kp59583

I think the problem with Democrats is that the best one for the job of the president never gets picked to run. I would never vote for Kerry. All you have to do is look at his voting record in the senate compared to what he's saying now. Edwards or Lieberman would have been a better choice.

__________________
ATHLON XP 2600+
K7N2G-LISR
512 SAMSUNG PC2700
ACER DVD DRIVE
memorex DVD recorder
WD 80GIG 7200 HARDDRIVE
AUDIGY2 SOUND CARD
4 FANS, ANTEC 350W PWR SUPPLY
ATI 9700 PRO

Guidoo

Edwards defintley has some charisma...but as a first term senator(he has held no prior elected position) he would most likely take a hammering in a general election. Lieberman appeals to many people...but for some reason he did poorly in the primaries he ran in. Is it his style ? lack of charisma ? or something else ..I dont know the answer to this one.

As for Kerry's voting record are you basing your statement on your research or someone else's ?
I sincerely hope you are not basing your statement on Bush's anti-kerry adds. While the adds are true...they are partial truths. Toshiro had a really good post a short time ago. basically explaining why voting records are not always as they presented.

Suppose a bill funding project X is before the house or senate, but an additional spending measure for something else has been added. Now if one votes against this bill with the extras added..you are now on record as having voted against project x. If the bill later comes back up without the rider clause and you vote for project x you are still on record as having voted against project x. This is why I take any voting record claim by a polotician about his/her opponent with not one but two grains of salt.

my explanation is no where near as eloquent as Tosh's was


All this having been said....if a politicians lips are moving.....their lying....

Guido

bird chest

That is very true. They often have other things and when they tell us the bill they have the area they care about and never tell us that this included a billion here and a billion there.

Renegade[CSR]

I sincerely hope, for the sake of us all, that this poll represents a very small minority of people who are still supporting Bush. I honestly believe that all candidates are considerably bad, but Bush is the worst. I hope the American people can see this and come to their senses, if this poll holds true.

bluelight

Well has his lowest figures of support ever at the moment and they dont seem to have any initiative...on anything more that repeating the usual ..so chances are good.

Bluelight

The_Neon_Cowboy

I don’t know I herd an interesting term from annalists describing Kerry today on CNN describing him as a liberal-democrat maybe that’s why the far left like him so much?

I can't see how someone who changes their stance like the wind changes direction, every day a slightly different story... could be so well supported…


Their just stating the FACTS, most is already public record I've herd many of those else were first it just they’ve collected all this up in one place. Some of this stuff Kerry said and then changed his story I watched him both times on TV. I’ve herd him flip flop with my own two ears and watched with my own two eyes.

I wouldn't vote for Kerry if you paid me. I've never voted for president and neither has my gf but this year we will be voting... and not for Kerry pretty much goes for my while extended family as well



[COLOR=red] EDITED FOR SPELLING
-Neon [/COLOR]

__________________

PoopyTheJ

Ummm, well, I don't vote, first because it doesn't matter, secondly because I can't see actively participating in the destruction of my life and wellbeing. What I mean is, both of the Main party candidates are career politicians, they make money by stealing mine, I'm not supporting that, secondly it really doesn't matter the winners already chosen.

__________________

bird chest

Yeah since you refuse to support a party you find more appealing the guys will win. How is it already decided. Your vote really matters I do not see how it does not? 60% of americans vote if more would we could change things. Find a party you like or like more and vote for them even though they are not going to win. Force the main two to adopt principles you want. The best example of this is the Populist party in the early 1900"s. Go research it they had a real lasting effect on the two parties.

PoopyTheJ

Already decided here http://avirubin.com/vote.pdf, this is kinda self explanatory
That said, we demonstrate that the insider threat is also quite considerable, showing that not only can an insider, such as a poll worker,
modify the votes, but that insiders can also violate voter privacy and match votes with the voters who
cast them. We conclude that this voting system is unsuitable for use in a general election.

BTW that pdf is a security analysis of the Diebold voting machines, paid for with your tax dollars and selected by both parties who recieve lots and lots of money from diebold.

__________________

bird chest

My computer could not find the site. But I will take your word for the site. But I have a hard time believing that. I think the machines will remedy this problem some what but if both sides are doing this then it is still irrelevent cause you vote still counts then.

RicHSAD

wow, I can't believe so many people are voting for Bush ... After all the shit he did ... oh well.

JavaFox

If Clark was still in the race, my vote would unequivocally go to him. But since he is not, I will be voting for Bush. For why, look at Kerry's voting record on defense. I'm mad at Bush for a lot of things, but Kerry is far too bitter of a pill for me to swallow.