FTR, I do hold the opposite position, on each and every one of those issues.
The one you listed first was the deal-breaker for me. I believed Bush about the WMD’s at first; now I can’t see any reason not to feel betrayed. The other issues, in my opinion, are all going to lead this country backwards.
I, of course, will never know this feeling, as I always back a loser. 
But there’s no excuse not to keep trying.
[hijack]
One of the issues Bricker brings up is school vouchers, and I wonder if you’d mind explaining to me why you think that will push the country backwards? I tend to favor them, myself, but I’d like to hear your reasoning. If you want my views in return I’ll be glad to share them - I just don’t think this would be the place for a full-fledged debate on the issue.
Thanks.
[/hijack]
I’m not as strongly opposed to them as I am to, say, NCLB, or the (potential) overturning of Roe vs. Wade. I just don’t think they’re the solution. I said about a year and a half ago, “The problem is with the public schools; they should be good enough that people don’t feel they have to send their kids elsewhere.”
I live in California, where public schools were woefully underfunded ten budgets ago. If things keep deteriorating, we’ll be back to the little red schoolhouse, and kids carrying their own slates. Why give vouchers to some families, and let the rest suffer in Lousy-D?
Rilchiam, thanks for the calm and concise posting of your view.
Sure thing!
So what are your views on vouchers?
Uh, if it makes you feel better, my dad became a citizen a couple years back, and the first time he voted, some minor local official he voted against lost by one vote. So, um, yeah, have faith that some guy who posts on the same message board as you has a relative whose vote once counted one time in a piddling local race somewhere far, far, away.
He’ll also feel great from the lack of radioactive fallout. 
Hey, I told ya you’d have to ask for 'em. 
Basically, I think they’re at least a way to force public schools to be more responsive to parental concerns. Not ideal, no, but something has to change. At the moment, if a public school system forces a student out of the school, there is no consequence for the school, whereas the family of the student usually has to scramble to provide an alternative. I don’t think/want vouchers to be based on the public schools per student spending, but 30-50% of that would be enough to provide incentive, while giving parents and students an option that many do not now have.
I have to confess, however, that part of the reasons for my views are based on my own prejudices against public school teachers and administrators. I had terrible experiences during my years in public schools, and my parents ended up having to pull me out and put me into private schools. And there was no consequence for the school.
So feel free to take my views with a grain or three of salt. 
Your a huuuuuge optimist. I have never once felt like a winner even when the guy I voted for won. I just didn’t lose quite as bad as I could have. I seriously wonder if at any point in my lifetime I will actually feel happy at an election result.
See, that’s one of the reasons I voted Libertarian. I don’t particularly care for either Bush or Kerry, and I realized that, since my state was already going to go for Bush, that voting for either him or Kerry wouldn’t change anything, but by voting Libertarian I could send a message of support to the Libertarian party, and if they got enough votes, possibly put the fear of God in the other parties. (Of course, Nader picked up more votes here than the Libs did, and had all the votes gone to Kerry, it still wouldn’t have made a difference in the outcome of the election.) Had everyone in a state which was soldily going to vote in the opposite manner, done that, then there’d be a real shake up in politics.
What Tuckerfan said. As a Californian, my vote for President was moot. The Bay Area and Hollywierd made sure of that. So, the Libertarian Party got the nod. But my vote certainly mattered on the Propositions and city races. All my choices won there.
Not worth voting unless you win? Grow up, kid.
I donated, I volunteered, I voted, I helped turn my state blue. It’s the dolts in those other states that didn’t do their jobs. My vote did count.
I voted Kerry, I live in Georgia, which means I only THINK I voted for Kerry, who knows what that Diebold machine did? I voted because I can then say to Pubbies, “I did not vote for that jackass loser, YOU DID!” when Bush fucks up the country thoroughly over the next four years. The assholes I’ll be talking to will probably be too stupid to understand how thoroughly Bush is fucking up, but I will, and that’ll be sweet.
In that case, maybe I should smack you for not voting for Bush!
I have to agree with Muffin in this…if you get pouty about the act of voting because your candidate didn’t win, then perhaps you are too immature to vote. The only time you can be sure your vote will back the winner is when you are the only one who gets to vote. Suck it up!
Exactly. Many people in this country voted, and some of them even did more. They donated money, they volunteered their time working for their candidate(s), they volunteered their time to watch polls, they worked the polls, they watched their neighbor’s kid so they could go vote… and not all of them saw their candidate emerge the winner.
It’s discouraging when you put forth the effort and don’t get the result you hoped for in one or more races, but I don’t think it justifies writing off one’s own role in the democratic process. And when I think about the time and effort some people have expended, it’s hard for me to understand why, exactly, standing in line to vote once every four years is such an incredible burden that not winning would utterly disenfranchise a voter.
Bingo!