Democrats & Liberals: Archives

Bert

By the time many people read this, the election will be decided (I hope).

Let’s look at the positives.

It looks like a record number of people will vote. Pundits have called this election divisive, and it is, but it may also be remembered as the election that cracked traditional blocks. Some Evangelicals, as you mention, might begin to vote for Kerry. And it looks like George Bush will get twice the Black vote that he got in the last election.

It is never good for any group when politicians think their votes are in the bag. It is probably not good for the U.S. to be divided that way.

It also seems to be an election not tied to any particular issue. Some voters are basing their decision on terrorism; others on the economy. The single-issue voters (abortion, gay marriage) seem less prevalent this election.

In any case, this is a time for unity. I don’t know who will win, so I am writing this for either Kerry or Bush. I will support my president.

Jack,

It’s funny that you’ve accepted as the truth that Bush will supposedly get double the number of Blacks votes. I’ve heard the same thing repeated often by Republicans lately, but never identifying the source or explaining why. It was heard so often, it is no surprised that the likes of Wolf Blitzer soon repeated it as gospel.

It’s based solely on one survey of 1600 Black Americans. Those voters supposedly switching to Bush, solely based their decision on the Gay Marriage issue.

This means that those same voters will vote for Bush, in spite of recent racially tinged reports of voter suppression, a White Supremacist running as a Republican in Tennessee and 2 high profile Black U.S. Senate candidates.

I do not need recent polling showing Bush’s Black voter support back at 9-10% percent, to realize why we Kerry voters are much more confident.

Bert

We will know soon.

But maybe not all voters are falling for that tired old racist politics. Jesse Jackson and AL Sharpton are getting old and so are their lines. To paraphrase Jesse Jackson, they are just old wine bags with sour wine.

Well, one thing is for sure: Voters of all sorts are turning out in droves. I take this as a sign that formerly recalcitrant voters are getting in to vote for Kerry, but either way it means Americans are bothering to make their voices heard as they haven’t in a very long time. And that has to be good news.

I for one cannot support a President when I know he is wrong. If George W. Bush manages to squeeze out a victory (or steal another one) I will be among the hundreds of thousands who will come forward and begin to fight for our country by getting behind any and all candidates that oppose his policies, his administration and his lies.

Dale:

Now how patriotic is that…and how mature? Basically, you are saying that if you don’t win, you are gonna run home with the ball to mommy. Very childish.

I’ll prefer Jack’s mature way of handling things. Jack will support the UNITED STATES by supporting its President, whomever it ends up being. That is how you show patriotism.

Bert: by the way, I dont care if Bush is predicted to win twice the black voters or half the black voters. By tomorrow, we will KNOW the score on that issue, rather than trying to predict it. Predictions at this point are simply pissholes in the snow.

Joe,

Very sarcastic paraphrasing of Dale’s post. For one, I agree with him. If the neocons steal another election, we must get behind our country and fight for it. That means fighting against the repression and deceit that they have fostered from day one. Their agenda is a disastrous one. I won’t go into all of it now, as most has been previously posted and discussed. How people can still support the neocons is what baffles me. Jack and your assumption that you would automatically be supporting the US if you stand behind a Bush Admin, is utterly naieve. I’m sure you both stood behind Clinton when he was Pres…

I was unhappy with the last election, and I DID try to get behind the President. Especially after 9-11. The President used that goodwill and trust to invade a sovereign nation. This invasion has killed over 100,000 people from that nation, and over 1,000 in ours. I could maybe forgive the misguided economic principles like cutting taxes during war and running up debt. I may even tolerate his ignorance of foreign nations, and his butchering of the English language, but I cannot stand behind someone who is incapable of admitting when he’s made a mistake.

Bush is a guy whose lost, doesn’t have a map, but will never stop and ask for directions. I just want out of the car.

I was unhappy with the last election, and I DID try to get behind the President. Especially after 9-11. The President used that goodwill and trust to invade a sovereign nation. This invasion has killed over 100,000 people from that nation, and over 1,000 in ours. I could maybe forgive the misguided economic principles like cutting taxes during war and running up debt. I may even tolerate his ignorance of foreign nations, and his butchering of the English language, but I cannot stand behind someone who is incapable of admitting when he’s made a mistake.

Bush is a guy who’s lost, doesn’t have a map, but will never stop and ask for directions. I just want out of the car.

I stood behind Clinton and actually voted for him in 1996 and Gore in 2000. Clinton, for all his faults, tried to reach out. Maybe erstwhile Clinton supporters can learn from him.

Supporting the president does not mean you agree with everything he does. You can oppose him in all the legal and ethical means possible. But you still have to do your duty to your country and you should consider the consequences of your hatred for yourself and others around you.

I choose not to hate. I choose to try to make things better.

Gene:

I dont think I put much spin on Dale’s statement, though I’ll admit to the sarcasm. He’s the one who said that if Bush wins, he will actively oppose him. To oppose your own country’s leadership isn’t exactly a hallmark of patriotism.

Now, there’s a difference when the country is led by a dictator who doesnt hold the support of much of the country. But, Bush is nothing like a dictator, and he holds the support of roughly 50% of our country, according to every poll conducted. To actively try to undermine a leader who has this level of support is simply childish and churlish, and is evident of a lack of patriotism. Patriotism is not synonymous with simply greedily wanting to get one’s own way.

Nixon, of all people, showed true patriotism when he chose to not challenge the 1960 election, which possibly could have been fraudulent. He did it for the good of his country, despite what it meant for him personally. Al Gore did the same thing by not continuing his challenge once the USSC made its decision. I had no problem with him challenging the election in a proper and legal manner, and respected him for not taking it outside the legal and Constitutional realm.

Your post also assumes facts not in evidence, when you suggest that the 2000 election was stolen. There has been much investigation into the 2000 election, and there is not a single REPUTABLE source that claims the election was stolen.

You said something intriguing in your post, when you admitted to not understanding how so many can support Bush. Yet its evident that almost half the country DOES support Bush and his policies. That you can’t fathom this indicates a potential blindspot.

For instance, I can’t fathom the support for Lyndon LaRouche, but then again, he doesnt garner much support. I CAN, on the other hand, understand the support for Kerry, even while I disagree with some of the reasons people give. Being able to intellectually understand different viewpoints, even while disagreeing with them, is an important aspect of intelligence.

I’ll choose to stick with Jack on this issue. I will support Kerry as my president if he is elected, even while I’m sure I will disagree with some of his policies.

Joe:

Sorry, I didn’t know you were posting as “Don” (and I mean no sarcasm here) so I’ll post as “DonO” in case you wish to go back to it.

Anyhow…

I really don’t think It’s unpatriotic to NOT support the leadership. It would be unpatriotic to oppose the process, which I won’t. If Bush wins, I’ll have to live with the results. I think America has made the progress it has based on patriotic stances against policies that have drifted away from the left or the right. It’s a fluid system that will continue to vascilate.

Our current political climate if very far to the right. For Republicans to have a hope of getting elected, they mush pull out the stops when courting evangelical christians, and the other religious right. I think these are dangerous waters that we’re treading in. I strongly support a secular nation. Especially when the “terrorists” that we fight are similarly minded religious extremists. A Palastinian who blows himself of up in the marketplace is the bretheren of the protestor bombing an abortion clinic. Both let their religious veiws try to influence a political adgenda.

I’ll continue to fight for these beliefs within our system, that while not perfect, is the best that I know of for affecting change.

I’d like to add a paraphrased setiment of one of our fore fathers… while I may disagree with your opinion(s), I would fight to the death to defend your right to express them.

To me, that is the ultimate in patriotism.

Thanks,
DonO

Joe,

While I wouldn’t call Bush and his neocons a dictatorship, I feel their threat to our republic is nonetheless very severe and real. When it comes to their efforts to “undermine” LABOR, I will OPPOSE them. When it comes to attacking a sovereign nation under the pretense of a threat to National Security, I will OPPOSE them. When it comes to providing tax relief for the wealthy while stripping funding for other significant and far more worthy programs, I will OPPOSE them. When it comes to their ignoring energy alternatives and good solid SCIENTIFIC environmental policies, I will OPPOSE them. And when I do, I will consider it my PATRIOTIC duty to do so!

I don’t think that Dale’s post said he would “undermine” anybody. He merely said he would do exactly what the red team has already done; “by getting behind any and all candidates that oppose his policies, his administration and his lies.” Sounds just like the stuff from the other side, especially during Clinton. Now, you can choose to slant it any way you want if that means you are “Being able to intellectually understand different viewpoints, even while disagreeing with them, (is an important aspect of intelligence).” But the fact remains, most of the red team canNOT understand our fervor, nor can we theirs. If you want to loftily insinuate that this has something to do with intelligence, then go ahead, bark up that tree. And just a tidbit, the 50% figures that are floating around are gathered from LIKELY VOTERS. We may see other evidence today. I can fathom why so many do support Bush, I just can’t fathom their ignorance.

Gene

Kerry wins pivitol trio of PA, Fla, Ohio. Also takes, MN, Iowa, & Wisc. Stuns the pundits by taking Virginia and Colorado.

Bush reclaims his remaining states from 2000. Also wins in NM and Hawaii.

Kerry goes over 300 electoral votes, while winning the popular vote by a narrow 2%.

Kerry wins pivotal trio of Ohio, Fla, & PA. Also takes Wisc, MN, Iowa & NH. Big surprise wins in Virginia and Colorado.

Bush reclaims other red states from 2000 along with picking up Hawaii and NM.

Kerry surpasses 300 electoral votes, while notching a 2% edge in popular vote.

In other words, its all over by 8:30 pm tonight EST.

DonO:

I’m confused by your “Don” reference, but liked your post nonetheless. I dont see some of the things you see as problems. Our country shifts like a pendulum, and I dont see most of the evangelicals as being religious extremists. To be sure, there are some, but the vast majority are intelligent and fair people.

Gene:

I may have taken Dale’s comment further than he intended it to go. If so, my apologies to Dale.

Regarding intelligence, I think it does take intelligence to see other people’s point of view and to understand those points of view. It also takes a measure of intellectual curiousity. You can call me or anyone who supports Bush ignorant, but its a misnomer. I think I’ve shown you that I have a valid viewpoint based on factual events. It just so happens that my conclusions differ from yours but its more a difference of outlook than of ignorance.

I do think the line between opposing policy that one does not like, and opposing the country in a non-patriotic manner can be a fine line. And that goes for either side. People may be crossing that line now and they may have crossed it during the Clinton presidency. But as DonO said, he’ll fight to the death to defend the right to express opinions, and so would I.

As far as the 50% being LIKELY voters or whatever—-I dont think that matters. My point was simply that our country was very evenly divided in the 2004 election, and remains very evenly divided. 51-49% would be pretty evenly divided, and we are much closer than that by virtually every poll. We’ll see how close the polls really are, but I suggest the outcome will be very close, regardless.

Joe,

I don’t think that it is such a fine line between not supporting errant policy “and opposing the country in a non-patriotic manner”. The fine line is what and who get to define PATRIOTISM. All the recent inuendo from the right claiming that war opponents were UNpatriotic?

You said: “It just so happens that my conclusions differ from yours but its more a difference of outlook than of ignorance.”

I agree. Don’t take this wrong, but in my OPINION, there are 2 types of Bush supporters: 1) Neocons, or at least those that share the outlook of the right and 2) those who are ignorant to the real facts (or are, more mildly, “unaware” of most aspects of the Republican Party Platform). I know from personal experience that there are a lot of people who share your outlook. But I live and work with a lot of conservatives here in the midwest and many are voting one issue (and one issue only!): ABORTION. That someone would vote for an admin that is responsible for tens of thousands of Iraqi men, women and children’s deaths just because they oppose abortion is what I can only understand as IGNORANCE.

I in no way want to imply that you are ignorant, as your writing is evidence to the contrary, nor do I accept that I have a “blindspot”. But when I see people led by the rhetoric coming from the right wing (perception control) propaganda machine to make decisions affecting my country’s well being, I am at a loss to describe it other than ignorance. Otherwise, I think I am intelligent enough to understand that some are genuinely right wing believers and I also can agree to disagree.

Gene in MO

Everyone,
I’ve never entered a blog before, so forgive me if I’m violating any “blogcodes”, but I’ve found all of your comments interesting. I’m especially drawn in by the conversation on “Patriotism”. I feel that this administration has used that word as a threat, and so it has lost all meaning in my world. What is patriotic? I believe that it is paying attention to the WORLD around you, and actively working to better your own community. You can learn a lot from being a “citizen of the world”, which you can use to improve your own country. I don’t feel that I need to support my president and his actions in the world to be patriotic. I love this country and feel honored to be born here, but lets face it, our administrations have made a lot of bad decisions. We hold a majority of the power in this world, and I believe that we use it poorly over and over again.
As far as this election goes, the reason that this one is so heated is because many of us beleive that this administration has done harm to this country, and we’re mad. I want to feel proud of this country again.

I too think the use of the term Patriotism is exploited and used to make people feel guilty for speaking up for what they feel is wrong with this administration. I dislike the signs I see that say support our troops, vote for Bush. Well, I DO support the troops and DON’T support Bush. And why are we made to feel unpatriotic if we think Bush is an idiot and should not be in office? It’s like having a relative with an awful deformity or drinking problem. If we don’t mention it, then no one will notice it. It does not work that way, everyone knows it! I will not back someone who I feel should not be in office. We made that mistake in 2000, and should not do it again!!

There’s a meta-news page on chaos2004.com: Election Day. It collects all the rumors and first results.

semper —

I don’t know why the blog editors didn’t chastise you for that last post but they should have. People who disagree with you aren’t slow, they just have a different opinion. We support our troops by opposing costly and unnecessary wars. One might even argue that warmongers like Bush DON’T support our troops because they send our armed forces where they aren’t needed and get them killed for no good reason. But I’m not going to make that argument. I’ll just ask you to be more polite to people who are honestly stating their opinions.

Okay, I need a little political process education. As I watch the counting of electoral votes, I’m confused by the fact that not all of the polling places have reported yet and absentee votes have not been counted; however the map is lighting up with color— I’m wondering what will happen if the votes sway in opposite support of what has been projected but they call the election too soon— what happens? (legal action, recounts, and admittance of misjudgement— I’m assuming).

I’m also wondering what happen to all the caution the media swore they would practice before making any predictions— ironically the only states they are practicing caution with are mostly swing states—its a little remiss, I think to “jump off sides” with the other states when all polling places have not reported yet.

I also have other questions, how do polling places report votes (is this an electronic process??) How are the electronic votes tallied and shared??

Thank you for taking the time to answer those quetions.

Alejo

I never respond to blogs but after reading your post, I could not restrain myself. The fact that you could chastise someone for using the term slow when I have just read numerous posts referring to my fellow Bush supporters as IGNORANT is amazing. I come from a highly educated and intelligent family and group of friends, yet we cannot agree on anything political. However, we do refrain from insulting each other’s intelligence and to me being called ignorant is far more insulting than being called slow. Where is your tolerance for the other side? We would appreciate the same politeness you are requesting for yourself. Our opinions are just as thoughtfully formed as I am sure yours are, we just see things differently. If you are going to ask for politeness from people, please have the courtesy to ask for it across the board.

Get behind bush should he win? Not likely. Not when our troops don’t have what they need in Iraq. Not when parents are holding bake sales to get supplies to the troops. No, I will never support a president that misled the american people. He wasn’t hired to take care of the Iraqi’s, we pay him to take care of america. His bluster about deposing saddam doesn’t impress me and I will never compromise my beliefs by supporting him.

Rebecca

I think you should support your president, but beyond some narrow legal requirements, you don’t have to. This is America. I will support the winner. I wrote a posting re in the red column - a generic post election post.

Shawn

I think you answered your own question. They are guesses. The networks are being more cautious than last time. Evidently the exit polls were misleading, so they waited until they had a decent statistical sample of actual votes. Experience gives them an edge. For example, you can usually predict Utah or Vermont a month before the election, the only doubt is the exact percentages.

What happens if they are wrong? Nothing. They feel embarassed and they lose credibility. That is enough to give them incentive to be right, but the also want to be first.

I didn’t particularly like either candidate, but I will support whoever takes the election. I believe that the law worked as it should during the Bush-Gore election. I don’t think anyone “stole” the election. I believe that the election was held fairly this time around. One of the greatest things about our nation is that we can transfer power from one group to another without violence. Looking at so many other nations around the world, a transfer of power from one party to another is accompanied by violence and death. I really believe this is the genius of our constitution.

On the bright side, checks and balances are in place to prevent any president from possessing too much power. The rule of law is a great thing. Laws rule this country not men.

America, I still believe in you.

Help us in the United States. We are being held hostage by an ultraconservative regime. What can we do? We need the help of the world. We need your free press.

Karen —

I’m not sure why you chose my particular post to respond to, but welcome to Watchblog. My belief is that no one should be described as slow OR ignorant, and I have not described anyone as either. The reason I chose to respond to semper’s post particularly is because he was referring to a specific person derisively and that person was a newcomer to Watchblog. I didn’t bring it up as a Blue supporter but as a Watchblog regular who would like to see more civility on the site.

It’s funny to me that the Kerry supporters have such sour apples on these pages. They lost and they just want to whine and complain. Bush got over 50%, Clinton never got that, facts are Bush won and over 50% of the country wants him as President. He has legitamcy and a mandate under the way our democracy is set up, to do what he thinks is best. SOme of you will complain and whine, oh well, maybe you should have done more for your canidate. I think it is sad that it appears the 20 million loud idea has failed so miserably. Percentage wise the targeted demo. did not show up anymore than in the past, I guess we are a generation of slackers.

My final point is this, Kerry should have been a man and stepped up and admitted defeat last night. Can you imagine what the press and liberals would be saying about Bush if the scenario were revered? Let’s imagine it, Kerry only needs Ohio to win, he is leading by 135,000 votes with 99% reporting, 4 networks have already called it for Kerry, and Bush hides out in the White House, not saying a word, not doing anything, just hiding and refusing to admit he lost. The liberals and press would call him a sore loser, out of touch, arrogant, and fearful to face the truth……..oh wait, I just described Kerry……

Just think of all the money George Soros wasted, will he be a man and go live in the monestary like he said he would if Bush won? Or will be be another Alec Baldwin (he was supposed to move to France last election).

The actions of the Democrats and their hollow words are the reasons they have won nothing.

bushagain:
As a fellow Bush supporter who could not be more thrilled about the outcome of the election I have to tell you that I do not blame Kerry for waiting until yesterday to concede. None of the networks (at least not the ones we were viewing in Texas) were willing to call the election decisively for Bush. Had Ohio had more provisional votes to count, it could have gone in Kerry’s favor, and I think we have to be symathetic to his delima.

I think I can empathize with the disappointment of the Democratic party. They really thought the majority were one thier side, and worked hard to get out the vote. What they did not count on was the fact that us Republicans were quietly standing by and watching, knowing that we were going to have to go to the polls this time and make a stand. They did get more votes out. The thing they did not factor in was the fact that it was also going to increase the conservative vote.

I am one of the so called ignorant people who vote primarily on the abortion/moral issues, and those things are so important to me that I would not have missed my chance to be heard for any reason, especially knowing that millions of new voters were coming out to try and oust my candidate. Now that we have won I think we have to have some compassion for the people who tried so hard to have thier voices heard. We need to win as gracefully as possible to help and foster unity in our country, which seems to be in a greater state of discord than ever before.