03-10-2004, 04:28 PM
Sir_Die_alot,Mar 10 2004, 03:36 PM Wrote:I see it as you do kandrathe. However nobody has commented on Kerry being chosen because "he can win". Personaly I think he will have a real struggle to catch Bush once the campaign gets going. Not because of Bush's popularity, but his own liberalism alienating conservatives. If you wanted a democrat who "could win" Lieberman (despite having a voice as boring as Ben Stein) is conservative enough that he could siphon off enough discontent conservative votes (and I think there are plenty) to give Bush a real problem for re-election. Hell, the more interviews I saw of him made me want to vote for him. :P Kerry rallys the base almost as well as Dean but I haven't seen a reason to vote for him, he is the not-Bush cantidate. Great for people who live like life Occhi's "__________'s all America's/Bush's" fault, but that isn't enough to get him elected. Not even close.Do you mean that you (maybe not "you you" but "you in general) vote for somebody because he looks like the other candidate or something?. I see that kind of voting also a lot here (NL) and I always get a bit despondent from that. (we have more political parties bij the way) So let's say you you like far right, but you see that left might win the elections, so you decide to vote moderate right, I think that is "cheating democracy". Mind you in the US presidential elections you vote for one person, so I can imagine a bit you do it, but we vote for the members of parliament, and people still do it. (yes I'm holland bashing now)
And what do you mean that Kerry is the "not Bush" candidate, to me he seemde like an okay guy, who wants some real changes.
And occhi: I agree with you that Nader is a better option. And it is also true that I blame Bush for a lot of things. Well untill somebody can tell me some positive things about this guy, how do you expect me to change opinion? :D