To those who plan on voting 3rd party in non swing states

Yep, you can get away with voting Green in Texas, most of the south or places like Mass. and New York.........just as long as too many people don't do it. ;-) so we can't really scold you for that, you're alot better than those that do it in Oregon or Pennsylvania.

But just think about how much more satisfying it would be to pull the lever or press the button FOR KERRY, a true vote to wound Bush! How good would it feel to draw that curtain, stare down Bush/Cheney on the ballot, then cast your vote for Kerry. I just want to savor it. It'll be the best 30 seconds of our lives :-) shame we can only do it once, but it'll sure let out alot of aggression!

nt

How good will it feel to vote for the lesser of two evils? Let me think on that...

including the Greens.

Kerry is infinitely better than Bush, this should be quite apparent by now.

If Kerry is "infinitely" better than Bush, what would that make Howard Dean, a guy whose positions I like better than Kerry's?

Infinity Squared better than Bush?

How exactly does that work? I was never that good at math. <snicker>

plus he is voting for John Kerry, and campaigning his heart out for him.

I believe that John Kerry will put Howard Dean in his admin, and this will be a stepping stone in Howard Dean's Political Career.

OTOH, I do not believe that GWB has a position for Dean in his admin.

...Infinity Squared plus One better than all of them. :)

I like more variety than neoliberal vs neocon.

if you want to help give a Democratic President a mandate for changing Bush*'s policies

having more nuance, how would it give him a mandate to change Bush's policies? He would only get a mandate for nuance. He is running on not being Bush, and abortion rights, though he bragged about voting for Scalia as SC Justice. So that is tepid too.

I really think this mentality is our problem, we do not know when and how to pick our battles. I agree that Kerry is not the most progressive candidate out there but it would seem that in order to have any f'ing chance of getting this fascist out of the White House and saving our democracy he IS the choice. Damn right you pick the lesser of too evils, either that or you might as well call Big Brother now and have them install that two-way video. "Nederland, do your calisthenics, Big Brother is watching."

not giving Kerry a chance. It doesn't. It only tells the dems we ain't their peons. I don't want to be their peons anymore. I want a party that represents me better.

Nader may have been a progressive way back in the 70's but now he is simply ego-centric and delusional. Why didn't he win back then--because everyone knew that his policies only worked in some ideal world that only existed in his dreams. They won't work now, either, because he doesn't see that coalition building it the only way anything of importance gets done and he won't join in the building. In at least one respect he is even more evil than the evil *, he holds out this dream when he knows that it is unattainable.

You don't like Nader. Fair enough. However, the original poster seems to imply that people in non-swing states should vote for Kerry even if he isn't their first choice. I think its bad enough that people in swing states don't get to vote for their first choice because of political realities, but this idea is just plain stupid. If you live in a non-swing state you should vote your conscience--period end of story. Otherwise, what's the point of voting at all? My vote is a way of telling elected officials what I want. I'm not going to throw it away on my second choice.

Cthulu for preside... Wait... new News coming in... What's this... Bush is more evil than Cthulu? WTF... Oh he's taking Cthulu as his running mate... Got it.

Kerry isn't evil, but y'get the point.

of my life?
Nope. I have a life thankfully.
If it was going to be a political event the best 30 seconds would be when I told the draft board in 1974 that I was a conscientious objector or when I had a conversation over supper with David Dellinger or a host of others.


on edit -- why am I being a Grinch?
:)

it's about pushing up the numbers

"But just think about how much more satisfying it would be to pull the lever or press the button FOR KERRY, a true vote to wound Bush!"

And maybe because my vote wouldn't be FOR Kerry? While he *may* end up getting my vote in November, it will simply be a vote against Shrub, not one for him.

Be happy voting for Kerry if that's what you want- I'm glad you have a candidate who inspires you so much. But understand that there are a number of people who don't care to savor such an act, and instead will want a shower immediately afterward.

Which means he needs every vote possible.

To those who say Kerry's not liberal enough: the only way he gets 'permission' to go further left after taking office is with MORE votes. If he wins by only a slim margin, the media/Republicans in Congress/general public will expect/MAKE him govern from positions close to the opponent he only JUST beat.

He needs a MANDATE. He needs as MANY VOTES AS POSSIBLE.

Only THEN can he govern the way you want him to. So you have to vote for him and then hold him accountable to your views. More or less. :)

All the Kerry spinners are saying he won't be able to do anything liberal because he has to balance the budget. He can't do that easily because he won't tax rich people having promised corporate America not to be a redistributionists. Why the hell does he require a mandate to be a boring ass manager? How the hell would it be easier to hold him accountable after he is elected. We face the same problem in the next election. Furthermore he has promised already he won't govern the way I want him to.

if somebody doesn't balance the budget, there will be no economy to drive our liberal programs.

It would have been a much more fertile ground for liberal social initiatives if Gore had beaten Bush, and Gore would indeed have beaten Bush had it not been for the abandonment of the fringe left.

Liberals cut their own throats last election. It truly amazes me that we are gearing up to do it AGAIN?!?

are not threatening the Presidency of John Kerry in anyway. I don't agree that balanced budgets are the most important thing on earth. I am a Keynsianist. Roosevelt did just find worrying about the poor first. Furthermore if he were really interested in balancing the budget he wouldnt' be promising not to tax corporations or the rich.

The hard fact is, thinking about the poor first is all very warm and moist, but if you want social spending to help the poor you need government revenue, if you want revenue you need income, and if you want income you need to think about the middle class first: low taxes and low interest rates.

Despite their unemployment they weren't starving because of them. Also the war itself was a form of Keynsianism. The war econmy thrived because of the Arms Industry. He did it at a time when there wasn't much revenue. There was hardly any revenue in the 30s because of the depression and there was no revenue in the 40s because of all the tax payers serving in the war. The war may have been the finale thing that pulled us out of the depression, but we were definately moving out of it already and it was because of Keysianism. It also accounts for our wealth in the 60s.

I don't want to tax the middle class. The wealthy and corporate America should be taxed, and Kerry has promised to protect both of them. If Roosevelt had thought like you the new deal would never have been hatched. Since this war is dragging us down I am not sure I believe the WWII pulled us out of it bs. There was terrible unemployment after the war was over, and it lasted till the mid 50s. It is just a fact that the depression was so bad that the recovery took a long time. In the mean time the poor were maintained through social programs, and eventually more powerful labor unions.

did you just make it up?

candidate that wants to get me out of the war, and I would feel better about sending a message to both Bush and Kerry that I am a real constituancy to be satisfied.

candidate that wants to get me out of the war, and I would feel better about sending a message to both Bush and Kerry that I am a real constituancy to be satisfied.

Sure, people have a right to vote for whomever they wish. And in the non-swing states, like mine, their vote won't kill a Kerry win through the electoral college. But then it'd be so great for Kerry to win BOTH the election AND the popular vote. It'd really send a message.

and foriegn policy agenda legtimized than to legtimize Kerry. Because both parties offer the same conservative views on the matter, no matter who wins those liberal views get marginalized. Then Kerry and Bush will claim they aren't popular, when in fact they weren't offered in the first place. I care about issues.

http://acuratings.com/acu.cgi?ACT=1&USER_ID=2826&YEAR=2003


ACU Ratings for Senator Kerry:

Lifetime 5

I've been a good little Democrat, voting for the Democratic candidate even when I felt I was compromising my ideals.

I thought maybe this year it would be different. I would for the 1st time be able to vote for the person I really wanted for president.

But, that was not to be. We can't have a plain spoken, honest candidate. That ain't real politics.

So, for my fiftieth year on this earth (and being in a swing state) I have decided to write-in my choice.

Fuck TPTB, the one thing they can not get from me is my vote.

Draft Ron Paul! :)

Maybe you really DON'T understand how bad a shape we are in right now.

This isn't about loving Kerry. We haven't seen him govern. Did you ever consider the possibility he would govern to the left of his campaigning? Give him a chance. If he isn't better than Bush. Vote him out.

If you live in a swing state and are a liberal, there really is no excuse for not voting democratic in this year's election.

Either that, or Bush's policies don't really effect you...

It just won't be Kerry.

Please note my sig line.

sell the entire country down the river if they don't get"exactly" what they want. Compromise isn't in their vocabulary.Strange when they supported a conservative candidate(rated the fifth most conservative governor in the nation by the Governors Assoc.) who passed himself off as both a liberal and anti-war, neither of which was true .A brief perusal of his record prior to the primary will prove those to be facts. And now this same candidate endorses Kerry , but some of his followers are too ideologically pure to compromise. Better we should have four more years of bush do they can vote their "conscience".
I have no job and my husband was laid off. We have no health insurance. I have no concern for their "conscience". They might be more willing to compromise and less"limousine liberal" if they had a few of the basics taken away.It is Kerry in November. and there is no other choice.

That's the sound of your vote going down the drain. And the glow you feel is the Republican Party showering you with love and gratitude.