Unfortunately though, many don’t. They allow things like this, among others, to influence their lack of informed decision making and then stand behind it like a badge of honor. Sadly, my family couldn’t tell you the difference between Iran and Iraq, yet profess to understand the war. They’ll be voting for Bush, and I quote; “Because he’s been ordained by God.” So I ask about the lying and WMD no-show. “Well, what’s it matter? Saddam and bin Laden are all the same, in cahoots together and one’s as good as the other. We might as well fight any and all at whatever time necessary.” Me: You don’t think sending troops to die for a dishonest cause (truthfulness is championed to an absurd degree with these folks, to the extent of denial and obfuscation) is wrong? “We HAVE to protect America!!” said indignantly. At that point, I gave up. I’m sure they’ve formed most of their opinions from very brief snippets of commercials and a general idea of what they think is going on. How do I know this? I’ve seen them do it for all of my 36 years. No amount of reasoned conversation or rational helps.
Well, the voting day is just a few days after Hallowen, so you just might be able to get away with that - you’ll post pictures on the SDMB for us, won’t you?
Might I suggest a different costume? Grim Reaper, perhaps?
I am sorry, but “undecided” voters at this point are a mystery to me…and the fact that tonight’s debate had an entire audience filled with them…well, all that was missing was a red-headed kid playing the banjo.
Seriously, people…if there has ever been an election with a more diverse choice, I must have missed a few history classes.
But then again, I have spent my entire life standing for half an hour behind people in line at, say, Burger King…and when that person in front of me finally gets to the front of the line, after the half hour wait, and they ask, “what would you like”, the dickhead, clueless asshole FINALLY glances up at the menu and says, “Hmmm…let me think…”
So, yeah…I guess I have not a shread of respect for the clueless, and the fact that THEY are the buttheads who might actually sway this election just makes me both furious and depressed.
That’s how we end up with outsiders like Jesse the Body and the recall that gave us the Governator. People get so disgusted with the status quo, they decide to bring in Anyone Except the regular politicians. Whenever people vote for a “political outsider”, it is because they are fed up with the “professionals”.
Well, here’s the thing. I consider myself to be basically a libertarian on social issues (though I’m sure I’m not in several ways.) That will generally align me in the direction of the Democrats on some domestic issues. (We’ll ignore third parties on both sides for the sake of this discussion.) I also consider myself to be somewhat conservative when it comes to economic policy and foreign policy. That will align me more with the Republicans. So I already have a difficulty making a choice when it comes to the two major parties, though I think I’m more likely to go Democratic overall. (For what it’s worth, I’ve taken the political compass test several times, and always wind up in that lower right quadrant where there is absolutely nobody mentioned.) For me, Bush is not the worst thing to have ever happened to America and Kerry is not a massive flip-flopper (just a politican that’s seen too many years in the Senate and can easily be called on his voting record) and vice-versa. Basically, taking an extremist position like Aeschines did in that other thread is not a way of getting me to listen to any arguments you may have. So, tell you what. Here’s a brief list of my positions on some of the more-popular issues:
–For gay marriage, in whatever final form it may take, preferably decided by the states
–Pro-choice on abortion, although I’m not sure what my personal feelings are
–Against any government regulation on the content of books, magazines, TV/Radio (though for continued FCC regulation of the technical part of RF)
–Against the new/proposed copyright laws, and support a lessening of copyright, preferably to no more than 15-30 years
–For decriminalization/legalization of at least marijuana and possibly other drugs
–For school vouchers
–Generally for Bush’s faith-based initiative, in the belief that local charities and religious organizations can do a better job than the feds with the same money
–Along those lines, generally for more action at the local level and less action at the federal level on many other things that I feel should be a local/state issue
–For a smaller federal government and lower federal taxes. State and local tax increases are easier for me to stomach because I live where the tax money goes. (For example, I already know that I am going to support all the bond issues on the ballot.)
–For the privatization/reform/removal of Social Security. Why should I spend my entire life paying money into a broken system when I could invest those taxes myself in higher-yield, long-term investments?
–For the war in Iraq, though I don’t like how the occupation has been handled.
–For research on NMD (can I use SDI, or is that too CivII and 1980s?), on the idea that research is good, even if we can’t get this particular system to work.
–For the building of plenty of the new nuclear plant designs.
–Against the NCLB act (partially because it’s an unfunded mandate and partially because I don’t see the value of even more high-stakes multiple choice testing), though I can appreciate some of the ideas and values behind it
–For stem-cell research (I don’t like the President’s decision, but research can still continue without federal funding, after all)
–For an expanded space program, manned missions to other planets, and possibly an overhaul of NASA
–For parts of the Patriot Act, against other parts.
–Agree with Bush on the ICC
–Believe that the UNSC (and general assembly) are next to useless as currently constituted, though I have no idea what would fix the problems
–Annoyed that it seems like the US is either condemned for not taking action or is begged to be a global cop (though this was more of an issue for me before 9/11, Afghanistan, and Iraq)
Heck, that’s just a start. If I were sit down and try to come up with as many possible things as I can think of, I’d be here all day and the list would constitute an entire thread. Suffice it to say that while I know that no candidate will ever be a perfect match for everything I think important and positions I take, I still don’t see either Kerry or Bush as a very good match. It seems to me that the only good thing that might inherently come out of a Kerry presidency is gridlock. (Yes, I generally believe that gridlock is a good thing.) So, yes, I’m still undecided, though to some degree the undecidedness is whether I hold my nose and vote for Kerry or go to a third party, which would most likely be the Libertarians. The decision might be easier if I wasn’t voting (absentee) in a small swing state.
Reading my quoted text, I seem to have misplaced two words. That should say " It’s enough that I wish someone like Jesse Jackson would be elected just to spite EVERYONE."
And yes, pretty much for the reasons you stated too.
the persons in question are being assholes and are using some disgusting tactics,
and
said tactics may dissuade uninformed undecideds from voting for Kerry and as such these people are actually hurting their own cause.
Personally, I find what some posters (Diogenes, rjung, Reeder, milroyj, et al.) pull to be appalling, to say the least.
And it’s not just the aggravation at their disingenuousness that brings some people to make such illogical declarations, it’s their malice and belligerence.
Some of us believe that politicians need to Earn our votes, not just feel entitled to it because they feel they aren’t as good as the other guy. The enemy of my enemy is still not my friend.
Crap, that should be “Not just feel entitled to my vote because the other guy is worse”.
And delivery does make a difference. I’m going to have a really hard time of listening to anything you say if you preceed your statement with “If you don’t agree with me, you want the terrorist to win/want four more years of hell/ are mentally deranged/hate childern/eat puppies/worship satan”. It basically tells me that listening to you is a waste of time.
The crazy guy ranting on the street corner may have some really intelligent things to say, but I’ll never know because he began by addressing me as “a drone of the illumanti reptile men from mars”.
Speaking of unmitigated arrogance, I recall about a year ago or so, you were telling us there was incontrovertible evidence that the administration’s claims about Saddam and Iraq were true (but since it was classified you couldn’t tell us what it was), and that when the truth came out in a few months all those ignorant liberals protesting the war would have to admit they were wrong.
We are being asked if we want to get fucked in the ass with a dildo using petroleum jelly for lube, or be fucked in the ass with a dildo using all organic butter for lube. So one has to weigh the pros and cons of, well there is a shortage of petroleum, but then again the friction will burn away the butter long before the jelly. Either way, we’re going to still get fucked up the ass.
And if you dont understand that, then you were only reading the menu at Burger King and not considering what the items were made of, the probable cost of each one compared to the price, the price of each compared to the health effects on your particular health, etc etc etc. You knew what you wanted before you even saw the menu. Dont rag on those who actually put some thought into their decision.
I admitted that I was had, I admitted that the intelligence was false, I admitted that all of us in the military were had, I admitted that I was furious about being made to look like a chump, I admitted that Bush lied as far as I can tell, and I admitted that I’m not voting for the man for a second term.
That’s how it turned out. I swallowed my pride and made my decision, and now the only people who I see being arrogant about it are people like you who continually try to put it back in my face long after I admitted that I was wrong. But hey, Bush is my boy, right? :rolleyes:
Who’s being the arrogant prick now? Thank you for proving my point.
I was/am part of the backlash. When it all initially hit the fan on 9/11, I believed Bush. I supported him. I thought he was telling the truth, being decisive, and taking the fight to the enemy. I stood up and defended him in various blogs and boards and face-to-face discussions. Then I noticed too many disconnects. Nothing added up. The “reasons” and the “facts” kept changing. I just couldn’t be a true believer anymore. Airman isn’t the only one who got angry and made a note to remember next time.
I really respect you for having admitted that. And, I personally will try not to throw it back at you. On the other hand, I do hope you truly understand how difficult it was for those of us on the other side to argue with people (you, and even moreso your friend Blackclaw or whatever his name was) who were making these appeals to authority that we were simply not allowed to question. I’m not saying that I think we should continue harping on it now that you have admitted your mistake but I do hope you understand why our feelings run so deep…much more so than if you guys had argued the same position but not from the point-of-view of having inside knowledge that you felt we had no right whatsoever to question.
And, for my part, I’ll say that although I feel burned by the lies and deception that I was fed, I can understand how you must feel even that much moreso…And, I will try to consider that in what I post on the subject.
Well, you certainly have to like at least one — Kerry. In the second debate, he went out of his way at least two times to stress how much he respected the views of pro-lifers, and even that he understood them and understood the moral principle behind them. That sort of graciousness is enormously conciliatory, and does much to heal mistrust. I actually like Kerry now, despite some of his “ambassadors”.
asterion, I get what you’re saying, but I think a couple of your arguments are questionable:
*–Generally for Bush’s faith-based initiative, in the belief that local charities and religious organizations can do a better job than the feds with the same money
—For the privatization/reform/removal of Social Security. Why should I spend my entire life paying money into a broken system when I could invest those taxes myself in higher-yield, long-term investments? *
The notion that faith-based programs do better than governmental/secular ones at alleviating social problems is one that’s been eagerly pushed by the religious right, but there doesn’t really seem to be hard evidence to back it up:
And the lack of oversight and professional regulation of many non-governmental social service providers has led to some catastrophic results:
Social Security isn’t “broken” by any reasonable definition of the term—it’s certainly a lot less “broken” than the pre-recession stock market. [Anecdote: When my elderly mother’s “higher-yield, long-term investments” started tanking, she was definitely glad she had her Social Security check coming in regularly!] As economist Robert Kuttner noted in 2002,
There definitely is a place in economic policy for more encouragement of private savings and asset creation, but let’s not be too quick to assume that our existing comparatively cheap, reliable, and effective taxpayer-funded social insurance program should be thrown out. Remember that a lot of the people advocating SS privatization have a strong financial incentive for wanting trillions more dollars of other people’s tax money pumped into the stock market to compete for the stocks that they currently hold.
Remember also that a lot of people, including many people here on Straight Dope, have been “outsourced” or “downsized” into lower paying jobs with lesser (or no) benefits and can not afford to start up an 401K or Keogh, or much of anything. Besides that, with the corporate scandals that have been in the news, do we really want those sharks to get their hooks into what is the only safety net (Social Security) some people have?
Maybe you dont realize this, but your, my and everyone elses SS money is allready being invested in the stock market and probably quite a few other places. The govt doesnt have a big mattress that it puts all the SS money under. Its in a fund. And what do funds do? They invest. The SS fund gaurentees you a certain return, which means if the fund loses money on its investments, the govt has to take money from elsewhere to make it up.
Now, let me ask you: do the sharks have a better chance of getting their hooks into your money when politicians and civil servants handle it, or when you handle it?
Im sorry man, but the sharks have had their hands in the ‘safety net’ the whole time the safety net has existed.
Think of it like a savings account. If you plunk a few grand into a savings account and leave it there, do you think youre not investing it? Youre earning interest. Where does that interest come from? Does it appear by magic? No, the bank uses your money to loan to other people/organizations, i.e it invests it. The bank charges them a higher interest rate than it pays you, and keeps the difference.
There is no way you can put your money anywhere and not have it decline in value with inflation without investing it. The issue is who gets to decide where it is invested.
