# Well, so much for voting this November. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 31, 2004, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593 "2004-03-31T19:43:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/121 "2004-04-05T17:04:36Z")
> [@](#): > > I don’t want to get into this particular subject in this thread, since it’s way off-topic, but I will say that the $87 billion Bush requested for military financing would have been put to better use as direct reparations to the Iraqi people. Which would have stopped a civil war, or a Shi’ite theocracy, how? > [@](#): > > OK, you’ve got me intrigued here. What say we keep an eye on events through November 2005, and then the loser has to say, in no uncertain terms, “You were right”? Works for me. > [@](#): > > I forget, did Clinton sign the Kyoto Accords or not? No, but I certainly don’t understand them sufficiently well to say they ought to be used as a litmus test. [/quote] > [@](#): > > And what bloody good are civil unions to gays and lesbians? Not only do they _not_ accord the exact same civil and legal rights as marriage does, the decision to honor or reject them is left up to the individual states - so a gay couple married in Massachusetts may not have their union recognized in Texas should they move there. If the Democrats don’t have enough of a spine to say “Separate is not equal, period” then I’m not going to consider voting for one. Yeah, whatever. A year ago, even civil unions were a radical idea, and now you want the frickin’ moon. I’ll let gays and lesbians tell me how close civil unions are in terms of rights ( **gobear** , any comments?); Barney Frank thinks pushing for gay marriage is going too far right now. I don’t think Kerry has to be ashamed of not being to the left of Frank on this one. [quote] > [@](#): > > Defense of Marriage Act. yeah, but where do you think that _came_ from? The Gingrich Congress, that’s where. There were a finite number of battles Clinton could fight, and he decided to cave on that one. Again, it comes down to the difference between being actively conservative, and not being able to thwart every conservative initiative that comes down the pike. First thing is, we’ve got to put them in a position to throw less bad stuff at us. > [@](#): > > “Don’t ask don’t tell”. At the time, that was _progress_. How soon we forget that the previous standard had been, ask and tell, with pretty steep consequences for lying. > [@](#): > > A complete failure on one of his biggest campaign promises - universal health care. Again, at least he _tried_. Think Bush’s gonna? > [@](#): > > Ruination of Yugoslavia and Rwanda under the guise of “humanitarian intervention”. Oh, gimme a break. The shame in Rwanda was that he _didn’t_ intervene; the shame in Yugo was that he didn’t intervene _sooner_. (Bush I got us into Somalia before leaving office, and Clinton got the blame.) > [@](#): > > Bombing a fucking pharmaceutical factory in the Sudan on flimsier pretexts than Bush’s WMD. Wow, that’s a biggie. > [@](#): > > Reductions in corporate taxes and social spending. Like I said before. > [@](#): > > Flagrant union-busting. Clinton was a union-buster? I want a cite for this, friend. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/122 "2004-04-05T17:17:17Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > Marches help with fundraising and raising the popular consciousness, but they do not get laws overturned. They demostrate popular support for the overturning of those laws. Would the lawyers who took those test cases to the state and federal courts have done so solely on their own initiative if they felt they didn’t have mass popular support? > [@](#): > > Viable change is only possible by working with the system. If all you do is march, you’ll be left wondering what happened as ypour smarter, sharper opponents win the court cases while you’re beating your drims and chanting inane slogans. You guys are taking the single examples I provide as counter-arguments and thinking that is the whole spectrum of my political activity. > [@](#): > > Go ahead and march AND vote for Kerry, by all means. I’ve been over this one already. I don’t think the Democrats are an alternative, and I’ve argued as such for years now. I’m not gonna turn around and vote Democrat just because Bush is a complete wanker and his appointees are disgusting thugs. > [@](#): > > It’s not either/or–both campaigning AND voting are impoertant. Show me someone worth voting for, then! > [@](#): > > Waht you radical lefties fail to understand is that you have zero, and I do mean ZERO, idea of how to launch and sustain a popular movement. Allow me to introduce you to the [Campaign to End the Death Penalty](http://www.nodeathpenalty.org/). The ISO has been involved since the beginning, and the CEDP has been doing great work around the issue. > [@](#): > > The Radical Right has done a wonderful job of convincing the working class to vote against their own self-interest because you lot are too lofty to explain your side. And you base this assertion on what evidence? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/123 "2004-04-05T17:45:05Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Allow me to introduce you to the [Campaign to End the Death Penalty](http://www.nodeathpenalty.org/). The ISO has been involved since the beginning, and the CEDP has been doing great work around the issue. What great work? How many state legislators have you elected that will vote to remove the death penalty? How many anti death penalty governors have you elected? How many Congressmen and Senators have you elected that will vote to remove the death penalty from federal crimes? How many anti death penalty presidents have you elected? And I’ll tell you, I’m strongly anti death penalty, but any page that the headline is “Stop the racist death penalty” has lost me right there. And I don’t even know why I typed this. All of y’all arguing with **Olentzero** are absolutely right, but you’re missing one thing. He. Just. Doesn’t. Get. It. You’re wasting your breath. His political purity is the only thing that matters to him. The fact that sometimes progress comes in baby steps is lost on him. On the bright side, some of the things said in this thread, I can easily use in talking to the people at work who’s only reason for not voting is: “What difference would it make?” ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/124 "2004-04-05T17:59:56Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Because most people, most parties, most institutions are ‘far from pure’, but there is usually a good deal of difference between that and being actively malign. I’d rather hang out with a small-time drug dealer than with a murderer, and I’d rather have a Democratic president than Bush. I’d rather have a workers’ government, myself. And voting Democrat ain’t gonna bring that about. > [@](#): > > So do I. But the actions of the Federal government have a great deal of effect on the degree of difficulty for the working class to organize itself. I don’t expect Kerry to do much leading in this area; I expect him, unlike Bush, to not be actively hostile to such organizing. Seems very much in line with your Debs quote. Oooh, “not actively hostile”. Such a tasty crumb, Master Kerry! Thank you, Your Lordship. :rolleyes: I’m sorry, Kim, I’m just not satisfied with “not as bad as Bush”. I do want the frickin’ moon and I’m not ashamed of saying so. > [@](#): > > I don’t know what Roosevelt’s Congressional majority was like in 1935, but after the 1964 landslide, Johnson had the most liberal Congress of my lifetime, and it _still_ took all of LBJ’s unparalleled arm-twisting skills, plus a good deal of horse-trading, to get Medicare through Congress. This is nontrivial stuff. So what did Johnson have to compromise away to get Medicare? What other crumbs did the American working class get snatched away in order to get decent health care for the poor and elderly? > [@](#): > > Often the first few steps toward doing consist of trying and failing. You’ve struck a real gem here, Kim. What I want to do - that is, radically reconstitute society - is incompatible with supporting the Democrats. They don’t want to do that. So leftists keep trying to organize, and make mistakes, and learn from them and keep trying. Eventually what we want to do can become possible. > [@](#): > > But if Bush wins, there will be no meaningful ‘try’. The work I want to do still needs to be done irrespective of who’s in office. > [@](#): > > Between 1996 and 1998, huh? What happened in between those dates that could’ve made a difference? I’ll tell you one big thing: the GOP held those anti-IRS hearings, which resulted in the IRS’ enforcement budget being slashed… Blame Newt, not Bill. OK, so Clinton didn’t have any veto power over this particular issue? > [@](#): > > I have no idea what the deal was on Carey. But that didn’t put Jack Welch in charge of the Teamsters, did it? No, since Jack Welch is (or was) head of UPS. It put Jimmy Hoffa, Jr. in charge, though - and that’s just as bad. > [@](#): > > Seems your Debs quote ought to come into play here: a longtime union like the Teamsters shouldn’t be dependent on one man. No, you’re right. But Carey had done something that could be built upon to increase the Teamsters’ rank-and-file members’ confidence to fight back around other issues. Clinton witch-hunting Carey out of office killed what little confidence the Teamsters had gained from the strike. > [@](#): > > Awww, Clinton _didn’t do as much good as you would have liked him to do_. Damn straight, Kim. I refuse to lower my expectations for social and political justice just because the other ‘electable’ party in the US refuses to meet them. > [@](#): > > Second, the difference in general between the Dems and the GOP on squeezing social spending is, the GOP’s actively fighting to squeeze it, while the Dems often fail to fight hard enough to defend it. You know it, and I know it, and so does everyone else. So why should I support the bastards if they’re not fighting hard enough? > [@](#): > > OK, how has it succeeded? You ‘commie bastards’ have been organizing for a long time; where are the fruits of your labors? You know the old definition of insanity: doing X over and over again, getting the same result, and expecting it to work differently the next time. Wasn’t it you who just said the Republicans have been beating us back since at least Nixon? The only reason the left may be getting the same results it got sixty years ago is because the left has been pushed back to where it started sixty years ago by the right-wing onslaught, both politically and socially, since the end of the Second World War. We have a lot of work to do before we can even approach the level of mass movements we saw in the late 1960s, to say nothing of the mass movements of the 1930s. Hell, I’d love to see replays of the kind of strikes that brought the unions to places like Ford and the city of Minneapolis in the mid-30s. We’re not there yet. > [@](#): > > The death penalty is hardly in play at the Federal level, except when it comes to appointing judges and Justices that may have to vote on this or that case. Allow me to introduce you to Clinton’s ["Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act](http://travel.state.gov/antiterr.html)". Clinton also expanded the list of federal crimes punishable by death from 2 to almost 60. The death penalty is most certainly well at play on the federal level. > [@](#): > > Kerry will probably be like Clinton and appoint a lot of centrists to the courts, but there’ll still be a world of difference between Kerry’s centrists and Bush’s reactionaries. Oh joy. That’s not enough. > [@](#): > > Kerry’s against the amendment, and for civil unions. That may not be as progressive as you like, but once again, there’s real daylight between their positions. Daylight? Yes. Enough? No. Same for the other positions, even on abortion. Kerry skipped out on a vote that would have clearly marked him as a progressive on the issue in order to pursue ‘electability’ on both sides. That’s just fucking slimy. > [@](#): > > [E]ven accomplishing _nothing_ would be an improvement over the GOP’s effort to dismantle what’s left of the New Deal and Great Society programs, one brick at a time. Since when has “nothing” ever been acceptable to anyone? > [@](#): > > Not every rich person is aware that in the long run, making sure the wealth is shared is the best way to preserve capitalism. AH, see, _there_ is the central key issue! Democrats are committed to preserving capitalism. I’m not. I’m not gonna vote for a party that’s committed to preserving capitalism, 'cos no matter how they try to sugarcoat it or blunt its sharper edges, capitalism is still going to produce economic crises and social injustices that it cannot hope to successfully address. > [@](#): > > Johnson knew the Civil Rights bill would cost the Dems the South for a long time to come. Cost them what? The support of the “Dixiecrat” type? Why would a party that claims to be committed to social justice, and is (only) occasionally successful at demonstrating this commitment, be worried about losing the support of the wing of the party _opposed_ to such commitment? You sign landmark civil rights legislation, suddenly you have serious grassroots support and you lose some conservative members. Net gain, from my point of view. > [@](#): > > But even then, did you see the GOP standing up for the blacks? No, last time I know of the GOP standing up for the Blacks was during the Civil War and Reconstruction. > [@](#): > > But gotta say, the effectiveness of your work over the past 25 years doesn’t impress me. I’m sure our steering committee in Chicago will be absolutely crushed to hear that and will order the immediate disbandment of the ISO. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/125 "2004-04-05T18:12:15Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > What great work? How many state legislators have you elected that will vote to remove the death penalty? How many anti death penalty governors have you elected? How many Congressmen and Senators have you elected that will vote to remove the death penalty from federal crimes? How many anti death penalty presidents have you elected? And I’ll tell you, I’m strongly anti death penalty, but any page that the headline is “Stop the racist death penalty” has lost me right there. So sorry to offend your delicate sensibilities, **TYM**. But the number of prisoners on any given death row are disproportionately Black and minorities, and uniformly poor. So are you going to re-think your stance on the death penalty because the CEDP calls it racist, or merely refuse to participate in any anti-DP events that the CEDP may be involved in? Electing officials isn’t the only, or even the primary, method of ending the death penalty. Stopping executions, like the CEDP has done in MD and CA, and being heavily involved in the campaign that resulted in the emptying of Illinois’ death row, is much more effective. > [@](#): > > And I don’t even know why I typed this. All of y’all arguing with **Olentzero** are absolutely right, but you’re missing one thing. He. Just. Doesn’t. Get. It. Get what? That I’m supposed to vote for the Democratic candidate even though he disgusts me, simply because Bush disgusts me more? That I’m supposed to yield to hypocrisy and vote for a party I’ve decided, and will continue to argue, is no alternative at all? I don’t see what’s so wrong with sticking to political ideals I’ve found to be correct. Yes, my ‘political purity’, as you call it, is important to me. That’s because I detest being a hypocrite. > [@](#): > > You’re wasting your breath. His political purity is the only thing that matters to him. The fact that sometimes progress comes in baby steps is lost on him. Hardly. I just don’t see the progress I’d like to make as coming from the Democrats. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/126 "2004-04-05T18:13:33Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Or"? If they’d rather have me vote Kerry than march in solidarity at the demonstration, what’s the point of having a demonstration in the first place? Go ahead. Ask them. They’re not the ones suggesting you should only do one or the other, YOU are. I betcha that they’re assuming everyone at the rally is going to vote for Kerry, and will be appalled to find out that you’re too pure to do that. Ask them which they’d prefer you do, if you’re only going to do one or the other. I’ve read _A People’s History of the United States_ cover to cover; I’m no stranger to direct action; I’m a big believer in organizing folks. But I’m not so foolish as to deny the power of the ballot, either. Ask the rally organizers, why don’t you? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/127 "2004-04-05T18:27:14Z")
If **Olentzero** was wandering through the desert, dying of thirst, and I approached him with two glasses – one empty, the other half-full – I wonder which one he’d take? ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/128 "2004-04-05T18:29:24Z")
> [@rjung](#): > > If **Olentzero** was wandering through the desert, dying of thirst, and I approached him with two glasses – one empty, the other half-full – I wonder which one he’d take? I’m guessing it would depend on whether or not you could certify that the water in the half-full glass was gathered and purified without the abuse of the sweat of the workers’ brows. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/129 "2004-04-05T18:29:58Z")
I ordered a cheeseburger, you dolt! ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/130 "2004-04-05T18:32:13Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > I ordered a cheeseburger, you dolt! 😃 This may be the best summary of why I hate radical politics that I have ever come across. Better even than the guy who told me over a game of pool (played with wooden cue sticks) about shouting, “Murderers!” at some local loggers. Mind if I quote you on this, **Olentzero**? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/131 "2004-04-05T18:34:08Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Electing officials isn’t the only, or even the primary, method of ending the death penalty. Stopping executions, like the CEDP has done in MD and CA, and being heavily involved in the campaign that resulted in the emptying of Illinois’ death row, is much more effective. There we disagree. Elected legislators who are against and will vote against the death penalty and elected executives who will appoint judges who are against the death penalty are the ONLY way to stop it effectively and permanently. Or as permanent as one can expect. There have been and will be executions in Maryland, and in Califonia, and Illinois’ death row will likely fill up again as quickly as it was emptied. Stop gap measures are fine, but should be considered only that - as stop-gap measures while the real work is being done. The real work consists of evangilism, organization, and last but not least, voting - voting for the person who will best provide some progress. (The death penalty may be racist as applied - I don’t believe that’s proved - but the racist card is played too often and in too many inappropriate situations for it to be convincing as an argument. Am I not a pure death penalty opponent if my reasons for opposing it do not include that it may be racist?) ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/132 "2004-04-05T18:42:56Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > There we disagree. Elected legislators who are against and will vote against the death penalty and elected executives who will appoint judges who are against the death penalty are the ONLY way to stop it effectively and permanently. Or as permanent as one can expect. How, then, do you explain the abolition of the death penalty in the United States in 1972, but its reinstatement in 1976? Or does that fall under the category of “as permanent as one can expect”? > [@](#): > > The death penalty may be racist as applied - I don’t believe that’s proved - but the racist card is played too often and in too many inappropriate situations for it to be convincing as an argument. So it should be disregarded as an argument in situations where it _is_ appropriate? The CEDP isn’t just shouting “racism” to appear radical; the racial bias in the death penalty _has_ been proven by state-sponsored studies. > [@](#): > > Am I not a pure death penalty opponent if my reasons for opposing it do not include that it may be racist? No, you are still a death penalty opponent, but that doesn’t mean you’re not going to get argued with by other DP opponents who have reason to believe it _is_ racist and should be openly opposed on those grounds. **Daniel** , since you obviously wouldn’t know sarcasm if it came up and bit you on the ass, no, you may **not** quote me. (Not that I believe it’ll stop you.) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/133 "2004-04-05T18:57:58Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > **Daniel** , since you obviously wouldn’t know sarcasm if it came up and bit you on the ass, no, you may **not** quote me. (Not that I believe it’ll stop you.) Dude, I invented metasarcasm. You know not of what you speak. Fer example, I recognized you were being sarcastic, but that doesn’t stop what you said from being a perfect summary of shoot-yourself-in-the-foot ideology. And since obviously I don’t need permission to quote you, I’ll take your petulant refusal for what it’s worth. Ask the rally organizers. I dare you. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/134 "2004-04-05T19:17:56Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Fer example, I recognized you were being sarcastic, but that doesn’t stop what you said from being a perfect summary of shoot-yourself-in-the-foot ideology. You wanna elaborate on that? It seems to me that an oversimplified hypothetical doesn’t really deserve much more than a sarcastic answer. > [@](#): > > Ask the rally organizers. I dare you. Darers go first. Do you really think I’d expect any other answer than “You gotta vote for Kerry”? I’ve already laid forth in this thread, rather explicitly, why I don’t intend to vote for Kerry, or any other Democrat, in elections. Am I gonna write off anyone who intends to vote for Kerry and not talk to them for the sake of ideological purity? Obviously not, else this thread wouldn’t have stretched to three pages already. I’ll argue with the rally organizers themselves why I don’t think Kerry is an alternative and that voting for him isn’t going to accomplish what we want to accomplish. They don’t have to agree with me either, but it is to be hoped that they don’t feel the need to engage in Red-baiting simply because their arguments don’t convince me or my comrades, either. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/135 "2004-04-05T19:37:24Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > You wanna elaborate on that? It seems to me that an oversimplified hypothetical doesn’t really deserve much more than a sarcastic answer. Sure thing: it seems to me that when you’re confronted with a choice where you don’t like either option, but where one is obviously worse than the other, you’ll reject both, even if it means hurting your own interests to do so. > [@](#): > > Do you really think I’d expect any other answer than “You gotta vote for Kerry”? Fascinating. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/136 "2004-04-05T19:54:08Z")
I have not yet seen an argument in this thread, or elsewhere, that has convinced me that voting Democrat is in any way furthering my interests. I’ve read up on Kerry. I’ve read about the history of the Democratic Party. I’ve read up on how reforms I would have organized in support of, had I been around, have been chipped away by both Democrats and Republicans. If I had found one shred of solid evidence that supporting the Democrats led to furthering my interests, I’d happily vote for them. But my interests and their interests are too divergent. If one party is trying to turn back the clock, figuratively, and the other party is only trying to maintain the status quo, _when the status quo is woefully insufficient_, I’m going to try to find a way to push things even further forward which doesn’t depend on parties that only want to preserve the status quo. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/137 "2004-04-05T19:58:56Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > If one party is trying to turn back the clock, figuratively, and the other party is only trying to maintain the status quo, _when the status quo is woefully insufficient_, I’m going to try to find a way to push things even further forward which doesn’t depend on parties that only want to preserve the status quo. …thereby asking for a cheeseburger when that’s not one of the choices. As I said, Pat Robertson is perfectly happy with the choice you ARE making. The leaders of the abortion rally are despairing about folks like you who make that choice. But that’s the beauty of democracy: if you want to help Pat, that’s your choice. When the Republicans win, and turn back the clock, you can stand up proud and say, “I helped them do this!” Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/138 "2004-04-05T20:02:30Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > …thereby asking for a cheeseburger when that’s not one of the choices. Says who? The Democrats and the Republicans? We’re supposed to believe them when they say they’re the only two choices we could possibly make? Ludicrous. ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/139 "2004-04-05T20:08:29Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Says who? The Democrats and the Republicans? We’re supposed to believe them when they say they’re the only two choices we could possibly make? Ludicrous. No, what’s ludicrous is a so-called progressive who consciously works to ensure George W. Bush’s reelection. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2004, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593/140 "2004-04-05T20:09:08Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Says who? The Democrats and the Republicans? We’re supposed to believe them when they say they’re the only two choices we could possibly make? Ludicrous. If you think someone besides the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate has a chance of winning the 2004 US presidency, you’re clinically insane. In the voting booth, if you want to influence the election in one direction or another, you can either influence it by helping turn back the clock or by helping prevent the clock from being turned back. In November 2004, **you will have no other choice in the voting booth**. Outside of the booth, there are plenty of choices. But you can help prevent the clock from being turned back, or you can decline to exercise that power, which is what the Christian Coalition wants you to do, and what all rational progressives desperately hope you (and millions of other self-righteous leftists) won’t do. Whether to exercise that specific power is a binary choice, independent of all other choices you make. Daniel [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/well-so-much-for-voting-this-november/237593.md?page=8)