Who are you voting for?

yeah, you're right! people should should quit whining, be patriotic, and keep a president that they don't agree with/respect/like or whatever.

btw, i'm not whining or crying when i say bush is bad. if ya wanna be a jerk about it, i'll get in your face and yell it. i am definately not better off than i was 4 years ago. and either is the country that i love.

and if ya really want to get down, i for one, and certainly not alone, am tired of sanctimonius right wing con artists "whining" about values, character, faith and patriotism. though they are the ones that "whine" the most about these "virtues", very few of them live by their own credo. don't do as i do, do what i say.

sorry. you really ticked me off. pretty hard to do. look at my other postings if ya don't believe me. your comments are too insulting to give a pass on. i have had enough of the smug right wing, or in this case, pseudo- intellectual bomb throwing.

do you really think that you are the only one with the capacity to think things through? man, i have been thinking things through on a daily basis for the last four years. and before that as well.

and ya know what i came up with?

under bush, i think things thoroughly reek.

but hey. you're the big brain around town. here's your chance to tell one and all why we should vote for someone/something we don't believe in and feel proud of ourselves...

It's the governments fault your not better off now than you were 4 years ago? and you call yourself an ex-conservative?

How about taking some personal responsibility, or is that the reason you have embraced the left?

mcg, as i recall, it was a fair question to ask during the reagan revolucion. it was o.k. for the government to take credit for bettering my/your/our life then, right? isn't that what he was sayin? since i've been president things are better?

by extension, isn't that the inherent question that arises when g.w. makes comments like "we're gettin' the job done." ?

in reagan's case, yeah, life did seem better than it had 4 years before. in bush's case, no, i really don't believe it is.

the republican party can't have it both ways. "if i ask the question, it's valid. if they ask the question, it's bunk.".

as far as taking responsibility for myself, i've been doing that for a pretty darned long time. even after i overworked myself into quadruple bypass at age 41.

what i want from government, is to do the same. both the reps and the dems need to take responsibility for their failures as well as successes. sadly, i don't feel like either side really does.

an ex-conservative. embraced the left. not really accurate. i'm conservative about some things, liberal on others;

li stopped voting republican because i felt like they had started fielding people that were more interested in molding our personal lives than performing the tasks outlined by the constitution.

let me give you an example;

a couple of years back, our city had a very good mayor. a republican. he was upbeat, inclusive and more than competant. he was also quite wealthy, having done well for himself in the private sector. when he was elected, not before, he announced that due to state law, he could not work for free. so he agreed to recieve a salary of $1.00 per year. under his leadership and bon ami, our city, which had been through some very tough and turbulant times, began to improve and flourish again. he was fair and open minded with all decent citizens. and charitable to some who really didn't deserve it. on balance, a pretty good mayor and a decent human being.

when he left office, he announced a bid for the governor's seat. i believe he would have been awsome.

he got totally fragged and ripped by the state republican party because he was pro-choice.

instead, the party fielded a "real conservative". he lost. instead we got a democratic governor, who wasn't as good as we could have had. not entirely his fault, but still...

i have a real problem resolving the stated republican stance of hands off, "smaller government" when it comes to taxation ( which btw, is what is supposed to pay for the iraq war that most republicans so heartily support) and "bigger government" when it comes to people's sex life and spiritual beliefs.

once again, the republicans can't have it both ways...

and that's why, while i find some of the ultra left stuff a little too-too, i began voting mostly democratic.

whether we vote dem, rep, liber, green or for the my god is a big rock party, it is our "responsibility" to vote for what we believe in, not for something else just because we view some of our fellow citizens as a "herd". not every human being in the world has that right.

and, that, is what ticked me off about the guy's flippancy.

I wanted to know why you are voting for Bush, not why you think others are voting against Bush. What has led you to have faith in Bush as the president?

Bush demonstrates more of the beliefs and values and judgement that I agree with than Kerry does.

exactly! "this guy represents me BETTER than the other guy". it's so easy people just have to make it hard...

and i respect your decision, honestly.

Yes I also respect your decision, but probably not your beliefs and values.

Well, it looks like quite a firestorm has hit since I last posted. I'll try to address what people have said.

argote, I'm voting for Bush in part because I don't think the country can afford a stark change in direction in our government during such a tenuous and difficult period. Plus, Bush thinks like a real leader. He's not a former lawyer or lawmaker. He doesn't fudge the edges.

Don'tTreadOnMe, I fully appreciate your enthusiasm on this subject. You obviously care about the issues. I am not saying your vote is being driven by what the crowd thinks. Its just that a good deal of people who ARE voting for Kerry are doing so, just because they have been indoctrinated by the media and by Michael Moore's feeble-minded work on the issues of the day.

Finally, someone asked me why I'm not voting for Nader, if I'm disaffected. The reason is simple but two-fold. First, Nader doesn't have a chance of winning. Voting for him is throwing your vote away, plain and simple. Finally, I think Nader's agenda would destroy the country. No candidate for President should adhere to a philosophy that makes large private corporations out to be a poisonous element in the body politic.

I am voting for Bush because I believe that he and his administration are leading this country very well. I also agree with his decisions regarding military support in Iraq. I believe that President Bush is a thoughtful leader who is not quick to judge...I believe that he is an honest man who has sincere motives for the United States of America. I believe that he has character and integrity...he holds many of the same values that I do. These past four years I have been very proud that he is this nations leader, and I think he brought value and respect back into the White House. I am honored to give him my vote this November.

I do not venture into this forum very often, and I am glad you will have me, but quite frankly, it's a little frightening with all of these personal jabs I see being thrown back and forth. It's childish...and it's also stressful to read. I am of the mind, "to each his own." If you support Kerry, great. If you are for Bush, great.

It's my opinion only, but I do not think that many votes will be turned over or won in here...these people are educated, it seems. Many of these heated debates are flat out silly. On one thread I saw that someone referred to another member as an ape? I mean c'mon. And no one is "human trash." I'll get off of my soapbox now...sorry for that!

The guy who called me "monkey girl" was banned but maybe not for that.

I notice you live in Houston so that says something about your judgement or lack of it right there. If I owned Hell and Houston, I'd live in Hell and rent out Houston.

very classy reply, harper...thanks for your thought.

How about keeping your personal judgements about other posters to yourself? You have shown your disdain for people insulting you, how about showing some manners and not insulting others?

amazing!
waiting for the other shoe to drop.

No he's not a former lawyer, just a greedy rich kid.

The big problem I have with him at the moment is that what he's said recently, that 'fighting back' doesn't cause terrorism, it defeats it, I completely disagree with. I disagree with the beliefs behind that claim. I mean, theoretically if you kill/imprison all the terrorists you should eliminate terrorism, but I belive that terrorism directed at the USA is largely the result of the USA beign extremely big and rich bullying much of the rest of the world in various ways. America has caused the terrorism that it is 'fighting,' and I wish there was a president who could acknowledge that, rather than act all righteous and portray the terorists simply as 'bad guys.'



So you have blind faith in Bush, how nice.



There are a few personal jabs here and there, but mostly it seems people come to this forum to debate, and the purpose of debate is not necerally to convince the other pserson that you are right, but to find out about what other people think, and see how it relates to what you think, and maybe modify what you think in places according to what you hear from others. Or something like that (ask Asherman, he put it much better than me). I think when it comes to beliefs and values and politics and all that, "to each his own" is the worst possible attitude you could have. Ebracing the diversity of opinion is all well and good, but it doesn't get you the party you want running the country. And avoiding debate can lead you to miss important information, or believe ridiculous things, or get cancer.

You say it's "great" if somebody supports either Bush or Kerry. You forget that those who support a third party cannot afford to hold a "to each his own" attitude - they need to convert people, get more votes for their party, otherwise their vote is wasted and their party is unsuccessful. If neither Kerry or Bush are going to do a good job, then it isn't great that people are voting for them.

I honestly dont think that our country can handle another 4 years of Bush. He's destroying this countries reputation and using Iraq like its a little GI Joe battlefield.

Well Agrote Dearie, Some of the more "sensitive" here are still very much in favor of "rotating bed partners". It is in vogue even though Republicans are claiming credit for it.

I don't see how someone can vote for a man who has been running this country into the ground since he was appointed president, I say appointed because we all know he wasnt elected. He has made life so hard on those of us who have had to bust our asses (can we swear on here?) just to make our next payment on the car or our loans and hope we have enough gas money to make it to work. I may be young but I do not concider myself naive, and you may or may not take me seriously and thats ok. But for my first time voting I will vote for Kerry because I truely believe that he will save this country. My generations depends on it.

indoctrinated? you're still saying the same thing... nobody but you, and of course the people that agree with you, have the capacity to think things through.

from what you say, it doesn't seem that you apply the same standards to people that are "informed" as opposed to "indoctrinated" by the un-kerry commercials and un-kerry news channel.

and even if i don't agree with every single, tiny, detail of the michael moore viewpoint, i give him credit for getting up and saying what he thinks. what you are saying is fleas cause dogs. and thay-ut dawg wont-ta hunt, son

i'm still waiting for the premiere of the "un-herd" documentary though

Thank you both for that wonderful unintended humor ala the Queen of Hearts!..."Off with their Heads!"