If the election were held today....

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

If the election were held today, who would you vote for?

  • Bush

    Votes: 11 20.0%
  • Kerry

    Votes: 28 50.9%
  • Nader

    Votes: 3 5.5%
  • other

    Votes: 1 1.8%
  • not voting because I don't approve of the choices

    Votes: 4 7.3%
  • not voting because I am underage or not a US citizen

    Votes: 8 14.5%

  • Total voters
    55
  • Poll closed .

U2Kitten

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Jul 28, 2001
Messages
17,927
Let's start our own Interference poll. Of course it will be unscientific, and it might be a little early, but oh well. It is anonymous so if you don't want anyone to know who you are for, click the vote in the poll but you don't have to post it.
 
I would vote Nader, but I chose the not a US citizen. This poll should be the least unscientific in can be.:huh:
 
Most likely Kerry. Possibley Nader if Kerry is going to be the clear winner in my state, because I'm not particularly fond of Kerry but HATE Bush.
 
I chose not voting. I'm not happy with Bush, but I don't see Kerry as any better and may be even worse in some ways. I am not going to vote for him just to get rid of Bush. I haven't heard him say he'd stop the war, and I disagree with him on several issues. I will not vote for Kerry. If the Dems had put up Clark or Edwards it would have made a difference. But even Kerry's face makes me sick, and I don't trust him.
 
Seabird said:
I chose not voting. I'm not happy with Bush, but I don't see Kerry as any better and may be even worse in some ways. I am not going to vote for him just to get rid of Bush. I haven't heard him say he'd stop the war, and I disagree with him on several issues. I will not vote for Kerry. If the Dems had put up Clark or Edwards it would have made a difference. But even Kerry's face makes me sick, and I don't trust him.

What do you think of Nadar?
 
Good to see that there are still 5 people at FYM that still support Bush! :applaud:
 
Aw Seabuscuit, I hear ya. :sigh: My Dad, right winger though he is, gave me some really good advice- vote the party, not the person. Which party generally agrees more with your values aned beliefs? IMHO, sitting it out and letting others decide for you is the worst thing to do. But I do know how folks who just want to say :censored: it feel. :hug:

SD

FW's right, come on Bushies, show yerselfs. :mac:
 
My Daddy always told me the opposite, vote the person and not the party. That's what my parents always did.
 
My parents also told me to vote the person and not the party, which is why I'm an independent. I know what Sherry means though--if you really don't like the candidates, think about which party is closest to your values. If it's Republican, vote for their candidate. If it's Democratic vote for theirs. In fact I know a fair number of people who are going to vote this way because they are not really enthused about any of the candidates but they want to vote.
 
Sherry Darling said:
My Dad, right winger though he is, gave me some really good advice- vote the party, not the person. Which party generally agrees more with your values aned beliefs?

FW's right, come on Bushies, show yerselfs. :mac:

Here I am! :wave: There needs to be a REALLY good reason for me to vote outside of my party (Republican) and so far, neither Bush or Kerry have given me one. Your dad is right, you can't let emotions and how you like a specific person get in the way of you overall values and beliefs (although I so often do...).

I don't care admitting that I'd vote for Bush. That doesn't mean I love him and want to be his friend. Besides, it's not like he didn't win the last election. SOMEBODY besides me must like him.....I think the type of people who are more inclined to post on a forum like this would be Democrats, and that's perfectly fine with me. All of my friends and most of my college are Democrats so it's nothing I'm not already used to. And I'm not out here to try and change anyone's mind.
 
LivLuvAndBootlegMusic said:
Besides, it's not like he didn't win the last election.

That phrase would be better said:

"Besides, it's not like he won the last election."

Keep in mind that more people voted AGAINST him than voted FOR him. :wink:
 
DaveC said:


That phrase would be better said:

"Besides, it's not like he won the last election."

Keep in mind that more people voted AGAINST him than voted FOR him. :wink:

Yeah, but unfortunately, that's not how elections are won in this country. Both candidates know what they have to do in order to "win" so neither should ever be able to use that as a complaint.
 
BluberryPoptart said:


Same was true of Clinton in '92 :D

That's true. Did you know that Clinton actually finished *third* in Utah that year? He finished second in my state, Alabama, and won the election with 43% of the vote.
 
Reading this and other threads, it seems some of you are upset that people don't vote. But what if they voted, and voted for a candidate you do not want? What if those 3 people you encouraged to vote caused your man to lose? So what is worse, not voting at all, or voting for the other candidate?
 
To answer U2Kitten's question: I'd rather someone voted and didn't vote for my candidate than didn't vote. That being said I understand about not liking either major party candidate worth a damn. Been there, done that. Third party candidacies are not well understood in the U.S, but one function they serve is the "protest vote". If you don't like Kerry or Bush and would rather not vote for either one, a vote for Nader can just mean that you're disgusted with the status quo, and you're saying so. This is heresy for a liberal, but I don't think that a vote for Nader is necessarily a vote for Bush. It's potentially a protest against the domination of U.S. politics by two parties which are rather conservative by universal standards. And yes, I'd rather someone voted for Bush than didn't vote at all.
 
verte76 said:
To answer U2Kitten's question: I'd rather someone voted and didn't vote for my candidate than didn't vote. That being said I understand about not liking either major party candidate worth a damn. Been there, done that. Third party candidacies are not well understood in the U.S, but one function they serve is the "protest vote". If you don't like Kerry or Bush and would rather not vote for either one, a vote for Nader can just mean that you're disgusted with the status quo, and you're saying so. This is heresy for a liberal, but I don't think that a vote for Nader is necessarily a vote for Bush. It's potentially a protest against the domination of U.S. politics by two parties which are rather conservative by universal standards. And yes, I'd rather someone voted for Bush than didn't vote at all.

:up:.

I, too, understand being frustrated with the politicians running and everything, but nothing will ever actually get done if nobody goes out and votes. People complain all the time about the way things in this country are going, and yet some of those same complainers never get involved. I was always taught that if you don't like the way things are going, you do something about it. If the person I don't want to win does win, well, that's the way things go, I won't always get what I want, that's life. Who knows, I could turn out to like them, and if I don't, I can vote against them again when the next election comes around and maybe they'll lose then. But both sides of the political deserve the right to try and get the things they want in this country.

Angela
 
Bush now has 9 votes, over 20% of the vote here in FYM!

:applaud:
 
I would never tell other people how to vote or that they should vote. There is something very presumptuous about that.

I don't believe in these guilt/fear tactics of "you must vote at all costs." I would never vote for someone/something I did not believe in and I learned that the hard way. Nobody can convince me otherwise. Voting just for the sake of voting seems misguided to me if you haven't found a party or a candidate you can truly support. For example, if you support Nader, but he is not on your ballot, why should you compromise and vote for the Dems or the next best thing if you don't believe in them? That's ridiculous, IMO.
 
Back
Top Bottom