Who do you plan to vote for?

[glatt]

Let's say the election was today. Who would you vote for? Some of you have already said, but many haven't.

You can vote anonymously in the poll without leaving a comment if you want.

Oh, and if you aren't eligible to vote in a US election, please don't use the poll, but feel free to post any comments.

[lookout123]

Like i've said before. Bush isn't America's best choice, but he is the best choice of the available options.

[Cyber Wolf]

I still need to do some more research. It's kinda difficult to get past all the hype and soundbytes. I want to see what anyone in the race other than Bush or Kerry are saying.

[hot_pastrami]

This year's election really helps me to identify with Aron Ralston, the dude who had to amputate his own arm to save his life. I feel like I can either hack my arm off with a pocket knife and cut my losses (Kerry), or lay on the canyon floor in misery and despair until I eventually die of exposure (Bush). Sure, nobody actually wants to amputate their own arm, but when you look at the only viable alternative, it suddenly doesn't look so bad...

[glatt]

Originally Posted by hot_pastrami

This year's election really helps me to identify with Aron Ralston, the dude who had to amputate his own arm to save his life. I feel like I can either hack my arm off with a pocket knife and cut my losses (Kerry), or lay on the canyon floor in misery and despair until I eventually die of exposure (Bush). Sure, nobody actually wants to amputate their own arm, but when you look at the only viable alternative, it suddenly doesn't look so bad...

So in this analogy, is voting for Nader or Badnarik the equivalent of shooting off a flare? There's nobody within a hundred miles to see it, so it's a futile effort.

[tw]

Originally Posted by lookout123

Like i've said before. Bush isn't America's best choice, but he is the best choice of the available options.

So you advocate the destruction of free trade? If using emotions, then one will conclude that George Jr is a free trader. Facts say completely different. The US is having record numbers of decisions imposed against it by the WTO. The tarriffs to protect anti-American steel companies (USX, Bethlehem Steel, etc) was an outright violation of free trade; not based upon economic data. That attempt to get steel votes also undermined one of America's most productive industries - the America steel reprocessing industry - resulting in a loss estimated at between 20,000 and 40,000 American jobs.

Bush has a long list of facts against him. Free trade is but one example. George Jr opposes free trade. Having completely undermined the WTO conference in Mexico resulting in most nations walking out days early. Many actually 'feel' George Jr advocated free trade. The facts repeatedly say different.

When you look George Jr, do you see his propaganda as lookout123 apparently does? Or do you be blunt and politically incorrect as I am - to learn the real facts. Facts-

from The Economist of 4 Sept 2004
If has been a rough summer at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) for America's trade officials. Recently the arbiter of global trade rules has ruled against them in cases from cotton subsidies to Canadian lumber. Now the Geneva body has also meted out punishment. On August 31st, a WTO arbitration panel ruled that eight of the organisation's members, including the European Union, could impose tariffs ... on Amerian goods, because America has failed to repeal a law that the WTO first deemed illegal in 2000.

Do you believe in world free trade? Are you employed by a steel reprocessing company (ie machine shop)? Then you must hate George Jr. This is not widely known because too many naively think George Jr is a free trader. Even the advantages of NAFTA has been stifled by George Jr, in part, because his 'so called' good friend and president in Mexico opposed the war in Iraq.

[Radar]

The poll should have Badnarik in it. Michael Badnarik is by far the best choice of every candidate running.

Kerry's campaign managers have decided to not even spend the money on TV advertising in Colorado. This tells me that at least SOMEONE in his group has some common sense. Colorado is hardly a swing state and what few votes it has in the electoral college inevitably go to the republicans in presidential elections. I will vote in the upcoming election because I want to support my local democratic state representative who is facing a major battle with a wealthy republican candidate. I wouldn't vote for Bush in a million years, and I'm unhappy with Kerry. If I thought it mattered, I WOULD vote for Kerrry, however. Since it doesn't, I'll show my displeasure by writing in the name of someone on my presidential ballot - maybe Bill, The Cat of Bloom County fame.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Maybe you don't think it will count but maybe if enough elections have disparity between the popular vote and the electoral college, something will get done about it.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Maybe you don't think it will count but maybe if enough elections have disparity between the popular vote and the electoral college, something will get done about it.

Unfortunately, the disparity will always have just benefitted the ones in power, who will be less than enthusiastic about change.

[Kitsune]

Has anyone ever stopped to consider what might happen if Bush gets re-elected? While he is certainly holding back at the moment on many decisions concerning our government, if he comes in for a 2nd term he'll have nothing to lose. And you thought that Patriot Act parts I and II were bad?

Truthfully, I really, strongly dislike Kerry. But there is no way I could conciously vote for a man who seems to have it in his head that American citizens need to have their rights taken away in order to lead a safe life. Bush's plans for our country are currently being held in check by the need to stay popular with as many people as possible in order to get elected a second time. After that, god only knows what he might do.

Patriot Act III?
Iran/Syria?
Military Draft?

[tw]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Kerry's campaign managers have decided to not even spend the money on TV advertising in Colorado. This tells me that at least SOMEONE in his group has some common sense. Colorado is hardly a swing state and what few votes it has in the electoral college inevitably go to the republicans in presidential elections.

Actually the Economist has been doing a study of swing states, one by one, for months now. Colorado was listed as a swing state.

Pennsylvannia is listed as about as close as one can get. PA still uses punch hole ballots.

[lookout123]

The election is still 45+ days, 2 debates, and 400,000,000 tons of mudslinging away but the electoral count as of today is

Bush: 311
Kerry: 223

i guess bringing the Clinton team on didn't inspire that many people. i guess we'll just have to wait and see.

link

[Cyber Wolf]

Originally Posted by lookout123

The election is still 45+ days, 2 debates, and 400,000,000 tons of mudslinging away...

I'd like to see the candidates use these two debates to talk about issues that are important to ME. Up to now, neither Bush nor Kerry have really gone into depth about the issues that I really care about. I really don't care what kind of war record someone has. Military experience != ability to run a country. It would if the military controlled everything in the country but it doesn't. We (in theory) control the military. So Kerry has three Purple Hearts; kudos, but what does that have anything to do with how Kerry could, for example, fix the broken wagon that is healthcare here at home? And how does Bush's alleged National Guard experience make him someone who has a good idea how to manage the SS balloon that is very close to running out of air? My future as I see it has much less to do with what's going on on the other side of the world and much more to do with what's going on here in my backyard (especially since DC itself's a hefting stone's throw away from me). Much of the discussion has been about ultimately irrelevant points in Kerry's and Bush's personal histories and about bad-mouthing and belittling the other party and it's manner of thinking. Both sides need to come off that and talk about real issues.

Originally Posted by tw

Actually the Economist has been doing a study of swing states, one by one, for months now. Colorado was listed as a swing state.

Pennsylvannia is listed as about as close as one can get. PA still uses punch hole ballots.

I'm glad to hear that Colorado is coming up in the world. I suppose this means that I'll have to follow the state polls and see if there's a snowball's chance in hell that the Republican stranglehold on the state is weakening. I am not overly optimistic about this, nor about the possibility of electoral college reform. The idea has been bandied about as long as I've been old enough to vote (i.e. a LONG time!) with no change thus far.