Dunno why, but that typo tickled the heck outta me! I picture a great big furry muppet saying “woogie woogie woogie” and breaking out a guitar and playing folk songs.
Just to add an interesting data point… It may mean nothing at all, but I was surprised by it. I recently found myself in the copilot seat of a bush plane in Alaska, carefully avoiding all contact with the controls (since I don’t have a clue about how to fly, and was just cargo). Without any prompting from me at all, the pilot started in on politics.
Now, I may be wrong, but my impression is that Alaskan bush pilots are not exactly wild-eyed liberals. In general, I’d speculate that they tend towards the libertarian wing of conservative: independent, “keep the gummint off my back” kinds of guys.
This pilot launched into quite a diatribe against the Bush administration. Paraphrasing, “I voted for them the last time, but not again. The biggest bunch of crooks I’ve ever seen. And they haven’t done shit for the small businessman - they’ve just been taking care of their rich buddies.”
I’ve got to wonder how much of this kind of sentiment is out there among people that would normally be considered “safe” Republican voters. The polls aren’t showing much of it, but maybe these are the same sorts of people who hang up on pollsters.
Purely anecdotal, granted, but intriguing.
Put enough anecdotes together and you’ve got a trend.
The reason I feel optimistic about a Kerry/Edwards win is that I can’t imagine anyone who voted for Gore in 2000 not voting for Kerry in 2004. But I do get the feeling there will be plenty of those who voted for Bush in 2000 who, if they don’t vote for Kerry, won’t bother voting at all.
And if four people…FOUR people hang up on pollsters, they’ll think it’s a movement!
BBC World News last night ran a segment about farmers in states like Nebraska who are traditionally Republican voters, yet who are also extremely angry at the current administration because they feel that its agricultural and business policies help large corporate agribusiness rather than family farms.
Of course, what the news segment forgot to point out is that this probably won’t change their vote, because the Democrats, for the most part, have no more real interest in saving the family farm than the Republicans. Democrats seem to have concluded, rightly or wrongly, that midwest farmer types won’t vote for them anyway, so why bother trying to help them in cases like this.
Actually, PBS also had a very interesting interview with author Thomas Frank, whose new book, What’s The Matter With Kansas, looks the way that Republicans have mnanaged to win over middle America with a populist social and cultural message, while shafting those same people on economic issues. And the Democrats have chosen to avoid taking up the battle on the economic front, and been content to wage the cultural battles and effectively abandon places like Wichita.
Note: This summary is only what i gleaned from the interview and from reading Frank’s website. I haven’t yet read the book, although it’s near the top of my list right now.
And I should trust Democrats why? I am a registered independant, and during the last election cycle that was close in this state (NY) a straw poll of people whom I know are also registered independant, ALL of us had the county’s voting rolls saying we weren’t registered, and had to vote via affadavit votes - i.e. absentee ballots when you’re not really absent. Since counting absentee ballots doesn’t happen unless an election is close, can you explain why I shouldn’t feel that this can be explained by the two parties wanting to throw out votes from stubborn malcontents?
As for the OP… I’m not sure I want Kerry/Edwards, I’m not sure I want more Bush/Cheney, either, but if you have made up your mind DO NOT count your victory as assured. Work for it, you bozo, don’t gloat. Not only will your gloating piss off the undecideds and those of us who distrust anyone in elected office, but I seem to recall people talking about how Gore was a shoe-in, too. :rolleyes:
I’m not sure I want Kerry/Edwards either, but I am sure I don’t want Bush/Cheney. That said, I keep waiting for Kerry to come up with a better reason to vote for him than “I’m not Bush”. Maybe you’re not Bush, but then again, thus far you’re not Clinton either. Show us you’ve got the leadership cojones, Boston-boy, or it’s going to be another miserable four years for America no matter who wins.
The last time I woted for a presidential candidate with some enthusiasm was Carter over Ford in '76. I voted for Carter again in '80 with a lot less enthusiasm, and I have to tell you the enthusiasm train has left the station for me. The Republican candidates have been getting scarrier and scarrier.
“Not Bush/Chaney” is good enough for me. There are all kinds of signs that Republican’s are backing away from the White House position on the Iraq war, the motor is sputtering out, this baby ain’t flyin’ any more. And I say PARTY TIME!
Don’t let me stop your little party, but I still think it’s a bit premature to go into the poultry inventory business. It’s a long way to November.
A lack of enthusiasm for Bush/Cheney does not automatically mean that Kerry/Edwards will win, or even that Kerry/Edwards will pick up those votes, or even that those people loosing enthusiasm will NOT vote for Bush/Cheney. If you want four more years of Bush/Cheney, or don’t care who actually wins, go ahead and party now. Otherwise work for what you want.
Of course, nothing says you can’t work cheerfully for your goal. 
PARTY! PARTY! PARTY!
Whoo Hoo!
::Insert Dance to the Music::
Feel the Joy! Feel the Beat! Feel the Heat!
Boogie oogie oogie!!
I hope the OP is correct. Although there is a bit of a woosh thing running through it.
But it makes me think of a political cartoon I saw in 1992. The main focus of the cartoon featured a very confident Bill Clinton when the polls had started to show him in the lead, and it was almost as if was picking out his cabinet in October.
In the bottom corner was a picture of Michael Dukakis, saying “Careful, Bill.” Dukakis had something like a 17 point lead after the Democratic convention in 1988.
Let’s not count our votes before they’re cast.
In fairness to the OP the situation is not similar. Michael Dukakis was getting a large part of his boost based on the so-called Massachusetts Miracle, which even at the time of the convention was imploding between his policies as governor, and his absolute inability to delegate ANYTHING to his Lt. Governor. By the time the election rolled around Massachusetts was in worse shape than it had been for years, and Dukakis was reaping the harvest of all the I-told-you-so’s from his Lt. Governor, and most state political leaders. John Kerry, whether you like the idea of him campaigning rather than working as a Senator, is not in a position to be held personally, and solely, accountable for anything that can happen between now and the election. I have my reasons to mislike the man, but there is no way he’s going to be able to pull a Dukakis-like political suicide, unless it comes out he has been secretly kidnapping baby seals to club for his personal entertainment. And then throwing away the pelts. :eek:
I wish to Hell the Dems had a more charismatic putative nominee. I liked Howard Dean. My favorite candidate never seems to make it; in the 1992 primaries I voted for Bob Kerrey. Oh well; I hope John Edwards helps the ticket.
I’ve never felt so anxious about an election before. I honestly hate to think about what four more years of this administration might do to us. The past few years have led to me using words I never seriously considered regarding the White House before: “fascism”, “imperialism”, “insane military doctrine”, etc. And Dick Cheney scares me; I really think we’ve had the Cheney/Bush White House rather than Bush/Cheney.
Too early to make any assumptions; a lot can happen before November.
Well … Gore DID win the election …
(someone had to say it)
And if Diebold has their way, your vote won’t be counted even after it’s cast.
It wasn’t universal in New York. My mom’s registered independent in NY, and she’s always voted the normal way. Also, where do you get the idea that counting absentee ballots doesn’t happen unless an election is close? I believe New York counts all absentee ballots.
Here’s an article about absentee ballots in NY, supporting that (formatting changed):
From here:
My wish for a Kerry victory/Bush defeat in November is probably as fervent as anyone’s, yet I’m not going to take it as a given this early in the year.
Still, I think Boyo Jim might be onto something here. Let’s say, worst-case scenario, Charlie McCarthy and his gang are returned to the White House. The result, among other unspeakable tragedies, is that we Kerry supporters don’t get a party. Boyo Jim, on the other hand, will have already had one.
I never said it was universal, nor meant to imply it was more than just Monroe county that was screwed up that particular way. As far as not counting absentee ballots, it’s what I was told by the Monroe county clerk’s office back in the early 90’s when I was voting absentee, and I called to say that my ballot didn’t get to me til a week after the election. (Gotta love the military mails.) I was told that it wouldn’t have mattered anyways, since they weren’t counting the absentee ballots anyways.
In that case, I’m pretty sure Monroe County was breaking New York State election law. All properly prepared ballots have to be counted, and those votes have to be contributed to the totals.