2004 Election Question

ABB

 

You mean this guy doesn't strike you as a charismatic leader??

 

As long as Bush is on the ballot I will always be more fired up at the thought of voting against him than for any other candidate.

I can support a Republican every now and then, but never Bush.

 

Anyone but Bush/Primate

 

Yes. That does not mean I am not unrealistic about his shortcomings... not exciting, not a great communicator, etc. Nor does that mean I am unrealistic about what he will accomplish... if he spends his first four years just trying to fix the Bush screw-ups, that will be fine with me. Likewise, being aware of his shortcomings does not dampen my enthusiasm for his skills and experience and the fact that at this time in our history he is by far the best possible Presidential candidate.

Yes. I plan on taking October off to go do volunteer work in some swing state... something I've never done before.

Yes. I plan on taking October off to go do volunteer work in some swing state... something I've never done before.

For me, these two questions go hand in glove. Kerry represents the America I grew up in, the one that claimed the 20th Century with ideas and hard work. While our record was not perfect, we got all the big things right and I would expect Kerry to lead in that manner. Bush represents something else... I don't think many people realize how absolutely fragile our system of government, our culture, our way of life, our freedom is... I think electing Bush would cause irrepairable harm to the country I know and love.

Kerry is the only alternative in my view.

 

Just like every election I've ever voted in, since 1980, the 2004 Presidential Election will be a selection of the lesser of two evils. IMHO, George W. Bush is definitely more evil than John F. Kerry, so I will be voting for Kerry. I get scared thinking about what this country will be like in 2008 after another four years of the most inept President in my lifetime.

 

How about, you, Max, who are you going to vote for. Still excited about Bush? By this point in time Bush's positions and fitness for office should be pretty well obvious.


I am going to vote for Kerry. Not real excited about Kerry, but some times it is importatnt to just cut your losses.

 

How about you, Max?

Are you fired up to vote for Walker Bush?

Look, with the increasingly negative tenor of campaigning, it will be nearly *impossible* for any of us to be truly inspired and fired up about either of these guys.

I once sat on a jury for a custody battle, and I witnessed two people (via their lawyers) spend one week making one another out to be horrific human beings. That was the "strategery." So, as a jury, we had to wade through everything to see two people who loved their kids, and we had to figure out which one was most able to care for those children.

This is, in my view, just the right analogy here. Bush will spend more money than any candidate in the history of politics on earth to smear John Kerry. If Kerry survives this with a large group of people being able to see him as a decent human being, that will speak volumes. Bush is hit daily with negativity, especially as he is currently on the clock. Few will have an idyllic view of him either.

Ultimately, maybe this is the best process -- to see as many warts as you can before you put someone in office (or rather, before someone is put in office. whatever).

 

It means I want my damn country back! It means I want a healthy back and forth between Dems and real Repubs and I want the US to stand for something in the world. It means I don't want another four years of a CEO know-nothing President who allows this country to be run by far right-wing neo-con losers and causes damage to every institution that the past several generations built to further our country and the world. Pick literally anything positive that our government has done in the past 100 years and ask yourself if this administration could support it... child labor laws, fair labor laws, the Marshall Plan, desegregation, voting rights, the Freedom of Information Act, the Clean Water Act, Wilderness, Parks, Forests, the GI Bill, Family Leave, SALT, Test Bans, Social Security, the list goes on. I doubt they could even get behind building Interstates without some qualifiers and huge amounts of kickbacks and grafts and no oversight.

 

Max,

That's a very legitimate question. I'd like to say that I'll vote for Kerry because he seems to be an inspiring leader. But I wouldn't be telling the truth - I'm voting for Kerry in order to prevent 4 more years of Bush.

Why is Kerry a better alternative? Basically, I see the Bush administration (and this is as much an indictment of the people who work for him) as piss-poor administrators. Using Iraq as an example, I don't care whether there were weapons of mass destruction, whether Saddam was tied to Al-Qaeda or even if the Bush administration directly ordered the picture-taking of the tortured Iraqi prisoners. What I do care is that they went into Iraq without any kind of realistic plan. Rumsfeld spent the first 6 months of the administration changing the format of the army from more traditional occupational models to quick-strike and exit models. That's not a bad idea actually (I actually wrote a paper supporting this in 1993) but it's a terrible idea when the administration turns around and asks them to work as peacekeepers/occupiers (especially when they clearly lacked adequate numbers to perform this role). It also didn't help that Rumsfeld removed the peacekeeping department from the Army War College. Thirdly, the idea that the Iraqis would all fall in line and cooperate once we removed Saddam was ridiculous - even our own country faced local rebellions after our Revolution. Finally, the fact that this administration has asked its soldiers to sacrifice their lives but has not asked its citizens (especially the most fortunate) to sacrifice a little of their paychecks has led to a massive deficit and debt that has set up a precarious future for all of us.

Overall, I see an administration that can't be bothered by details and has created several messes (Iraq, deficit/debt) because of this. More than anything related to ideaology, this is why I can't trust Bush with a second term.

 

There are some things to like about Kerry, but to me he's pretty much vanilla, 7 out of ten, melba toast, etc. In other words: a typical politician, albeit with an impressive military record. I liked Clark a lot more, still do. Kerry is pretty run of the mill, IMO.

But I can't honestly see how it isn't glaringly apparent that a mediocre candidate is head and shoulders above Bush. It's not like they're two sides of the same coin; Bush is dangerous...hell, he's been danger realized.

He has lead the most extreme adminitration of my lifetime, and he has done so incompetently. He has destroyed our relationship with our tradtional allies at a time when they were invaluable. He directly lead the transition from the US's greatest ever global support to it's least in the midst of the War on Terror, which requires support above all things. He lied us into war, and despite the facts being out there, has never even apologized.

Despite numerous gaffes, lies, disasters and misdirections, he has taken responsibility for exactly nothing. His administration is as divisive as I've ever seen, and has used governmentla agencies to carry out intimidation and acts of outright treason against those who have critized it. He used the lowest of all denominators, fear, as the fuel to pursue his goals, and has repeatedly stked the fire. He has admitted that he feels on a mission for God, and has no trouble shaping our policies accordingly.

He told the world that they were with us or against us, and the UN that their options were support our war on demand or become irrelevant. His administration called nations who, as we know, cited reality in the face of our lies and misinfomration and opposed the war "traitors", and villified them as cowards, opportunists, and insubordinate. His post-invasion plan consisted primarily of faith and arrogance, and now the irrelevent UN is our only hope, if only those who he deemed "against us" would help us clean up our mess more.

It's simply endless. I have never been more afrain about the direction the US was taking; never close. I supported Reagan's gamble to out produce the USSR with much less of a feeling of dread. I liked his father, to a degree, and supported the 1st war, but looking back Bush Sr. seems a relative Lincoln. I supported Clinton's expulsion, and on isolated moral grounds still do, but on the basis fo pragmatice fear I would thank God every day if Clinton could be reinstated. Bush is reckless, incompetent, and dishonest. And what's worse, as he sees himself engaged in a divinely inspired cause, he either doesn't see it, or doesn't care.

It is the shame of my political life that I supported this man. I would feel better had I been old enough to support Nixon; at least his unchecked ambition and paranoia only threatened internal corruption and divisivness. Bush does that on his way to making the globe see us as it's biggest threat, and routinely playing right into the hands of men like Bin Laden.

Yeah, Kerry probably mediocre, maybe a bit better. But mediocre I'll take, considering the alternative.

 

My wife used to work for a lawyer who had given the following advice about voting for judges: vote all the incumbents out. The longstanding judges can far too comfortable in their positions. It is a rule of thumb I will usually apply to all politicians. Unless I'm actually really impressed with somebody, I'd rather just run them out, even if their performance is ok. In that vein, I will vote against Bush in this election, and I'll vote against whoever his successor is in the next one. How sad is that?

 

I'm voting for Kerry because his middle name is Forbes.

 

Totally sad reality, and it's the one we have to live with. We live in a world filled with choices where you have to choose the lesser of two evils. I hope that one day someone will run for President that I can fully support without any hesitation or reservations.