Kerry has lost my vote.

In the latest Gallup poll, Kerry is winning against Bush among registered voters who say they are likely to vote.

With Nader added in the poll he does not win.

Note: Not that I don't think ebrown and Edgar should vote for Nader, given the states they are in it makes little difference but there is truth in that Nader can play kingmaker and do so for the ideology that is furthest from his.

It's sort of crazy to argue the point. If Nader receives the number of votes that takes the Dems out of the win column into the loss--there's nothing more to say.

But, no matter what my political leanings, I think it's terrible to rail against anyone for voting their conscience.

It's great to be an activist and ultra-involved in politics, but trying to guilt others, or act as though they owe some sort of accountability to you for their vote, is going over the line, IMO.

As for ILZ. She seems to operate in a backasswards manner, with methods ranging from stupidity to the mildly retarded. The last time I witnessed someone here as rude as her....it was me. Abhorrent!

I support the Green Party goals, broadly speaking. As most of us are aware, a party's platform is rarely followed to the letter, if at all. It is a statement of philosophic purpose, but not binding. I think it is too soon to assess the impact of a Nader in the race and way too soon to forcast the winner in any available scenario.

Just so everybody knows - I'm not female.

Also, I am niether human nor vulnerable.

ILZ
ILZ, we already know what you are not, we're just trying to find out why?

BBB

<I knew it>

<The human part...>
:wink:

And, to put my vehemence in context, I supported Nader in 2000.

This bizarre Nader fiasco deserves a thread of its own, where sense can be pummelled into the brains of would be Nader voters.

Clearly, this task falls on my shoulders. From now on a riptide of reality will be pounded into my every sentence.

I agree with edgarblythe. There are too many people who do things according to expediency rather than principle. Of course, Nader will not win. But I, for one, after the recent events concering Iraq, will vote for him.

It is clear that President Bush has slapped all of Islam in the face with his inattention to the brutalities inflicted by the troops under his command.

It is also quite clear that Senator Kerry would do little or nothing to change our situation in Iraq.

It appears that Kerry is just as unenlighted as Bush. He will not call for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq and he endorses( for the Israeli vote?) the inhumane policy of Sharon's political assassinations.

The only principled person in this race is Ralph Nader.

Pound away ironzion of lion.

Edgar
Edgar, history tells us that poets always can slay lions.

BBB :wink:

But can poets slay politicians?

mporter
Poets always have, always will.

Interesting fact that during the Civil War, newspapers were threatened if they reported the real story of the tragedy of the war. But poets wrote about it unthreatened. Why? Because the government considered poets of no importance. So we have the personal history of the war by poets to remind us of their importance.

BBB

But, where are the poets when ya need one?

Edgar
Why, Edgar, we've got our own.

BBB

Who was the poet that wrote:

"Would it have been worth while,
To have bitten off the matter with a smile.
To have squeezed the universe into a ball
To roll it towards some overwhelming
question,
To say: "I am Lazarus, come from the dead.
Come back to tell you all. I shall tell you all.
If one, settling a pillow by her head,

Should say: That's not what I meant
at all. That is not it, at all".

you are kindove weird cause i don't think so but if they can i wanna stay away but i liketo kill people bye

ILZ, Are you a killer like Bush who can kill over 10,000 innocent people, and not have any guilty feelings?

or like Arlo Guthrie when he says, "Shrink, I wanna ... I just wanna kill ... kill... kill"
Shrink says "You're our boy."

Re: Scrat

I wasn't referring to their sweeping general statements... that's fluff, and written so as to sound innocuous and receive a "gee, that sounds nice enough" from those who don't dig deeper.

Do you support these specific goals of the Green Party of America?:

1) Confiscate the assets of the 500 largest companies in the US.

2) Provide federal government housing to every person in the US.

3) Guarantee every person in the US a job at a "living wage".

Do you actually support these goals? If so, do you think they are reasonable? Do you think anyone has really considered the costs and consequences of such action, beyond the "gee, it sure sounds nice" level? (I don't.)

Scrat
Scrat, for once I had hoped you were not playing the usual game, but it seems you can't resist doing it.

Where do you find the Green Party goals you cited? Or are they just your fantasy and you going to hide behind the old cliche of its just a communist plot?

BBB