Not really; it’s only logical. The Democrats and Republicans represent large agendas and groupings of opinions; anyone who supports Gore or Bush is likely to have issues they disagree with the candidate upon, and therefore is less enthusiastic. Conversely, the Libertarian and Green Parties, being smaller parties, have a more focused and defined agenda, and those who support those Parties are much mroe likely to be in general or complete agreement with the Party, and therefore more enthusiastic about the Party.
As for me- four-square for Bush. I was highly impressed with his convention acceptance speech, where his stated positions agreed with mine nearly 100%.
Even if he hadn’t agreed with my positions so well, I’d probably vote for him- Social Security is my hot-button issue, and Bush is willing to attempt reforms and privatization, while Gore just wants to pretend that nothing’s wrong.
I’m still undecided. I’m not voting for either gore or bush, for the fact that neither of them will commit to anything I care about (with the exception of bush’s anti-gun crap). so I’m looking into the other candidates, but I can never find any un-biased (or even moderately biased) information on them. can anyone help?
Every time Al Gore opens his mouth he talks about some new social program that I’ll end up paying for. Plus, he thinks it’s OK for me to pay higher income taxes just because I’m married. The guy makes me puke.
I have to vote for George W. Bush just for those reasons alone.
that allow you to take a survey of your political beliefs and then match you with the best candidate.
I like SelectSmart best - just click on editor’s choice presidential selector.
I matched 90% with a Socialist, then 86% with Gore, and 78% with Nader, so Gore it is.
9% with Bush!! Haha. I can only imagine the America he envisions, bereft of individuality and rampant with hate crimes and dsicrimination. Didn’t you here, hate is a traditional family value?
Anyway, I encourage everyone to use this site. It addresses all the serious issues. I hate when people pick a prez based on one hot-button issue like abortion. This allows you to see all the major issues and even compare candidates, and it also has summaries of the candidate’s PoVs.
If you haven’t decided about your vote yet, check out http://www.biography.com. Look up Bush and Gore, find out about them as people, as decision makers, based on their lives, from an idependent, reliable, well-known source.
Okay, enough of THAT. Even if you have already decided, check it out. it is VEEEEEEEEERY interesting. I noticed that Bush has very little experience, politically, and zero foreign affairs stuff. May have been a good gov, but no president, not yet. He probably met his VP Nominee while working in the oil business in TX. Reminds me of that 80’s prime-time soap, Dallas. Bunch of rich whiners fighting all the time.
Gore, having been VP, seems better suited in every respect. And he is gung ho for the environment like Nader, but with the foriegn relations experience Bush severly lacks.
I love how Bush tries to paint himself like he isn’t a political insider (daddy bush?)
So I am voting for Gore. But I wish McCain was the Republican nominee, because I would have loved to vote for him (and I am a Democrat living in the most Republican state in the nation!).
And our governor kempthorne would have made a great Vp for president McCain. Maybe in 4 years…
::::fingers crossed::::
FWIW, Lewis Lapham’s got a great essay about Nader in this month’s Harper’s, and according to Lapham the man is quite witty and personable in real life. The essay showcases a bit of Nader’s lighter side, as well.
Hey, John? You do know that it won’t be until 2030 before Social Security won’t be able to fully disburse each retiree, don’t you?
I think it’s a bit of a mischaracterization, too, to say that Gore doesn’t favor Social Security reform–both major parties have claimed Social Security reform as one of there flagship issues, and there’s general (albeit misinformed) consensus among politicians that the system’s broke and in need of immediate attention. The policy differences between the parties here simply concern whether Social Security will be privatized, and if so, to what degree.
A-yup. And I’ll be 58 then. And looking forward to retiring. See why it’s kind of important to me?
I am also of the impression that the 2030 number is based upon current budget estimates, which assume that our current growth bubble will not end any time in the near future and which assume that no other great crisis will make politicians look to start raiding the funds earmarked for SS (crises like, oh, say, starting a whole bunch of new social programs and then having to pay for them when the recession hits; like Medicare going bankrupt; like a major war; another major banking crisis where the FDIC has to reimburse bank account holders; etc.).
Gore is asking me to place my trust in future leaders to be incredibly wise and foresighted in dealing with the government and Social Security. I consider such an idea laughable at best. With Bush’s plan, hopefully I’ll gain some control over how my retirement money is invested, rather than hope in the benevolence of 535 Congresspeople I can’t vote for, and 3 whom I always vote against.
But if you’d like to debate me further upon this matter, please start a thread in GD. Let’s not get this one moved.
after reading all the candidates’ stance’s on the links Nacho4sara provided (not letting the survey decide for me), I’ve decided I’m voting for Harry Browne (i’ve also decide that I’m mostly libertarian) Thanks Nacho4sara
John offered as follows;
“But if you’d like to debate me further upon this matter, please start a thread in GD. Let’s not get this one moved.”
to Gadarene. The matter being privatization of social security.
Well, Gadarene, are you gonna do it? If not, I will. This is a topic of much interest to me, and I am quite ill informed.
So if you don’t, I will.
You have until sundown (PST).
Peace,
mangeorge
Because in the Democratic Party, it no longer matters what you believe on the issues. What matters is not letting Republicans win any fights.
Al used to believe in partial Social Security privatization. But W is for it…nope, Al’s got to be against it now! Can’t pretend those darned Republicans are right about anything…
That’s one of the things I like about W. In Texas, he genuinely worked with the other party to get things done.
I remember during the impeachment, the media were crying over what a terrible thing the lack of “bipartisanship” was. But somehow, the need for bipartisanship seemed to only apply to one party. And now that we have a Republican who has truly demonstrated bipartisan cooperation, it’s no longer an important enough issue to merit mention.
As a Libertarian I want to vote for Harry Brown. But if it appears that by doing so will help gore, I won’t. Surprisingly I also like Buchanan because he’s a prick. Pricks have good leadership qualities. But I think voting for him would also be in gores favor. I may have to hold my nose and vote for Bush. If it keeps gore from getting elected, so be it.
As for those who are worried about poverty and people shooting each other, I don’t give a rip. I’m voting for the guy who is going to help ME! Why should I vote for someone who is hell bent on infringing on my rights and life style for the sake of insignificant rif raf?
It’s my vote, and I’m using it for ME! And algore is the Anti-Me!
Things are pretty good, and have been for eight years. People don’t want change. The 2nd is of major importance to only a minority of people. The economy, Roe vs Wade, and SSI are more significant to the masses.
So, I guess it’ll be Gore. Not by a landslide, but by a pretty comfortable margin. Even though I’m voting for Nader.
I’ve been right every election since 1960.
Sorry, Bush people.
Peace,
mangeorge
