I know some of use are not of the voting age, and I know some are not even americans who vote. But this is election year and it is the time where we need ot choose for the lesser of two evils.

Questions are:

If you could vote for one, who would it be George W. Bush, or John Kerry? And why?

If you could, who else would you vote for (i.e. Write in) and why?

What is one key thing that needs to happen for the US in the next presidential term?

I will add my answers later

Prediction: Rabban, van, JB, and myself if I could, vote Republican.

All others vote donkeys.

Dont think it matters...crooked politicians are all there is to choose from since WWI. Double edge sword for me. Im not rich so I cant vote republican...im dont want to support minorities and people who live off the government so I cant vote democrat...only option is to vote against bush...wish there were more to choose from...no other candidates...to vote against bush means voting for kerry....all BS anyway...if u dont vote against bush then u vote for him...if u vote democrat for their ideas thats a waste because they never actually happen...when I move up the job ladder I will convert to rebublican...til then it is almost a waste to vote at all...

B

Sizicus, you one smart cookie. XD

But I don't get what Bolo's saying. I mean, I do since I guess he probably only watches TV for his news, but I can tell you I'm not rich.

If I had my way there would be a flat tax and very little the govt could spend it on. So many of the social programs that are out there I'd like to see cut and given the opportunity to donate towards if I choose. I think the govt should only be involved in programs that no other organization can provide (like a military).

Last edited: Saturday, April 24, 2004 at 1:59:44 PM

@ bolo - your comments confirms many suspicions.

I agree wit the cleaner, we need another terrorist attack thats y im voting for

Bush, he wont do anything to prevent it for happining, and start a war on some

One else that had nuthing to do wit it but have lots of oil, and lets us (the military)

Do his drity work. Thats the president for me...

Sorry, your wrong.

Bush shouldn't be president in the first place. Gore won the popular Elecection (even tho that means nothing) and eventually the supreme court decided on the next president. Most of whom were given thier positions by former republicans. (Reagan, Bush sr.) The Fact that Jeb bush was governer of the state that wasn't able to count it's votes correctly adds more to the problem. I predict that Florida will become a lanslide for Democratic votes in the next election. Get thedumbass out of office now before he becomes a lame duck.

My vote counts twice against Bush if I vote for Kerry. But only once if I vote for someone else. Again, lesser of two evils.

If I could vote for someone else It would either be Cuthulu or maybe a lottery system.

Van, I believe Vash was being sarcastic. I don't think from his statement he likes Shrub anymore than you or I do.

Yea I knew that of course I have my own problems

Vote for Bush.

Confirm your stupidity.

Im not even am that stoopid....

Well, I'd probably vote for Kerry, even tho I'm 12, because I just don't like the way that guy looks like a monkey and talks like he's better than pizza. (And NOTHIINGS better than pizza). I agree with Tally, although I've never found reason to before, Bush represents evil in my household, mostly because since he became president, our financial, social, and racial life has been close to hell. I'd take Kerry anyday. Besides, yall can choose a better way here.

Last edited: Sunday, April 25, 2004 at 10:43:11 AM

Bush won, fair and square. The recount conducted by Flordia newspapers after the fact confirmed this. Get over 2000, OK? Gore lost.

Rabban, even tho my friend bushy probally won florida (who knows how many vote they threw away) he still lost

The popular vote nation wide, so your theory of brushy winning fair and square is probally y we still

Have an electoral voting system. It allows people to win with out actually winning,

Funny how that works is'n it...

I've always thought our government was funny.

Last edited: Sunday, April 25, 2004 at 3:26:25 PM

Ah, but Rabben, you forget that the tab voting system was flawed, and even before FLORIDA NEWSPAPERS (which really should have no say in the presidential election process, since I could print a newspaper myself that would say the exact opposite regarless of wether it was true or not) before all of that, the supreme court reached a decision that totally disregrgarded and bypassed the electoral process.

Regardless of that, he now still our president but I will never admit he won 'fair and square'.

With what he has been doing lately I am truely scared for this country if he gets elected again

Research the function of the electoral college. Its another elaborate way for the government to feed the illision that the people are really in control. BTW why the hell is gas 2 bucks a gallon? Didnt we just have a minor war so that we could all save 25 cents on gas? Im confused...oh nevermind...it was all for the love of the iraqi people...nothing to do with oil at all....hmmmm....i would like to thank bush for the current job market taking a shit since he was elected... He is working soooo hard to bring back the jobs......wait just HIS OWN

B

Heh, actually I'm Green Party. I was one of the people blamed for Gore's loss, since we tend to be from the Democratic side, I guess. We're pretty much nonexistent this year (well, last election was probably the ONLY time wee made an impact in Presidential elections).

I don't like Bush, but Kerry has already contradicted himself a couple times. 2 sides of the same coin, so I really haven't made my mind yet. Kerry's ideas seem good, but he mostly talks of how he WOULD'VE done things had he been president the last couple years. No offense, but hindsight is 20-20, so anybody can state what should've happened. Bush is self-explanatory. I swear, he's as bad as Reagan: "whatever brings the biggest cheers from the biggest couch-potato idiots is my policy! The couch-potatos said to "kick their ass!" so I'll do it until I've lost the support of every country and I run out of troops."

But I'm not sure if Kerry would be any better. <sigh> I'll keep watching.

- BombJames Bomb

I hear ya JB!

Seems like Kerry is trying to rush to mediocrity.

I really don't feel like he is that strong of a candidate against Bush.

We'll see which "tilt" he takes with his VP choice.

I sooo tire of the 2 party trap that is forced upon us.

It is so inherently un-democratic.

Parties from the left, right, libertarian, labor, various social strata's are completely marginalized from the political process. It just feeds the apathy and alienation from the political process. Politics become a every 4 years media show. No wonder so few vote, so few become involved in social/ political issues.

I grew up in Tanzania and have traveled and lived abroad a bit in my life. Despite it being one of the poorest countries in the world, Tanzanians were very politically savvy. They were aware of global political issues. They even followed domestic American political events.

Ahh but here it seems complacency reigns.

Yet there is grassroots based activity on a number of issues. It is here that I think a counterweight to the established political order and power will have to develop from.

So there is hope amongst the despair.

In the mean time I will be watching Kerry too.

Baba

(also registered Green Party)

Last edited: Monday, April 26, 2004 at 7:00:15 AM

Sometimes I think I'm leaning toward Libertarian, but I can't make the leap to the fringe. I would like to hear what Kerry has to say without beginning each statement with a Bush bash. When he starts out like that, it turns me off. Just say what you're going to do that's better AND stick with it. Kerry's flip flopped on so many issues that I get the impression that he'd say anything to get elected.

As said before. Democrats have good ideas but they never get done.....EVER.

B

I might have found the missing link . :)

@ Jinx,

Lauryn^TM

Let Bush speak for himself. Bush Speech

Last edited: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 at 10:44:56 AM

Funny. You misspelled "Speech". Besides, why make fun of someone who's overcoming a speech impediment? Bush is a hero for being president in spite of his disability. :)

Why does this thread have to sink into making fun of Bush? Perhaps someone could present Kerry's views and let me why they're better for the country.

Last edited: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 at 11:57:03 AM

Jinx,

I think you and I have reached this state of mind insanity

Lauryn^TM

That's what makes the soundbites, JB - the media knows that the majority of Americans only pay attention when there's some "us vs. Them" story to watch. Hence the abundance of tripe on TV these days. But it's also the nature of a challenger in an election, just as the incumbent will paint his/her opponent in a negative light relative to their own image.

But back to the subject: if you REALLY want to know what the candidates say they WILL do different from their predecessors, go directly to the sources. John Kerry's book A Call to Service: My Vision for a Better America details his plans for the future. Yes, he does say what he thinks Bush has done wrong, but also gives him credit for what he thinks Bush did that worked, whether he agreed with him or not. Kerry's had to change some of his plans between the time this book was published (2003) and now because the economy has become even worse. It's a bit more realistic to adjust your plans based on what is available rather than to bulldoze your way through ideologic policy in spite of conditions (or evidence), don't you think? For updates, check out his website .

I'd also recommend reading Bush's plans, but most of the recent books about him are negative: Bush at War , etc. For his plans, the best place to go is his website . I don't agree with most of his ideas, mind you, but he does present some valid arguments for what he's done and still wants to do.

Last edited: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 at 12:14:05 PM

I just had to share...

There is one more thing that's been bothering me about this whole political process. It doesn't matter.

Sure, I get to vote for the people I feel share my views, but once they're in office they're going to vote how they want to vote on any particular piece of legislation. So the election is my one chance to have any real say in what's going on, otherwise they're going to do what they want. I've written my senators on several topics. Their replies are either, "thanks for agreeing with me" or "let me educate you on why I voted the other way". Now if I were able to donate $9M to my favorite platform, sure, I'd have a bigger voice. But it seems more and more like we're voting in the aristocracy. 8(

Welcome to the Representative Government! While our voting of leaders is Democratic, our voting of legislation is Representative. This was set up in the original constitution for one main reason: the original leaders considered the average Joe to be an idiot.

You see, only the politically elite would understand the ramifications of voting for or against a complex bill, so they set it up that the people choose somebody who sounds like he knows what he's talking about, then he in turn makes choices based on his own experience. He will have to consider that going against the majority desires will earn him a short term in office, but how many people actually track the actions of their congressman? Not many. They blame the president. I really don't have a solution, as I can see where a strictly majority voting system would be easily controlled by well-placed media and scare tactics (Patriot Act, anyone?) It's still a better system than most countries, though.

- BombJames Bomb

Right! I just wish the "representatives" would say what they really represent rather than just saying anything to get into POWER. For example, I don't care if Kerry owns an SUV, OK? But to say that he doesn't own one, that it's the family's, is just plain silly. And Bush tends to only talk about what's important to him and where he's doing well, but what's he going to do about other stuff?

Did you see that article on the congressmen and the Hummer?

The political debate, for the most part, is a joke in my opinion. And I agree, a straight majority vote would be a mess as well (hanging chad anyone?).

JB very well said. My thoughts exactly...its been over 200 years since the conception of this system. Back then women, non-whites, etc., were uneducated and so were most of the people who could vote....seems we should utilize the constitution's ability to be changed and put something else into effect....strict majority voting is bad too....as JB said media and such would sway most of the morons to whatever end had the most $...also if a true democracy was in action it would be a dictatorship of the majority....still a good system compared to many other countries...how about some more on this JB?

B

Heh, I'm not a political science major. So, if I try to get into any more detail, it would be personal guesses more than educated insight. I played around with the idea of weighing a vote based on either your IQ or your completed education. The problem with the latter is that this would mean those with money would automatically have power. There are some smart Joes that just can't afford college but keep up with the news. Shouldn't kill their votes.

The IQ test is an interesting idea, but the test would have to be updated. They've already noted that the test is not very accurate in its current form.

My personal favorite is that those that give to the community or participate more would have more weight to their votes. In other words, you EARN political weight by doing public service or military service or participate in certain political educations. Those that are involved in such activities tend to be more aware of how the system works, and will therefore have better judgement in voting. Everybody can vote, but the people who are involved will have more weight than those that just sit at the TV and swallow media all day. That may tip the scales enough that a purely democratic voting system could be put in place. This would "smooth the curve" between the average powerless voter and the "I'll do what I want, not what I promised" congressman.

However, this is a bit of a tangent. Doesn't help the fact that we have some pretty shoddy choices for president coming up. :S

As for the latest Bush advertisement accusing Kerry of voting against additional weaponry for the Iraq War:

(1) The bill was practically a blank check, thereby allowing the President to financially continue the war indefinitely. It is better to restrain yourself so that you will actually be driven to reach a conclusion.

(2) Voting against that bill does not mean you refuse military funding. It may have just been not to his liking. The bill had certain presidential-powers attached that many were uncomfortable with.

I haven't seen the latest from Kerry, but I'm sure it has just as much out-of-context mud-slinging to Bush as well.

- BombJames Bomb

So what we need is a system where after their military service, people can actually become Citizens.

Go Roughnecks!

Anybody but Bush in the end...the dude scares the crap outa me.

(I think it should be required that a good percentage of our elected officials have a kid in the service - might make them think twice about things...)

Good insight JB. Im not a polysci major myself but it is pretty obvious something is screwed UP...rankings are sooo hard arent they? Some of the smartest people I know are farmers with an 8th grade education...im gonna vote against bush...which means I gotta vote for kerry...sad but true

B