CDIH

because galt had not posted yet. duh!

i only agree with galts comments regarding kerry. i still think your vote is wasted on nadar. i mean, its not even an opinion, its pretty much a foregone conclusion. if you want to vote for nadar in some form of protest or display of your democratic freedoms, go right ahead. your vote counts even less in new york like you said where kerry will win in a landslide.

nader with an e

I am voting for Kerry cause I know all his policies, they are basically "I woulda done the same things as Bush did but I woulda asked nicely first".

you'd need bloody anus to chart when he adopted that position, dropped it, and then re-adopted it.

I'll admit that I was considering voting for Kerry for a while but I got increasingly pissed off at the sense of entitlement democrats have and the measures they took to get Nader off the ballot so my vote is a partly a protest against their corruption.

i support their efforts to get nader off the ballot. nader singlehandedly won the election for bush last year. sure, maybe if gore didnt suck so much he could have overcome the nader factor but with the way this election is headed nader might as well join the republican party.

for my next trick, I will get Keyser to support the American Socialist Party.

I'm not going to argue about this but it's pretty obvious that both gore and kerry will have no one to blame but himself for losing this election.

with a little help from ralph nader.

Galt Wrote:For someone supports Kerry to be talking about how a Nader supporter doesn't understand "what he stands for" is just laughable. There is no rational reason why Kerry shouldn't be destroying Bush right now in every poll.

Kerry has done nothing. Kerry has said nothing. He has offered no plan for anything. He talks in vagueries (I totally just made that word up) about how Bush misled us into war, but also how he wants more funding to get more troops and better support and somehow build a global coalition. How he's magically going to save social security from it's unavoidable impending doom, as it is a ponzi scheme. He hasn't explained how he's going to pay down the debt, and also add trillioins of new spending to the government.

He is an atrocious candidate. You can't possibly say you support him for any other reason that "He's not George Bush". That's what Kerry's lead with, and that's all he's had to offer. The Bush detractors don't tout Kerry because of anything he's going to do, all they talk about is how evil the Bush administration is and how they're all borderline (if not actual) facsists who are intentionally destroying the country.

You mock Sleeper for not knowing where Nader stands on anything. At least Nader has taken a stand on something as wacky and insane as it may be.

Somehow it's possible, but Kerry is a weaker candidate than Gore. I can't believe I'm saying this, but he has no chance to win this impossible-to-lose election.

as per usual , you are wrong. i support kerry because i think he has the best chance to beat bush, but i will not be voting for him. your assumption that i will vote for kerry is incorrect. dont feel bad though, i am getting used to you making false assumptions.

The Sleeper Wrote:I'll admit that I was considering voting for Kerry for a while but I got increasingly pissed off at the sense of entitlement democrats have and the measures they took to get Nader off the ballot so my vote is a partly a protest against their corruption.

so you are casting a vote for a candidate,not cause you want him to win but as a protest against a different candidate. genius.

there should be an iq and civics requirement to vote.

can you explain your position in the same manner you asked sleeper to?

Keyser Soze Wrote:you'd need bloody anus to chart when he adopted that position, dropped it, and then re-adopted it.

another casulty to the bush-cheney propoganda machine.

yea who are you voting for and why

Keyser Soze Wrote:can you explain your position in the same manner you asked sleeper to?

sure. i think bush has been the worst president of the last 100 years. i support kerry because he has the best chance to beat him and couldnt possibly be worse.. i will not vote for kerry though until he clarifies his positions. i am hoping, quite naively, that he will solidify the ideas behind his rhetoric during the debates. if he doesn't, i will probably not vote this election for a president. i will withhold my vote rather than vote for the lesser of two evils.

you have done exactly what you accused sleeper of doing. you talk in platitudes and generalities.

that's rich, you criticize me for not knowing nader's positions, yet you are hinging on debates held a month before the election to decide to vote for kerry or not. I don't know why I took you seriously.

The Sleeper Wrote:that's rich, you criticize me for not knowing nader's positions, yet you are hinging on debates held a month before the election to decide to vote for kerry or not. I don't know why I took you seriously.

its completely different. you have commited a vote to someone you know next to nothing about. i have decided to wait to decide until i have a clearer idea of a candidates position. unlike you, i choose to learn as much about the positions before giving my vote. i have a good idea about what kerry is proposing on a series of issues but he has not fully clarified his ideas. i am waiting for that before i decide.
you made your decision with a bare bones of information and then decided to vote not for someone but against a party. then you question my choice to withhold my decision until i feel that i am fully informed on a candidates position.? silly boy.

I refuse to believe you know more about kerry than I do about nader based on your musings so far in this thread.