Non-AABBs Only!!

He has personality he just isn't abrasive and irritating.

The personality of a three toed sloth, perhaps, but that is about it.

Sloths, kumquats, later please, thankee.

Still waitin' on onyxelle, Occam Bill (anyone seen him around?), loads others that my addled brain can't recall at the moment. Have really appreciated this thread so far, though, lots of thoughtful responses.

Hola Sozobe, I apologize for my tardiness. I would vote Bush to prevent a Hillary or Dean type of candidate. Of your four choices; as I have said before I would seriously consider voting for General Clark. His commentary on CNN long before throwing his hat in the Presidential Race impressed me a lot. He strikes me as a man who places a high value on integrity and I find that very attractive in a leader. I also think his military experience would make him most credible when negotiating global policies.
In hopes that the AABB's will respect your wishes; I'll also agree with a previous poster that any major changes in our anti-terrorist policies could prove disastrous. Rightly or wrongly; I believe the would-be Saddam's of the world have noticed that we're not just crying wolf any more. I couldn't in good conscience vote for anyone who would reverse that message entirely. Those who know me; know that I believe Iraq should only be the beginning of a world liberation movement. Ah but that is subject matter for another thread. My problems with Bush; are pretty much everything else he's done accept how he's dealt with international threats. I believe those threats are of paramount importance… and therefore will likely vote for Bush this time around. I believe 4 more years of environmental and constitutional degradation could more easily be rectified at a later date than the consequences of not finishing what we started. If Clark gets the nomination, however, I may very well change my mind. I hope that's what you were looking for. (Attention AABB's: Out of respect for Sozobe, I will not debate the merits of my opinions here.) :wink:

Hey O'Bill, nice to see ya!

Thanks a lot for your take.

You came down clearly against Dean, and possibly for Clark, any thoughts on Edwards and Kerry? Is Clark the only one who could make you think about not voting for Bush? What about as VP for Edwards or Kerry?

Nice to see you too, darling. Yes, Clark is the only one who could get my vote from that group. I wouldn't feel comfortable with Kerry taking over the "War" and I'd sooner trust a used car salesman than your average lawyer (above average is scarier still ). The Green Guy might get me yet. (The Bush brothers seem determined to raise the dumbest group of kids mankind has ever known and I do live near an aging power plant. )

Thanks for the invite, soz.
Nice effort here. It is really discouraging to try to keep a thread unadversarial-like, itn't it?

With me, as it usually turns out, I'd vote the lesser of the evils.

Clark hadn't even decided he was a Dem, until he was convinced to run. From the material I've read (not editorials, but people he served with), he's a narcissist, who made a lot of enemies while in service--he says (like Dean) what plays best at the time, and then denies or twists it later (when he gets called on it.) This happens occasionally, but he has practiced it too much for the short time he's been in the public eye. In short, I deem him another 'twist in the wind' guy. Too unknown, and what is known is pretty bad. One of the biggest evils in the Dem Derby.

Dean--Clark's twin, possibly worse. He has proven to be a loose cannon. Making bold statements, and retracting right away. People like this ...you can't gauge what he's going to do, because he doesn't seem to know himself. The 'character' issue isn't so much his 'morals', but his knowledge of what direction he plans to take the country. He assassinated his own character by making so many statements he later tried to distance from, when he was criticised for them. Also very mean-spirited and whiny about his competitors doing the very thing he was doing to them. Seems to unstable and immature to hold the office.

Edwards--No experience. Too unknown. Pablum rhetoric.

I have watched every debate and tried to catch as many interviews as I can. If I found someone of any party who I felt met my standards, I'd work for their campaign and vote for them. I'm not tied to a party or a person.

So, it seems I'd vote for Kerry, absent Lieberman.

I would have chosen McCain, had I been given that choice in 2000, but I feel Bush has addressed what Clinton left waiting for him. I do have objections/hesitation with some issues/statements Bush has forwarded, but I've never agreed with 100% of any President's actions.

Thanks so much, yours was a take I was especially interested in, Sofia. I understand you to be saying that if you were not voting for Bush, you'd vote for Kerry, but you plan to vote for Bush -- is that correct?

Well now, Occom Bill just has to come to the Florida 2004 Gathering. I'm intrigued and need to pick his brain. I'm sure Stefan and Letty would love to do the same......I say that in a very nice way, Bill!

Sophia! Good to see ya girl! (((((HUGS)))))

Voting for Bush, barring some unforeseen event.


{{{{{{{{{Rae}}}}}}}}}}

Okay, now YOU'RE going to have to come to the gathering as well.

There is much to discuss and lots of fun to have.

I reread my post, and it read so much like a soap opera. All personality issues, and no substance. I realize there is a two-tiered system I follow in finding someone I want to vote for--

First, I have to believe they have a 'vision' or a set of principles about the governance of the country. If you get a grip on someone's principles, you can comfortably assume what they might do in different circumstances.

I listen/read as much as I can about what they have done--and see if it's what they said they were going to do previously. (This is where a political history is almost invaluable.) I realize many politicians have to amend their stances sometimes--they may change their mind, or have to let go of things they can't achieve. My first tier objective in choosing a politician amounts to believability, authenticity. Clark and Dean never got over that basic hurdle. For instance, I respect Kucinich, Lieberman. I believe they are authentic. Once authenticity is established, the next round is how much I agree with the candidate's plan. I didn't agree with Kucinich's. I did agree with Lieberman's. I believe Bush is authentic, and agree with more than half of his decisions, and agree with his basic direction.

So, how about I drive up the night of April 15th, pick you up and bring you here for the gathering?

(Yes I did read what you wrote......just like with Bill, I'm intrigued.)

Rae--

When things settle down here, I am coming to your house. Don't know when it will be, but I'll bring my fishing pole. K?

Ma'am, you have an open invitation to visit whenever you like. And if you bring your pole, I'll buy the bait!

(Should I tell them to redirect? Nahhh... fellowship and niceness is fine.)

Actually, I have heard from most of the people I had in mind, would still like to hear from onyxelle, but she can PM me if she would prefer (this goes for everyone else, too -- I'm really curious about the reasons behind every single one of those votes up there), so I hereby open this thing up for a free-for-all. No more ahemming and stomping. Have fun.

Rae; I will try very hard to make my brain available for picking at the 2004 gathering, but there is a very good chance I'll be in Costa Rica at that time. I have learned that my satellite connection will survive the trip (and may even work better there), so feel free to pick it from a far. It is a very intriguing group you have signed on already, and I'd love to attend.
Sozobe; you must be getting tired of the snow... why don't you come down as well?

Is it just me; or does Kerry remind anyone else of Dukakis? I agree with Sophia that Clark and Dean have done a lot of "twisting in the wind" but I'm not sure how Kerry got excluded from the charge. I believe elections have so much more to do with perceived positions than actual beliefs that a certain amount of twisting is actually required. Apart from the obvious "quitting", I think Ross Perot fatally wounded his campaign by being too honest. Anyone resembling him would steal my vote in a heartbeat. Regretfully, I don't see anyone of his caliber ever being interested in the job again. I like the stance Bush has taken against the so called "axis of evil", and fully believe he has sent an effective, much needed, message to the Kim's of the world. His domestic policies, however, are almost as bad as his foreign policy is good. I don't think I'm paranoid (but you may) in believing our constitution is on a path to destruction regardless of who we choose this time around. If I like Costa Rica half as much as I think I will, I will probably stay. If anyone has any thoughts on this; please, please, please tell me what you think here: http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=551740&sid=be446cb910928ed68d6c5fcf0533fe0a#551740

Occum Bill ~ three days is all I'm asking for! Costa Rica cna wait three little days!

Well, Timber would rather be dead than vote Democrat, I think, but this is what he had to say about it in the other thread: