Could someone please explain to me how anyone could remain undecided at this point in the Presidential race? I just read a newspaper article that said 6% remain undecided after the last debate. There is so clear a contrast between the two that I am puzzled as to how anyone could not have made up his/her mind by now. Any thoughts? BLD
Just guessing here, but one reason could be because neither candidate is overly impressive, and neither has a record that one can point to unequivocably as one of making either the right decisions, or taking a position of unimpeachable integrity? That would make me undecided. But, in this race, I have chosen the lesser of two evils. WAY lesser of two evils. I'm willing to put up with Kerry's so-called flipflopping if it means that he will at least take an intellectual approach to foreign policy, listen to experts, try to build alliances, and not rush in with this "wingin' it" approach to winning battles (as in Afghanistan, what a JOKE).... Oh yes. Let's not forget the minimal forces that Rumsfeld deployed in Iraq too - he won the "war" but Bush can't win the peace unless we have about 5 times as many troops on the ground. These mistakes are critical failures of judgment, and President Bush should not be given a second chance. What second chance do the 1,000+ of our young men and women in uniform who are dead as a result of these goof ups have? Vote for Kerry - save our future.
I doubt the Afghanistan citizens look at it as a joke. The first democratically held elections ever! Women are freed from slavery, etc.... I'd say that is one of the greatest accomplishments of all time. BLD
Barry, (And I am not speaking of Carl.) Many on the so-called left always talk about human rights. Liberals used to care about democracy and human rights, compassion and liberty. If Clinton had freed 50 million (Iraq and Afghanistan) people, he would be hailed as another Lincoln or FDR! Regarding "undecideds," I think Carl has some valid points. A number really don't see much difference between Bush and Kerry regarding Iraq now that Kerry doesn't have to worry about Dean and is no longer an "anti-war candidate." The "undecideds" are usually comprised of two groups, those who are serious voters and want to make an intelligent choice and those who are apathetic but vote anyway. The apathetic are those who say "It doesn't matter who wins, they're all the same anyway...they're all bought and paid for...the little man has no one to vote for...there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them...etc....etc...etc..." Personally I am glad there are some "undecideds." I am in hopes those who are serious about making an intelligent decisions will decide to support Bush. We may not all agree with him on every issue, but at least we know where he stands. We know he has resolve and will not waiver, will not fail, will not falter when it comes to fighting terrorism. Bush knows the country is divided regarding the war in Iraq. Yet, as a true statesman who is more focused not the next election but on the next generation, he continues governing in ways he feels is in the best interest of the country even when not popular. It is refreshing to have a President who doesn't not govern by polls!
Why? A majority of us didn't vote for him. So why would we want him to do whatever Karl and Dick think? I kinda thought the president was supposed to represent the people. If he doesn't care what we think, don't we have an undeclared dictator?
A plurality, not majority, didn't vote for Bush. If you're worried about dictatorships why are you against Bush who freed 50 million people? Guess human rights and liberty only belong to Americans. President Carter's commitment to human rights abroad must not have been firmly entrenched into the Democratic Party philosophy. If you're that concerned about dictatorships, wait until Kerry is President and Hillary Clinton is Chief Justice of the Supreme Court! Talk about civil liberties going out the window!
Undecideds fall into two categories: 1) dumber than a bag of rocks, 2) fakers with low self-esteem who relish the attention they get from candidates fighting for their vote, and news organizations who follow same. I think most are in category 2.
I'm still not fully committed to either candidate, or perhaps more to the point, to either party. I generally take a hard line on the war on terror. The events of 9-11 put America and the world into an entirely different space, one where traditional post-Vietnam anti-war activism is no longer appropriate. Advantage Bush. But deep down I'm scared to death of the religious right, since I am one of the satanic heathens that many feel should only be considered second-class Americans, if that. Advantage Kerry. I support abortion and fetal stem cell research. Advantage Kerry. I implacably oppose affirmative action. I'm a white male and I will not support policies that discriminate against me. Advantage Bush. I support gay liberation, but I really wish that gay activists would be less prone to being "outrageous". Gratuitously outraging a powerful majority can easily turn into a death wish. Advantage Kerry. I think that the US needs to take back control of its own borders, even if that pisses off the Hispanic population. But I fear that things have unraveled too far for that to even be possible. Neither party is willing to address this absolutely critical issue. I think that the invasion of Iraq was probably a serious mistake. I was one of the first to say so here on Degreeinfo. Advantage Kerry. I think that Europe isn't the world and France isn't Europe. Paris shouldn't have a veto over US policy. Advantage Bush. But I do think that the US should try to avoid appearing as if it is contempuous of world opinion, particularly when much of the world sees our attack on a soverign state as simple super-power aggression, like the Soviet Union's invasion of Hungary. They fear that if we can do it to Iraq, we can easily do it to them. Some countries may try to go nuclear to deter us. Advantage Kerry. I think that Kerry's suggestions for solving the current Iraq quagmire are totally absurd. Create a new coalition? Composed of whom, exactly? What country is willing to commit troops that hasn't already done so? Whose participation could make things right when the US has trouble keeping a lid on? France? Advantage Bush. I don't like the suggestions that Bush "lied" about Iraq. Why did everyone from British intelligence to the Israelis think that Saddam had WMD programs? Why did Clinton maintain no-fly zones over Iraq for eight years and periodically lob cruise missiles at them, if he already knew that they were clean? Advantage Bush. The greed and corruption of America's corporate leadership makes me sick. Advantage Kerry. I feel just as negatively about the corrupt and greedy labor unions. Advantage Bush. I think that the US should be developing alternative sources of energy. Advantage Kerry. But it will be a long time before those sources become economically viable, so we need to look to increasing and safeguarding conventional oil supplies in the meantime. Advantage Bush. I think that the rising cost of health care is a tremendous problem that has to be addressed. Advantage Kerry. But I'm rather skeptical of government taking actions that would deter private investment in healthcare and biomedical R&D, then putting the money back in from tax revenues with the other hand. Advantage Bush. I favor protecting the environment and wildlife. Advantage Kerry. But I don't like the overregulation and micromanagement that have turned environmental law into a bureaucratic nightmare. Advantage Bush. I'm troubled by Bush's budget deficits. Advantage Kerry. But I'm unimpressed by unrealistic claims that they could be managed by raising taxes on "the rich". Advantage Bush. I support the police and am very tough on crime. Advantage Bush. But I think that civil liberties need to be protected. Advantage Kerry. I think that greater emphasis has to be placed on our schools. Advantage Kerry. But we can't just continue ignoring the 1,000 pound gorilla in the classroom: the fact that schools can't succeed when few of their students speak English any longer and when many students didn't even attend school in the countries they recently came from. Neither party wants to touch that one. I'm scared by the fact that Hispanics seem to be turning into a nation within a nation. There are 4 million Mexicans in Los Angeles county alone. That's certainly a critical mass, making assimilation unlikely, and I fear that ethnic separatism is probably inevitable. Nobody wants to touch that one either. I strongly support tort reform and putting a lid on class-action lawsuits and excessive punitive damage awards. Advantage Bush. Frankly, Bush's speaking style bothers me. I'm always amazed when he manages to say something intelligent. Advantage Kerry. But equally frankly, I'm a poor public speaker myself. Whenever discussion board cretins refer to the President as a "chimp", I hear the epithet as if it were directed at me. Advantage Bush. I support expanding opportunities for the poor. I strongly support things like the community colleges. Advantage Kerry. But I oppose making excuses for the poor. They have to take some responsibility for themselves. Advantage Bush. I admire Kerry's Vietnam service and don't put much credence in the swiftboat crap. Advantage Kerry. But it angers me to hear National Guard service equated with draft dodging and flying supersonic jet fighters in the vital air defense mission dismissed as if it were nothing. Advantage Bush. I think that Bush probably did get special treatment. Advantage Kerry. But I also think that Kerry undercut his own position fatally when he joined the new left and attacked his own former Vietnam comrades as war criminals. Advantage Bush. I think that if America is going to succeed, it needs to concentrate on expanding the pie, not on eternally redistributing it. Advantage Bush. But I am very hostile to outsourcing and to deindustrialization generally. That's simply a recipe for national disaster. Advantage Kerry. I think that big business and evangelical religious activists have too much influence on the Republican party. Advantage Kerry. But I think that the Democrats are in the pockets of the labor unions and race/class/gender militant groups. Advantage Bush. Just culturally, I am not entirely comfortable with the new Southern Republicans, the former Southern Democrats who switched parties after the civil rights movement and who seem to have elbowed aside the older Midwestern Bob Dole Republicans in defining the GOP's style. There's just too much Bob Jones University in the GOP for my taste. I'm more comfortable in San Francisco where I was born than in the rural South. Advantage Kerry. But frankly, I question whether the United States should be handed over to the most liberal member of the Senate. Advantage Bush. OK, bottom line, I guess that I'm leaning slightly towards Bush at this point. If the election were held today, he's who I would vote for. But there are any number of things about him, and about his party, that make me uncomfortable. I'm not really happy voting for him and I'm half tempted to just sit this election out without casting a vote for the top office. But I hate the feeling that I would be handing the country to people whose judement I trust even less than my own. Actually, if the Democrats were more friendly and welcoming to wavering Bush voters like me, instead of always constantly playing the angry sarcastic closed-minded ideologues, they might actually convince some people to switch. It probably wouldn't be all that hard. But both parties seem more interested in masturbating than in trying to be attractive and persuasive.
Bill, Thanks for taking the time to reason all that out and share it with us. In a number of areas, such as treatment of corporations and the elites, I really don't see the contrast that you do at all. I will only comment on one statement you've made: I'm pretty sure most would consider me a part of the "religious right." I have never once thought, nor heard among my "religious right" friends, any assertion that even hinted that non-Christians were second-class citizens. Perhaps if you go to the "right of the right" Falwell and Robertson types, but that is a very small minority amongst us and they're opinions are not taken seriously by most of us (in fact, much of what they say just embarasses us). In addition, they definitely do not have any influence whatsoever over Bush and the NeoCons. If so, Bush would be WAY more conservative than he is on any number of issues. I mean, in the last debate when asked if being gay was genetic or a personal choice he said, "I don't know." Hardly a hard right answer to that question! BLD
He freed 50 million , so Osama is still at loose...I think capturing OSAMA was Bush's intention to go to war in Afghanistan not to free those people. Why should we not vote for Bush... Gas prices have reached all time high... Unemployment rate is high. Salary lelvels have sky dived... 900 Soldiers died in Iraq... He went to war in Iraq to find WMD and came out with Saddam, STILL LOOKING FOR WMD.... Huge fed deficit due to foolish tax cuts.... Osama is still alive/free somewhere in the mountains of Afghanistan OR Pakistan.
rajyc, Do you honestly think that if Kerry had been the President on 9/11 that the country would be better off today? BLD
I think Kerry, like Bush, would have gone into Afghanistan. I don't have a problem with that. I think it was warranted given Sept. 11. I don't think Kerry would have messed with Iraq. That was (is) Bush's war. He wanted it from the start, and he has invented the rationale as he's gone along. I think Iraq is a HUGE mistake. I think Bush is way over his head on this one, and unfortunately, there is no way out of it without making a bigger mess of it. If Kerry wins (I don't think he will), he will have to unravel the whole thing without Iraq dissolving into more chaos. That's a formidable task for anyone. Without Iraq, we don't have $80, $120, $150, $210 billion (pick your number) down a sinkhole. Without Iraq, there are another 1,100 or so service men and women who are still alive, not to mention countless Iraqi's, as well as allied troops. In short, this country is a whole lot better off, and safer IMO, without the Iraq War. I assume that almost anyone other than Bush would have found smarter and safer ways to deal with terrorism. Kerry would not have invaded Iraq, and he certainly would not have done so in the name of God, thereby pouring gasoline on a religious holy war. You know, a truly scary moment in the last debate was the question to Bush re his religious beliefs. On the one hand, I respect the fact that he seems to be moved by his faith. However, when he admitted that it influences his foreign policy, it sent a shiver up my spine. The separation of church and state disappeared to where? Bush gives a lot of mixed messages. When pressed, he acknowledges everyone's right to faith, or not. Yet his thrust (and inspiration, it seems) in the Iraq war is HIS faith. He has willingly imposed his Christianity against Islam, and he has dragged the rest of this country into that fight. Similarly, when asked about gays, he spoke fairly neutrally about gays. That is, he generally acknowledged that they have a right to their lifestyle. Then he says, " But as we respect someone's rights and we, you know, profess tolerance, we shouldn't change -- or have to change our basic views on the sanctity of marriage." So suddenly, when he says "we" he is not including gays anymore, or those who support gay marriage. He very much sees this country as divided into camps. The conservative Christians are clearly the camp that he caters to. The rest get lip service that I don't think he honestly believes in.
Hi Tom, "When pressed, he acknowledges everyone's right to faith, or not. Yet his thrust (and inspiration, it seems) in the Iraq war is HIS faith." in my view does not mean thrusting Christianity on Islam... Saddam had a secular ideology. I don't think I would call his (or anyone else's style these days) as an Islamic governance style. In much of my informal study, I feel that classical Islamic governance style ceased to exist after the Abbasid Dynasty took hold of Baghdad in the early middle-ages. Regardless what Bush's motive was to "liberate" Iraq (I can't say if it was oil, retribution for his father - the way Saddam used to talk about him, or just a decoy for the economy), it could not have have been an imposition of Christianity on Islam... It just doesn't work that way anymore. Could have been so during the crusades and colonialism... but not these days. Regards, Mahmood
Thank you Tom. Nice response. I don't agree with everything you said, but that's what's great about living in America. Now, why didn't it bother you that Kerry said his faith governs his life and his decisions? Why didn't it bother you when Kerry, during his closing statement, said with faith in God he will lead America? Anyway, I am still waiting for Kerry's "idears" to solve "Americer's" problems, am glad he opposes "quoters," and certainly glad he has an "agender" for our country.
I am one of the undecideds. Generally, I would prefer a Republican president. In particular, I prefer the Republicans' economic policies. But from a national security point of view I support Kerry. I think George Bush's performance in this regard is so terrible that it would be dangerous to re-elect him.
Jimmy, Kerry's response doesn't bother me because I feel he would keep his faith out of his foreign policy. Bush has proved that he can't separate the two. He draws a line and says God is on our side of the line. We are right; they are evil. He has turned this into a crusade. When Kerry says faith governs his life, I believe he means that he derives strength from his faith. Bush said this too, but then he clearly crossed over and said it influences his foreign policy. I might be willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt, except that we have empirical evidence. It DOES enter into his foreign policy. Some might say it rules his foreign policy. I do have a positive thing to say about Bush and the debate. I thought his response on the last question, where he talked about his wife, was very genuine and touching. He clearly loves his family, and that's good to hear. Kerry also had a nice response regarding his wife and his mother, though I have to admit that Kerry is at a disadvantage here, because he does have a little of the Dukakis in him.
