Who Should I Vote For?

[elevation]

...

Kerry




I don't know what will happen to the world if Bush wins

 

[anitram]

Rumor has it that Zogby went on Jon Stewart's show today and called the election for Kerry.

So, you could just go with the winner.

 

[shrmn8rpoptart]

what about nader, i mean, of course he's not going to win, but, i'd rather vote for him than a giant douche or a turd sandwhich. is it really throwing your vote away if you're voting for the man that you would like to see in office?

 

[verte76]

what about nader, i mean, of course he's not going to win, but, i'd rather vote for him than a giant douche or a turd sandwhich. is it really throwing your vote away if you're voting for the man that you would like to see in office?

No. I know several people who are voting for Nader, mainly for his position on Iraq, although they may have other reasons as well. The chairman of the local peace council is supporting Nader and thinks we're nuts for going with Kerry. If your conscience is telling you to vote for Nader, then do so. This year, I think the people who are voting for Nader are people who really don't like Bush or Kerry, and think they are two sides to the same coin, so to speak. I don't agree with them, but I'm not telling them what to do with their votes.

 

[nbcrusader]

reread verte's post.

vote Kerry if you believe in the following:
-- separation of church and state
-- helping the world, not attacking it
-- catching bin Laden
-- spending money on education instead of unneeded wars
-- health care for all
-- social security reform
-- 20 years of leadership in the Senate
-- hope, not fear mongering
-- fiscal responsibility
-- no blood for oil
-- taking pride in being an American, especially when you are overseas

vote for Bush if you believe in the following:
-- strapping your children with HUGE taxes to pay off the present deficit
-- deficits that will destabilize the economy
-- being a bully is good, cooperation is bad
-- Saddam Huessin funded the 9/11 attacks
-- trading Sammy Sosa away from the Rangers was a good idea
-- reinstituting the draft [this will be a reality]

And they say campaign ads are misleading....

 

[pax]

And yet how much of what sharky said about Bush was untrue?

I mean, obviously the part about Bush being a bully is subjective and obviously there's an agenda, but let's face it--not only is Bush in fact strapping us with huge deficits and in fact has played right along with the Hussein/9-11 ploy, his Rangers did trade away Sosa.

 

[namkcuR]

To the original poster...the best answer to your question is this:

Bush sees things in black and white. Either you're on this side of an issue or you're on that side of it. Either you're with us or with the terrorists. He just doesn't waver, and to him there is no such thing as a grey area.

Kerry understands the grey area. He understands that you can't be so black and white about things when you're the president of the United States. LIFE is one big grey area. Frankly, I think it's dangerous to be so unwilling to open your mind even a little bit to the possibility that you might be wrong.

So, to sum up, if you want someone with an open mind who accepts that there are more than two ways to feel about any given issue, vote Kerry. If you want someone who thinks there are only two sides to any given issue and someone who doesn't get hung up on the complexities of world issues(yeah that's what I want in a president ), vote Bush.

 

[pax]

You know, I have been searching for an answer to Mr. BAW's question, and I think namkcuR really spelled it out nicely above. I'm also voting for Kerry because I think he is more pro-woman than Bush (big no-brainer there--thanks for sending all that help with contraception overseas, Bush!--oh wait, you BLOCKED that). And, duh, I'm a woman.

I feel that Kerry will be guided by (yes) a superior intellect and superior experience. Sorry, but two terms as a governor of Texas, wherein most of the highlights were questionable executions, don't held up for me. Kerry makes me feel a hell of a lot safer, knowing that our foreign and defense policies will no longer be vetted by that strange mix of cowboys and paranoid neocons--rather by more thoughtful and deliberate people who will work for better relationships with our foreign neighbors. This does NOT mean giving up the right to self-defense--but it does mean knowing that, should we choose to exercise that right, other nations have every right to question why we did so, and to be presented with evidence for the decision.

So, yeah, anyway, namkcuR summed it up better than I did. But those are just a few of the reasons I'm a Kedwards girl.

 

[nbcrusader]

And yet how much of what sharky said about Bush was untrue?

I mean, obviously the part about Bush being a bully is subjective and obviously there's an agenda, but let's face it--not only is Bush in fact strapping us with huge deficits and in fact has played right along with the Hussein/9-11 ploy, his Rangers did trade away Sosa.

Okay, the Sosa part is grounded in reality.

The rest is hyperbole, conjecture and political spin

 

[nbcrusader]

Kerry understands the grey area.

Kerry has an understanding of what some people want to hear and is willing to make promises that are totally inconsistent with his record in the Senate.


Have Kerry over for breakfast, not as your leader.....

 

[nbcrusader]

Kerry makes me feel a hell of a lot safer, knowing that our foreign and defense policies will no longer be vetted by that strange mix of cowboys and paranoid neocons--rather by more thoughtful and deliberate people who will work for better relationships with our foreign neighbors.

For Kerry, the first Gulf War failed his "global test"

There is no way we are safer with Kerry

 

[namkcuR]

For Kerry, the first Gulf War failed his "global test"

There is no way we are safer with Kerry

You do realize that liberals who are supporting kerry are not likely to defend the first Gulf War anyway, right?

There is no way in hell we are safer with Bush is more like it. He makes rash decisions. He hasn't done anything good for this country in the last four years. His color coded terror alert system is the biggest crock of shit I've ever seen. No, we need this guy gone. Now.

 

[pax]

I like this quote from Slate's Chris Suellentrop:

How I Voted: I didn't mean to abstain from Slate's "Show Us Your Ballots" exercise, but I missed the deadline. Here's my candidate: Kerry. I was ambivalent about the Iraq war before the invasion, and I ultimately decided that if you're ambivalent about war you should be against it. The president and this administration apparently feel otherwise. They've put the burden of proof on peace rather than war. Their disdain for the global institutions that have projected American power overseas for 60 years has undermined not just our country's hard-earned reputation and moral authority but our hard-earned might. Their disregard for the Geneva Conventions is shameful and a dangerous international precedent. On the domestic side, Kerry seems a little too eager to spend taxpayer dollars, but I take his pledges of—if not his instincts for—restraint as a reason for guarded optimism. More important, on that score, he can't be any worse than Bush. Besides, this is a one-issue election for me. I don't hate President Bush. I think he's well-intentioned and a good man. He's just not a good president.

http://www.slate.com/id/2108744/ (at the bottom)

 

[nbcrusader]

You do realize that liberals who are supporting kerry are not likely to defend the first Gulf War anyway, right?

Yeah, I realize there are those who still got it wrong on Gulf War 1.

So, when Kerry says "I will hunt down and kill terrorists", how can this possibly be reconcilled by his past record?

Does he have some unique definition for "terrorist"?

Or "hunt"?

Or "kill"?

You'd vote for Kerry because of the DHLS's terror coding system (which is what the public asked for)????

 

[pax]

What public? When? I didn't ask for it, and neither did anyone I know (including conservatives--yes, I do know some and talk to them).

 

[nbcrusader]

Just think back to the days after 9/11 when there were cries of "why weren't we told"

No big secret here.

 

[pax]

Yes, because the color-coding is sooooo informative and specific and crucial.

 

[namkcuR]

The color-coding system is completely ineffective. It's crap. It's the absolute epitomy of the story of the boy who cried wolf. Every two months it's raised and we're told we could be attacked at any time. If/when it finally is for real, no one's going to believe it. Meaning we're no safer than we were.

 

[ILuvLarryMullen]

Well I will give you the reasoning behind why some of my family members that have voted republican in the past are voting for Kerry. Does the country seem to be worse or better of now or when Bush first took office? The economy is doing poorly, they supported the war to some degree at first and now think it's a bunch of crap, the environment, etc. While they are not necessarily wild about Kerry they feel that Bush hasn't done anything to improve the country in the past 4 years, so why not give someone else a chance? They don't think that Bush is going to suddenly do something good for the country in the next 4 years, when he hasn't in the past 4.

 

[deep]

For Kerry, the first Gulf War failed his "global test"

There is no way we are safer with Kerry

I believe this is somewhat dishonet represetation.

The vote was 52-48

Some wanted to give more time for sanctions, before military action.

 

[Scarletwine]

I know the Nation is a liberal mag, but this is a pretty concise lisy for Kerry. They also include reference for each fact. (Of course some never beLIEve thses as facts)

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041108&s=facts

100 Facts and 1 Opinion
The Non-Arguable Case Against the Bush Administration
by Judd Legum

 

[Scarletwine]

LOL I just got this. This the religious right's man

http://207.44.245.159/video1033.htm

 

[nbcrusader]

The vote was 52-48

I guess the political winds were blowing a different direction for Kerry that day.