Does anybody else have certain issues they will not compromise on?

[Walt Starr]

Here are mine in order:

1) Unequivocally opposed to the Iraq War. I will no longer cast a vote for anybody who supports this abomination. I don't care what letter comes after their name.

2) 100% pro-choice. As far as I'm concerned, one cannot be pro-choice and have voted in favor of cloture on Alito. Sorry if that offends some, but nobody who voted in favor of cloture on Alito is worth voting for. Again, I don't give a shit what letter comes after their name.

3) Must oppose the Patriot Act. Voting in favor of cloture on the PAtriot Act is to support the PAtriot Act in my opinion. Sorry, can't accept anybody who is in favor of this disgusting stripping of human rights from the people regardless of the letter after their name.

4) Cannot oppose equal rights for all people. DOMA or similar legislation is in direct opposition to equal rights. I cannot support anybody who would support granting some rights to one group of people and deny those same rights to another group of people, I don't care what letter comes after their name.

These are the issues I DEMAND ideological purity on and will accept no substitute. If I have no candidate in a race who is 100% in line with my beliefs on the above listed issues, I will cast no vote in that race.

I've found becoming Independent to be incredibly liberating.

[Dolomite]

1. None.

(with the exception of gun rights)

[bowens43]

31. what exactly are 'gun rights'?

[zanne]

2. Equal rights for all.

There's no excuse to skirt around this issue. None.

[aden_nak]

3. Impeachment. No compromise. No surrender. No lenience.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Yes I do

Human Rights I will NOT compromise on them, whether the issue is torture, women's rights (and the right to choose is but one aspect), civil rights, the full gamut


I oppose the patriot act

I oppose the war in Iraq

and just like you I am now an Indie... if a green candidate does these things he will get my vote. If I dem surprises me, he will get my vote.I don't expect to be surprised by a Republican since the troglodytes they have been recruiting are made from the same mold

[Walt Starr]

6. Given a Green candidate and a Dem candidate being 100% in line on

the above issues, I'll investigate other issues.

The above four are my starting point and are the issue I will not compromise on any longer.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. You and I are in the same line

and given the long passage of history and what usually happens to parties in the US... assuming the Republicans survive this one... you might even find yourself considering them in 30 to 50 years... but that is quite a way down. They first have to clean house, assuming they even realize it... then again they might go the way of the Whigs... who coincidentally saw their height in power in the Adams Presidency...

The joy of an indie is we can look at all candidates and go.. hmmm and in my state I can vote in any open primaries, which essentially are all.

[Neil Lisst]

5. Yes and No.

It depends on the exact situation.

[sinkingfeeling]

7. Yes.

[SaveElmer]

8. Yes...no compromise on bringing the Democratic Party back to power

I will not vote for anyone who hinders the return of the Democratic Party to power. I will not suport any primary challenger to any sitting Democratic U.S. Senator with the possible exception of Lamont in Connecticut, who IMO would be elected to the Senate should he beat Lieberman.

If a Democratic office holder or candidate offers political endorsement to any Republican I will not vote for them. (Examples are Randy Kelly in St. Paul, William Schaeffer in Maryland, Ed Koch in New Your, and of course Zell Miller)

I will not support any third party candidate under any circumstance.

[Walt Starr]

10. I see by your avatar you are a Friend of Hillary

There is no way in hell I will cast a vote for Hillary, even though it could mean my wife decides to leave me (she really likes Hillary).

I USED to be a party line voter (for twenty-five years). I've since become liberated.

[SaveElmer]

13. Well I don't know her personally...

So I would not call her a friend....but I strongly support her for any office for which she may choose to run.

Sounds like your wife is an incredibly intelligent, perceptive women!!! ;-)

[Walt Starr]

15. My wife pays little attention to politics

and generally votes precisely teh way I tell her I am going to vote.

a "Friend of Hillary" is the name given to her supporters who donate. Once upon a time, I was a Friend of Hillary.

[SaveElmer]

16. Yes I know...

Just a little friendly joshing!

[Misunderestimator]

90. Wow... does she wear a collar too?

[Walt Starr]

95. Nope, we share most of our beleifs

and she trusts my judgement. I never tell her how to vote, just how I intend to vote.

When it comes to judges, however, I trust her judgement as she's teh lawyer in the family.

[Misunderestimator]

98. So, does she leave the democratic party as often as you do?

[Walt Starr]

100. I've only left the Democratic Party once

and that right after the Alito vote.

But don't let facts get in teh way of a good personal attack, especially on my wife who is not here to defend herself.

My expectation is she will vote a straight Democratic Party line and only take my advise on the local non-partisan races.

[Misunderestimator]

103. That's not a personal attack... I'm just asking how much she follows

what you do. The first post I responded to made it seem like she didn't have much interest in politics at all, so I'm glad you've clarified that she's a democrat.

[Walt Starr]

107. Well if you had ever followed my posts over the past five years

you'd know I've voted straight Dem Party lines. My wife has done the same. The only time she really wants to know how I'm voting is in the non-partisan elections and the issues.

[ronnykmarshall]

99. Oh you are bad!

:spray: :rofl:

[Lexingtonian]

43. Nope

You're still a party line voter. We just don't have an organized classical radical Left party in the country since the ACP disintegrated.

Maybe acceptance that political change is evolutionary/incremental is when real freedom begins...?

[Walt Starr]

56. Sorry, I'm not a Communist

and never will be one.

[Lexingtonian]

91. I didn't say that

No one thinks you're in a league with Stalinism or Leninism. But purist Marxism proper....

Btw, Paul Fussell says the blue collar workers of the country are all instinctive Marxists.

[Walt Starr]

93. I'm not a Marxist

Marxism is an ideology based upon teh erroneous assumption that people can be perfect.

[Ken Burch]

131. As you reminded all of us at GREAT length

during the discussions of last fall's D.C. antiwar march... :eyes:

As to things I won't compromise on:

All the things you mentioned, Walt, plus

1)Reform of us foreign and trade policy. Our national interests should be based on a vision of global stability based on a foundation of social justice, human rights, environmental safety and peace, rather than "open markets" and the willingness of other countries to impose austerity on themselves in the interest of our corporations.

2)Electoral reform. No electronic voting, paper trails, the abolition of the Electoral College(with electoral votes distributed proportionately within each state until the EC is abolished)and the establishment of Instant Runoff Voting so that the "spoiler" issue is forever removed from American politics.

3)A real campaign to wipe out poverty and inequality here at home(point 1 would seek to wipe them out globally).
And an end to the demonization and scapegoating of the poor.

[bvar22]

67. Curious about this.....

Will you be willing to vote for a Democrat who has helped the Republicans remain in power by voting with them on Conservative issues?

The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[SaveElmer]

84. I know of no Democrat that falls into that category...

I think there is universal acknowledgement that Ben Nelson is the most conservative Democrat in the Senate. Yet he does vote the party line 60% of the time. There is no conceivable way a challenge from the left would be successful, so yes, if I lived in Nebraska, I would happily vote for Ben Nelson.

As I said however, if any Democrat expressed political or electoral support for a Republican I would not vote for them. Ben Nelson has not done this.

[AbbyR]

9. Based on that, both of my senators and my rep are out

Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor and Mike Ross have manged to vote for the first three. I'm thinking something about verified voting might be on my list, as well as universal health care.

[sui generis]

55. but the point is they are not telepathic

You have to go sit down in front of them and tell them what you think and why you think it's important.

They won't know to support their base until the base tells them using direct language, what they want their ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE to represent.

So we have to take it away from DU and drop by, phone, mail, email, attend rallies, be incessant about getting on their agenda to talk with them.

They keep track of the number of times people advocate FOR issues - they have to, or else they won't have a constituency. Start racking up points.

[Cocoa]

11. no

I feel very strongly about certain issues, labor rights and campaign finance issues at the top of that list, but I am capable of voting for candidates who made particular votes that I abhor.

[napi21]

12. The only issue I can think of that I insist on is that it not be a Fundie!

I think we all have to recognize that there are no 2 human beings who will agree on a list of issues. I think we have to look carefully at each candidate, and choose the one who promotes issues closest to our own.

The reason I say I would NEVER vote for a fundie is because they let that belief affect every other decision they make, and that would make them unacceptable on every issue as well.

[Walt Starr]

14. I can understand that way of thinking

since I took that approach for the past quarter century.

I will no longer compromise my values and principles.

[NativeTexan]

17. I won't vote anything but straight........

.......ticket Democrat, for one!

[Walt Starr]

19. That's how I did things for a quarter century

No more.

[NativeTexan]

116. Well, I've done it for 33 years.....

...no regrets.

[FormerDittoHead]

114. Hey, I get to put a new one in - INCREASE TAXES ON THE RICH

If anyone thinks we can continue down this merry road without increasing taxes on THE RICH after all we've given to them - to me, all the rest is window dressing...

I'm tired of these Democratics who are afraid of bringing some PROPORTION back to our economy.

I'm not talking about Robin Hood, I'm talking about those who have the wealth pay to have it protected! WE should not be paying to protect THEIR wealth!

ON EDIT - OOPS! REPLIED TO WRONG MSG! I THOUGHT THIS WAS GOING ON THE BOTTOM!

[ugarte]

18. Reproductive rights

Every other freedom is meaningless if the government controls your body.

[salvorhardin]

20. Refusing to vote...

Refusing to vote in a race where no candidates meet your ideological criteria does not help you.

As much as I share your disgust at voting for "lesser of two evils" candidates, there is almost always a reason to vote. For instance, if you live in a high freeper concentration area, you could join the other party for the precise purpose of voting for the less extreme candidates in their primaries. Similarly, you can do the same in your own party. Also, there are local races and issues where voting can have a direct impact on your life, such as keeping the religious right off your schoolboard.

You're not the first to espouse these views. Joseph Heller was quite frank in that he had not voted in the last 30 odd years of his life because he saw no real choice. While I can understand that line of reasoning, because it is something I happen to agree with -- that both parties are pretty much cut from the same cloth, I just can't endorse abdicating your franchise. Unless you believe things are so far gone as to merit taking up arms, in which case I think you probably have bigger issues to contend with than voting.

[Walt Starr]

24. When you choose not to choose you still have made a choice

so refusing to vote in a race where I am given no option is still a vote.

[salvorhardin]

27. How?

You've just thrown away your one last vestige of power.

Would you actually allow a fundie nutcase onto your schoolboard by not voting just because their challenger was less than perfect in your opinion?

[Walt Starr]

30. Yes

When things get worse, people learn and move in teh right direction. case in point, the fundie school board in Pennsylvania that lost the ID case.

[still_one]

29. you can vote, just NOT for the candidates being forced upon you

[sui generis]

25. I disagree

as long as a candidate is downplaying your views the candidates and issues will continue to be cut from the same cloth. And if they continue business as usual to get elected, they'll have to keep it that way to stay elected.

There's this little thing called "campaigning" where a candidate tries to differentiate himself from the "other cloth".

If everyone is driving for the middle, nothing will ever change.

So it IS valid to say "don't take my vote for granted", always. That's how a democracy works.

[still_one]

26. I will vote, but not necessarily for the candidates being presented

It is NOT too much to ask a candidate to be pro-choice, against the Iraq war which incidently was based on a lie, and support civil rights for all.

[sui generis]

21. it's clarity of principle

the next step is to demand it of our candidates, to let them know that real democratic leadership is what will win a landslide, what will excite people to go to the polls and vote FOR hope instead of against fear.

We cannot win by not losing. We have to lead.

[still_one]

22. Items 1, 2, and 4

[fed-up]

28. All of the above and recognition/concrete action on GLOBAL WARMING n/t

[SteppingRazor]

32. Not as long as we're the opposition party...

If we have to elect a few DINOs to take over Congress, I'm more than happy to. After we run the GOP out of town, we can start talking about ideological purity. Until then, the enemy of my enemy is most certainly my friend.

[Walt Starr]

34. I can understand that stance in a Democrat

Since I am no longer a Democrat, I no longer am tied to party line votes.

[SteppingRazor]

39. Given that, the comment on your user profile makes me sad...

I'm sorry your opinion has changed so much since you created your profile.

[Walt Starr]

45. I created that Profile in early 2001

and the actions of the Democratic Party have caused me to change my stance.

25 years straight party line votes and I even sought office twice as a Democratic Candidate.

No more.

[Ken Burch]

132. What did you run for, Walt?

I admire you for having the guts to try that.

For whatever its worth to you, I quit the party in early '93, when Clinton sent the Haitian refugees back to be beaten to death
by the Tonton Macoute(although I still voted for Democratic candidates the vast majority of the time).

Kucinich brought me back, because his candidacy represented the first sign in over a decade that progressives were welcome in the party. Now I'm planning to say.

I understand your frustration, I just hope you'll keep an open mind to eventually returning.

[SaveElmer]

38. Exactly right...

There are two choices...a Democratic majority or a Republican majority.

The bests interests of the country are served by a Democratic majority. In my opinion voting for a third party candidate, or mounting opposition to popular Democrats from Red states is an unconscionable waste of resources...hell we are lucky to have Democratic representation from those states at all...why would we jeapordize that?

[Walt Starr]

47. since the DLC was so hip to a "Thrid Way"

I decided to go my own "third way" and be completely independent of any political party affiliation.

It's really quite liberating.

[SaveElmer]

Well you kow...I tried what you are trying...

A number of years ago...after 1988 I was just so fed up with losing I made the same commitment you are making. I voted write in in Virgina Governor's races, I took up activism in several issues I knew would never be resolved the way I wanted them to be (animal rights etc), and just railed against everyone who disagreed with me in any way.

I eventually came to realize I had been wasting my time. As I spent my time in my libertaing pursuit of purity, the Republicans swept in. I will never make that mistake again. I still support animal rights, and am pro choice, and pro gay marriage, and anti-death penalty etc... but I will never let one issue define who I vote for again. I know that we as a country are going to be better off with a Democratic majority...and if that means voting for Bob Casey in order to get Ted Kennedy back as chairman of the Judiciary Committe...I would be glad to do it.

[Walt Starr]

52. I am not a single issue voter

I am a four issue voter who demands ideological purity on all four issues.

[SaveElmer]

54. Well like I said...

I tried that and found it to be one of my bigger blunders.

[Walt Starr]

57. I tried your way and all I got was a Bush Administration

Did it your way for twenty-five years.

No more.

[SaveElmer]

60. Well I hope you enjoy it...

It does feel good at first I'll give you that. For me however, in the end, it proved wholly unsatisfying.

[sui generis]

72. me on the other hand

I've decided never to let my vote be taken for granted again. If the dems want it, they have to earn it.

That's how politics works. A candidate has to support his or her base. If they support some other "base" then why should I just help shoo them in?

It's encouraging them never to change, never to take notice.

[loyalsister]

122. I would love to feel comfortable with that

However, I am not convinced that they will go back to voting traditional Democratic values.
If they worry that they will lose votes if they do, they don't have a lot of incentive.
I refuse to trust a candidate unconditionally until they prove it to me with their votes.

[bowens43]

33. Nope.

The only thing that counts is control of congress. Nothing else matters. If we have to elect a hard core conservative who is a Democrat , it will be well worth it if it helps us to regain control.


People with attitudes like yours gave us Bush in Florida in 2000.

[Walt Starr]

36. People with attitudes like yours gave us the following

1981 - Bob Stump, while U.S. Representative from Arizona
1981 - Eugene Atkinson, while U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania
1983 - Bob Martinez, while mayor of Tampa, Florida
1983 - Phil Gramm, while U.S. Representative from Texas (resigned before switching parties and re-won his seat in a special election)
1984 - Andy Ireland, while U.S. Representative from Florida
1985 - Kent Hance, after losing the Democratic U.S. Senate nomination in Texas
1985 - Carole Keeton Strayhorn, now State Comptroller of Texas
1988 - Jim McCrery, while running for U.S. Representative from Louisiana. He had been a staff member for Buddy Roemer, but switched parties before the special election after Roemer was elected governor.
1989 - Bill Grant, while U.S. Representative from Florida
1989 - Tommy Robinson, while U.S. Representative from Arkansas
1989 - Rick Perry, before running for Agriculture Commissioner of Texas
1991 - Buddy Roemer, governor of Louisiana switched parties shortly before the beginning of his reelection campaign, which was not successful.
1992 - Byron Looper, before running for State Representative in Tennessee
1994 - Walter Jones, while running for U.S. Representative from North Carolina
1994 - Mike Bowers, while Attorney General of Georgia
1994 - Fob James, while running for Governor of Alabama
1994 - Richard Shelby, while U.S. Senator from Alabama
1995 - Jimmy Hayes, while U.S. Representative from Louisiana
1995 - Greg Laughlin, while U.S. Representative from Texas
1995 - Ben Nighthorse Campbell, while U.S. Senator from Colorado
1995 - Billy Tauzin, while U.S. Representative from Louisiana
1995 - Nathan Deal, while U.S. Representative from Georgia
1995 - Mike Parker, while U.S. Representative from Mississippi
1996 - Norm Coleman, while mayor of St. Paul, Minnesota
1998 - Sonny Perdue, while a Georgia State Senator
2000 - Matthew G. Martinez, while U.S. Representative from California
2001 - Michael Bloomberg, before running for mayor of New York City
2002 - Amy Tuck, while Lieutenant Governor of Mississippi
2004 - Ralph Hall, while U.S. Representative from Texas
2004 - Rodney Alexander, while U.S. Representative from Louisiana (his switch just before the filing deadline prevented the Democrats from fielding a viable replacement candidate)

[SaveElmer]

40. Sorry but that is wrong...

In virtually all of these cases (with a couple exceptions that I see - Norm Coleman most of all) the alternative was not a progressive Democrat, but a Republican. Do you really think Alabama was gonna vote for someone to the left of Richard Shelby for U.S. Senate?

[Walt Starr]

50. I held that view once upon a time

I no longer do. I demand ideological purity on my four issues for anybody to get my vote. My vote is not something that should eb taken for granted, nor is it to be given willy nilly any longer. It must be earned and the place to start earning my vote is on my four non-negotiable stances.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SaveElmer]

58. That is certainly your right...

It is wrong headed in my opinion. Voters in Montgomery County Maryland used that standard for many years, voting for Connie Morella because she was a liberal Republican. They finally woke up and realized she was a vote for Tom Delay and Dennis Hastert as well. She is gone now.

[Walt Starr]

62. If the Democratic PArty wants my vote

then they'd better get on the right side of the above issues.

[SaveElmer]

64. Well I suspect...

The Democratic Party will come to a consensus about where it stands on all issues. Some you will like some you won't. I will measure the totality of that and have no doubt that I will be satisfied on the whole.

[Walt Starr]

66. If they are not in line on the above issues

then they are unacceptable to me.

[SaveElmer]

68. Yes Walt...you have made that quite clear...

Enjoy your independance...I will be working for the removal of the Republican Party from power.

[Walt Starr]

69. To do that, you need the independents to vote for your candidate

:evilgrin:

[SaveElmer]

74. Most independents...

Do not vote on one or a limted number of issues...if they were we would have had viable independent and third party candidates by now, and we haven't.

[Walt Starr]

Expect things to change over the next few years

It's how the religious (wrong) right took over the GOP. Sit out elections where the GOP candidate does not meet your ideological purity tests and eventually, they pay attention to ya.

[sui generis]

70. I'm not making any predictions

until I've seen the movie for myself.

I saw the last one and didn't like the ending.

We lack clarity of principle and we don't speak to our base. We're always trying to move our dark blue tent over to the light red middle, and leaving the dark blue people on the other end of the tent out in the rain.

If you move the tent too far, it won't be blue any more. We stand for more than just effective social programs and sustainable growth.

We stand for those things for all Americans, not just married heterosexuals, not just white anglo saxon protestant babtists. We stand for rationality and moderation and respect and foreign policy mediation, not unjust wars based on complete political fabrications.

If we're mush mouthed we're still not going to attract mush brained moderate undecideds. There's a reason they're undecided.

[sui generis]

65. So you would have voted for Zell Miller instead?

for every example there is a perfectly valid counter example.

Vote your conscience - that's what I would recommend. Don't take my vote for granted.

Voting for DeLay may have been the "compromise" I was willing to accept! DeLay is a temporal issue.

People dying in wars cannot be fixed.

[SaveElmer]

71. If you look at my original response on this thread you will see...

That I would not have voted for Zell Miller once he expressed political support for the Republican Party.

My concsience tells me we are vastly better off with Democrats in charge than Republicans, and my vote will go towards that end.

[sui generis]

73. it's all good

the democratic party does need a base of people whose votes it can rely on. It gives it room to be ideologically pure, even if people like you (collectively) may disagree with the ideological purity.

:)

Seriously, no judgements here. It takes all of us, the bike frame and the squeaky wheels to get where we're going.

[SaveElmer]

76. I agree...

Hey on the issues I bet we agree on most everything...it just a strategic difference...

And i see the need for some people to rock the boat and hold people's feet to the fire occasionally. I was a big fan of Paul Wellstone just for that reason.

It's just that right now, in the situation we are in, the stakes are too high IMO, to do too much of that!

[Walt Starr]

77. "the stakes are too high"

I've heard that every election since I first registered to vote as a wet-behind-the-ears eighteen year old.

[SaveElmer]

78. Yeah it is a catch line often...

But I don't use it lightly. I've been voting since 1979...and I believe these next two elections are the most important of that time. As bad as Reagan was, Bush is exponentially worse in my opinion. We are so close to knocking these people out!!!

[Walt Starr]

79. Well, I'll have to see some candidates I can vote for

Durbin is up for re-election and my current Representative is GOP. I'll wait to see, but I've been none too pleased with Durbin lately.

[SaveElmer]

81. Boy I wish I had your problem...

I live in Virginia....Allen or James Webb (probably). I will probably suck it up and vote for Webb if for nothing else than to bloody up Allen to prevent him from running for President. And there is no way Webb can be worse than Allen.

[Walt Starr]

82. The big fight here is for governor

I have problems with corruption in the Blagojevich camp, but I REALLY like what he did to enforce pharmacists filling legal prescriptions.

[SaveElmer]

85. Yeah I saw that...

That is one issue that does drive me nuts...another excellent reason to stay away from WalMart.

And Blagojevich can talk baseball!!! That is always a plus in my book!!!

[WildEyedLiberal]

109. Pity he roots for the wrong team.

Go Cardinals! :7

(Shit, now I'll never get elected to statewide office.)

[PeachyDem88]

125. Sonny is my Governor, Deal is my Rep.

Both of them are swine...

I still agree with bowens43, though.

Winning is all that matters, now.

These are dark days. Beggars can't be choosers.

[acmejack]

35. I think you pretty much cover it Walt.

We can agree on that!

[NoFederales]

37. 1. Secure pensions; 2. Secure voting integrity

Looks like I'm soooooooo screwed.

NoFederales

[proud2BlibKansan]

41. 1. against the war

2. No Child Left Behind needs to go away

3. universal health care for every US citizen

I am not willing to budge on any of these issues.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TechBear_Seattle]

44. Full equal rights for gay people

Specifically, I demand the right to get all of the legal rights afforded by marriage, including those found in common law (judicial rulings, etc.) and not just statutes; and I demand the right to serve openly and honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces. Until I have the same rights given to heterosexuals, everything else is secondary.

I will reject out of hand any candidate who either refuses to commit to these values, or who commits and then refuses to follow through. It is for these two reasons that I refuse to support most Democrats. I don't give a snake's fart about how gay-friendly is the platform when candidates and party officials order me to vote for them and then tell me to piss off after the election.

And yes, being an independent is extremely liberating. :hi:

[paulk]

46. one compromises when your opponent holds more power

than you do. It's the situation liberals currently find themselves in.

Your solution to this situation is to give your opponent even more power.

That's stupid.

Period.


---------------------

[Walt Starr]

48. The extereme religious right did not compromise when the GOP was

in the minority.

Now they control it all.

[sui generis]

49. if there is any proof that single issue voters are powerful

and effective, that would be it.

We really need to understand that as much as we dislike the principles of the republican party, they are highly principled to their constituencies.

[Walt Starr]

53. They accepted losses when they knew things would end up going

in exactly the opposite direction they wanted.

Now they are on teh verge of total implementation of their agenda.

There's a strong lesson in that.

[paulk]

86. sure they did - they compromised with the "business" side

of the Republican party - they formed a coalition - that has cost many of these "religious" and values voters decent jobs and an economy they and their progeny can prosper in. Apparently it's a price they've been willing to pay - it remains to be seen whether the "business" side of the Republican Party is willing to continue paying the price of association with the religious whackjob right...

[Walt Starr]

89. Teh religious right did not care about those issues

and thus, anything that happens with those issues re meaningless to them.

[SaveElmer]

94. Of course they did Walt...

They voted time and again for candidates they knew would not push their agenda

[Walt Starr]

97. No, you're wrong

They consistenetly sat out elections where anti-choice candidates were not put forth. They voted in favor of anti-choice Democrats regularly.

They pushed their agenda to the point where pro-choice Republicans stand no chance on a national level and in most districts nationwide.

[SaveElmer]

104. They voted for George Bush twice...

Anti-Choice does not mean their agenda will be pushed....everyone knew George Bush was not going to push a right to life amendment...same with Ronald Reagan. Had they witheld their vote based on that they would never have gained the power they have.

There is a difference between giving something lip service and actually intending to do it. The fundies knew this.

Now they are so entrenched they feel they can make those demands. They are deluded however if they think it will work.

[Walt Starr]

110. George Bush didn't NEED to push an anti-choice amendment

he pushed SCOTUS nominees who will overturn Roe, instead.

[SaveElmer]

111. Well actually...

I was talking about George the 1st!!!

[Walt Starr]

112. They voted for him only once

they stayed home in droves in 1992 knowing damn well and good that Clinton would set their agenda back and that he would win because George the elder put up somebody who didn't vote to overturn Roe.

[SaveElmer]

113. I'd like to see evidence for that assertion...

Independants abandonded him in droves and went to Perot...

[Walt Starr]

127. Wrong again

The split on Perot was roughly even.

Hard rightwing Christian evangelicals were advised by leaders such as Bauer, Robertson, etc. to sit out 1992.

[SaveElmer]

129. I'd like to see numbers...

Exit polls...whatever, that shows fundies sat out 1992

[Walt Starr]

130. As soon as you give me numbers showing that Perot made the difference

[sui generis]

61. if your "opponent" is no different than your pick

then who gives a crap about who has more power?

That's just being ineffective.

These people are elected to represent us, all of us, not the other way around.

If they have to ignore us to get elected, then they will have to ignore us to stay elected. How is that different from a republican?

[paulk]

80. first off - the OP is talking about single issue voting

where one issue, and one issue alone, would determine your support. That's a long way from saying both candidates are the same.

The OP is saying that even if you agree with a candidate 90% of the time, as long as you disagree with ONE issue, even when you disagree with that candidate's opponent 100% of the time, then you sit it out.


The situation you postulate only occurs in the fantasy world of third party voters - where both parties are the same - there is always a difference between candidates, even if comes down to ONLY an addition of one member to a particular caucus.

[Walt Starr]

83. Single issue voting was how teh religious right took over all power

It works. Get used to it.

[sui generis]

87. nobody was being offensive, BUT

since you pitched the first fit . . .

the fantasy world of party line voters is that everyone is going to back them, whether they like it or not.

You'll have compromised not to offend our hardline dem conservatives, and when you lose you'll figure out you've still compromised your principles.

If a candidate says he's pro gay on Tuesday and then says he's anti-gay on Friday to get the "moderate undecided" vote, then the hard line right will still bash us for not having any principles we stick with. The party can be viewed as a single candidate to those people who normally vote straight line dem without questioning anything.

You want a single issue? Here's one. Without equal rights your social programs don't equally apply to me or my gay traditional family. I'm not putting my family second for your politics.

My "one issue" is the one I will fight for with my dying breath, and I'm not gambling with my family. This is not a game. This is not posturing. If you're no better than what's already there, you don't get my vote, and this issue has tremendous relevance to my life and to the wellbeing of my family.

It is offensive to be told to just give you my vote ANYWAY. I'm telling the democratic party that if you want to represent me, then listen to me. Otherwise we'll part company until you do.

[MuseRider]

59. Ahhh, the liberation!

You bet it is liberating. We do not have registration here for Independent so my husband and I are now unaffiliated. We did it the day of the cloture vote on Alito.

Got a phone call from the DNC the next week, sucker argued with me about why they should have just shut up about filibuster and then ended his conversation by saying, "Oh, you are in Kansas. Who cares what you think." or something like that. If I hadn't already switched I would have done it the next day.

I am with you. Too many years working and watching my vote go to people I wouldn't want running for dogcatcher.

Equal rights. NOTHING less than equal rights. That and everything else you mentioned. I can take a well crafted apology for the IRW vote if they stop funding or voting for funding but if they still vote to fund it instead of having the courage to actually mean what they say they are toast to me.

I am one of the most faithful people in the world and will give anyone the benefit of the doubt until they screw me one too many times. They finally did it. It hurt like hell to fill out that form but it feels right now.

I want a REAL liberal who will say unequivocally what they stand for and mean what they say. Then I will look at the policies. If it is just more political bullshit then they won't get a second look from me anymore.

[WildEyedLiberal]

63. Not really - labor is my biggest issue

I hate the idea of purism and generally roll my eyes when someone says they're going to "hold their nose" and vote for so-and-so, because most likely, said person has impossible requirements that no human politician is capable of meeting.

However, if there was a Democrat who was anti-labor, as in backed businesses during labor disputes, voted to weaken OSHA standards and labor laws, opposes minimum wage/living wage, and supports crap like "right to work," I don't know if I could vote for him/her. I probably would, because likely the alternative would be a Repuke who would not only believe all of the above, but also be anti-choice, anti-civil rights, and pro-corruption. Hopefully that's a choice I'll never have to make, since you'd have to be really fucking stupid to run as an anti-labor candidate in Illinois.

[bvar22]

106. Do you consider being "Pro-Free-Trade" as "Anti-Labor".

I do.

The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[WildEyedLiberal]

108. It's a little more complicated than that

Trade is a really complex issue. Free trade is like capitalism -I think there can be benefits, but there needs to be strict regulation and there need to be safety nets for the working class (in all countries).

I oppose NAFTA and CAFTA, although not I don't believe many people knew the consequences of NAFTA until recently. However, given the problems that arose with NAFTA, there is no real reason anyone should vote on CAFTA. But is the solution to be strictly protectionist and impose high tariffs, or is there another solution?

I am a fair trader, but it's an issue that's a lot harder to have an instant take on, unlike labor negotiating/benefits issues, because the scope of impact is so much bigger.

[johnnyrocket]

75. Pro-choice, anti-deficit, MORE corporate oversight....

...separation of church and state,
protection of personal privacy and personal rights,
medicare Rx bill overhaul,
universal health care,
REAL and FAIR bankruptcy reform,
environmental regulations,
much bigger push on alternative energy ,
much bigger pollution control,
global warming acceptance and a drive toward solutions,
push for actual science and research, and acceptance of the results.

There's lots more.

[blm]

88. OPEN GOVERNMENT. No more hiding papers that prove criminal government

actions.

I support open government Democrats.

[AtomicKitten]

92. I'll hold my nose if I must and vote for (D) in the general election

I'm hoping the Dems choose a candidate I can wholeheartedly support - AL GORE - but will compromise and vote in the general election for whomever my fellow Dems democratically choose in the primary.

[Walt Starr]

96. A position generally acceptable to Democrats

I, however, am no longer a Democrat.

[in_cog_ni_to]

101. All that you listed and Bush being tried as a WAR CRIMINAL and his

entire administration be tried also. They ALL should get life in prison. For them, I would support the death penalty. Preferably by hanging them by their balls.

[quinnox]

102. There are issues I feel strongly about

Such as freedom of religion, the environment, freedom of speech, a governement sponsored comprehensive health care system, foreign policy based on diplomacy and peace instead of conflict and war.

But as far as voting, I will vote for Democrats most of the time unless there was a liberal republican perhaps who I liked better.

There is room for compromise usually in my view, that is what politics is about.

[Snivi Yllom]

105. flip flopping

trying to have it both ways is a deal killer

[Radio_Guy]

115. Your four plus

I would add higher taxation on the rich. If you make seven figures, your tax rate on every additional dollar above one million should be no less than 75%. Good education takes dollars and we have crumbling schools instead thanks to Bush's tax cuts for the rich.

[Odin2005]

117. Only on economic issues

I an very far left, I would vote green most the time if we had a multi-party system, but we have to accept the fact that The US is one of the more socially conservative Western countries, which makes social issue litmus tests political suicide. The fact that none of the OP's "no compromise" positions are economic shows why we lose in red states. I think we are a fairly left-wing country on economic issues, but the Republicans are able to use social issues to get people to vote against thier economic intrest. Demographics are on the side of social liberals; my generation, the once that is currently becoming old enough to vote, is the most socially liberal generation in US history, or so I read. Just give it time, insisting on towing the line on social issues now just means the Republicans win again.

[Atman]

118. The Constitution

It's held this country together for 230 some-odd years, and no goddam C-student cowboy poser she be allowed to trash it for fun and profit.

But then, I'm just a liberal puke.

[thinkingwoman]

120. Hey Walt, Independent is GREAT

no more swallowing hard and voting for somebody who repeatedly lets you down just because they have a certain letter!

Here are mine, many of which overlap with yours.

1. Patriot Act (1st and most recent times). I will not vote for a prez candidate who voted for it. Period.

2. Equal rights. I'm sick to death of discrimination. Won't vote for anybody who supports discrimination in ANY form. No compromise. No surrender.

3. Honesty. All politicians lie? Fine, then I won't vote for any of them. I would have had more respect for our current crop of leaders if they would be honest about screwing us over. Seriously. Tell me the fucking truth for once.

4. Separation of Church and State. This one covers abortion for me, because there is NO MEDICAL REASON to treat this procedure differently than any other medical procedure people undergo. I don't have to fight for the right to a blood transfusion just because some religious sect doesn't approve. Men don't have to notify their wives if they want a vasectomy, and they don't have pharmacists refusing to fill their prescription for the little blue pill. I'm sick to death of the push for theocracy and I won't vote for anyone who supports it in ANY way.

I have always been a well-informed voter, but from now on I will be combing through the records of every candidate at every level. I won't be complicit in any way to the fucking over of America.

[Hekate]

121. Reproductive rights. Human rights. Civil liberties. Bill of Rights.

And the environment. That pretty much covers it.

But you should know that the conversation ENDS the moment a candidate wavers on reproductive rights.

Fortunately my Congressional representatives at this point are pro-choice Democratic women: Senators Boxer and Feinstein, and Representative Lois Capps. I may have issues about some things with DiFi, but unless the Goddess Almighty runs against her, she still has my vote. Barbara Boxer is okay with me, and I know Lois. I feel lucky.

Human rights, Civil liberties, Bill of Rights, Environment --> The cornerstone of all of them is my right as a human being to my own bodily integrity, control of my own reproductive system.

No compromise on that whatsoever.

Hekate

[loyalsister]

123. 14......

Legislation that enables these 14 characteristics. In fact, I am considering the possibility of creating a system of holding their feet to the fire. I want to question how deep they are in and how likely they are to dig us out.
I have become more independent myself. I am holding legislators to high standards. A real exhibition of true democratic principles and values are a must. If they are too afraid now, when?


The 14 characteristics are:

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottoes, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.


Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .


Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

Copyright © 2003 Free Inquiry magazine

http://www.veteransforpeace.org/The_14_characteristics_030303.htm

[REP]

124. I Like Your List

I'd rearrange the order a bit, but other than that, it pretty much sums up where I draw the line. The Bill of Rights is another good list.

[Douglas Carpenter]

126. there are practical reasons to vote Democrat in the general election

If the Democrats take the House this November

10 members of the Progressive Caucus would become chairmen of committees

John Conyers becomes Chairman of the Judiciary Committee

Even a vote for a conservative Dem is a vote for Conyers and the 10

If the Democrats take both houses this November. Ted Kennedy will be Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee with John Conyers Chair of the House Judiciary Committee

________________

Having said that I do find myself morally compromised if I support a hawkish Democrat for any federal office. Allowing America to forget the lessons of Vietnam and drift along with the insane and immoral policies that could very likely lead to the very destruction of much, most or all of the human race is about as big a moral compromise as I could possibly imagine. In fact supporting any candidate with a caviler attitude toward war is itself a great moral compromise. Mass slaughter is not a marginal wedge issue. Still the reality is that a Democrat majority in either house provides some amount of a brake on this drift toward destruction. It could make a lot of difference in the long run

And there are domestic factors as why voting for a less than a more ideal Democrat is the pragmatic and moral choice as well. Please allow me to quote from Noam Chomsky: "I mean, I'll vote for Clinton, holding my nose--but the reason has nothing at all to do with big policy issues; there I can't see too much difference. What it has to do with are things like who's going to get to appoint the judiciary happens to have a big effect on people's lives....
They may be small policy differences when you look at the big picture--but remember, there's a huge amount of power out there, and small policy differences implementing a huge amount of power can make a big difference in people's lives....Okay, that makes a lot of difference for people whose kids are hungry in downtown Boston"

[Walt Starr]

128. I'm not preparted to waiver on my four points at all, regardless

As far as I'm concnered, refusal to be ideologically pure on those four issues means the candidate is absolutely no different from the Republican, regrdless.

Party consideration is no longer a factor for me. I am not a Democrat. I am an Independent, so any candidate must earn my vote and ideological purity on my points points is a requirement to be capable of earning my vote.