Why Vote for Bush/Kerry?

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-09-20 06:49pm

As far as I can understand the US election, it can be more or less summed up as "vote for Kerry, because he's not Bush" and "vote for Bush, because he's not a wishy-washy idiot like Kerry".

Now as a homework assignment if you will, explain why one should support Kerry without using the words "not Bush" or "won't do what Bush will do", in other words, why is Kerry good and why should one vote for him? And then do the same thing with Bush. What are their policies, what do they plan, what do they stand for, and why should one vote for them other than "he's not the other guy"?

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-09-20 07:20pm

Vote for Kerry because it'll send a message to future candidates that incompetence in the first term will not be tolerated by the American public, even if the challenger is a lukewarm liberal.

If a company's CEO is doing a bad job, the guy is out, period. Doesn't matter whether or not they think the next guy will be better, worse or the same. It conveys the message that if you do not do well at the job, you will not keep the job. It gives an incentive to succeed.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-09-20 07:27pm

If a company's CEO is doing a bad job, the guy is out, period.

You don't know much about the business world, do you.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-09-20 07:34pm

Durandal wrote:Vote for Kerry because it'll send a message to future candidates that incompetence in the first term will not be tolerated by the American public, even if the challenger is a lukewarm liberal.

And that's not "He's not Bush" how?

There really any positive reason to vote for either of the canidates. Mostly it's what they're not and the degree of what's wrong with them. Both of them are spectacular fuck ups.

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-09-20 07:37pm

I want to say "voting for Kerry will slow down the fundamentalist Religious Wrong's plans for domination" but that probably counts as "not Bush" also.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-09-20 07:38pm

Mayabird wrote:I want to say "voting for Kerry will slow down the fundamentalist Religious Wrong's plans for domination" but that probably counts as "not Bush" also.

Actually, that is a half decent reason. It would be more so if Kerry weren't half way to the religious right on some issues like gay rights.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-09-20 07:40pm

Vote for bush because he's restarted the design of nuclear arms!

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-09-20 07:51pm

Stormbringer wrote:
Mayabird wrote:I want to say "voting for Kerry will slow down the fundamentalist Religious Wrong's plans for domination" but that probably counts as "not Bush" also.
Actually, that is a half decent reason. It would be more so if Kerry weren't half way to the religious right on some issues like gay rights.

That's why I say "slow down." It'll at least remove some of their current political momentum. And if delayed long enough, you'll have my generation start to take over with their more socially liberal views on gay rights and things like that. I can't see my friends listening to eighty year old fundiecrats when they get into their late twenties/early thirties, get families and careers and a voice the politicians will listen more to. It'd be much like my parents not listening to eighty year old segregationists when they got married and had me.

Text edited. --Beowulf

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-09-20 08:02pm

MKSheppard wrote:Vote for bush because he's restarted the design of nuclear arms!

But you can't hug your children with nuclear arms!

theski · Post by **theski** » 2004-09-20 08:06pm

Joe wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:Vote for bush because he's restarted the design of nuclear arms!
But you can't hug your children with nuclear arms!

WWJN

"What would Jesus Nuke"

Sharpshooter · Post by **Sharpshooter** » 2004-09-20 08:11pm

Vote for the Kerry/Edwards Ticket because:

(Valid reasons)

They will invest in developing renewable sources of energy, helping us wean ourselves from our dependency on foreign fuels.

They will reverse the Clean Air act, cutting maximum emission levels back down to the third of today's standard they were before its instatement.

They will see to it that broadband and high-speed internet systems are ade available to the people, instead of sitting in a warehouse somewhere.

(Cheap Reasons)

Because God doesn't give them directions on what to do.

They don't have two web pages to confuse the hell out of people (The Reps have www.georgewbush.com and www.bushcheney.com, the second of which should be the real site - it's not a one man show, you know).

Their don't start peddling goods at you right off the bat.

Theirparty updates their web pages (as of this moment, the Republican Convention is still taking place, according to Bushcheney.com)

Their web page didn't cause IE to perform an illegal action and shut down.

...man, it's nuts trying to avoid compare-and-contrast reasons...

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-09-20 08:17pm

Joe wrote: You don't know much about the business world, do you.

Actually, it is precicely analogous to the business world since the definition of a good job is decided by the stockholders.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-09-20 08:24pm

They will reverse the Clean Air act, cutting maximum emission levels back down to the third of today's standard they were before its instatement.

Uhuh. And what do you think that will do to the already-ravaged US economy?

They will see to it that broadband and high-speed internet systems are ade available to the people, instead of sitting in a warehouse somewhere.

They havn't explained how they are going to do this. One of the reasons broadband internet isn't as common in the US is because the entire population is spread out over such a wide area. It's alot easier to implement broadband here in Canada, where 80% of our population lives within 500km-wide strip along the US border.

Bugsby · Post by **Bugsby** » 2004-09-20 08:50pm

Ma Deuce wrote:
They will reverse the Clean Air act, cutting maximum emission levels back down to the third of today's standard they were before its instatement.
Uhuh. And what do you think that will do to the already-ravaged US economy?

Bullshit. Employment is down, but revenues are on the upswing. We have a recovery, its just not a good recovery because all the money is going to people on the top and jobs arent being created. Sure, it will slow the growth rate, but to make an omlette you have to break a few eggs, right? And besides, slowed growth is a fair price for saving the economy. Every Republican I talk to about the Kyoto treaty says that it was voted dwon because it allowed China and India to be outside the regulations because they needed increased emissions for their industry. If "we need increased emissions to help our industry" is a terrible argument, then it applies to US corporations. I really don't get the "we could save the environment from going straight to hell, but then we wouldn't make our quarterly numbers!" argument. It's so short-sighted its ludicrous.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-09-20 09:22pm

If "we need increased emissions to help our industry" is a terrible argument, then it applies to US corporations. I really don't get the "we could save the environment from going straight to hell, but then we wouldn't make our quarterly numbers!" argument. It's so short-sighted its ludicrous.

The trouble with Kyoto is it's targets are totally unrealistic. Shortly after the EU implemented Kyoto, they found that they would miss it's 2010 emission control targets by a fair margin (Linky). Kyoto is bullshit. It needs to be scrapped and a treaty with more realistic goals should replace it (naturally, this a treaty should not exempt the developing world like Kyoto does, because by far they produce the most air pollution per capita)...

salm · Post by **salm** » 2004-09-22 05:46am

i´ll vote for kerry because he opposes the death penalty (at least a bit).

Stormin · Post by **Stormin** » 2004-09-22 09:41am

Vote for John Kerry 'cause he is a war hero!
(Warning, don't follow link if you lack a sense of humor

)

Thinkmarble · Post by **Thinkmarble** » 2004-09-22 11:07am

Ma Deuce wrote: The trouble with Kyoto is it's targets are totally unrealistic. Shortly after the EU implemented Kyoto, they found that they would miss it's 2010 emission control targets by a fair margin (Linky). Kyoto is bullshit. It needs to be scrapped and a treaty with more realistic goals should replace it (naturally, this a treaty should not exempt the developing world like Kyoto does, because by far they produce the most air pollution per capita)...

Greenhouse gas production in co2 equivalents per year per capita:
USA 25 (only beaten by Australia and Luxemburg)
Germany 11-12 (slightly above avagerage for the EU )
China 2-3

OnTopic:
- better health care program
- better economic policies
- less interference from him in the science area
- plans to combat outsourcing by investing in education
- in favour of more civil rights for homosexuals

paladin · Post by **paladin** » 2004-09-22 09:20pm

I think I'll vote for Colin Powell.

Guardsman Bass · Post by **Guardsman Bass** » 2004-09-22 09:39pm

I'm voting for Kerry(I'll be eighteen by the time elections come around), because of two reasons:

1. I like his position on stem cells and health care, and I figure he probably won't be able to do much difference than what Bush is doing right now in Iraq

2. I believe that as soon as he gets in office(if he's elected), we'll never hear about this "war hero" blah from him ever again.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-09-23 12:51am

Thinkmarble wrote:Greenhouse gas production in co2 equivalents per year per capita:
USA 25 (only beaten by Australia and Luxemburg)
Germany 11-12 (slightly above avagerage for the EU )
China 2-3

You got me on that one, but there's still no reason why China should be exempt. Their total CO² output is still about 2/3s that of the United States. Also, my point about Kyoto's utterly unrealistic targets still stands.

BTW, your info seem a little out of date: Australia and Luxembourg are actually now slightly below the US in terms of CO² emmisions per capita, however the US is still below Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, and Qatar (in ascending order). Qatar's CO² per capita output is more than double that of the US, the UAE about 50% more. Kuwait is closer, but still above the US by a comfortable margin, and Bahrain is only slightly above.

Source

Agrajag · Post by **Agrajag** » 2004-09-23 02:26am

I personally cannot believe that so many American's, upon being asked why they would vote for Bush, say "I like the way he speaks."

WHAT? I hear that type of comment all the time and the amazing part about it is that they never say they like what he says, it's almost always about HOW he says it. I always want to jump through the TV and say, "BUT DO YOU LISTEN TO WHAT HE IS SAYING???"

The other day Bush actually got on Kerry for incorrectly calling Lambau Field, Lambert Field. Several of my conservative friends thought this was great. My first thought was, "Are you joking?" Bush has single-handedly created an entire, highly-successful industry on his adventures in grammar. The depths that this guy will sink to is just amazing. You have to give Karl Rove credit. He doesn't give a damn about hypocrisy as it appears most of their supporters aren't capable of spotting it.

BTW, my other favorite was when Cheney stood in front of a large audience and actually had the balls the utter the phrase, "...and we've lowered the cost of healthcare for everyone."

I won't be at all surprised to hear them claim that they cured Death. When you figure out it's not true, it'll be too late for you to vote.