Man, I'm not even sure I even want to bother voting now...

[Frangible]

Two of my favorite candidates, Dean and Clark are now gone. Kucinich is the only other one I really like, a true progressive. I'm sorry but... I'm not even sure I can vote in good faith for Kerry or Edwards. The things I hate Bush the most for, Kerry and Edwards voted for. How can I elect an IWR/Patriot Act whore? I just can't do that... no. That was wrong of them and I cannot support them.

Sad thing is... Kucinich doesn't have a prayer of getting elected at this point. (Sorry DK fans... I love the guy)

Why is it, the best way for a democrat to get elected is to act like a Republican?

Sigh. Very disappointing. I wanted a real progressive and real change in 04. The best I can hope for now is "Diet Bush".

[Guava Jelly]

1. Ya gotta vote

If you don't you crap on all that Dean and Clark fought for.
If you don't vote it helps the republicans.
you dont wanna do that do ya???

[Frangible]

3. No I don't

But why does it even matter when Kerry or Edwards will do the same as the Republicans when it matters most?

[Lex]

12. You seriously think

Kerry and Edwards are the SAME as Bush?

That's just too precious.

[alcuno]

21. Someone with a 96% "liberal" voting record is not going to do the

same as the Republicans. I really wanted a Dean or a Clark to win this thing, but that is not to be. Kerry may not get my heart, but he'll get my money and my vote (if we EVER get to vote here in Illinois.)

I don't believe that Edwards can do it because of national security and the MONEY issue. Kerry has foregone the limit on what he can spend and we need that.

I can't wait to vote and I'm firing up as many people as I know to do the same. I absolutely salivate at the thought of voting and will be the first person in my polling place come November.

[lovedems]

31. March 16 seems so far away doesn't it! Look at this and reconsider

your position. This is for the original poster. I don't know who you want the sitting President to be in the next 4 years, but I don't want the chimp. Think Pickering, Asscrack, and tell me that they are the same.

NewYorkerfromMass shared this

William H. Rehnquist, born: October 1, 1924...79 years old.

John Paul Stevens, born: April 20, 1920...83 years old.

Antonin Scalia, born: March 11, 1936...67 years old.

Sandra Day O'Connor, born: March 26, 1930...73 years old.

Anthony M. Kennedy, born: July 23, 1936...67 years old.

David Hackett Souter, born: September 17, 1939...64 years old.

Clarence Thomas, born: June 23, 1948...55 years old.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, born: March 15, 1933...70 years old.

Stephen G. Breyer, born: August 15, 1938...65 years old.

(Got this on Freeperville Central- it's occasionally good for something)

bain_sidhe shared this more illustrated scenario.

Liberal (mostly) SC Justices

John Paul Stevens, born: April 20, 1920...83 years old.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, born: March 15, 1933...70 years old.
Stephen G. Breyer, born: August 15, 1938...65 years old.
David Hackett Souter, born: September 17, 1939...64 years old.

Centrist/Moderate Justices (swing votes on abortion and civil rights)
Sandra Day O'Connor, born: March 26, 1930...73 years old.
Anthony M. Kennedy, born: July 23, 1936...67 years old.

Conservative/Reichwing Justices

William H. Rehnquist, born: October 1, 1924...79 years old.
Antonin Scalia, born: March 11, 1936...67 years old.
Clarence Thomas, born: June 23, 1948...55 years old.

It's worth noting that the oldest Justice is on the liberal wing, and a second liberal justice, Ginsburg, has had a bout with cancer. "Swing vote" O'Connor, too, has has a bout with cancer.


Edit: Sorry Alcuno, I wasn't trying to bring this to your attention!

[alcuno]

35. Illinois votes on March 16? Excellent!

I hope we make a great big nail in the * coffin. At this point, I could probably be convinced to vote for Al Sharpton if he was all that was left of the Dems.

[lovedems]

37. I hope you are registered. The deadline was 2 days ago to vote

in the primary.

Sorry about that last post. I wasn't trying to bring the SCOTUS to your attention, I was trying to bring it to the attention of the original poster. I hope you weren't like WTF?

[alcuno]

47. No problem. I don't think I've ever missed an election.

Federal, state, school board; I vote.

[Lindacooks]

24. Here's where they differ

Kerry and Edwards will not attack the environment the way Bush has.

Kerry and Edwards will not appoint an anti-choice judge to the Supreme Court. Chances are very good in the next five years that one of the Supremes will resign or die, and if Bush is in to appoint, say bye-bye to legal abortions in this country.

Kerry and Edwards will help protect our food supply, not weaken FDA and USDA regulations the way Bush has.

Kerry and Edwards would NOT have attacked Iraq unilaterally, but would have let the U.N. inspectors do their job.

Bush will do everything he can, including cheat, steal, lie, and kill, to keep power. If you value democracy, you had better vote.

So if you like breathing, drinking water, eating food, having some privacy left, and being able to vote, you damn well better vote Democrat in 2004.

[Frangible]

43. AAAH! but that's the thing...

True, they would be better on the environment (thank god).

And yes, Bush could bring in someone that sucks to the supreme court-- but perhaps not. Remember, most conservatives at least claim to be pro-choice. (anything else is political suicide) I know a lot of conservatives here, and they are *all* pro-choice... I would not assume they would automatically be against abortion.

I haven't heard anything about FDA/USDA regulation, guess I'll do some reading there.

Kerry and Edwards DID attack Iraq unilaterally. They voted for the IWR, the blood is on their hands. And Edwards still insists it was the right thing to do. Kerry is backpeddling, but talk is cheap. You cannot say "oops, my bad" when it comes to war and death. Death is forever.

I will support Kucinich in the primaries here (not that it's worth anything), and beyond that? I don't know.

No, I will not vote for Bush. I don't want another four years of him, but how are things going to be different with a pro-war Democrat in office who thought the patriot act was a good idea? A vague possibility of a pro-life justice?

Just depressing. Maybe I'll get pissed off at Bush again enough to vote just to spite him.

[susanna]

33. Maybe, just maybe...

They still have a fundamental decency that can be activated. This is my take (I am a former Clark supporter).

If they sense, like many of us have, that 'enough is enough,' who is to say they can't change or grow into a more powerful and more confident leader, willing to challenge themselves along with the status quo?

This is what I pin my hopes on. It's very murky and obviously a long shot, but it is the best I have right now...

I despise the IWR votes of Kerry/Edwards, especially since I lost a magnificent friend to this 'war.' That said, are they both redeemable in another way that I cannot see yet? It is possible, so I rule nothing out.

That's the way I have to look at it. I'm a weirdo, but then I wear that label as a badge of honor. :-)

[still_one]

2. Because the party can be influenced by progressives

but only if we win the election first

[zoeyfong]

49. Absolutely not. If kerry wins, nothing changes.

I'm beginning to think that progressives can only influence the party if we lose. Think about it, if republican-lite wins, why would any dem running for office in the future stray from that strategy? Most politicians care about winning first, principles second. It is only if republican-lite *doesn't* work, that they will change. Now, it is possible that they would move farther right, rather than left in an effort to win; but if the present backbone-free, republican pandering strategy works, don't look for any leftward movement any time soon.

[MercutioATC]

4. Chin up. We still have a revolution to run here :)

I agree that our choices seem to be disheartening, but we're just going to have to change things from the bottom up, it seems. Step #1 still has to be getting Bush out (a vote for the Dem candidate in November). Aside from that, vote for Dean (or Clark or whomever) in the primary and push your agenda. If we can't put the force of change in at the top, we'll have to just force change from the rank-and-file.

[Zhade]

57. I've been convinced for a while that that's what it will take to change.

A revolution, rather than electing b*sh-lite and hoping for the best.

I'd be thrilled to be proved wrong. Somehow, I doubt that will happen.

[mandyky]

5. Primary or GE?

Depending on your state for the primary vote either Clark or Dean. For the General Election, hold your nose and vote for the nominee even if it is Kerry or Edwards. Regime change is the #1 mission for Election 2004. America cannot take 4 more years of shrub.

[SinkingInTheRain]

6. After what Kerry did to Dean I am discouraged too

That's why I am supporting Kucinich/Dean. Kerry has left me empty.

[fearnobush]

25. It was Gephardt !!!

[Mari333]

7. Please Vote for a Democrat if not for yourself for these guys

They need to come home. Please.


Bring our kids home
http://www.bringthemhomenow.com

[walkon]

10. What makes you think

either Kerry or Edwards would bring them home?

There may be good reasons to vote ABB but that's one I don't believe.

[Mari333]

32. Vote so this wont happen again, then.

I am tired of ideological purists. I am tired as the mother of a soldier. I am tired of death and destruction. Its life and death now . Bush cannot get in again. Bush cannot get in again.
http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm

[lovedems]

38. I hear ya Mari. I was accused of not making any sense for supporting

the dem nominee who I assumed would be Kerry for the exact same reason.

I simply replied "2 wars isn't enough?????" I don't get it. I think the PNACers are starting the plans for future invasions if the chimp gets 4 more years.

[Tinoire]

11. Very powerful post Mari. Very, very powerful. You should post it more...

Broke my heart that did. Would probably make me vote for the devil himself if he promised to bring them home.

[mandyky]

27. Have Kerry/Edwards promised to bring them home?

Kucinich is the only one with a 90 day plan.

[Tinoire]

28. I know. Kucinich is my man 100% and all the way round.

I just started a thread asking about Edwards. I want specifics.

Renaming the war an occupation won't cut it. I want them home. I want them out.

[Rowdyboy]

19. Very powerful post, Mari

especially for anyone who knows your situation. Its a sobering reminder that we're not playing children's games here. Lives are at stake; its not a time for foolishness.

[zoeyfong]

50. Kerry was the one who sent them over there in the first place.

Don't know why anybody should count on kerry to bring them home.

[Mari333]

54. So we hold Kerrys feet to the fire.

ABB.

[John_H]

8. LOL!

[rwenos]

9. No - It's About the Supreme Court, and MUCH more!

I hear you talking. Trouble is, if you stay away -- Bush wins.

The voting statistics proved it in 2000: The Nader campaign kept Al Gore from becoming President.

Our system always breaks our hearts. I love Dean, personally. I wanted him to be President.

But to call Kerry or Edwards "Bush Lite" is to ignore:

1. 500 Dead Americans in Iraq, no WMD.
2. Environmental Regulations (think Texas, the chemical cesspool).
3. Wall Street Shenanigans (they indicted Jeff Skilling today).
5. Choice (Bush has already limited this as much as he can by executive order.
5. The Court. The Court. The Court. (Stevens is 83, Rehnquist is 81, and Ruth Bader Ginzburg and Sandra Day O'Connor are cancer survivors.

WANNA HAVE CLARENCE THOMAS OR ANTONINE SCALIA AS CHIEF JUSTICE, WITH A SOLID 6-VOTE MAJORITY ON THE COURT!

Listen to your heart, then suck it up like everybody else and vote for the Democratic candidate, mate.

[Baclava]

13. ...and then reality set in...

The days of one ideology being 100% right or wrong on any issue are history. At some point, some candidate will run on a platform of consensus-building and eliminating the pervasiveness of polarization, both inside and outside the Beltway.

[mlawson]

14. Consider how many Dems felt in 1968.

Bobby was headed for the nomination, he was SHOT, and we saw him lying there in blood on live TV. Try to imagine that, with Dean or Clark. Then Eugene McCarthy's campaign imploded, and we were left with Hubert Humphrey to face Nixon. And many Dems didn't bother to vote in the GE that year, and look what we got...

Let's not do that again; once in a lifetime is quite enough.

[rwenos]

23. Before Bobby, Martin; After Bobby, Czechago

And in that year, 1968, Amerika felt like it was spinning out of control.

January: Tet. (The beginning of the end, proving we could not win the Vietnam War.)

March: Martin Luther King assassinated.

June: Bobby Kennedy assassinated.

August: The Chicago convention. Blood on the streets. A "police riot" by the Chicago PD. A Democratic Party at war with itself.

November: RICHARD F*CKING NIXON IS ELECTED PRESIDENT.

I rest my case, your Honor.

[Robb]

26. Great, great post. nt

[sistersofmercy]

15. You know...

I'm not going to try to convince you of what is best in the election. We do need to rid yourselves of bush*. I believe no matter who gets office whether Kerry or Edwards that there is a good chance either one will right a wrong. Although, I accept Kerry's and Edwards explanations, you may choose not to.
BTW, I'm very sorry about Dean, I like him very much and I am truly sorry to see him leave the process. I believe he is still going to make himself heard and that is a good thing. I also believe he will be a part of the eventual administration, in what role, I'm not sure but I believe he will be and it will be a good thing.
In addition, when Dean supporters were saying that Dean was getting shafted by the media, at first, I just thought, well that's politics and Kerry went through it. But after the WI debate I saw it for what it was. Dean had been railed by the so called "scream" thing for being over-the-top and after WI debate (which I thought he did extremely well) the commentary was the he'd lost his fire. I remember thinking, gee, they're are beating him up at every turn. Now they can't and Dean will continue to be a part of this process, on his own terms.
Good Luck in your decision!:hug:

[in_cog_ni_to]

16. That's my dilemma too.

:( The IWR and the Patriot Act votes are a real turn-off for me. Kerry at least "regrets" his vote and says he will re-do the Patriot Act. Edwards is a hopeless cause. He still thinks the war was the right thing to do. :(

If Kerry takes Clark on as VP...he will for sure get my vote. If he doesn't take Clark....I have to think LONG and HARD about voting for him IF he's the nominee. I think I hate Bush more than I hate Kerry's votes in congress. No, I KNOW I hate Bush and his cabal more, but a vote for Kerry without Clark would be a nose holder. :( It really is a dilemma. It's a vote for another Washington Insider or stay home. I've NEVER done that. *sigh* Good thing I have until November to think about this.

[Habibi]

17. No, the best you can hope for is to

*defeat* Bush. And that ain't too shabby. Any Dem is going to be better than Bush.

As for making them accountable to us, here's my plan: When they call for support, I'm going to say: All right, you have my vote. If you also want my money to help you get other votes, you're going to have to dance with me a little.

[arwalden]

18. Vote. Don't Vote. It's Up To Ya.

Wow... how can anyone elect a patriot act whore? I suppose that for those who are one-issue voters then something as puzzling as *that* presents a real delima.

Other folks look at the big picture of what's best for the whole country instead of just a pet-issue or two.

>> "Why is it, the best way for a democrat to get elected is to act like a Republican?"<<

The pendulum swings... and right now the national pendulum is on the conservative side. That's just the way it is. That's where the votes are. Elections are won from the center. Blah blah blah... you've heard it all before. Why do I even bother?

-- Allen

[lovedems]

39. I always like your responses to posts like this.

They always direct and to the point. If I try it, I sound like a raging bitch so I always reconsider.

I like the things you have to say to posters like this, it is always the same, yet different.

[fearnobush]

20. 95% of us would have voted for the Patriot Act after 911.

You gotta vote, not voting is just as bad as voting for Bush. Remember, The Patriot Act is still TEMPORARY, after 911, It was presented in such a way that hid the insidious details. We were all in Post 911 shock, and YES we were being takin' advantage of. Why are those who oppose our candidates so blind to these facts? VOTE!!!! ABB ABB ABB!!! !!! !!!

[lovedems]

42. That was a question I asked in a thread earlier.

Look at what happened to Cleland for voting against it. I am not making any excuses for the PA but if the dems would have stood on principle whould it have been mass political suicide for the dems? We already lost a lot of seats in 2002. I am not assuming, I am asking. What would have happened if the dems didn't show some sort of support for this? Bearing in mind, like you said that bu$h was counting on peoples fears.

[zoeyfong]

51. I was not deluded about IWR or Pat. Act for one minute.

You talk about the post 911 shock like the hysteria and wagon cirlcing, firing blindly in all directions, etc. were perfectly natural, understandable, universal reactions. Wrong. Many of us watched the whole thing unfold day by day with horror and disbelief that america could be coming to this. Nevermind alQaeda, we seemed and still seem hell bent on destroying ourselves in a futile, all-consuming search for absolute security. Wherever bin laden is, he must be quite satisfied with himself. I think the attacks he staged have succeeded beyond his wildest drems.

[lovedems]

58. The fear was rampant. I didn't say that I was one of the ones who

was afraid but do you mean to tell me that Cleland wasn't voted out because of fear? They totally exploited his vote against the PA. I think you are deluding yourself to think that a majority in this country were running scared. How in the heck do you explain the Iraq war if it wasn't for fear? There certainly wasn't any REASON behind it. I knew bu$h was lying about WMD's but apparently approximately 70% of the people didn't. This administration played on peoples fears and took advantage of it. That didn't answer my question anyway. I wanted a response to what would have happened to the democrats had they all opposed this like they should have. Would it have been mass political suicide? Would we have more repugs in the house and congress?

[anti-NAFTA]

22. Allen Colmes called Edwards a "protectionist" as a derogatory term.

Are you sure you don't want to vote?

[kclown]

29. This is a no-brainer. You vote for whomever is on the ballot.

If you have to choose between Kerry and Bush in November, make
your choice.  If you wanted Dean instead of Kerry, then,
q.e.d., you haven't worked hard enough, and now it's too late.

Politics is the art of the possible.  If you want to make the
impossible possible, get to work.  

[earthside]

30. It is a truism ...

Always keep this saying in mind in politics:

"Don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good."

Politicians make mistakes. The better ones learn from them, listen to the people, and lead.

Remember, Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern voted for the Token Gulf resolution, but went on to become great political leaders of the peace and anti-Vietnam war movements. Hubert Humphrey at one time in the early 1950s supported loyalty oaths, but became a great champion of civil rights legislation the in US Senate in the late 1950s.

Kerry was not my first(Dean), second(Clark), or third(Kucinich) choice. I am not happy about Kerry's vote for the 2003 war resolution or the Patriot Act. But it is true that he has one of the most liberal, progressive voting records in the Senate (a point the radical Republicans will, in fact, use against him).

So, Kerry IS good enough.
He is a liberal.
He has more actual anti-war protest experience than ANYONE in the US Senate.
No, he is not perfect.
But he is not Bush.

[LWolf]

34. So what are you voting for?

If you want to be able to say you picked a "winner," then Kerry or Edwards is your man. If you want to be able to say you voted for what's right for America, then DK is the one.

If you're convinced he can't win anyway, and know you'll be stuck with one of the others anyway, why not vote for the best? What's stopping you?

Isn't our vote supposed to be about what is right for our country? In the general election, making Bush into roadkill is what's right. For the primary, it's about platform, direction, issues. In my not-so-humble opinion, those who vote for the direction of the party and the country, based on platform and issues, are the real winners.

[AmyStrange]

36. If Kerry is nominated...

the only chance he has of winning (in my opinion) is if he picks Edwards as his running mate and even then it will be real close.

Otherwise, Bush will win and Congress will lose even more Dem seats.

You may not believe me, but you'll see that I'm right in November.

Plus, no way in hell am I voting for anyone who voted for the War in Iraq and that includes Bush, I don't care how many SCOTUS Justices we lose. There are just too many idiots out there who think we did right by going to Iraq and like the tax cuts that Bush pushed and Kerry voted for and won't see much reason to change leaders from a known to an unknown.

I hope I will be wrong in Nov...



Dave (AmyStrange.com) Ayotte
Please, regularly check the One Missing Person (is one person too many) searchable website for the latest (and archived) missing person news stories:

http://NEWS.OneMissingPerson.org/




Serious Serial Killer discussion:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SK-Cafe/

[zoeyfong]

53. Ditto.

[seaglass]

40. So don't vote, you're the one who has to live with it.

If you ever have kids you can tell them about how you lived through 4 years of Bush hell and when it was your turn to do something about it, you sat it out.

[Frangible]

46. How do you define "Bush hell"?

I define it by the laws that he's signed and what his administration has done... but when Kerry and Edwards vote for the same things I despise him for... why is it ok for them to support it? I don't get that.

I do not hate Bush specifically. I hate what he's done as president. I hate his actions and how they have affected this country.

In a new president, I want someone who will not do those things. Someone who won't do those actions.

Does that make sense?

[seaglass]

52. Bush hell is the laws he has passed and the laws he

will attempt to pass if he gets back into office.

Includes trashing the environment, going to war under false pretenses, tax cuts to the wealthy, and appointing right wing judges for a start.

I know that a Dem is not going to do all those things.

[Maddy McCall]

41. Well, you bothered to post here about it...

So are you expecting someone to attempt to talk you out of your decision?

[Frangible]

44. classify it as general rambling

It is a messageboard, after all :)

[zoeyfong]

45. Same here. I don't care who wins at this point.

I will probably write in Dean.

[Crunchy Frog]

48. I'm not terribly enthusiastic about

either of the remaining viable candidates. However, the Bush cabal is so evil that I cannot even consider not throwing my total support behind whoever ends up with the nomination.

We may be talking lesser of too evils here, but the greater evil is of such a vast order of magnitude that when the time comes, I will happily support the lesser evil.

[Renew Deal]

55. I have the same problem

though I never trusted Dean. I have been saying that I will vote for Clark in NY. It will probably stay that way.

[hedgetrimmer]

56. whomever receives the vote does not matter... the vote is what does!

Voting, we have a long way to go to truely understand what it means. The power and use of voting should not go wasted... VOTE... write in donald duck, i do not care ... vote, VOTE! thank you.

many blessings

[arwalden]

59. "write in donald duck" -- I just don't understand this way of thinking.

It's silly.

-- Allen

[mikehiggins]

60. Can I steal your graphic? And the point is to get Bush out.

Edwards OR Kerry will have to appoint a Democratic administration and there is zero liklihood that either man will be able to f__k things up as thoroughly as BushCo have managed to.

The Patriot Act will go down, there will be no more invasions, Iraq will demand we leave as soon as they get a government acceptable to Sistani, any chance of a gay marriage amendment will die in the Oval Office AND there will be no more right wing Supreme Court justices nominated, possibly the most important consideration in terms of keeping this country free and democratic.

If you think THIS is as bad as it can get, you haven't been paying attention.

So, ham sandwich V BushCo? You want that on rye with mustard?