If the election were held today....
- Thread starter U2Kitten
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
meegannie
Blue Crack Addict
anitram said:
I haven't decided whether or not I'll be voting this year.
RocknRollKitty
Acrobat
anitram said:
2861U2
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Bush, without a doubt. My family are HUGE Republicans
How could any of you stand to listen to Kerry's voice for 4 years. Plus, he never smiles. Probably the most boring person ever.
"I actually did vote for the 87 billion before I voted against it"
There are many more instances such as this.
How could any of you stand to listen to Kerry's voice for 4 years. Plus, he never smiles. Probably the most boring person ever.
"I actually did vote for the 87 billion before I voted against it"
There are many more instances such as this.
Sherry Darling
New Yorker
Yes, I'd rather someone vote for Bush than not at all. If there really are more folks in the US who support him than not, I'd accept that. (I'll move to Canada, but I'll accept it. 
)
Antiram, I hear you, I do. But in my country at least, there is so much apathy! I don't feel like we have such a dire situation, such as the one you were in, which would warrent a conscious vote boycott. I hear, "You're never going to change it, so why bother?" "Politicians are all corrupt, so why bother?" Well, you know what? That's not going to change unless we get involved! Part of that is voting. If you support a specific candidate, by all means, write him in. That's a great solution to me--it's participating. But I also believe that voting is just the beginning! We have to be informed, get info from multiple sources, be in contact with our reps through letters and phone calls. We have to organize! A real democracy will not work without this. I get very frustrated with folks who complain and complain about the Way It Is, and then I find out they haven't get bothered to get to the polls!
Just MHO, of course.
SD
)Antiram, I hear you, I do. But in my country at least, there is so much apathy! I don't feel like we have such a dire situation, such as the one you were in, which would warrent a conscious vote boycott. I hear, "You're never going to change it, so why bother?" "Politicians are all corrupt, so why bother?" Well, you know what? That's not going to change unless we get involved! Part of that is voting. If you support a specific candidate, by all means, write him in. That's a great solution to me--it's participating. But I also believe that voting is just the beginning! We have to be informed, get info from multiple sources, be in contact with our reps through letters and phone calls. We have to organize! A real democracy will not work without this. I get very frustrated with folks who complain and complain about the Way It Is, and then I find out they haven't get bothered to get to the polls!
Just MHO, of course.
SD
The problem I'm having is that I'm not happy with the way things are, but a positive change does not appear possible at this time. I don't see the alternatives as a solution, or even an improvement. I'm not saying I won't vote, like Seabiscuit, but I agree with meegannie, I'm not sure I will. I am going to wait and see what happens, and if anyone can win me over. If not I could always write in Bono (I know, he's not eligible, not a US citizen)
America needs to get beyond the two party system if anything is ever really going to change. I think this may happen in time, even if it's in the form of electing 'cool' or 'joke' people like Jesse Ventura and Arnold. We need someone not imbedded in the system. I am among those who believe all politicians are corrupt. Of course they are, or they would not be in the positions they are. An honest man cannot get ahead in this country. They're all rich, too. A poor man or an ordinary citizen could never have the money or the clout to get elected.
America needs to get beyond the two party system if anything is ever really going to change. I think this may happen in time, even if it's in the form of electing 'cool' or 'joke' people like Jesse Ventura and Arnold. We need someone not imbedded in the system. I am among those who believe all politicians are corrupt. Of course they are, or they would not be in the positions they are. An honest man cannot get ahead in this country. They're all rich, too. A poor man or an ordinary citizen could never have the money or the clout to get elected.
Last edited:
A question for you Kerry supporters, could you please explain what is supposed to be so great about him, and what's so much better than Bush? He hasn't even said he'd stop or scale down the war. I heard him on TV last night talking about America's commitment and following through, sounded like Bush to me. Also why do you hate Bush, is it only the war?
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
I would never tell someone from another country that they should be voting or whatever. It's none of my damn business. By the same token, people *died* in my home town for the right to vote. For the inside scoop of Alabama, and Southern, political tensions, read Diane McWhorter's "Carry Me Home". That will tell you more about the U.S. Southern voter than I'll ever know.
All throughout history, people died for the right to vote.
It is not participation that is at issue. As one bumper sticker said "If you want me to vote, give me candidates."
The problem is that we end up voting for the lesser of two evils, and in the end of the day absolutely nothing will change. There is no difference between the Democrats and the Republicans in America in the way they operate. They both support the top 1% who are living the American dream while the bottom 99% lives out the American nightmare. And there is an apathy not at the voting polls, but among the middle class who doesn't seem to realize that without a revolution, they will get nowhere, while the top gets further and further. So they are happy to maintain the status quo so long as they can have their Ford and their house in the suburbs, alternately voting for one of two parties who essentially believes in the same thing. As a foreigner, I heard a Kerry speech the other day, I heard a Bush speech and for the love of God, how can you even tell they are not members of the same party?
I agree with U2Kitten about positive change not necessarily being a viable solution at this point. A revolution comes from within and so long as your middle class is satisfied with the scraps that come their way, without comprehensive health care, and with carrying the corporate fat cats, then you will never effect any sort of change regardless of whom you are voting for. This is because you are voting for that top 1% who has no idea what it is like to live in a 2 bedroom trailer.
"We the people" were a few dozen rich, white men. And they still are today.
It is not participation that is at issue. As one bumper sticker said "If you want me to vote, give me candidates."
The problem is that we end up voting for the lesser of two evils, and in the end of the day absolutely nothing will change. There is no difference between the Democrats and the Republicans in America in the way they operate. They both support the top 1% who are living the American dream while the bottom 99% lives out the American nightmare. And there is an apathy not at the voting polls, but among the middle class who doesn't seem to realize that without a revolution, they will get nowhere, while the top gets further and further. So they are happy to maintain the status quo so long as they can have their Ford and their house in the suburbs, alternately voting for one of two parties who essentially believes in the same thing. As a foreigner, I heard a Kerry speech the other day, I heard a Bush speech and for the love of God, how can you even tell they are not members of the same party?
I agree with U2Kitten about positive change not necessarily being a viable solution at this point. A revolution comes from within and so long as your middle class is satisfied with the scraps that come their way, without comprehensive health care, and with carrying the corporate fat cats, then you will never effect any sort of change regardless of whom you are voting for. This is because you are voting for that top 1% who has no idea what it is like to live in a 2 bedroom trailer.
"We the people" were a few dozen rich, white men. And they still are today.
Last edited:
While I agree with a lot of what you said, I cannot let this one go by.
So you're saying that the Clinton and Bush presidencies were essentially the same? And that things wouldn't be different if Gore were president instead of Bush? It's not that I don't agree that both parties are on the right of the global political spectrum. They certainly are. But I can't stand it when people say that both parties are the same, so why vote anyway. If the current administration has shown Americans anything it's shown that who you vote for does matter.
anitram said:
So you're saying that the Clinton and Bush presidencies were essentially the same? And that things wouldn't be different if Gore were president instead of Bush? It's not that I don't agree that both parties are on the right of the global political spectrum. They certainly are. But I can't stand it when people say that both parties are the same, so why vote anyway. If the current administration has shown Americans anything it's shown that who you vote for does matter.
Last edited:
Clinton was a fine Republican president.
Zinn actually wrote up several wonderful chapters comparing the presidencies of Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and frankly when you look at what they did in terms of budgets, judges appointed, social programs, military spending, foreign policy, it's hard to believe they were members of different parties. It's just that Republicans are in your face more, so they come across as inherently "evil" when looked at from a liberal point of view. The Dems are just hiding behind a whole lot of fakery, but they're doing nothing for the bottom 99%.
No, I don't know if the presidencies would have been the same. But it is hard to say because 9/11 would have forced anyone's hand, left or right. Everything changed then, and there is no way you can stipulate that Gore, or Nader or anyone else would have been radically different in light of what happened to the country on that day. Let's be frank, I don't like Bush at all, but he's not the devil incarnate. He's in many ways a man of his time. Yes, Iraq was likely pre-planned, but like I said, 9/11 wasn't and there is no telling where people would stand since they were not in the White House at that time when patriotic fervor was high, etc.
Zinn actually wrote up several wonderful chapters comparing the presidencies of Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and frankly when you look at what they did in terms of budgets, judges appointed, social programs, military spending, foreign policy, it's hard to believe they were members of different parties. It's just that Republicans are in your face more, so they come across as inherently "evil" when looked at from a liberal point of view. The Dems are just hiding behind a whole lot of fakery, but they're doing nothing for the bottom 99%.
No, I don't know if the presidencies would have been the same. But it is hard to say because 9/11 would have forced anyone's hand, left or right. Everything changed then, and there is no way you can stipulate that Gore, or Nader or anyone else would have been radically different in light of what happened to the country on that day. Let's be frank, I don't like Bush at all, but he's not the devil incarnate. He's in many ways a man of his time. Yes, Iraq was likely pre-planned, but like I said, 9/11 wasn't and there is no telling where people would stand since they were not in the White House at that time when patriotic fervor was high, etc.
Sherry Darling
New Yorker
I agree, That Guy. "Give" me candidates? They don't just appear. Not that you think they do. 
But really, if someone wants good candidates, and is boycotting the vote because of that, I'd want to know what he or she is doing to support his or her candidate of choice next time. That's the thing about democracy--it demands participation beyond just pulling a lever.
But really, if someone wants good candidates, and is boycotting the vote because of that, I'd want to know what he or she is doing to support his or her candidate of choice next time. That's the thing about democracy--it demands participation beyond just pulling a lever.
RockNRollDawgie
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I'd hold my nose and vote for Kerry!
Anyone, anything, is better than another 4 years of Dubya.
Anyone, anything, is better than another 4 years of Dubya.
RockNRollDawgie said:
You'd like this site, then.
http://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.com
RockNRollDawgie
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ThatGuy said:
LOL!!!!! I agree with most of it.
It's more like Kerry is the lesser of two evils.
Last edited:
anitram said:
I have never heard the truth about my country laid out so well by someone who doesn't even live here. I can't disagree with anything you said. I can see the things you are talking about first hand in my life and the life of the people I know.This part especially stands out to me:
They both support the top 1% who are living the American dream while the bottom 99% lives out the American nightmare.
I don't know when people, including my elderly aunt, are going to get over the 'democrats are for the poor- republicans are for the rich' myth. That might have been true in FDR's day but not anymore. They are BOTH for the rich, the only difference is, the Democrats pretend to care, and the Republicans make no bones about it, they don't care. But either way, no one cares, unless you are a lobbyist with money and something in it for them, or a way to scratch their back after they scratch yours. Most representatives will vote against the wishes of their constituants if money is a factor and use the old "I know what' s best for you" shit. Of course they will all try to get jobs and pork barrel highway jobs in their areas, hey, they have to keep themselves getting elected, usually for life. But it is true that they have NO idea how it feels to live in a trailer, to drive a piece of shit with a broken transmission, to work your ass off and still live payday to payday not making ends meet. NOBODY cares about those Americans. They don't have any money. And in America, that's all it's about.
Last edited:
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
I hear you U2Kitten and anitram. I won't disagree that the upper 1% is calling the shots, and the middle class is accepting a few crumbs from them. Health care costs in particular are insane. A container of medicine that cost me $17.00 in 1992 now costs $53.00. That's a rip-off. I am pissed, and I will continue to be pissed. I have protest literature piled on my shelf from Oxfam and related groups. But do read Diane McWhorter's book, folks. It's one of the best history books I've ever read. She strikes alot of people as some sort of misguided idealist, but we have very similar backgrounds, we went to the same schools, etc, etc, and we come from the same place. I do not work for her publisher.
I'm in the "holding my nose and voting for Kerry" political persuasion now. The "John Kerry is a douchebag but I'm voting for him" site is hysterical.
I'm in the "holding my nose and voting for Kerry" political persuasion now. The "John Kerry is a douchebag but I'm voting for him" site is hysterical.
Last edited:
I remember a few years back in the Lousiana governer's race, damn I forget the guy's name, but they had jokes and bumper sticker that said 'vote for the crook,it's important!' They knew he was a crook but they felt he was the lesser of the evils against David Duke. He won. But he did get back into trouble and ended up in jail. Honest, decent, politicians are too hard to come by, if there are any. I have no respect for people like them. Look now, we've got the Skull and Bones class of '68 vs. '66. Goodie 
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
Oh, I remember when David Duke was in that race in Louisiana. No offense to anyone here from Louisiana but they have some of the worst politicians on the planet. I can't remember the guy's name either but he was running against one of the most notorious Ku Klux Klan leaders. There have been at least two KKK Grand Dragons from Louisiana, and quite a few from my own state, including choice main characters in Diane McWhorter's book. The KKK can get fd.
*not surprisingly I screwed up my original post with too many smilies*
d. *not surprisingly I screwed up my original post with too many
smilies*verte76
Blue Crack Addict
U2Kitten said:You Verte, too many
I thought I was going to die laughing when I couldn't post due to too many
smilies.......too many smilies isn't enough for me. ad infinitum
I'm a Bushie goat.. well, I suppose that's appropriate, yes?
I like Bush because he isn't afraid to do what he thinks is right. I don't like with having a religious nut in the White House (which is what I think Bush is), I don't like having someone so close to the oil industry in the White House (Bush again), and I think John Ashcroft and Donald Rumsfeld should go flock themselves (yo! Bush! you listening?)
But I am voting for Bush.
besides, if he pisses me off to much, I can just eat him munch munch.. I'd rather eat a bush than a john...
goat
}~
I like Bush because he isn't afraid to do what he thinks is right. I don't like with having a religious nut in the White House (which is what I think Bush is), I don't like having someone so close to the oil industry in the White House (Bush again), and I think John Ashcroft and Donald Rumsfeld should go flock themselves (yo! Bush! you listening?)
But I am voting for Bush.
besides, if he pisses me off to much, I can just eat him munch munch.. I'd rather eat a bush than a john...
goat
}
~
i voted for bush in 2000... so for me not to vote for him again one of many different things would have had to happen
a) bush does something that just really pisses me off
b) i'm worse off now than i was when he took office
c) kerry just blows me out of the water with his ideas
so far... none of those things have happened. add that to the fact that i just simply don't trust kerry with homeland security, and my vote... for now... still rests with bush. but it's a long way till november. right now all kerry is telling me is why bush sucks. ok... i can figure that out on my own. stop telling me why he sucks and start telling me why you're good.
we'll see what happens come debate time
a) bush does something that just really pisses me off
b) i'm worse off now than i was when he took office
c) kerry just blows me out of the water with his ideas
so far... none of those things have happened. add that to the fact that i just simply don't trust kerry with homeland security, and my vote... for now... still rests with bush. but it's a long way till november. right now all kerry is telling me is why bush sucks. ok... i can figure that out on my own. stop telling me why he sucks and start telling me why you're good.
we'll see what happens come debate time
Last edited:
Seabird said:
Looks will decide the election, just as it has decided every election since 1960. And it isn't just "youthful" superficial looks I'm talking about. It's a race between who looks more "presidential." I'm sure it would make our Founding Fathers very proud.
Melon
Seabird
War Child
melon said:
Looks will decide the election, just as it has decided every election since 1960. And it isn't just "youthful" superficial looks I'm talking about. It's a race between who looks more "presidential." I'm sure it would make our Founding Fathers very proud.
Melon
Someone else said Kerry's voice made them sick. Bush's face and voice also make me sick. Politics makes me sick. Neither of these men deserve a vote and will not get mine. If I had a candidate to support, yes I would. I have done it in the past, working in phone banks and at the polls on election day.
Seabird said:
Nah...I hear you. I wish I had the same enthusiasm for Kerry as I have for enthusiasm against Bush. As a media geek, I'm not quite sure who or what to blame. Is it Kerry for being inherently lackluster? Or is it the media, who always reduces public figures to a hollow stereotype? Or is it myself for overanalyzing the situation?
In terms of "looks," it may be a difficult election. Kerry is no Bill Clinton, and, flaws aside, the man could carry a room. Too bad Clinton couldn't have run for a third term, because Democrats are just plain...boring right now. Heck, if it weren't for constitutional age restrictions, I'd have tried to have run by now.
But I still have to be reminded that it is still very early. The party conventions have not even begun, and Kerry is still sans-VP. I read that Kerry is currently biding his time before the convention, plotting his strategy and allowing the Bush Administration to blow steam early. He's known to run quite a savvy election here in Massachusetts, and, depending on who one talks to, that's a good or a bad thing.
So I wait, having to choose between an extremist conservative Republican and a right-center, pseudo-liberal Democrat. In Canada, Kerry would be considered a conservative, if that's any guide to how politics are in this nation.
Melon
Last edited:
Similar threads
