me uncomfortable about him, and what the OP is postulating, is that it’s just so hard to figure out exactly where he does stand and what he would do.
That’s why we have “special interests” in the first place. Your view is not the view of the entire country and everyone thinks that anyone who disagrees with their position is an “idiot”.
“Complex” in and of itself is not a desirable quality. Most of us dumb folks are too busy working and getting on with our lives to sit down and spend days analyzing the pros and cons of each candidates position on every issues.
I think what might be swinging my vote away from Kerry is his response (or lack therof) to the Rights attacks on his 'Nam cred. He should have been like “yeah thanks for defending Arkansas from the VC while I was up to my eyeballs in rice paddies and Gooks, motherfucker!” (or something more PC).
I have heard people on talk radio proclaim, in all seriousness, that Bush is more of a “people person”. They’d like to have a beer with Bush. But Kerry? Nah. Too stiff. Too standoffish. Or something. No good over beers, like I said.
This is how we will decide who our next President will be: “Is he a good beer buddy?”
I’m afraid, rog, that your question assumes more principle than can be credited to many an American voter. An irrational feeling of “trust” (Bush takes a clear stand!) is setting the bar too high for the descriminating tastes of some of my fellow citizens, it would appear.
msmith537 Maybe I was a little vague about my meaning when I said idiots. I didn’t mean to imply that everyone who supports GWB is an idiot. I should’ve been more precise. When GWB is caught in one of his lies, rather than admitting the man lied, the “idiots” of whom I speak, are the ones who dismiss the fact that he wasn’t honest and they justify his actions by saying…it was for a good reason. I don’t accept that as a justification for the level of dishonesty to which I refer.
As far as our presence in Iraq goes. I think it is way overdue. I also believe we need to provide our troops with whatever means they require to get this damned mess straightened out.
The lobbyists and special interest groups which cause me grief are the ones who actively seek to corrupt the democratic process with their voting blocks, bribes and illegal activities used in oder to force legislation to their advantage regardless of who it might cause harm in the process. Since it is nearly impossible to distinguish one from the other, there should be another or at least a better way.
Also, I wasn’t being literal when I said to hang them all. Sorry if that is the way you took it. Sarcasm is often hard to recognize and even harder to express sometimes. Especially for an ignorant ass like myself. I just know that I’m not impressed with any of the choices I have in this election.
PS… I most assuredly know that I do not represent the rest of the country and just because WE don’t agree doesn’t make either one of us an idiot.
I forgot this wasn’t the pit. I’ll try to be a bit more gracious next time, okay?