Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Please tell me why I should vote for Kerry in November?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:23 PM
Original message
Please tell me why I should vote for Kerry in November?
Please don't hand me the usual "Anyone but Bush" line, or the "Party Loyalty" line. I'm sick of hearing those, and I'm sick of holding my nose and voting for Democrats I really can't stand.

Can someone please reconcile these issues in my mind? Tell me why, considering these positions of our prospective nominee, why I should pull the lever for Kerry, and not look at the Green candidate or Nader?

(1) John Kerry voted for all of Bush's tax cuts, helping to create this record budget deficit. How can we expect him to be fiscally responsible?

(2) John Kerry voted for "No Child Left Behind." Can we honestly expect him to be committed to quality public education?

(3) John Kerry voted to confirm Antonin Scalia as a Supreme Court Justice. Can we expect better judgment from him in his appointments as President?

(4) John Kerry voted for the PATRIOT act. Can we honestly expect him to safeguard our rights when he was one of the ones who helped Ashcroft steamroller them?

Please don't turn this into a flame war. I am honestly trying to reconcile these issues in my mind. If I can get some honest, satisfactory answers to ease my mind, I'll be more willing to vote the party line. But as it stands right now, this is going to be the first time I've not voted for a Democrat for President.

Serious, thoughtful replies only, please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
59millionmorons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Vote Nader
Or stay home. Who cares.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Excellent Advice. I, Too, See No Need To Validate
someone who has already made up their mind. Who cares? This is pointless. The smart money knows that this election will be won from the center. It will not be won by moving to the far-far-left to placate the fringe purists... but in the process losing 6 centrist votes for every purist vote gained.

Call me suspicious, but I often question the motive behind these "convince-me" types of threads. Perhaps this one will be different, but I'm not holding my breath.

-- Allen

(This message makes more sense if you wear three-D glasses.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Only left-wing nutcases were against the war?
Edited on Mon Feb-16-04 12:53 PM by BullGooseLoony
Is it too much too ask for some leadership?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goobergunch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Leadership?
In the 2004 Democratic Party?

Not according to yesterday's Washington Post story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. LOL. Yes, Apparently So.

-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goobergunch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Sign me up to be purged! (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
26. "This election will be won from the center"
Edited on Mon Feb-16-04 01:18 PM by pabsungenis
Like 2000?

Or 2002?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. LOL... Yes... Just Like That.
-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #7
36. um, is that the same 'smart money approach'
that had us getting our asses handed to us in 2002?

Please tell me how voting for the bulk of Bush's policies will make it easier to beat him? I'd really love to see that spun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. LOL... Vote For Anyone You Please, Dion.
But I'm not voting for the "bulk of Bush's policies". What an absurd suggestion! --- I keep seeing this repeated almost word for word cut-and-paste. People who suggest that I am actually supporting Bush by supporting the Democratic nominee are out of touch with reality.

If not out of touch, then those people are simply suffering the effects from a blinding rage of disappointment and inability to accept the fact that their preferred candidate wasn't the right guy at the right time.

I do know that those people who cast their vote in an effort to "send a message" or in a misguided attempt at "punishing" the party for not being ultraleft enough are doing themselves (and the country) no favors. The message won't be received... it will be nothing more than a quickly forgotten footnote in the history books. It will have no meaningful effect policy decisions. Other than, perhaps, to drive the party more center (more right) in order to recapture votes from the center and from the socially liberal Republicans. Ultimately their efforts alienate the party from the goal of political purity sought by the spoiler fringe .

The desired effect is not being had. -- Nose. Face. Spite.

But as I said... go ahead and do what you need to do. I'm certain that there's nothing that I or anyone else can say will change your mind.

-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
35. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #35
38. I Am Sorry You Feel That Way, Dionysus
Edited on Mon Feb-16-04 04:05 PM by arwalden
You anger is misdirected. Aim it at the White House instead.

-- Allen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #1
42. And might I remind you....
Over 2 million people voted for Nader because they're fed up with Democrats who are pseudo-Republicans.

On a lot of major issues, which I've brought out here, Kerry looks a lot like a Republican. Enough that I'm hesitant about voting for him.

And I come here, trying to ease my mind, and I get a lot of Kerry supporters just being nasty, or saying "vote Democratic, no matter what."

Remember, unless we can draw distinctions between the two, you're going to lose a lot of voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. Let's see...
1) No, Kerry did not vote for all of Bush's tax cuts. You can check the record.

2) NCLB was a bill pushed and sponsored by Kerry's co-senator, Ted Kennedy. It was passed with bipartisan support. The biggest problem I can see regarding NCLB is that the Bush administration isn't funding it.

3) Scalia, whether we agree with him or not, is qualified to serve on the court. If we start blocking any candidate because we disagree with him/her, then we'll be screwed next time there's a Dem President and a Republican Senate.

4) 99 senators voted for the Patriot act, including Wellstone, Kennedy, Harkin, Byrd and many other liberals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
28. thank you, Dookus
I would like to mention your first point again, for all the posters who keep putting out this piece of disinformation - KERRY DID NOT
VOTE FOR ALL OF THE BUSH TAX CUTS!!!

KERRY DID NOT
VOTE FOR ALL OF THE BUSH TAX CUTS!!!

KERRY DID NOT
VOTE FOR ALL OF THE BUSH TAX CUTS!!!

When people can't even get this easily verifiable fact right, I have to wonder at their true motives...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
34. Thanks Dookus
plus concerning NCLB, he isn't going to keep "one size fits all" testing, won't use it in a punitive manner, won't keep turning schools into just testing centers, and will fund it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. He's a Democrat
That's really all anyone needs to consider.

Sorry if this doesn't fit your idea of "serious, thoughtful replies". There's not a whole lot of thinking that goes into this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
14. Well....yeah. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodHelpUsAll2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
4. I wish I could
Edited on Mon Feb-16-04 12:33 PM by GodHelpUsAll2
but I can't offer you any help as I am having trouble with ALL of those myself. It's a tough situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodHelpUsAll2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
5. Can you feel the love?
And the DNC wonders why 50% of the population doesn't vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
revcarol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. No.
You make up your own mind on your own criteria.

Sick of ABB, makes us not question and scrutinize the candidates,and make discerning judgments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diplomats Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
8. What about all of Kerry's votes for Dem/progressive
legislation over the years? You ought to at least look at his entire record rather than cherry-pick the votes you don't agree with. The man has a higher liberal rating than Ted Kennedy. But, hey, vote for Nader if you want. I don't care. I won't lose any sleep over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philgoblue Donating Member (9 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
9. You shouldn't -- Vote for Edwards
Top Ten Reasons to vote for John Edwards

1. Living Proof of the American Dream
John has an American Dream biography – he grew up the son of textile mill and post office workers and was the first in his family to go to college. Therefore, the concerns of regular Americans are not hypothetical to him, they’re real – he’s lived them – and people correctly feel that he genuinely “cares about people like me.” Edwards himself was a product of solely public schools and all of his children have gone to public elementary and secondary schools. Contrast that with other candidates who attended elitist prep schools and have sent their children only to private schools – how can they truly know much of anything about where most Americans send their kids to school? Of the three candidates, only Edwards can contrast his working, middle-class background to Bush’s aristocratic life of privilege.

2. Electability I: Defeating Bush – Geography
In general elections since 1964, Southern Democrats are 4-1-1 while Northern Democrats (Humphrey, McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis) are 0-4. No Democrat has won the White House without winning at least 5 Southern states. To win the Electoral College the Democratic candidate will have to be able to dominate in the Midwest and win several key battle-ground states in the South. In the last 40 years, only Southern moderates have been able to move outside of the Democratic core and win in the suburbs and in key states such as Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, West Virginia, Louisiana, Georgia, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Only Edwards can put Bush on the defensive and make him campaign and spend money in states he won in 2000.

3. Electability II: Defeating Bush – Polls show Edwards will defeat Bush
A national CNN-Gallup poll taken last week shows John Edwards defeating George Bush among likely voters in the November general election.

4. Electability III: Defeating Bush – Campaigning Ability
Unlike others, Edwards is a charismatic and effective campaigner who reaches voters on a personal level because he comes from a regular working family background and has a vibrant, engaging, warm personality. He wins over independents and moderate Republicans while he energizes the party’s base. That’s how he was able to win an upset victory over an incumbent Republican senator in a state previously dominated by Jesse Helms. Edwards has won the most votes cast by independents so far in the primary season.
Other candidates put people to sleep.

5. Not a Washington Insider
John is not a life-time politician; he was very successful in private life before going into public service. He has been in government long enough to know how it works, but not so long as to become entangled in the Washington’s webs. Of the top two candidates, only Edwards can legitimately be considered a reformist outsider – a role that worked for Clinton and Carter.

6. Independence from Special Interests
Unlike other candidates (one of which has collected more special interest money than any other Senator), John Edwards has NOT accepted money from PACs or corporate lobbyists in his Senate campaign and this presidential campaign. Edwards is not beholden to special interests, only to the voters and his ideals. He supports further campaign finance reform. A President Edwards will ban members of congress from taking lobbyist campaign contributions and stop the revolving door between former top officials and lobbying firms. Therefore, only Edwards can contrast himself with the special interest financing of the Bush campaign – there are now skeletons in his closet.

7. Issues
In addition to electability, Edwards has a strong set of key policies. Indeed, of the remaining campaigns only Edwards clearly articulated a vision for the future. He’s for stemming the loss of jobs out of America (we know about that here in West Michigan and so do you in Wisconsin) – see the enclosed Plan. John has put forward a “College for Everyone” plan where bright students from high school can earn free tuition at colleges during their first year in return for doing 10 hours of community service a week. His “American Dream,” tax credit provides up to $5,000 toward the down payment on a first home and paying to send kids to college. He has a realistic health-care plan based on insuring all kids, giving breaks to small businesses that provide for their employees, and expanding the family medical leave act. John’s for keeping the tax-cut for the middle-class, but repealing those that went to the wealthiest 2% of taxpayers in order to shore up Social Security and build-down Bush’s massive, economy-stifling debts. These and other policies will finally bring job growth back to Wisconsin and America. Edwards is both strong and smart on national security. He voted both for war against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and against Saddam Hussein, but has always questioned why the administration did not make a good-faith effort to bring our long-time allies on board to help with troops and funding and did not have a plan to win the peace in Iraq. He will create a global coalition to fight terrorism and combat real weapons of mass destruction, promote democracy and freedom, and revitalize international institutions that make America stronger

8. Effective Experience
Unlike others, John Edwards has something to show for his time spent in the Senate. In a time of crisis for our country, John Edwards was chosen by his Senate colleagues to successfully lead the final floor defense of the President during the 1999 impeachment trial. John McCain (whose vote was critical) stated that he voted against a guilty verdict in large part because of Edwards’ eloquent and persuasive defense. In 2001, with Senators Kennedy and McCain, John Edwards successfully led the passage of the Patient Bill of Rights and legislation that made it legal to buy drugs from Canada – both core issues to regular Americans.
Unlike other candidate, John takes responsibility for his votes (he doesn't hold his finger to the wind and try to make up stuff to justify past votes (see Wisc debate)

9. The primary season is far from over – say No to a Coronation
Please, try not to pay too much attention to the horse-race obsessed media. Only about 18% of the delegates to the national convention have been elected so far. Of those votes, 42% have been won by Senator Kerry, 24% by Edwards, 15% by Clark, and 10% by Dean. This race has just begun, no candidate has won over anything near a majority of Democratic voters, and numbers will tighten now that it has become basically a two-man race. Edwards has done very well in most of the key primaries so far – Iowa, second with 34% of the vote; South Carolina, first with 45% of the vote, Oklahoma, tied for first with 30% of the vote, Missouri, second with 26% of the vote, Tennessee, second with 27% of the vote (where he had to split the vote with neighboring Clark). Don’t believe the hype that it’s already “pretty obvious,” who the nominee of the Party will be. Around this time in 1992, it was “pretty obvious” that Tsongas was the nominee and about 3 weeks ago it was “pretty obvious” that Dr. Dean was the nominee.

10. Anyone who is looking for a candidate who really can beat Bush in the general election and build a better, united America, cast your vote for John Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
10. Kerry confirmed Scalia?! cripes.
there goes my turn at-bat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyBrandt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
11. Don't: Vote for Senators with more Progressive records than Kerry
Oh, wait...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philgoblue Donating Member (9 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #11
24. Yep
Vote for the candidate who is for a wholesale renegotiating of NAFTA -- Edwards.
Not the one that wants to "bla bla bla enforce bla bla bla the already existing bla bla bla side agreements." -- Kerry.
Vote for the one that talks about a MORAL and patriotic obligation of Americans to help people rise out of poverty -- Edwards.
Not the one that voted for the Republicans Welfare Reform -- Kerry.
Vote for the one who supports Affirmative Action -- Edwards.
Note the one who when asked yesterday in Wisconsin to name a specific case he supported diversity could only come up with "rehabilitating gang members." -- Kerry. Great, nice link he opened between Blacks and criminals. That's sure progressive.

I really could go on and on, but to conclude. Kerry is unelectable -- so you're real choice is either Bush or Edwards.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalpragmatist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Welcome to DU
But the question regards IF Kerry is the nominee in the GE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
12. Reason to vote for the Democratic nominee in November...
whomever that nominee turns out to be: the BEST CHANCE to defeat George W. Bush and ensure that we don't have another four years of far-right extremists running the country, that right-wing extremists aren't appointed to the 2 or 3 likely vacancies on the Supreme Court in the next 4 years, et cetera...if that isn't sufficient reason for you, then by all means, vote for Nader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
funky_bug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
15. I had the same concerns
I'll address them the best I can.

"(1) John Kerry voted for all of Bush's tax cuts, helping to create this record budget deficit. How can we expect him to be fiscally responsible?" I'll have to leave this to my collegues. I have not done the research.

"(2) John Kerry voted for "No Child Left Behind." Can we honestly expect him to be committed to quality public education?" NCLB is a farce as it stands right now. Two of the largest problems with it are the lack of funding for the mandates outlined, and the unjusitifiable relevence these tests place on the students and faculty. John Kerry's stance on fixing NCLB include fully funding education, no questions asked, and addressing what he calls "one size fits all" testing, which is an inaccurate gauge for defining quality education. He's behind the good stuff in NCLB (highly qualified teachers), and ready to fix the stuff that isn't working.

"(3) John Kerry voted to confirm Antonin Scalia as a Supreme Court Justice. Can we expect better judgment from him in his appointments as President?" Yes, he voted to confirm Scalia, but it was something like 89-0. It was a presidential concession, and though he could have voted against the appointment, it would have made no difference. In the senate, you have to give a little to get a little. Compromise is, unfortunately, part of the game, and part of life. He has promised not to appoint judges with such low caliber should he take office. Again, the direct quotes are at his website, if you would like to take a look.

"(4) John Kerry voted for the PATRIOT act. Can we honestly expect him to safeguard our rights when he was one of the ones who helped Ashcroft steamroller them?" Thankfully, the PATRIOT has a sunset clause. Kerry knew that when he voted for it, and plans to adhere to the clause if he takes office. Also, what Ashcroft has done with PATRIOT is a bigger problem. Even Clark said that he would take the PATRIOT to Ashcroft and make him answer for its blatant misuse.

Finally, I encourage you to go to his website and read up on his issues. I'll admit that I don't agree with everything, but I do find comfort in the majority of what I have read.

Good luck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
16. just a few reasons
Edited on Mon Feb-16-04 12:59 PM by Bucky
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
searchingforlight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
18. In a perfect world, I would be voting for DK
but it is not a perfect world. (all the more reason to vote for DK) and what we need right now is to stop the bleeding. If Kerry is the nominee, then he will get my vote because right now I hate what my country stands for and I desperately need to see a change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalpragmatist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
21. Kerry DID NOT Vote Yes on Any of Bush's Tax Cuts
Edited on Mon Feb-16-04 01:04 PM by liberalpragmatist
That's a vicious lie that too much of DU takes seriously.

That being said, I can't say anything that will MAKE you vote for Kerry - that's going to be Kerry's responsibility, and hopefully you'll change your mind by November.

But pour over his record. If nominated, the man is easily the most progressive candidate in 16 years, and, in many ways, he's much more liberal that Dukakis or Clinton. His voting record shows him voting liberally ahead of 75% of the Democrats in the Senate.

Yes, he was wrong on the Iraq War, but do you really believe he would have led us to war? Kerry's was upset at the way Bush handled the situation, and it's not fair to say that he never spoke out against it when even before the war occurred, Kerry was speaking out against it - in January, he made a speech urging the President not to rush to war. Obviously, I can't convince you if you insist on focusing relentlessly on the war vote, and that's your right, but the approach Kerry favored was EXACTLY the same approach Dean favored: Go to the UN, get inspectors in, attack AS A LAST RESORT only if an imminent weapons threat is discovered and Saddam refuses to disarm, and make every possible effort to get full UN backing.

As for NCLB, as others have pointed out, it was a Kennedy bill, and while there are problems with it, there are some good things in there, and those need to be properly funded.

I understand that the PATRIOT Act is an abomination, but some context is absolutely necessary. The approval was nearly unanimous - the only senator to vote no was Russ Feingold; even Paul Wellstone voted "yes." There were sunset provisions, and the consensus has emerged only afterward that the bill was wrongheaded - nobody, and few on the left (not to marginalize those that did) spoke out against it at the time. The current view that the Act is dangerous only went mainstream later, and Kerry and other Democrats have recognized their mistake, and Kerry has pledged to repeal it.

I acknowledge that there are many passions here over free trade, and I understand that some are disappointed with Kerry's support for free trade. NAFTA was controversial when passed, but the truth is that most experts, economists, and President Clinton all believed it was the right way to do it. The key point to understand on these three points, PATRIOT, trade, and NCLB is that hindsight is always 20-20. Kerry has been right far more than he has been wrong, and trade is an issue on which it is now clear the prevailing view on NAFTA was wrong. Kerry has pledged to revisit it, in line with the findings of most academics, economists, and experience from other nations such as Europe, which were able to trade far more effectively. All are saying now that there were inherent problems in NAFTA that should now be corrected. Kerry will do that. What's more, Kerry is not ideologically rigid. Understand that Kerry isn't like George W. Bush; he's practical and scientific and won't do something that flies in the face of facts to the contrary. If there are problems, and the left wing of the party raises them, Kerry will be responsive.

Then there are countless other issues on which Kerry is a Democrat you can be proud of. He is one of the senate's strongest environmentalists, and led the filibuster on ANWR. He's proposed a national initiative to develop renewable energy. He's a lifetime conservationist.

And do you really want a second Bush term and 3 additional Scalias on the SC? Kerry is aggressively pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and is a liberal.

I understand that if you perceive that there is no difference between Bush and Kerry, why you would not vote for Kerry; voting third-party would be justified if Bush and Kerry really were no different, or if, say, the Democratic nominee was Zell Miller.

But any objective reasoning shows that Kerry is lightyears ahead of Bush and that a Kerry presidency would be starkly different from a George W. Bush one. No, it may not be a utopia, but there is no pure candidate. To say that Kerry is the lesser of two evils is hyperbole; he is a progressive in every way. I hope you'll consider what I have said, and come around by November. I can't force you to do so, and it's your right to vote as you choose, but please pick wisely, especially if you live in a swing state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JailForBush Donating Member (753 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
22. I agree with your post, but consider these two points...
Yes, Kerry probably is no better than the lesser of evils, but consider these two points:

1. The Green Party is corrupt, too.

2. Forget the presidential election for a couple minutes and look around you. The presidential campaign is pretty much a lost cause, but there are other elections and causes where we can make a difference. I'm using Campaign 2004 to shine a light on the corrupt King County Democrats and Green Party of Seattle, rally an anti-Microsoft resistance, and try to find at least thirteen U.S. citizens who give a damn about public education.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
23. Seriously, I can only think of one reason...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
29. because he'll make better Supreme Court appointments . . .
unless you want to see Chief Justice Scalia and Associate Justice Ashcroft, you should vote for whoever the Democratic nominee turns out to be . . . if Bush wins, Roe v. Wade is toast . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fiorello Donating Member (140 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
30. Setting the voting record straight
Kerry's voting record is not 100% perfect, but it's better than you think.

The following is all from the NY Times review of Kerry's voting record
(http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/08/politics/campaign/08KERR.html):

"Mr. Kerry voted for the Clinton tax increase, raising the minimum wage, stiff gun control laws, antismoking measures and a nuclear test ban treaty. He voted against the Bush tax cuts, capital punishment, the Star Wars missile defense system and the confirmations of Robert H. Bork and Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court."

All these votes are 100% opposite to what Shrub would do.

Kerry did not vote for the Bush tax cuts.

He voted for the "Clinton tax increase" - which created the budget surpluses and economic boom of the 1990's - every ReBuplican voted against it.

Kerry may have voted to confirm Anton Scalia - there was little opposition when Scalia was nomnated - but he voted against the other ReBuplican yahoo justices (Bork and Thomas).

Kerry voted for the patriot act - but he did NOT appoint John Ashcroft to be A. General. I think it's safe to say that whoever a President Kerry appoints as A-general, it will be better than Ashcroft.

It should be pretty easy to vote for Kerry against Shrub.

Others (from NY Times review):
"He has consistently voted in favor of abortion rights, even on matters where polls showed the public to be in favor of restraints...."

"Similarly, he has been a strong advocate of gay rights, even when most senators were on the other side."

"Environmentalists also consider Mr. Kerry to be one of their most stalwart allies in politics."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
31. you're wrong about the tax cuts, he voted against them.
Other than that, I agree with your question. Also, you left out the IWR vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtf Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. Something that puzzles me
Edited on Mon Feb-16-04 02:27 PM by wtf
I've been reading this board for a couple months, and I'm having a hard time understanding why Democrats think Kerry has any shot at all in the GE, considering that most DEMOCRATS don't even like him, this makes no sense to me.

Anyone who has any iota of interest in politics both on the left AND right, knows and says openly that Edwards would be the most formidable candidate to run against Bush, and it's like we smile, nod, agree......and then vote for Kerry.

If democrats lose this election, it will be 2000 all over again, not * winning, but us losing.

ok, I had to get that off my chest real quick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #33
40. Because Clinton and the DLC said so
and Kerry has been groomed & grooming himself for this post ever since his Yale days. And now the entire propaganda machine has kicked into gear to make you buy into the Kerry coronation.

There is no other reason unless you're pro-war, pro-occupation, anti-Palestine, pro-NAFTA, pro-utility privatization, pro-corporate globalization. You might get larger crumbs under Kerry if you're into crumbs from the elitists' table.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
32. Vote Nadar - just don't bitch when we have another 4 years with BUsh
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
poskonig Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
39. I'm handing you the party line.
Bushler needs to go. Kerry supports a cooperative foreign policy, tax fairness, health care access, affirmative action, a clean environment, and has the record to back it up.

Would you rather have an administration with Wes Clark, Howard Dean, and John Edwards in it or Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Asscroft? Think about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedEarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-16-04 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
41. It's very simple........Kerry...or ....Bush
If you liked the last four years vote Bush. If not, vote for Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC